Assemblée Législative de la Nouvelle-Écosse

Les travaux de la Chambre ont repris le
21 septembre 2017
























HALIFAX, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 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 the daily sitting at this time. The first item on
the agenda is the daily routine.



PRESENTING AND READING PETITIONS



PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES



TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS



STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Natural Resources.



HON. DONALD DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, today I am pleased to announce the appointment of a Public
Review Committee for the proposed systems plan for parks and protected areas in Nova Scotia. I am
particularly pleased that Mr. John Mullally of Halifax has agreed to serve as chairman of this committee. Now
retired, Mr. Mullally is a former Deputy Minister of the Department of Natural Resources. He brings an
extensive background of experience and expertise to this assignment.



Mr. Speaker, other members appointed to the committee are: Pauline Himmelman of Pleasantville,
Lunenburg County, a former municipal councillor and deputy warden; Pam Matthews of Wolfville, a biologist
with a longstanding interest in the wilderness and natural history; Kathryn Heckman of Dartmouth, an
environmental lawyer; Robert Gilroy of Springhill, a retired community college vice-principal; and Mr. Jim
St. Clair of Mull River, Inverness County, a local historian and instructor at UCCB.



5359

 

The mandate of the committee is to hear and to summarize public comments with respect to the
proposed parks and protected areas systems plan. Based on this public input, the committee will make
recommendations to government regarding the content of the final plan. The committee will convene a series
of public meetings across the province in January and February 1995. A schedule for those meetings is
currently being developed and details of the times and places will be announced before Christmas.



The proposed systems plan was released last March and since that time, Mr. Speaker, it has been
widely distributed for public information and review. The plan proposes 31 Crown land sites for protection.
The 31 sites total more than 700,000 acres and represent 19 per cent of the provincially owned Crown land
in Nova Scotia. Together with existing protected areas, the plan provides for protection of more than 8 per
cent of the province’s land.



The 31 sites proposed for protection in the systems plan were chosen based on the following criteria:
sites that represent Nova Scotia’s typical landscapes and ecosystems; natural features or processes that are
unique, rare or otherwise outstanding; and sites that present opportunities for wilderness recreation and eco-tourism.



The proposed parks and protected areas systems plan represents an important commitment by our
government. It ensures that good examples of the landscape and environment that define the character and
image of Nova Scotia are maintained and protected in their natural state.



In closing, Mr. Speaker, I encourage Nova Scotians to participate in the public meetings in January
and February and I also want to take this opportunity to thank the members of the Public Review Committee
for their willingness to undertake this important assignment. Thank you. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, in light of the unfortunate but temporary, I think, absence
of our caucus’s Critic on Natural Resources, I might take the liberty to respond briefly to the statement by the
minister.



As a general statement we welcome the announcement and think that the public consultation element
of reviewing the proposed systems plan for parks and protected areas is an important one. Not to be overly
critical, but I would have hoped that the period for public consultation might have been modestly longer. I
noticed that the minister suggested that the public meetings will take place across the province in January and
February. They are traditionally among our worst weather months and I am just concerned that the logistics
of potentially having to cancel meetings here and there might find that the time is a little bit constrained.



Perhaps suffice for today’s purposes, that the minister might take under advisement that concern, I
don’t know if others have raised it with him and that he might be open in the event that the persons whom
he has appointed to the committee should happen to come back to him and indicate that some additional time,
perhaps down into March, even into April, might be helpful to ensure that all of the members of the public
who wish to offer opinions on the proposed systems plan for parks and protected areas have a legitimate and
a full chance to do so. I will leave that to the minister’s devices and best judgment.



I might say that I am particularly pleased to mimic the words of the minister, that a man of the
stature of Mr. John Mullally, well-known to so many in this place and indeed, a gentleman who was deputy
minister to many on this side of the House during our time in government, has agreed to serve as chair of the
committee. He is a fine person, an intelligent, articulate person and one whom I know and all members are
aware and all Nova Scotians will come to be aware, has indeed the best interests of developing the finest parks
and protected areas system in the province that we possibly can develop. I very much applaud his appointment
and congratulate the minister for doing that.



The only other comment that I might like to make is when I read the statement by the minister, he
indicates that the criteria that would be used, as 31 sites proposed are assessed, “Sites that represent Nova
Scotia’s typical landscapes and ecosystems; natural features or processes that are unique, rare or otherwise
outstanding; and sites that present opportunities for wilderness recreation and eco-tourism. The proposed
parks and protected areas system plan represents an important commitment by our government.”, and I agree
with that.



But then I read these words, “It ensures that good examples of the landscape and environment that
define the character and image of Nova Scotia . . . are maintained and protected in their natural states.”. I
simply wanted to make the comment and not so much by way of shot at all, but to point out that while this
minister is doing what I think is absolutely essential to ensure that those things which do define the character
and image of our province are improved, enhanced, maintained and promoted.



Meanwhile, other elements of the same government are embarking on a casino gambling regime .
. .



MR. SPEAKER: Time, please.



MR. DONAHOE: . . . which, by way of my standards and the standards of thousands and tens of
thousands of Nova Scotians, is, frankly, inconsistent with the approach being taken here by the Minister of
Natural Resources. I hear the catcalls from across the way and maybe they do not like me saying that, but I
believe that . . .



MR. SPEAKER: Time has expired.



MR. DONAHOE: . . . many Nova Scotians would agree with that sentiment.



With that caveat, I would, again, Mr. Speaker, repeat that we support the initiative announced today
by the minister, we very much support the appointment of Mr. Mullally. We do urge that if the public
consultation process needs a little extra time, that the minister consider that and that we look forward to the
report of the committee when it finally does report its work. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I just very briefly want to say that I am pleased to see this
Public Review Committee get up and running. I hope that even though the time is limited, that there will be
every attempt made to have very complete and exhaustive and thorough consultation with the public of Nova
Scotia and, particularly, people that have more direct knowledge and expert representations to make.



The committee, of course, Mr. Speaker, is for the proposed systems plan for parks and protected areas
in Nova Scotia that the minister indicated had been released last spring or the idea for this was released last
spring. I would just like to say that I hope that at the same time that this public review is happening, that the
government is not backing away from its commitment, for example, for special places, for protected areas.



You may be aware that there is some significant controversy happening down in the Lunenburg area
with respect to some challenges made against the government’s authority over the designation of protected
areas. I certainly hope that in the process of conducting this public review that there is no weakening of the
commitment that this government has shown in the past, at least to ensure that some of these areas designated
as protected areas are maintained and promoted as such.



So with those few words, I look forward to, perhaps, participating in this process, appearing before
the committee and certainly reviewing the information that they come up with in the development of a proper,
comprehensive and strictly enforced plan for parks and protected areas in Nova Scotia. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you revert to the order of business, Tabling Reports,
Regulations and Other Papers.



TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Community Services.



HON. JAMES SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table a reply to House Order No. 123.



MR. SPEAKER: The return is tabled.



GOVERNMENT NOTICES OF MOTION



INTRODUCTION OF BILLS



Bill No. 131 - Entitled an Act to Enhance the Accountability of Crown Agencies and
Corporations to the Auditor General. (Mr. Robert Chisholm)



Bill No. 132 - Entitled an Act to Permit the Council of the Town of Liverpool to Regulate the
Parking of Vehicles. (Mr. John Leefe)



Bill No. 133 - Entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 71 of the Acts of 1993. The Community of
Sackville Landfill Compensation Act. (Mr. William MacDonald)



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



[2:15 p.m.]



NOTICES OF MOTION



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



RESOLUTION NO. 1174



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



Whereas members of this House believe that the Speaker has frequently failed to demonstrate in his
performance as Speaker that he is guided by the usages and precedents of this House; and



Whereas members of this House believe that the Speaker has failed to preside over the proceedings
of this House in an impartial manner;



Therefore be it resolved that members of this House have lost confidence in the Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. Looking back at motions of that type
in this House, I believe a study of those motions previously would indicate that such motions should be dealt
with as expeditiously as possible by the House. I would be willing to indicate to the Opposition members that
under Opposition Members’ Business today we would certainly be willing to waive notice, if they wanted to
call this resolution for debate and for a vote, so that it could be dispensed with and this motion of non-confidence would not be hanging over this House or over a member of this House. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: Does the honourable Leader of the Opposition care to respond?



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Well, we have already indicated to the House the order of business that
we . . .



SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.



MR. DONAHOE: . . . propose to call today, the honourable member for Pictou Centre has introduced
a bill in this House which is vitally important, having to do with the regional health boards of this province.
(Interruptions)



I am asked, Mr. Speaker, how serious I am. I can assure you and all members that we are serious
enough that at the next Opposition Day (Interruptions) the resolution of our choice, either that or another
resolution which I propose to introduce here today, will be called not later than next Opposition Day.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Further to that, and I think we can help him with this dilemma as well,
we recognize the bill that they have called for debate today is very important. They had, however, indicated
last night they will be spending one-half hour on a resolution they intend to call. Perhaps we could debate this
resolution that he has just introduced during that time period.



I am sure that if the resolution that would be pushed back as a result of that is deemed to be very
important by them, I would be willing to bet that the Liberal member who has the late debate would allow that
resolution to be debated during the late debate.



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



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, in an attempt to be helpful, I think we all can agree, by unanimous
consent, to even resolve the matter and deal with the resolution without debate. I would suggest that we are
quite prepared to waive any requirement for debate and have the matter dealt with immediately.



MR. SPEAKER: Very well, is it agreed then that consent be waived and the matter be dealt with
now?



It is agreed.



Would those in favour of the motion please signify by saying Aye. Contrary minded, nay.



A standing vote is requested by two honourable members.



Would those in favour of the motion that the Leader of the Opposition has made please indicate by
standing. Will the Clerk please take the count. The Clerk has the count. Please be seated.



Would all those against the motion made by the Leader of the Opposition please rise. Will the Clerk
please take the count. The Clerk has the count. Please be seated.



THE CLERK: For, 10. Against, 36.



MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion to be carried in the negative.



The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



RESOLUTION NO. 1175



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



Whereas as of this week, the Legislative Assemblies in five provinces and the House of Commons
elect their Speaker, breaking with the tradition that the Speaker is selected by the Premier; and



Whereas the process of nomination, discussion and secret ballot to select a Speaker has enabled
members to overcome Party interests and select the person who appears most capable of serving the broader
interests of the House and the public it serves; and



Whereas the Premier’s power and influence is not likely to be harmed by losing the prerogative to
name a Speaker;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Premier to adopt the model gaining growing
acceptance across Canada, endorse the selection by secret ballot of our Speaker and ask the Committee on
Assembly Matters to propose election procedures that can be used at the earliest possible date.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice on that resolution.



MR. SPEAKER: I hear several Noes.



The notice is tabled.



MR. ROBERT CARRUTHERS: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. That resolution, as I understand,
it is asking the Premier to direct this process of picking the Speaker and as I understand it now, the Speaker
is picked by the members of the House and not by the Premier and I would suggest that that resolution is out
of order.



MR. SPEAKER: With respect, I appreciate the point the honourable member is making but as an
expression of opinion, I feel that the notice is proper and is entitled to be tabled.



The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



RESOLUTION NO. 1176



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



Whereas in Nova Scotia by long-standing tradition and practice the Speaker is nominated by the
Premier from the ranks of the government side of the House; and



Whereas the Legislative Assemblies of Saskatchewan, Ontario, the Northwest Territories, Alberta,
British Columbia, New Brunswick and the House of Commons of Canada have changed from the traditional
method of selection of Speaker by Premier’s nomination to election of the Speaker by secret ballot; and



Whereas pursuant to Rule 12A(3) the proposed amendments to the Rules and Forms of Procedure
of this House of Assembly providing for the election of the Speaker of this House, be referred for examination
to the Committee on Assembly Matters;



Therefore be it resolved that the Rules and Forms of Procedures of the House of Assembly of Nova
Scotia be amended by adding thereto new provisions establishing the rules whereby the House shall elect its
Speaker, such rules to be in the form and style as set out in the schedule attached to this resolution.



[Schedule A



To a notice of motion relative to the election of the Speaker of the House of Assembly of the Province of Nova
Scotia dated November 30, 1994.



1. (1) The House, prior to the sitting of the Third Session of the Fifty-sixth General Assembly of
the House of Assembly of the Province of Nova Scotia and thereafter at its first Session of a General
Assembly, and at any other time as determined pursuant to subsection (2) of this Rule, shall make
the election of Speaker the first order of business, which shall not be interrupted by any other
proceedings.



(2) Where there is a vacancy in the Office of Speaker whether at the opening of an Assembly
or because the incumbent of that office has indicated his or her intention to resign the Office of
Speaker, or for any other reason, the House shall proceed to elect one of its Members to be Speaker.



(3) The election of Speaker shall take precedence over all other business and no Motion of any
kind shall be accepted, and the House shall continue to sit, if necessary, beyond its ordinary hour of
daily adjournment, until a Speaker is elected and is installed in the Chair and if the House has
continued to sit beyond its ordinary hour of daily adjournment, the Speaker shall thereupon adjourn
the House until the next sitting, unless otherwise ordered.



(4) No Minister of the Crown nor Leader of a Party shall be eligible for election to the Office
of Speaker.



2. (1) (a) For the purpose of electing a Speaker, the Clerk of the House, or in the absence of
the Clerk, the Deputy Clerk, shall administer the election process and shall preside during
the election of a Speaker.



(b) During the election of a Speaker, the Clerk of the House or Deputy Clerk shall not
be permitted to entertain any question of privilege or point of order.



(c) During the election of a Speaker, there shall be no debate.



(2) The election of a Speaker shall be conducted by secret ballot as follows:



(a) Any Member who does not wish to be considered for election to the Office of
Speaker shall advise the Clerk of the House in writing no later than 6:00 o’clock p.m. on
the day preceding the day in which the election of a Speaker is expected to take place.



(b) Before the taking of the first ballot, the Clerk of the House shall fix in the lobby
an alphabetical list of candidates and shall distribute that list to Members present in the
Chamber.



(c) Members present in the Chamber shall be provided with ballot papers by the Clerk
of the House.



(d) Members wishing to indicate their choice for the Office of Speaker shall print the
first and last name of a Member on the ballot paper and shall deposit their completed ballot
papers in a box provided for that purpose at the Table.



(e) Once all Members wishing to do so have deposited their ballot paper, the vote shall
be counted by the Clerks who, for this purpose, shall retire from the Chamber. The Clerk
of the House, being satisfied as to the accuracy of the count, shall destroy the ballots
together with all records of the number of ballots cast for each candidate and all those
persons present will in no way divulge the number of ballots cast for any candidate.



(f) If one candidate receives a majority of the votes cast, the Clerk of the House shall
announce in the Chamber the name of that Member as Speaker.



(g) If no candidate receives a majority of the votes cast, the name of the candidate
having the least number of total votes shall be excluded from subsequent ballots.



(h) If every candidate receives the same number of votes, no name shall be excluded
from the next ballot.



(i) For each subsequent ballot, the Clerk of the House shall prepare an alphabetical
list of candidates and affix that list in the lobbies, and distribute it to Members present in
the Chamber.



(j) Subsequent ballots shall be conducted in the manner prescribed above, and the
balloting shall continue, in like manner, until such time as a candidate is elected Speaker
upon having received a majority of the votes cast.



(k) At any time after the result of the first ballot has been declared, but before the
commencement of a second or subsequent ballot, a candidate may withdraw from the
election, which shall then proceed as if such member had not been nominated.



(l) If only one Member stands for election to Office of Speaker, or at any stage a
withdrawal pursuant to the above rules leaves only one candidate remaining, the Clerk of
the House shall announce in the Chamber that candidate’s name and without any vote
declare that Member to be elected Speaker.



(m) The election of a Speaker and a Chairman of Committees shall not be considered
to be a question of confidence in the Government.



3. When the Speaker has been elected, a Chairman of Committees or Deputy Speaker shall be elected
following the same procedures that are set out herein for the election of a Speaker.]



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



RESOLUTION NO. 1177



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 conventions of this House and all applicable legislative authorities require that the
Speaker maintain impartiality and not attend Party caucus meetings while this House is sitting; and



Whereas yesterday the Premier and Liberal Leader characteristically claimed credit for personally
intervening, to ask the Speaker to respect this convention; and



Whereas the Speaker has denied that any such conversation took place, modestly suggesting that he
voluntarily chose to scrupulously observe this important protection of his impartiality;






Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Premier and the Speaker to end their public
disagreements and work positively to restore Nova Scotians’ confidence that this House will call the
government to account, thoroughly review legislation and fairly represent all viewpoints.



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. 1178



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 Lunenburg County has been chosen at the site of a reserve armed forces training facility
that will prepare local tradespeople to respond to emergency situations around the world; and



Whereas the facility known as the Lunenburg Municipal Engineering Flight School is a pilot project
by the Department of National Defence Air Command Headquarters; and



Whereas about 100 training days of employment will be provided each year to about 60 tradespeople
at the training facility;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to the first 12 people
enrolled at the facility and wish them every success as they begin training under military command.



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 Cape Breton West.






RESOLUTION NO. 1179



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



Whereas American based Monsanto Incorporated has proven its influence on Nova Scotia’s forest
industry; and



Whereas according to CBC’s Fifth Estate report on November 29, 1994 serious concerns were raised
whether this American chemical company attempted to bribe a federal government department into approving
a genetic enhancing drug for Canada’s dairy industry;



Therefore be it resolved that in the opinion of this House the provincial government undertake a
review of Monsanto’s relationship to Nova Scotia’s forestry and agricultural industries.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury.



RESOLUTION NO. 1180



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 Leader of the Opposition was recently quoted as saying, so far the three provincial
governments in the Maritimes have failed to provide forceful leadership representing the Maritime
community; and



Whereas the only failure of leadership rests with the Leader of the Opposition and his Maritime
colleagues, who are notoriously behind the times; and



Whereas Nova Scotia and the other Atlantic Provinces are linking government departments to co-ordinate strategy in response to federal proposals;



Therefore be it resolved that this House congratulate the Premiers of the four Atlantic Provinces for
their leadership and cooperation and encourage the Opposition to follow their example, as this supports the
media assessment that the Tories are out of power and out of touch.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



RESOLUTION NO. 1181



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



Whereas Conservative MLAs have frequently and sincerely acknowledged their mistakes and urged
the Liberal Government to stop taking the disastrous BuCameron path; and



Whereas it was therefore a surprise to read this morning that the Conservative Leader fiercely
defends Ultramar’s right to further monopolize the sale of gasoline and heating fuel while shedding its
obligation to keep operating a Nova Scotia refinery; and



Whereas large corporations with massive PR budgets have no special right to walk away from deals
affecting the fundamental economic interests of Nova Scotia;



Therefore be it resolved that the Conservative Party should heed its own warnings and avoid vigorous
defence of the job-destroying corporate irresponsibility exhibited by Ultramar, which has been found so
repugnant by many Nova Scotians.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



RESOLUTION. NO. 1182



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 much-respected, senior Liberal Party statesman Mitchell Sharp co-authored a definitive
report on conflict of interest; and



[2:30 p.m.]



Whereas the Sharp Report states that even in the absence of a crime or offence, an ethical problem
may well exist when interests coincide, and that it has often been stipulated that public servants must appear
to act in the public’s interest; and



Whereas it makes a mockery of the so-called arm’s length casino selection process for casino
proponents to have a green light to hire and involve business associates of the project team members;



Therefore be it resolved that the government should forget its loyalty to its small, cozy, Liberal circle
long enough to make it clear that the public interest is betrayed when casino selection and regulations are
conducted by associates of those proposing and representing casino operators.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury.



RESOLUTION NO. 1183



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



Whereas international trade is the key to Nova Scotia’s economic prosperity; and



Whereas the honourable Minister of Natural Resources recently met with the Mexican Ambassador
to Canada in an effort to expand the market for Nova Scotia forest products; and



Whereas 750 Nova Scotia balsam fir Christmas trees were exported to Monterrey, Mexico from the
Northeastern Christmas Tree Association’s yard in Giants Lake, Guysborough County;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House commend the Northern Lights Christmas
Tree Farm of Belmont, the Minister of Natural Resources, MGM Enterprises Limited, and the Northeastern
Christmas Tree Association for their success in expanding Nova Scotia’s presence in the international market
place. (Applause)



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 Minister of the Environment.



RESOLUTION NO. 1184



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



Whereas public service as an elected, municipal councillor demands commitment, caring and concern
for the well-being of the population; and



Whereas those who have served the Municipality of the County of Kings have answered that call to
public service; and



Whereas on Tuesday, December 6th, the Municipality of the County of Kings will honour former
councillors;



Therefore be it resolved that members of this House add their voices who will speak in honour of the
public service provided by Mr. Gerry Buchan, Mr. Howard Beals, Ms. Peggy Lindsay, Mr. Casey Mooy, Mr.
Dick Killam, Mr. Don Newcombe, and the late Mr. Fred Trenholm and extend our thanks to these former
councillors for their service to the people of Kings.



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 Halifax Fairview.



RESOLUTION NO. 1185



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



Whereas more than two years ago, an inquest in Toronto, location of our country’s largest, best-funded hospitals, recommended that government guidelines outline the requirements for and funding for
trauma team leaders; and



Whereas the Minister of Health has endeavoured to use his medical background to justify a political
decision, first made by the Conservatives, to withhold guidelines and funding for the essential position of
trauma team leader at the Victoria General Hospital’s trauma centre;



Therefore be it resolved that the Health Minister should heed his own advice by not pretending that
he is making medical judgments when he defies certification requirements and long-standing
recommendations that the funded position of trauma team leader is essential to save as many lives as possible
in emergency situations.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



RESOLUTION NO. 1186



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 1994 budget declared that the November 1st wage reduction will not affect anyone who
earns $25,000 or less, while the 1993 budget declared the principle of protecting those who can least afford
such a restraint measure; and



Whereas on May 12th, the Human Resources Minister actually boasted about the Liberal’s responsible
and sensitive manner towards all those in the Public Service who earn $25,000 or less per year; and



Whereas the minister further explained that this will protect the lower income worker and part-time
worker. It will protect the single income earner, it will protect the single mother;



Therefore be it resolved that the government should honour its straightforward commitment to
protect from wage roll-backs all low income and part-time workers earning less than $25,000 a year and drop
the Finance Minister’s incredible position that the part-time or casual, low income earners, are suddenly
undeserving.






MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Annapolis.



RESOLUTION NO. 1187



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



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



Whereas a number of Nova Scotians have been recognized by this committee throughout the province
for enhancing the natural beauty of our scenic countryside; and



Whereas one of the recipients of a Nova Scotia Beautification award is from Bridgetown, the friendly
town, in the great constituency of Annapolis, Nova Scotia;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to Marian Inglis, for
receiving an Award of Merit from the Nova Scotia Beautification Committee.



Mr. Speaker, I would 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.



RESOLUTION NO. 1188



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 individuals for their outstanding
contributions to agriculture; and



Whereas the coordination of the Hall of Fame requires great leadership; and



Whereas Mr. Dick Huggard has just been named president of this prestigious organization;



Therefore be it resolved that this government congratulate Richard Huggard on being appointed
President of 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.



That brings us to the end of the daily routine. I wish to advise the House that the Clerk has conducted
a draw for the Adjournment debate at six o’clock this evening. The successful winner this afternoon is the
honourable member for Lunenburg. She has submitted a resolution that reads as follows:



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly recognize the importance of tourism and the
people who are vital to the success of the tourism industry in Nova Scotia.



So we will hear on that matter at six o’clock tonight. The time now being 2:40 p.m. and the Oral
Question Period today running for an hour and a half, it will run until 4:10 p.m., and that will be the duration
of the Oral Question Period today.



ORDERS OF THE DAY



ORAL QUESTIONS PUT BY MEMBERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.



SYSCO: MINMETALS - FINANCIAL STATUS



DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister responsible for Sysco, the financial papers of the
country are reporting the Lehman Brothers bank of New York have had writs issued naming among others,
Minmetals. This relates to a $100 million loss on a marginal account due to some trading and swap positions.
What information does the minister have on the current financial health of Minmetals, particularly relative
to this situation?



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable member for his question. With
respect to the specific action itself, that matter came to our attention a couple of days ago when, in fact, the
action was filed and became a matter of public record.



With respect to the more specific question and the one that really should concern us, and that is
whether or not the company Minmetals can fulfil its obligations under its agreement with the Province of
Nova Scotia for the joint operation and subsequent purchase of Sysco. Those obligations are secured, in our
view, sufficiently under the terms of the agreement.



DR. HAMM: I thank the minister and, needless to say, I think we all appreciate that this is a serious
matter. To further question the minister, what provisions are there in the contract that is now being introduced
between the province and Minmetals that would provide protection to the province and to Sysco, in terms of
default of payment, during the three years when Minmetals will be providing, perhaps, some operating
accounts to the new company?



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, the agreement itself refers to a line of credit in place with a major
chartered bank in Canada or, in the alternative, cash on deposit and the bank itself is named as the Royal
Bank of Canada.



DR. HAMM: Mr. Speaker, by way of final supplementary, would the minister comment as to whether
there is sufficient protection in the contract to protect Sysco in the event of some time during the contract
there would be a seizure of North American assets of Minmetals?



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the honourable member’s concern but if you read the
contract closely, Minmetals doesn’t have any assets in Canada or in Nova Scotia until they complete the
purchase three years down the road. In the interim period, they are simply a party to a joint operation. So,
none of the Sysco assets will be at risk.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



FIN. - PUBLIC SECTOR ROLL-BACK: CASUAL EMPLOYEES - EFFECT



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question through you to the
Premier. It has to do with Bill No. 52 and the 3 per cent roll-back on all public sector workers, including those
earning under $25,000. I would like to ask the Premier, he himself in this House declared in defending Bill
No. 52, and I quote from Page 1776 of Hansard, Wednesday, May 18, 1994, the Premier said, ” . . . but it is
important that the public understand that it, `Does not reduce the wages of workers earning less than
$25,000.’”.



My question to the Premier, in light of what the Minister of Finance told us in this House here
yesterday, that there are hundreds if not thousands of workers earning less than $25,000 a year that work
irregular hours that are having their wages rolled back, would the Premier indicate to us what in fact he is
telling the public now, as it relates to what he told them a few six or seven short months ago?



HON. JOHN SAVAGE (The Premier): Mr. Speaker, this question is one that is better answered by
the Minister of Finance within whose purview this is and I am going to ask him to do so.



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable member for his question.
Under the legislation which was introduced, a board was established for the purpose of interpretation of
various applications of this legislation. This is a very complex piece of legislation, if not in the writing, at least
in the application. We made it clear that any full-time employee or any regularly employed part-time employee
would be given the exemption of which the honourable member speaks.



But with respect to casual employees, those employed without any expectation of employment in a
predictable way, who came on one day gone the next, the decision of the board which was appointed under
the Act and specifically under the Act, Section 22(1)(f), has the responsibility for defining the application,
indicated that for these casual employees that exemption would not exist.



Now, we have accepted that interpretation from the board and I think it is substantially based on the
question of fairness so that somebody coming on for one day and leaving the employ would not make more
money than a full-time regular employee doing exactly the same job.



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, you may recall that when I introduced my question, I based it on
a quotation, on a statement, that the Premier had made, not the Minister of Finance, I asked him a question
on this yesterday. I asked the Premier to explain the discrepancy between what he told the public of Nova
Scotia last May and what he is telling the public of Nova Scotia right now.



I want to go back to the Premier because I believe he has some obligation in this issue and I want to
ask the Premier, if he will in fact intervene on behalf of those groups that he and his ministers indicated that
they were here to protect and had ensured, through the drafting of Bill No. 52, that they would protect the
lower income worker, the part-time worker, the single income earner, the single mother. I want to ask the
Premier, will he intervene on behalf of these groups and ensure that their wages are not rolled back 3 per cent?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, this matter is perfectly well addressed by the Minister of Finance but
I can reassure the member opposite that any individual can apply to the board if they feel so disadvantaged.
I suggest that you pass that on to those people with whom you are obviously in contact.



[2:45 p.m.]



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, let’s all take ourselves back a few short days ago when this Premier
stood in front of a group of people who had paid $100 a plate and he told those people . . .



MR. SPEAKER: Question. Question.



MR. CHISHOLM: . . . what a great social conscience he had and how he was committed to look after
those people that needed to be protected, Mr. Speaker.



I would like to ask this Premier one last time, and I haven’t paid $100 to do it, but I am going to ask
him nonetheless, on behalf of hundreds of people that are earning less than $25,000 a year. Will he put his
money where his mouth is, with respect to a social conscience and intervene and back up the commitment he
made to those workers who were supposed to be protected by his government back in the spring of 1994?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, before I answer probably in the same way, let me say that my concerns
for social responsibility are well-known and I was involved in this when the member over there was in
diapers.



Let me repeat what I said, Mr. Speaker, there are avenues which the member over there, and most
people know perfectly well, and I would refer those people to the avenue, because it is quite logical and quite
sensible for such a person to appeal to the board. That’s the answer.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.






ABORIGINAL AFFS.: MILLBROOK RESERVE - RCMP RAID



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for Aboriginal
Affairs. I would like to ask the minister who said some time ago, we - referring to himself and his government
- will not take action on these reserves until we have had discussions. I wonder if the Premier will tell us
whether he was aware of a series of raids across the province involving corner stores and gas stations in stores,
situated in a number of communities in Colchester County and on the Millbrook Reserve this morning in
which lottery machines and cigarettes were confiscated?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am grateful for the opportunity to set the record straight on this. This
was nothing to do with the province. This was a criminal investigation carried out by the federal government,
that is the RCMP. This government, obviously, neither expects nor wants to be informed when criminal action
is taken by another level of government. I should also add - so that he may understand it more - there were,
in effect, some 29 areas across the province, to my knowledge only 10 of which were on reserves. So, there
were other areas beside natives who were affected by this. So, I think it is fair to put that in perspective before
we continue down this merry chase that he is obviously on. (Applause)



MR. DONAHOE: Well, the Premier seems to think that I am on some merry chase and he wants to
make sure that I understand and that the people in Nova Scotia understand, that there were just as many non-natives affected by this raid as were natives. I don’t know why the Premier is quite as paranoid about this
particular issue any time I raise it with him. (Interruption)



I wonder if the Premier then would simply indicate whether or not he and his Finance Minister and
perhaps other ministers are in continuing negotiations with the native community? The Premier has earlier
said that it is his intention to deal nation-to-nation with the aboriginal community of our province and in a
spirit, what he describes as a spirit, of cooperation rather than confrontation. While I acknowledge and accept
and understand the impact of the comment the Premier just made about these particular raids, I wonder if the
Premier in the context of those raids having taken place, could he tell us what is his stance and the stance of
his government relative to the administration of justice with regard to our native community and VLTs and
cigarettes? What is his own government’s legal position in that regard?



THE PREMIER: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I must make this very clear, just in case it is not totally
clear to all members, we do not, in this government interfere with the RCMP. What the federal government
does under the Criminal Code, that is their business, that is not ours. Our concern is to deal with our
aboriginal peoples in as open and honest a way as possible. We are continuing, as you know, it has been public
knowledge, presented them with a set of proposals. They are in the process of, both individually and
collectively, responding, and it is taking time.



Mr. Speaker, when they decide on that and when they decide to accept and we have further
negotiations, I will keep this House informed. We just do not have anything to tell you at this point because
it is taking a long time.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Premier could indicate to the House what impact, if
any, does the Premier believe that these raids and the current activities will have - I repeat, if any - on the past
five or so months of discussions and consultations, which he and his ministers have been having with the
aboriginal community on matters such as taxation and casinos and gaming in general, with the native
community?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I think it is a little risky for me, in public, to project what impact that
would have. I think it would be far more cautious of me to say that we understand the dilemma that they see
arising out of this. But as I have said, and I will repeat, this is a criminal matter. It is out of the province’s
hands and what impact it will have on them will, undoubtedly, be shown in our future communications,
perhaps in the upcoming weeks.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



HEALTH - EASTERN KINGS MEMORIAL HOSPITAL: CLOSURE - ADVICE



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Health. I would like to
know whether there is any written documentation that the minister has that urged him to close the Eastern
Kings Memorial Hospital located in the Town of Wolfville?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I understand the question as being is there some written
document that urges me to do something or other. I could say I am not aware of any written document, per
se. There are many forms of information and consultations that occurred prior to making up any plan for the
health care services, particularly in terms of facilities in the province. They would be extensive, but we draw
on all of those to make decisions.



MR. ARCHIBALD: What I am trying to get at, Mr. Speaker, it is a real puzzle to me and to many
people living in Kings County, particularly in the Wolfville area, why the minister chose to close the Wolfville
hospital. He has just informed us he has no specific documentation. He cannot point to anything that says this
is why we do it.



Could the minister then tell me why he would have chosen Wolfville, perhaps, over New Waterford
or why Lunenburg escaped? There must have been a reason that told you Wolfville hospital should be closed.
It seems incumbent upon the hardship that it is creating in the area that the minister would just close the
hospital on a whim and this is about all he has told us. Is there any information you can provide?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I might say that the development of a plan and, indeed, it was a plan,
it was well announced to each facility in this province in terms of what we would plan for their facility for the
coming year, ending in April 1995. That plan was delivered to each of the facilities. It was based on our
evaluations of the services needed in terms of that.



I might ask, rhetorically, as to what was the decision made to build Valley health centre, the hospital
there with two empty floors and an empty day surgical unit. That is the question we have to ask and the
answer to that rhetorical question, Mr. Speaker, very clearly, was that there was no plan. We, indeed,
presented the plan to each of the facilities and we are working with the communities to work out that plan.
That is the answer to the honourable gentleman’s question.



MR. ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I would like to answer in great detail to the honourable minister
why the Valley Regional Hospital was constructed and, indeed, there was a plan. If he paid as much attention
to operating and being a good Minister of Health as he does to all his other activities, perhaps he would
understand and be able to furnish one reason why Wolfville was closed. If he cannot tell us why, then tell me
why, in Annapolis County, you had a different set of standards. Why are they not closed until the home care
service and the emergency ambulance service is in place? You had no regard for the Town of Wolfville but
in Annapolis, what is the difference? We should be consistent.



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the line of questioning of the honourable gentleman opposite is based
on a cookie cutter approach, which was consistent with what was done for the past 15 years or more in this
province. We approached each community separately; we asked about needs, we looked at the facilities
available close to other facilities and we made decisions based on that and, I might say, continuing to work
with communities to fulfil the in-hospital needs of those communities. We will continue to do that.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



HEALTH - PHYSICIAN AFFAIRS ADVISOR: DR. DAN REID - APPOINTMENT



MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question, too, is for the Minister of Health. Yesterday
he said in this House that former Liberal Cabinet Minister, Dr. Dan Reid, was to possibly fill the position of
advisor on physician affairs. He indicated it would be about a $115,000 a year job, more than the deputy is
making. He also indicated, I know the advertisement went out June 24, 1994; you had to have your application
in by June 30, 1994, so I can understand why a lot of people didn’t apply.



The minister indicated yesterday that Dr. Dan Reid, former Liberal Cabinet Minister, was not
officially hired for the job. Dr. Dan Reid told his patients and others in September 1994 that he had the job.
Would the minister clarify who is correct?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I was asked to officially clarify something that is
in the process of being finalized. I could not do that honourably in this House because it would be misleading
the House. The fact is that we are making sure that all of the contracts are properly signed and sealed and
delivered. I was very forthright with the honourable gentleman opposite when I said, yes, indeed, that
candidate was the candidate we were looking to.



MR. MOODY: Well, this minister has a lot of trouble with contracts. No wonder he is having
difficulty. I would ask this minister, what is the difficulty in sorting out a contract when the closing date was
September 30th? Is it that Dr. Reid wants more money? What is the problem? Would he tell the House today
what is the problem, five months later, since the date closed for applications, what is the difficulty in sorting
out a contract? Is it money?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, it is no more money than it was with the commissioner for health care
reform, to which the honourable gentleman referred in the previous Question Periods. We have a process in
place where we were making sure that the i’s were dotted and the t’s were crossed and that process continues.
I cannot make definitive statements here in this House regarding contracts for specific individuals until that
is done and vetted by Human Resources.



MR. MOODY: I can’t understand it. The commissioner of health has taken over six or eight months
to sign and dot her t’s; now we have another contract that is five months, can’t get the t’s and i’s dotted. What
is the difficulty?



I would ask the minister if he would table in this House, within the next week, the details of this
contract for this position. Surely to Heavens, before the position was advertised, the terms of reference were
set out. What is he doing, designing the terms of reference with the individual? Would the minister table the
terms of reference of that position within the next two days in this Legislature?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, these positions that the honourable gentleman refers to do not happen
overnight or within months. You have to have people come from jobs in other areas. In particular with
physicians, they have to have the ability to close down a practice, which I think has been there for some years.
Those are the things we have to work out and we cannot do this knee-jerk like. I would ask the honourable
member to understand that these are professionals who have other obligations.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



LIB. (PARTY-N.S.) - TRANSITION TEAM (1993):

 

BILLS - PAYMENT



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Premier.
Yesterday, senior staff in the Premier’s Office confirmed that this government has paid out $8,258 to George
Unsworth and other Liberal Party notables for their efforts on behalf of the Liberal Party in conjunction with
the Liberal’s transition to power. The transition team was undeniably a committee of the Liberal Party.



Could the Premier explain why the government, and not the Liberal Party, has paid these bills
associated with Liberal loyal service?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, this Liberal Party was forming the government. It was, without any
shadow of doubt, a commitment by a government. It is acceptable and done in other transition teams and the
member knows that perfectly well.



[3:00 p.m.]



MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I don’t know what Liberal and Tory Governments do in this
country but we have checked to be certain and there is not one NDP Government in this country that has paid
out money to Party faithful to head up transition teams at taxpayers’ expense. My question to the Premier is
simply this, will he agree today to ask the Liberal Party to repay to the public purse any expenses incurred by
and paid out to this transition team of high placed Liberals?



THE PREMIER: Certainly not, Mr. Speaker.



MS. MCDONOUGH: Maybe we can find out what it is that taxpayers got for their money. I wonder
if the Premier would agree to provide a full detailed accounting of what exactly Nova Scotians are paying for
in the expenses associated with the Liberal Party’s high placed transition team?



THE PREMIER: It was very appropriate and necessary for us to engage people in a transition team
that was going to take over the government. We started this about two to three months before. I would assume
that since we were a Liberal Party becoming a Liberal Government that we should have asked for NDP
supporters to work on the transition team, or Tories. What we did, Mr. Speaker, was to commission a team
of people who are professional and who deserve to the paid and who expect to be paid in a sensible way. I
think what this does, this scandalous throwing of dirt at people who gave up a lot of time and a lot of effort
to a transition team, does not serve the political process at all well.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



HEALTH - HALIFAX HOSPITALS: MERGER - REPORT TABLE



MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. This is regarding
the merger of the four hospitals, the new QE II. The minister said that there were a number of reports that
suggested this merger. But we haven’t seen a single report yet that says that such a recommendation, that this
should happen. I think the minister said in July that he had no such report, he came in one day with a whole
group of papers and said that he would table all of these reports that said that this merger should happen. We
haven’t seen anything tabled yet.



Would the minister today clarify whether or not any of those proposals submitted by the institutions
or any report recommended the merger of those four hospitals and would he stop making the promise of
tabling and would he table those reports?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, for seven years there was a group formulated to look at
merger of programs and merger of staffs of the facilities here in the city. Seven years. There are eight filing
cabinets of reports recommending merger of programs and staff in the former offices of this committee, this
group.



I ask you, Mr. Speaker, and through you ask the honourable member opposite to recall that some of
these were received, in fact most of them, during the tenure of office of the previous administration and there
was not one, not one recommendation followed by that administration previously despite the years of study
that recommended the merger of emergency medicine, the merger of some programs in thoracic surgery, the
merger of obstetrics and gynaecological programs and I could go on and on.



If this floor would accommodate the files, I would truck them in and ask the honourable gentleman
opposite to go through them and learn a bit about mergers and what can be done. (Applause)



MR. MOODY: My first supplementary, one of the things I did learn as minister was to be factual.
I will tell you, yes, there were reports on merging of programs, but there was also a report that said not to
merge the hospitals because of the cost factor.



I would ask the minister if he would table the analysis done on the efficient, the cost-effective report
that said we can deliver all these programs better and more efficient under one hospital; will he table that
report?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest that any competent businessman would understand
that when you have programs that needed to be merged, why were they being merged? They were being
merged for economy: economy of finances; economy of scale; and so on. We have proceeded and will proceed
to do that in order to provide for these economies of scale, focusing on programs, not focusing on institutions.






MR. MOODY: This minister has gone ahead with no concern for the workers and no concern for
anyone, just his own idea. I would ask the minister if he would agree - before this merger continues on because
there have been no meetings that I am aware of; if there have, they have been recent - that a financial analysis
be done before any merger officially happens to put those hospitals under one administration?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, certain financial analyses have been performed in my department and
have been very suggestive. In fact, just one simple one is that the incidence of day surgery, if it was increased
by another 15 per cent or so, we would save millions of dollars a year. But you cannot get anyone to agree on
doing this. We are going to say this is one of the main things in terms of mergers, what will happen, we will
save, not only money but, more important than that, we will be able to attract specialists of high calibre and
retain them. We will be able to do better for people with even less money, but more programs.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.



HEALTH - PROV. HEALTH COUNCIL: BILL NO. 95 - CHANGES



DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health. The minister, on occasion, has made
reference to the Provincial Health Council and I think, on occasion, takes their advice very seriously. But the
Provincial Health Council is now calling for changes to Bill No. 95. The council does not believe that the bill
enables the community with any real power and they have not had any real tangible response from the
minister in terms of changes. So, my question to the minister is, will the minister be proposing any changes
to Bill No. 95?



HON. RONALD STEWART: I thank the honourable gentleman opposite for his question regarding
this issue. The honourable member may not know but, as early or as late as yesterday at 10:00 o’clock, I met
with the Provincial Health Council and we discussed, briefly, some of the issues in terms of Bill No. 95, the
regional health board issues. There is concern about this; there is real concern on the part of the Provincial
Health Council and I agreed at that time, yesterday, and, in fact, previous to this, to look very seriously at
amendments that would strengthen the recommendations of the Blueprint Committee and reflect the true
community health board control over programs.



DR. HAMM: As the minister must be aware, I would not have knowledge of that particular meeting
but, certainly, that is encouraging. Bearing in mind that the interim regional health boards are now having
their orientation, and that has been reported in the press and, come the first of the year, by the minister’s own
pronouncement they will be up and running, will the minister be bringing, in this session of the House, the
amendments to which he has alluded so, in fact, that they can be debated and made part of the legislation and,
in fact, will be in effect as the regional health boards, the first of the year, start their very important work?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I would hesitate to get into a detailed description of how we can better
express and strengthen the role of the community health boards in the reform system. Suffice it to say that
according to much legal advice, legislative advice, we can do so through the regulations of the bill, for
example, but the bill will have to be, I believe, amended in certain aspects and that could be done in the spring
sitting.






DR. HAMM: By way of final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister would be able
to give us some information as to whether or not the Provincial Health Council had expressed any views in
terms of appropriate representation on both regional and community health boards?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I understand the question. Appropriate representation;
I am sure that the honourable gentleman opposite would agree that there is, indeed, appropriate representation
of skillful and honourable people on the boards. Perhaps he is referring to geographic representation. There
was no comment made by the Provincial Health Council; I did not pose that question to them. We didn’t
discuss those questions specifically. Suffice it to say, in the matter he raises, that is the strengthening of
community health boards, I certainly, very briefly, pledged to them the changes that would strengthen that
component.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Hants West.



FIN.: HEALTH CARE COMMISSIONER - SALARY



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Approximately
two weeks ago, I requested from the Minister of Health details regarding the salary paid to the Commissioner
of Health Care Reform. My colleague, the member for Kings West, had been seeking that information over
the past four weeks from both the Minister of Human Resources and the Minister of Health, without any
success. Now that the Minister of Finance has had a couple of weeks, can he advise the House what salary is
paid to that lady who occupies that position?



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: No, I cannot, Mr. Speaker.



MR. RUSSELL: Well, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance is also the Chairman of the Priorities
and Planning Committee, so I would assume that the contract for Ms. Hampton went through the Priorities
and Planning Committee. My first supplementary is, does he have details of her contract?



MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I am not specifically aware of that contract. I certainly take that
part of the question on notice. Contracts generally come through the Priorities and Planning Committee, if
they are of a certain category. This may have been one of them, I am not sure.



MR. RUSSELL: I presume, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Finance is referring to a special
category, meaning whether or not they are to go out to tender or not.



My final supplementary is to the Minister of Health. Can the Minister of Health advise us whether
or not Mary Jane Hampton’s contract was tendered and what her salary is?



HON. RONALD STEWART: This was a contract position, Mr. Speaker, as I understand it. The
contract is under review by Human Resources and Ms. Hampton is working, as she has for the past several
months, for the previous salary to which she was entitled.



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






NAT. RES.: TENDERING GUIDELINES - ADHERENCE



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question, if I may, sir, through you to the
Minister of Natural Resources. My question to the minister is quite simple, and that is whether or not the
minister could tell me if his department, agencies, boards and corporations for which the minister is
responsible, are they to follow the tendering guidelines and directives as set out by the government?



HON. DONALD DOWNE: In regard to our department and department activities, they are asked
to comply with all tendering programs as pointed out.



MR. HOLM: Well, the minister says that they are asked to comply. I refer to a memorandum issued
by the Honourable Wayne Adams, dated November 29, 1993, talking about preferred lists for professional
services, pointing out how they are notorious, and going on to say that the use of preferred lists, the notorious
preferred lists, are to be withdrawn immediately. Yet, we find out that Nova Scotia Resources Limited is, in
fact, using preferred lists for legal services. They have three companies. They are: McInnes Cooper &
Robertson; Cox Downie; and Stewart McKelvey Stirling Scales.



My question to the minister is quite simply this, why is Nova Scotia Resources Limited still using
notorious preferred lists in contravention to the directives given by the Honourable Wayne Adams?



MR. DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, NSRL is a Crown Corporation and that Crown Corporation, in virtue,
has a right to deal with companies, as they feel fit, in regard to the corporations or law firms that they deal
with. In fact, it seems to me that you cannot tender law contracts, in fact, they appoint individuals that they
are dealing with. Cox Downie is a member law firm as is mentioned in the other two law firms that have an
excellent reputation in the Province of Nova Scotia and they are using them, obviously, because they are doing
a good job for them.



[3:15 p.m.]



MR. HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I think if the minister was on the Gong Show he would have got the gong
because quite frankly, this government has shown, in fact, that it can tender legal services. What we have also
seen and it has been done by the Minister of Justice for the Minister of Transportation and Communications
already, the minister is saying that it is a Crown Corporation so it doesn’t have to follow fair, open tendering
practices. If we aren’t having double standards in the Province of Nova Scotia, because what he has done is
insulted every other firm in the Province of Nova Scotia saying that they aren’t capable. I ask the minister,
will he go back and instruct Nova Scotia Resources Limited to follow the fair open tendering policies as set
out by the Minister of Supply and Services? Will he instruct them to follow those proper practices?



MR. DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, I think the honourable member is misleading the House in regard to
the comments that he is making. In regard to legal contracts being tendered, on a specific job for a specific
purpose, that is one item. But in dealing with the overall governance or issues within a Crown Corporation,
it is up to the discretion of the representative to deal accordingly.






I have instructed our staff to follow the guidelines as set out by our government and if there has been
an infraction on that, I will investigate that. As far as I have been aware, at this point in time and I will review
it, our Crown Corporation has been following the guidelines in accordance to the way they see them being
interpreted in regard to the legal contracts or legal companies that are doing work for the Crown Corporation.
I understand that they have been hired and dealt with because of their professional ability, as most of the law
firms we have in the Province of Nova Scotia have high calibre work that they do. This particular Crown
Corporation is not dealing with one company, they are dealing with a number of companies and what is wrong
with that?



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.



HOUSING - AUTHORITIES (HFX.-DART.): MGT. AUDIT - RECOMMENDATIONS



MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Housing and Consumer
Affairs. There was a management audit done of the Halifax and Dartmouth Housing Authorities and it was
completed in September 1994. One of the recommendations of the report was that they amalgamate the two
housing authorities. Would the minister indicate to the House and to those authorities, what is going to
happen?



HON. GUY BROWN: Mr. Speaker, a very good question. I have met with the mayors involved, of
the City of Halifax and the City of Dartmouth, and they have gone through the report, the federal government
has gone through the report and we will be making a final decision in the next few days with regard to that
report.



MR. MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, I am a little disappointed that it has been over two months since that
report was tabled. One of the other recommendations was that the authorities should maximize the use of the
private sector in the operation of the housing stock. Has the minister looked at that aspect of the report?



MR. BROWN: Mr. Speaker, we have three partners in the social housing programs in this country,
be it in Nova Scotia or be it in some other province. We have the municipal government, the provincial
government and the federal government. Due to an election in the municipalities this fall, I thought it was
fair and just to wait until the new councils, the new mayors were elected before we moved forward. That we
have done and we have met with them and they have a copy of the report and as soon as they have gone
through them, we will be making an announcement. But as a personal point of view, I have a problem with
regard to privatizing social housing ownership in this province.



MR. MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, I do realize, to the minister, that there were civic elections and a
changeover of mayors and councillors in the area. But that report indicated you could save over $1 million
by amalgamating them, so I think it is important that the minister get on with the job and report back as soon
as he can as to what is going to happen with that study.



MR. BROWN: Oh, Mr. Speaker, that is why we did the audit and we are doing checks on all housing
authorities in Nova Scotia, because we believe in this government that we can manage much better and we
will be moving forward with that program and other ones.



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






NAT. RES.: ELECTRICAL CONSUMPTION - DECLINING



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Natural Resources. Nova
Scotia Power Incorporated has made the decision to cut 38 jobs at the Seaboard generating station near Glace
Bay. Of course Nova Scotia Power is now a private company and they are able to make decisions free of
government intervention. However, that still doesn’t mean we cannot be concerned about layoffs in areas of
the province with high unemployment rates, as high as they presently are in industrial Cape Breton.



Can the minister provide Nova Scotians with an answer as to why electricity consumption is
declining in Nova Scotia, yet it is projected to steadily increase in New Brunswick?



HON. DONALD DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the member opposite first, in the debates
that were in this House for quite some time in regard to the privatization of the Power Corporation, many
members on this side indicated all too well to all Nova Scotians that this, in fact, would probably be the case
on the privatization of the Power Corporation and that the Glace Bay generating station would probably be
closed down because of the privatization issue and some 38 jobs would be lost because of that.



AN HON. MEMBER: They said never, Don, they said never.



MR. DOWNE: They said never. In regard to the issue (Interruptions) Mr. Speaker, in regard to the
decline in the consumption of power, there is no question that right now, with Point Aconi coming onstream,
there is a surplus of power in the Province of Nova Scotia. In fact, the surplus of power will probably be in
the position until the year 2000 to the year 2003. The Power Corporation, to my best knowledge, there is a
surplus of power in the Province of New Brunswick and they are not looking at any new generating facilities,
probably until the year 2000 or beyond.



I might point out also that New Brunswick Power also has the ability to export down to the United
States.



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, it is somewhat encouraging to learn that the minister, even though it
is a private company, is concerned about job losses, as I think we all are in this House.



Nova Scotia Power is presently involved in practically a cutthroat advertising war with Irving Oil
from Saint John, New Brunswick. The Glace Bay layoffs, we are told, were necessary because the corporation
is citing a slow growth in electricity demand, and I am sure that would include electric heat. It seems a little
strange that Irving Oil, being based in Saint John, isn’t dimming the New Brunswick Power Corporation’s
ability to do business; in fact, it still seems to be on the incline in that province.



I wonder if the minister has any concerns relating to Irving Oil coming into this province and
advertising as they have been?



MR. DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, this is a matter that is really not up to me in regard to two private
sectors that are doing their own marketing program. It would be irresponsible of this minister, who is
responsible for energy and other areas, to comment on private sector marketing positions and ploys.



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, for my final supplementary, may I go to the Minister responsible for
the Economic Renewal Agency. Mr. Minister, the facts speak for themselves. I wonder if you feel the reason
behind the increased demand for power in New Brunswick over the next five years is because Frank McKenna
is going out and generating business to come to his province, leaving our province in a cloud of dust behind
him?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Well, I really don’t know what the member’s after and I can’t tell him where
the extra power is going but I can tell you that we have become the second best province in Canada creating
jobs in this province, ahead of New Brunswick. Maybe the jobs we’re creating don’t take the electricity that
the ones they have created in New Brunswick do but we will put our job creation record in the last 10 or 12
months up against New Brunswick any time.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



HUMAN RES.: DEVELOPMENT CO-ORDINATOR - CANDIDATE (HUMAN RES.)



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: My question is for the Minister of Human Resources. The minister will
recall that she stated yesterday that to the best of her recollection the top candidate for the job of human
resource co-ordinator in her department was an employee of the Department of Municipal Affairs. Having,
I am sure, a chance to confirm that with her staff, can the minister assure us today that one of the candidates
in the competition was, in fact, an employee of the Department of Human Resources, her own department and
that the candidate with the top score from the Human Resources Selection Committee was the employee from
the Department of Municipal Affairs.



HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: Yes, Mr. Speaker.



MR. DONAHOE: The minister will know that when a successful candidate is chosen that the normal
practice as I understand it is that a letter confirming an offer of employment to that candidate goes forward
to that candidate. Can the minister tell us whether or not such a letter did go to the successful candidate and
if so would she be prepared to table that letter?



MRS. NORRIE: It is my understanding from the department that the competition hadn’t gone to that
level. No letter had been prepared and sent to the home department of the employee that had been the top
candidate in the secondment competition.



MR. DONAHOE: I am not sure I understand what the minister means when she says that the
competition did not go to that level. There was a publicly advertised competition, it was clearly stated to be
open to employees of the Nova Scotia Government only. We have already learned that four candidates applied;
one of them was from Municipal Affairs, one was from Human Resources. We are being told by this minister
that the top candidate recommended was a person in Municipal Affairs and the competition was held to the
point where the top candidate was selected. Then I asked if a letter to that top candidate, the person
recommended for the job went forward to that candidate and I am now being told by this minister if I
remember her words correctly that, the process didn’t go to that level. Could she please explain either what
she means by that or, more to the point, why did the competition not go to that level?



MRS. NORRIE: I would like to clarify for the House that the announcement, if you like, that the top
candidate was from Municipal Affairs was not my statement, I confirmed his statement yesterday that he made
in the House and that it was my understanding that that was true. The candidate chosen is a standard practice,
the home department is, if you look on the job opportunity sheet, to agree that the candidate can move from
one department to another. It is standard practice that that can happen with a telephone call or verbally and
no letterhead gone between my department and the department of the candidate, as he has said, who was the
top candidate.



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



HUMAN RES.: DEVELOPMENT CO-ORDINATOR - CANDIDATE (MUN. AFFS.)



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: There is no question, I have missed with some noise in the House. Is
the Minister of Human Resources today telling us, and all I need is a yes or no, is she telling us that the top
candidate after the interviews were held, the top candidate recommended for the job of human resource co-ordinator was an employee of the Department of Municipal Affairs? Is that what the minister is telling us?



HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: Yes and I confirmed that yesterday in Question Period when I asked
earlier. Thank you.



[3:30 p.m.]



MR. DONAHOE: So, going back then to the question of why there is no letter of offer to that
candidate, who obviously wanted the job or he or she would not have allowed his or her name to stand as a
candidate, no letter confirming that the job was available to them, we are told this did not go because the
home department, in this case, Municipal Affairs, would not let that person go.



May I, by way of supplementary, ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs whether or not that candidate,
recommended to enjoy the secondment in the Department of Human Resources, was informed in writing by
either this minister or some senior official in her department that that employee was not going to be permitted
to undertake the secondment. Was that conveyed to the candidate in writing?



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: I think, Mr. Speaker, it is important that we clarify, as the Minister of
Human Resources has said, that there was an individual from the Department of Municipal Affairs who was
considered for that job, that that individual candidate had actually applied for that job and was considered for
that job, but the candidate was discussed for the job. It is important that we do not buy into the discussion and
the statements that the honourable Leader of the Official Opposition would like to make, such as putting
words into people’s mouths.



There was no offer of a job to that candidate. The person was discussed as a candidate for the job.
There was a discussion within my department with the fact that the candidate was coming from my
department, how it would affect the department. As I said yesterday in answer to the question, in actual fact,
this candidate had had discussion with their immediate boss within the department and there are a number
of things that will be happening in the Department of Municipal Affairs and the candidate would like to have
an opportunity to advance within the Department of Municipal Affairs.



MR. DONAHOE: Well, that is all very interesting, but the minister still did not answer my question
and she tries to make it sound as if I am putting words in her mouth. I am not putting words in her mouth or
anybody else’s mouth. I am asking questions that we are attempting to determine exactly what happened with
this arrangement which, frankly, stinks to high Heaven because Mildred Royer’s friend ends up in the job.
(Interruptions)



Will the Minister of Municipal Affairs, by way of final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, confirm that
an employee in her department was interviewed, was the top candidate recommended by the interview
committee, was informed that she or he was the top candidate recommended and that he or she was informed
by an official in the department that the Department of Municipal Affairs would not allow the secondment
to go forward?



MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I will answer the question, again, as I did yesterday and today, already.
The top candidate was considered from the Department of Municipal Affairs. There was a discussion about
that individual as a candidate from the Department of Human Resources. As is the normal practice, they check
with the home department to see if having that individual move - it is a two year secondment - would, in
actual fact, provide a concern for the home department.



In this instance, as I have said already, the candidate is aware of some movement that we want to
make in the Department of Municipal Affairs. That there is some restructuring that will be going on in certain
aspects in the Department of Municipal Affairs and that individual would like to have an opportunity to
advance within the Department of Municipal Affairs.



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



SUPPLY AND SERV.: LAWYERS - TENDERING POLICY

 

 

MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, my first question, if I may direct through you, sir, to the Minister
of Supply and Services and, quite simply, it is this. Does the minister consider that legal services are
professional services?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Yes, Mr. Speaker.



MR. HOLM: We agree on that, Mr. Speaker. Well, we have seen already today that the Minister of
Natural Resources obviously is prepared to flaunt the rules that are laid down by the minister in his tendering
directive. We know that the casino corporation has not called for proposals, did not do a proper call for
proposal or tender for the legal services for the casino project.



So my question to the minister is, quite simply, this. Do your colleagues consult you before they
decide to ignore the directives that you have given out?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I will answer the question in phases. The answer to the last part of the
question is yes. My colleagues do consult with me quite often from time to time on procedure. To get to the
first part of the question, they do not consult in terms of breaking the rules because it is not a deliberate
objective of any of my colleagues nor myself. I will say and make it clear, as my colleague, the Honourable
Donald Downe said earlier, that the agencies, boards and commissions do have that capacity in charge of their
various commissions to do their appointment of services or goods, whatever the case maybe, apart from the
minister or any minister’s direct involvement. I am not saying it is perfect, it is the way it is at this point in
time.



MR. HOLM: So in other words, Mr. Speaker, agencies, boards, commissions and corporations can
be used by this government if they want to use them to pass out their patronage plums and favours to
supporters. (Interruptions) It means that the tendering policy, the paper that we have, quite frankly, is not
worth the paper it is written on. You might as well tear it up and throw it away. (Interruptions)



I ask the minister, quite simply, this, if this is not a public relations exercise why should anybody
have any confidence whatsoever in this material that is on the paper? Why waste a tree? What is the purpose
of putting out a tendering directive if it does not matter that nobody has to obey it? (Interruptions) What is
the purpose?



MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the question in that presentation. I am not sure there was
one. (Interruption) I did hear the question asked, what is the purpose of the paper and it is not worth the paper
it is written on. I will say, not in a strong boastful way, but I will say with a degree of respect that I monitored
that other provinces in this country have called us for advice and direction on how they put together their
tender policies. (Applause)



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



TRANSPORT.: ROUTE 236 (EAST HANTS) - MAINTENANCE



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the honourable Minister of Transportation
and Communications. (Interruptions) Many times we have been told by the Minister of Transportation and
Communications that provincial highway construction and repairs and maintenance, et cetera, will be carried
out based on the merit system and available funding, of course. I certainly appreciate and support that concept.
I would like to know, as does Danny Joseph of Truro who has commuted this road daily for five years, if your
department has any plans to address the deplorable road conditions in the constituency of East Hants,
specifically Route 236, the most direct route between Truro and Windsor? I might caution the minister, if I
may, that the past cannot be changed and the present, for the time being, I emphasize, is in his hands.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I would say to members that we hope to address all the
deplorable road conditions in Nova Scotia as funding allows us to do so. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



HEALTH - CAMP HILL MEDICAL CENTRE: MERGER - SALARIES



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. In July of this
year, I wrote to the minister requesting information relative to the cost of merging the metro health
institutions and the minister did not respond to me until late September. When he did, he did not supply me
with any cost information. The minister has also stated that the salaries of the employees at Camp Hill
Medical Centre will be brought up to the same levels as those employed at the Victoria General Hospital. It
has now been over four months since the minister made this announcement, and I ask if he will now provide
to Nova Scotians his estimate of the cost of adjusting the salaries of Camp Hill employees as the merger goes
forward?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I am at a disadvantage. I am not aware of the letter that
the honourable gentleman has opposite, but I certainly would check it later on. Again, in terms of estimates
and costs of mergers and so on, that is part of the responsibility of the transitional board and of my staff to
work with that. We are already doing that diligently within my department. Those estimates will be
forthcoming as soon as we gain all of the information and proceed with the merger.



MR. DONAHOE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I ask the Minister of Health, with the greatest respect, how
does he explain to the taxpayers of Nova Scotia that the merger is announced, things take place to result in
some of the merging, to take place? We have him stand in the House some months later saying, we will find
out about the cost, as this work goes on.



I think Nova Scotian taxpayers would like to know from this Minister of Health, why is it that he has
the cart before the horse and he has a merger going - about which he will find out and, unfortunately, the
taxpayers will find out - the cost, after the steps have been taken to effect the merger? How does he justify that
position?



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I can say very clearly and with great confidence, that I cannot give
absolute estimates of what is going to happen to a particular reform initiative. I can give the honourable
gentleman an idea; for example, I have been given an estimate fairly recently that in studying the provision
of health care services in the central region, we could, with changes, including amalgamation, save up to $50
million here in the central region. But can I stand in this place and guarantee this to the people of Nova
Scotia? Of course I cannot. But I can tell you that we are diligently pursuing not only the savings which would
accrue to the change in programs that we anticipate in the reform process throughout the province, but also
the fact that programs are going to be improved. That is the essence of this, whether or not they are going to
be improved.



We have to consider the whole issue, whether, for example, if we say $50 million, and again I use
that figure only because it was one of the estimates given to me. If we have even half of that, we would pay
for any kind of merger and we would cover all the costs thereof.



MR. DONAHOE: Well, by way of final supplementary, I would say to the Minister of Health, that
there are also estimates around which have been made known to me. That the cost of salary adjustments for
the employees of Camp Hill Medical Centre will cost Nova Scotians at least $35 million. That is quite a hit
on the $50 million of savings that the minister has just talked about.



My supplementary to the minister is, will he tell Nova Scotian taxpayers today, yes or no, whether
or not he had made available to him an analysis that provided details, both in terms of program delivery and
financial and fiscal implications of the merger of these hospitals, upon which he based his recommendation
to the government that the merger go forward? If such studies exist, will he commit to table them in this
Legislature?



DR. STEWART: Again, Mr. Speaker, I have spoken in this place in past Question Periods and every
chance I get, talking of the studies that have been done over the past seven years or more, in respect to the
merger of programs and the ability we will have to have cost-effective management of in-hospital services
particularly and of other health care services within the central region.



I would give an undertaking to the honourable Leader of the Opposition that I will, in every way, be
very forthcoming, in terms of costs, estimates and other things, as soon as they are available and as the merger
goes forward.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



NSLC: IDENTIFICATION CAMERAS - STATUS



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Finance, through you,
of course, in his capacity as the Minister in charge of the Liquor Control Act. I wish to know, as does Mr.
MacGillvary from Pictou County, what happened to the identification cameras that were formerly in the Nova
Scotia Liquor Commission buildings?



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Funny you should ask. The honourable member was kind enough -
he brought this matter up first about a week ago - and when he asked me yesterday, I didn’t have the
information and I apologize. I do have it for him today.



The responsibility for taking the photos IDs was transferred to the Motor Vehicle Branch in their new
program. As a result, the cameras became superfluous to the operation of the Nova Scotia Liquor Commission
and they were donated to a number of organizations, mostly organizations involved with children. I have a
list of those organizations and I will table them for the honourable member. (Applause)



[3:45 p.m.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



AGRIC.: PROGRAMS - ELIMINATION



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: My question through you, Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Agriculture.
The government has eliminated many valuable agricultural programs which, in the past, have been of great
assistance to farmers. One program that has been eliminated is the Fertilizer Assistance Program and I would
like to know, as well as Mr. Lewis of Berwick, how many programs in total have been cut and what assistance
is the Liberal Government planning for farmers in place of these eliminated programs?



HON. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Speaker, presently the Department of Agriculture and Marketing
has 36 different assistance programs. As I have pointed out before, with the help of the Nova Scotia
Federation of Agriculture, we are in the process of evaluating all of the programs and before any new
programs are announced, or before programs are phased out, the farmers in this province will certainly have
an input, directly, with this government and the staff of my department. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



LBR.: WORKERS PART-TIME - BENEFITS



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of
Labour and it is on the matter of part-time workers. Yesterday and today, we heard about the fact that part-time workers who are either on an irregular basis or a regular basis and work a few extra hours are going to
see their wages reduced by 3 per cent even though they are earning under $25,000. I think most people realize
that a number of the jobs that are being created tend to be part-time jobs; the percentages now are in the high
teens.



My question to the minister is that when we discussed this matter on the floor of this House last
spring, the issue of benefits for part-time workers, the minister agreed that it was, in fact, a serious problem
and a worthy issue and that he would be taking steps to move forward on some of these issues in terms of
trying to bring forward legislation to provide benefits for part-time workers. I wonder if the minister could
indicate, given the increasing need to provide some level of protection for part-time workers, could he indicate
to this House what steps he has taken to move in that direction, to provide benefits for part-time workers?



HON. JAY ABBASS: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite raises an important question; in fact, I
anticipate that upon the passage, hopefully very soon, of the new Workers’ Compensation Act that more time
will be available or more resources will be available within the department to look not just at the Labour
Standards Code but also at the Trade Union Act because, especially in the case of the latter Act, there are
concerns both on the employer’s side and the union’s side about the length of time, for instance, which it takes
for an arbitration to find its way through the system. The short answer is that, pending the passage of the
Workers’ Compensation Act, there is no expectation that this House will see a new Labour Standards Code.



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, what I am specifically referring to, again, is the question of benefits
for part-time workers. That is the Private Member’s Bill that I introduced in this House last spring, that is
what it addressed and that is what my question is all about, because I think most people realize that there has
been, over the past 10 to 15 years, a clear conversion of full-time work to part-time work by employers, one
of the major reasons being to avoid the cost of providing pensions and benefits.



Again, the minister clearly indicated in this House in debate last spring that - and I would just quote
here on Page 694 of the Assembly Debates, Wednesday, April 27th, “We need a better profile of the Nova
Scotia work force. We should communicate with the other provinces, including Saskatchewan, find out more
about their legislation. We should consult with employees and employers within our province . . .”.



I know that the minister has had a busy time with saving the Premier’s hide and so on. I would like
to ask the minister if he would give a real commitment to part-time workers, to actually bring forward, to
begin this consultation immediately, to provide the information with respect to part-time workers and the
provisions of benefits for that class of employee in the Province of Nova Scotia?



MR. ABBASS: Immediately, meaning today or at least tomorrow. I cannot give that undertaking.
As I said in an earlier answer, in my last answer on this same question, no new Labour Standards Code is
imminent. But upon the passage of the new Workers’ Compensation Act, I would look forward to having the
resources within my department to do work, not just on the Labour Standards Code, but also upon the Trade
Union Act.



MR. CHISHOLM: Well, I guess in conclusion, the commitments that the minister made to me and
to members of this House, indicating how important this issue was, were merely words and his commitment
to actually doing something on the issue of providing legislative framework for the provision of benefits for
part-time workers is not in the future. I would like the minister to explain to part-time workers in Nova Scotia,
the level of commitment he is actually going to show for that class of worker. That class of worker that is then
increasing in numbers, day by day.



MR. ABBASS: Well, the member opposite is perhaps jumping to conclusions or over-extending
himself with his logic. All I can say, is that possibly even part-time workers understand - as do all taxpayers
in Nova Scotia - that this government has, against all odds, managed to bring forward a brand new, 257 clause
Workers’ Compensation Act which eluded past administrations.



With all due respect, the members opposite have, in the past, said they would congratulate the
government when it did good work. I think this is one of that Party’s opportunities.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.



ERA - BLUENOSE II: OPERATIONS - RESPONSIBILITY



MR. JOHN LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Economic Renewal Agency,
if the other two members can finish their question and answer. My question is this, at any time since the
minister’s announcement with respect to the creation of the Schooner Bluenose Foundation, was responsibility
for Bluenose II’s operations given or offered by government to the Schooner Bluenose Foundation?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Under the agreement we have with the Schooner Bluenose
Foundation - which I am pleased to tell the members opposite has now been duly incorporated and structured -
hired a world-class lawyer to do the work and it is now completed. The agreement we have, which has been
asked for under a House Order, will be tabled. We have agreed to enter into an arrangement that the Schooner
Bluenose Foundation - let me back up, I was just about to talk about the Preservation Trust. Would the
member opposite like to restate his question? It might be easier.



MR. LEEFE: I can understand with three groups out there vying for money why the minister would
be confused.



MR. JOHN HOLM: At least he is honest, he is confused.



MR. LEEFE: My question to the minister is this, at any time since the announcement creating the
Schooner Bluenose Foundation in early June - that is the Lindsay group - has responsibility for Bluenose II’s
operations at any point since then, been offered by government to the Schooner Bluenose Foundation?



MR. BRAGG: The discussions we had with the Schooner Bluenose Foundation, which is Mr.
Lindsay’s group, which are given the responsibility to raise money for a new vessel. That group is solely
responsible for raising money for the new vessel, not operating the existing Bluenose II at this time.



MR. LEEFE: So the answer is no, and I caught the minister’s last three words, at this time. So, I am
assuming that he may be keeping the door open in that respect.



My first supplementary, Mr. Speaker. When the government established the Schooner Bluenose
Foundation, how many dollars did it transfer to the foundation?



MR. BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, at the time that we agreed to the Schooner Bluenose Foundation taking
over the objective of raising money for the new Bluenose III, we did not transfer any money over at that time.
What we have done is we have paid any expenses they have incurred up to this time, under receipts that they
have submitted to us and so on.



We are in the process, at this time, of forwarding them the balance of the money that was in the
original Bluenose trust fund for the construction of a new Bluenose to that foundation. That is something that
is going on at this time. I do not have the exact amount of money involved, but there is in the vicinity of
$300,000 that was in the trust fund for the building of a new Bluenose.



MR. LEEFE: Yes, that $300,000 is the amount that was reported in the Chronicle-Herald article on
June 4th. I wonder, Mr. Speaker, if the minister could advise the House whether that same $300,000, give or
take a couple of dollars here or there, is still under the full control of the Schooner Bluenose Foundation and,
if not, to where they have been transferred?



MR. BRAGG: I can answer the member very quickly. The answer is, yes. It is under the control of
either the department that I am responsible for or the Schooner Bluenose Foundation. We have forwarded
some money to them, as I have said, to cover ongoing operational expenses as they start their fund raising
campaign, to be used to raise money and the balance, as requested, will be forwarded to them.



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



ERA - BLUENOSE II: TENDER - REFIT



MR. JOHN LEEFE: Again, to the minister and again staying with the Bluenose in its various forms.
The Schooner Bluenose Foundation has an operations committee. That was in the minister’s release,
subsequent to the foundation being established.



I wonder if the minister could advise the House if that committee had ever been given an
understanding by the minister or by his staff that that committee would be authorized to tender for a refit on
Bluenose II?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: No, Mr. Speaker. The operations committee of the Schooner Bluenose
Foundation were never instructed to tender for a refit. There were some discussions with the Lindsay group,
which is the Schooner Bluenose Foundation, about whether or not they should undertake the repairs of the
Bluenose II or whether it should be done by Mr. Moore’s group, the Preservation Trust. It was decided, in
conferences with Mr. Moore and Mr. Lindsay that, in fact, the Preservation Trust would look after getting the
refit and the work done on the existing Bluenose II, not the Preservation Trust.



MR. LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister would advise the House, was the operations
committee of the Schooner Bluenose Foundation, or indeed was anybody in that foundation, the Lindsay
foundation, given an understanding that once refitted they could use Bluenose II for fund raising for the
Schooner Bluenose Foundation?



MR. BRAGG: The agreement between the Preservation Trust, the Schooner Bluenose Foundation
and the government is that the Bluenose II will, in fact, be used for fund raising efforts by the foundation to
raise money for Bluenose III.



MR. LEEFE: My final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, is to the Premier. I wonder if the Premier could
advise the House if, at any time, he has had written correspondence with Mr. Wilfred Moore with respect to
Bluenose II and, if so, would he be kind enough to table the correspondence.



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure. I would have to check that.



MR. SPEAKER: On a further question, the honourable member for Queens.



ERA: BLUENOSE II - REFIT



MR. JOHN LEEFE: I take the Premier at his word, of course, and I know that he will check and if
has had any, he will indeed endeavour to do that.



This morning in the Lunenburg Progress Enterprises, Mr. Philip Snyder, whose firm won the
contract for refit of Bluenose II confirmed that he had, indeed, done so and when asked how much it was
worth, he said it was confidential and he advised Mr. John Cunningham on the staff of the paper to call Mr.
Wilfred Moore. Mr. Cunningham notes that he has called Mr. Moore on a number of occasions, but the calls
have never been returned.



[4:00 p.m.]



I wonder if the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency could help us - and, indeed, help Mr.
Cunningham, I suppose - and advise the House how much money has been budgeted by the Bluenose II
Preservation Trust - this is the Moore group - for the refit that is going to be done in Lunenburg this spring,
I suppose, or winter?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: The discussions and the agreement that we had with the Preservation Trust,
the people who are undergoing the refit of the existing Bluenose II, was that they would spend less than
$500,000 on the repairs to bring it up to a home class license so that it could be operational?



MR. LEEFE: The minister then is endeavouring to convince the House that he can get more for less?
Right. (Laugther)



My supplementary question is, Mr. Speaker, would the minister advise the House what class
certificate the Bluenose II will have as a result of the Bluenose II Preservation Trust conventional repairs, and
what limitations that class certificate will place on her travels?



MR. BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, what I would like to offer the honourable member is that I will find out
and report back to the House tomorrow, if he wants to raise that question, or I could give him a written report.
I don’t know and I am not going to go out on a limb and tell you one thing when it is not the case. But I will
find out that information and any other information about that license that I can, tomorrow.



MR. LEEFE: I appreciate the minister’s cooperation. My final supplementary, to the minister, can
he advise the House, specifically, where the money is going to come from to cover the costs of the repairs that
have been tendered by the Moore group?



MR. BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, I can certainly do that. Based on the assumption the repairs will be
$500,000 or less, which we are assured they will be, and based on the fact that Mr. Moore is confident that
he can raise a significant amount of that money from the private sector, we have agreed that between the
federal government and the provincial government, that we will look at funding the balance that is needed,
up to a maximum of $300,000, which we spoke about before, cost-shared 70/30 between the federal and
provincial governments out of one of our economic cooperation agreements.



Depending on the amount of the fund raising that Mr. Moore does at this juncture, it will determine
how much of that $300,000 it would be anticipated would be needed. It could be as much as the whole
$300,000, it could be less than that. At this time it is not clear until after he completes his fund raising
endeavours and they get the total cost of fixing the vessel, cement it.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



JUSTICE - CORRECTIONAL SERVICES: MARITIME PLAN - RELEASE



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of
Justice, and it concerns the so-called Maritime master plan for correctional services and facilities. During the
spring session in estimates debates on Justice, the minister indicated that that master plan was anticipated to
be made public in July or August, and we are now coming to December 1st. My question is, whether the
Maritime master plan is now in the minister’s hands? If so, how long has it been there and when will he make
it available to the public, as promised?



HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I think there might have been some misunderstanding. The
actual final plan that was worked on between the three provinces was only completed in the fall; I can’t
remember exactly, it may have been October, something like that. We have had some discussions with the
Province of New Brunswick with regard to it, but because of delays relating to the Kingsclear Inquiry, we
haven’t been able to get in touch, my senior officials with theirs, until fairly recently. Some discussions have
been held, more are planned, and then once we agree - because I think P.E.I., basically, isn’t a player in it -
then the intention would be to release the plan but those discussions have to be concluded first.



MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I am very concerned with the minister’s suggestion that all the
discussions have to be concluded with the Government of New Brunswick before the master plan is publicly
released. I think it is at variance with the commitment that the minister made during the estimates debate and
I quote directly, he said, “. . . we are going to review the options we come up with” in the master plan that
was, “and we will work on them and it will be full disclosure as we go along.”.



There is a lot of concern about government foot dragging with respect to moving forward with
improvements at the Halifax Correctional Centre, for example, improvements recommended by the external
review that followed Donald Findlay’s untimely death. My question to the honourable minister is, will he
follow through on the commitment he made to ensure a full public disclosure and wide consultation with
respect to the options set out in that master plan and will he do so immediately?



MR. GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I cannot do so immediately and the member for Halifax Fairview is an
experienced member and she knows, full well, that when there is a joint study between governments you have
to have the agreement of both sides. That report has not been in our hands that long; we have been working
on it and I indicated that we would get on with concluding our discussions and have the plan released.



She also mentions Halifax County Correctional Centre. Many of the improvements that were
recommended under the O’Handley Report have been completed, those that were feasible, some of them are
not possible, we have moved a long distance in those and those are coming along. I will fulfil a commitment
that I made in the past that the information will be made available but first we must respect discussions
between different governments and as soon as those are concluded, that information will be available without
question.



MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, the undertaking that was given is that there would be a number
of options outlined in that plan. So, the impression that the minister is giving is that there have to be decisions
made between the governments before the master plan proposed options are brought forward. Again, remind
the minister, that he stated in estimates, we will do as much consulting as we can, “. . . we will see that it is
studied as carefully as possible and we will be open to scrutiny and we will make our plans available.”.



My question remains to the minister, will he not honour that commitment, given the seriousness, the
concerns about public safety, safety of staff involved in correctional centres and inmates’ safety, will he honour
the commitment made and release to the public the options that are under consideration so that there could
be further public consultation and input before this government makes a number of the decisions that have
to be made about future directions, with respect to correctional services and facilities?



MR. GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, in case there is any misunderstanding, the decision between governments
is not to decide what is going to be done. Ultimately, it is to decide if there is sufficient consultation so each
side, each province, knows what is going on. It may be that we have nothing in common and we are not going
to proceed but we will consult, there will be information made available. As a matter of fact, the honourable
member knows this, it was the past few days, earlier this week, I met with the officials representing the
correctional officers’ union and we had a discussion. My officials are meeting them within the next week or
10 days.



There will be ongoing discussions and I don’t think we should try to put fear in the hearts of inmates
or their families, we are trying to do the best that we can. In fact, within several months, three or four months,
after the unfortunate death of Donald Findlay, we moved immediately to correct a major problem we had at
the Halifax County Correctional Centre, so we don’t have that recurring problem. We are concerned, I visited
all the correctional centres and we are going to get some action to improve corrections in Nova Scotia.
(Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.



ERA - BLUENOSE II: MOORE GROUP - TENDER



MR. JOHN LEEFE: To the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency, I wonder if the minister
would advise whether or not electrical, mechanical work on the standing and running rigging of Bluenose has
been included in the tender that the Moore Group has let?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, I don’t understand what he means but let me try to clarify what
I know. The winterization has been done by the Government of Nova Scotia to preserve things and winterize
it for the winter. The repair work, as I understand it, that is being done on the Bluenose II is all encompassing
under the work done by the Preservation Trust.



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



OPPOSITION MEMBERS’ BUSINESS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Private Members’ Public Bills for
Second Reading.



PRIVATE MEMBERS’ PUBLIC BILLS FOR SECOND READING.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 130.



Bill No. 130 - Regional Health Boards Act.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.



DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce to the House, Bill No. 130, an Act to
Amend Chapter 12 of the Acts of 1994, the Regional Health Boards Act.



This bill is introduced to correct a glaring deficiency in an Act to establish Regional Health Boards,
Chapter 12 of the Acts of 1994. This bill allows for interim and regional health boards to exercise far-reaching
authority in planning and administration of health care. This bill is severely deficient in that it provides no
guidelines for the minister when appointing boards, specifically in terms of what is suitable representation
on those boards. The bill is somewhat more specific in the matter of community health boards and makes
specific reference to representation by population.



The reform of the health care system by the current government is, by its own declaration, based on
Nova Scotia’s Blueprint for Health System Reform. The reform process is one which will increasingly isolate
the Department of Health from health care delivery at the community level.



The initial step has been the appointment of regional boards by the minister on the basis of
applications from Nova Scotians. The process was flawed when, in February, the Premier stated that only
Liberals would be appointed. This statement has resulted in many non-Liberals with excellent qualifications
to sit on a regional health board being dissuaded by the Premier’s statement on who would be considered for
appointment. The process was clearly flawed from this point forward, even if one were to accept political
appointments as being correct in the planning and administration of health care delivery.



The legislation introduced in the spring session, an Act to introduce regional health boards, was
spawned by the blueprint process but we must bear in mind that regionalization was not an issue to be decided
by the Blueprint Committee, but was a position given to them. The fair formation of regional health boards
is integral to an equitable and effective reform process in health care.






The legislation outlines clearly the powers and duties of the regional boards. I quote, Mr. Speaker,
from Page 3, Clause 7 of the bill in terms of the powers of those boards. “A regional health board shall, where
authorized by the regulations, (a) develop regional health- service plans, . . . (b) rationalize institutional health
services . . . (d), fund regional health programs and services; . . . (e) recommend to the Minister the core
programs . . . (i) conduct regular and systematic evaluation of the regional health system; . . .  8(a) establish
community health boards; (b) determine the community within which a community health board is to exercise
jurisdiction; (c) determine the method of selection of the membership of a community health board; . . .”.



It is self-evident that these powers which are invested in the minister and, through him, to the boards
are considerable and are fundamentally important to communities if there is truly to be self-direction of the
health care process. If communities are to be well served, then it is imperative that as regional health boards
function, they must be seen to represent equally and fairly those that they were designed to serve.



The Blueprint Committee states that Nova Scotians want to have “more say in decisions affecting
their health”. The ministerial appointment of regional health boards as a precursor to permanent regional
health boards must ensure and assure. The legislation provides no guideline for the appointment of
representatives and gives no criteria for the minister to follow. That these boards are important is highlighted
by a quick read of the Blueprint Committee report and I am quoting here now from Page 41, “the interim
RHBs should develop a regional health service plan that includes rationalizing all institutional services . . .
RHBs should have total authority for the regional funding . . .” package and, “. . . existing hospital boards
should be replaced by more appropriate governance structures in order to integrate all health care sectors.”.
All of these are key questions to be answered in the development of health care at the local level.



[4:15 p.m.]



In essence the regional health board is the planner, funder, evaluator and deliverer of service. On
November 29th the press reports that regional health boards will take over hospitals in late 1995. They will
define community health districts. Both of these efforts would be best served with strong local input. The
regional boards will take over public health services and drug dependency services in late 1995-96 and then
take over home care services.



While the Blueprint Committee is vague on the make up of regional health boards, it does give
direction as to what they should be doing. “Plan, fund, co-ordinate and evaluate programs that serve the entire
region. For example, orthopaedics, vascular geriatric assessment, regional ambulance service, etc.”.



The Blueprint Committee recommended the interim boards would exist no more than two years, but
this not in the legislation. The interim regional health boards would initiate community health boards and
community health regions immediately and, in fact, regional health boards can negotiate between themselves
to determine the exact boundaries of regions.



The regional health boards will develop regional health service plans and will consist of no less than
two-thirds consumers. The Blueprint Committee on Page 28 is very clear when it makes reference to
representation by population on regional health boards as appointed by community health boards. It is
apparent the committee appreciated and accepted the philosophy of representation by geography and
population.



The minister, despite persistent urging, has not indicated what criteria he has used to make
appointments to interim boards. The inappropriate lack of proportional representation on interim boards flies
in the face of accepted normal representation. Nowhere is there a better example of a lack of proper
representation on an interim health board than the disproportionately small representation of Pictonians on
the Northern Regional Health Board, a mere 2 of 15 members to represent 37 per cent of the population of
the northern region. This is most startling when a close examination reveals that there is a 40 mile separation
of the major population centres of Pictou and Colchester Counties and a 100 mile separation of population
centres of Pictou and Cumberland Counties. There is no suggestion that there is not a definite geographical
separation and, in reality, a marked separation of community and health delivery services in the three centres
making up the northern region.



Other areas of the province are as well uncertain as to the fairness of representation in Kings County
and in Halifax County. Mr. Speaker, if legislation is to break new ground on the basic criteria of
representation, then would it not be appropriate that the legislation indicate the new modus operandi. The
question of representation is one which is fundamental to this debate.



The first Canadian House of Assembly occurred in 1758; the first meeting being held in the Old
Court House on the corner of Argyle and Buckingham Streets. Representation was based on population and
geography in this historic Assembly. The difficulties of providing an adequate system of representation have
long plagued political theorists and practising politicians. The democracies of early times practised direct
democracy.



Mr. Speaker, representation is, in fact, a medieval invention which originated in the early church’s
practice of calling together representative councils to deal with matters affecting the government of
Christendom. Particularly, the custom of calling representatives from the communities was adopted by Simon
de Mortfort in 1265, the date often singled out as the true beginning of the mother of parliaments.



Today, representation is closely linked to the responsible conduct of government. Efficiency in
securing some degree of responsibility is a central objective in all schemes of representation. Underlying many
of the schemes is the attempt to secure representation which reflects with more or less mathematical exactness
the divisions within the population.



Before 1848, effective government was through the Council of Twelve; members appointed by the
governor, who used inappropriate appointments and ignored true representation of the population centres and
the geographical areas of the province leading to widespread discontent, until responsible government was
achieved in 1848.



Poor representation inevitably tends to lead to nepotism, favouritism and patronage. Each step of the
way, representation by population appears to be the overriding principle. The difficulty of representation of
low density population spread over large areas, adds another element to the equation and suggests that
geographical identity be expressed.



The problems of representation by geography and population can be addressed by so-called functional
representation, in which people are represented on the basis of a particular interest or activity. This basis, as
well, would lead to an understandable process by which to make appointments. This latter process is not in
vogue in this part of the world, but was utilized in fascist Italy. It, by its very nature, pits adversaries in bitter
struggles.



Chief Justice Johnathan Belcher, appointed in 1754, devised a plan of divisions of the province to
develop that historic first assembly in 1758. The division was based on representation by population and
geography. The first assembly in Nova Scotia was the first in 24 autonomous communities outside of England,
Ireland and Scotland forming the British Empire.



That we continue to be committed to representation by population is exampled by the June 1, 1992
report to the Law Amendments Committee from the Provincial Boundaries Commission which again reports
representation as being a creation of population.



The Report of the Select Committee on Establishing an Electoral Boundaries Commission identifies
terms of reference for the Provincial Boundaries Commission to effective representation and these are: 1.
relative parity of voting power achieved through constituencies of equal population to the extent reasonably
possible; geography, community history and community interests. This is a recipe for effective representation
which is sound and has historical endorsement.



The minister needs direction on appointing interim health boards and later in approving, through
Order in Council, the make up of the permanent boards. It is inappropriate and unacceptable that a minister
can make appointments affecting the development of care in our province, with no guidelines or criteria on
which to base his appointments.



We cannot have communities of appreciable size having their interests attended by those appointed
from another community area. There is no reasonable basis for this type of appointment.



The bill, which is an amendment to an Act to Establish Regional Health Boards, Chapter 12, Acts
of 1994, will require the minister in both appointing an interim and permanent regional health board to ensure
that the member represents - to the extent reasonably possible - the population demographics and geography
of the region for which the board is established.



Mr. Speaker, I move the bill for second reading.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I, first of all, appreciate the opportunity to rise and
address these issues. But I might say that this bill, as constituted, is, in my view and having looked at it, either
a little too late and a little too little. We hear the honourable gentleman opposite proposing that we now
change the appointment of boards that have already been appointed.



I would suggest that the honourable member, in his comments, either seriously misunderstands the
intent of the Blueprint Committee and the intent of regional health boards or he is engaged in some
skulduggery of some kind. I would suggest that the honourable member opposite is not engaged in
skulduggery. He is an honourable person and states his mind very clearly and forthrightly. So I must assume
he misunderstands the effect of the blueprint and what it has said to us.






We hear, for example, the history of the province and the voting patterns, I want to pose a very
simple question that I hope the honourable member will answer as he expounds further. That is, is he
completely, absolutely, dedicated to the full election of community and regional health boards? Is that the sole
selection method that he espouses? Because he implies that regional and community health boards, as
expressed by the Blueprint Committee, have to be elected according to population and representation by
population. The Blueprint Committee says, no. We will not have that. That is not the way we want to do it,
Mr. Speaker, and that is what we have undertaken to follow.



We have heard, for example, significant statements of population and percentages and how many
miles from a given community one other community is. Well, if we get into the specifics of numbers, I would
remind the honourable member opposite, who proposes this legislation, that in terms of the number of people
coming forward to be chosen for the boards, if you look at the numbers appointed from Cape Breton County,
for example, which was 13 per cent of those who applied and the number from Pictou County, which
happened to be 20 per cent of those who applied, I would venture to say that Pictou County, indeed, has it over
Cape Breton County in terms of numbers. But of course that is not what this is about and that is not a
reasonable way to look at things and I don’t want to suggest that in any way.



This amendment, Bill No. 130, seeks to direct regional health boards specifically, and further, direct
communities as to absolutely how they must govern themselves. In fact, it suggests, as the honourable
gentleman has suggested in his previous questions and previous speeches, that geography is a very important
element of how we govern health care in the province. I reject that outright as inadequate in the extreme and,
in fact, Mr. Speaker, would lead to chaos in our system.



The Blueprint Committee itself says, that in terms of interim boards, there should be no geography,
geographic or otherwise, considerations in the terms of who will sit on those boards. The people sitting on
boards in the health care system should sit on those boards, very clearly, Mr. Speaker, because of their
interest, because of their talent, not because of their geography, not because of their political persuasion, as
I have said in this House before, necessarily.



The bill, as it is presented, directs us to geographically represent or geographically compose the
regional health boards. Well, the regional health boards, the interim boards are already composed. We cannot
go back and change history. They are composed, they are there and they are working. This bill is contrary to
the spirit and actual recommendations of the Blueprint Report. The Blueprint Report is very clear that the
primary motivation, the primary goal of the regional health boards, the interim boards, is to establish
community health boards which will, in turn, select the permanent regional health boards. That is the key to
this discussion.



The community health boards, Pictou or New Glasgow or Pictou County, or whatever they determine
to be as a community, will elect the regional health boards and, therefore, on the permanent boards, they will
have representation. This is the issue that I feel the honourable gentleman opposite, in a very well-meaning
and proper way, misunderstands what this report is saying and what the blueprint is commenting on.






[4:30 p.m.]



It is anti-democratic in the extreme to take a bill and to tell permanent regional health boards how
they have to be selected. Now the honourable gentleman opposite has come out fully in favour of election. I
will assume that from his comments. I would say that the Blueprint Committee itself said very carefully, we
understand election, we understand appointment and we feel that a combination of the two may be most
cautious and most acceptable. That is what the communities will take into consideration. It will be the
communities and the community boards who will decide exactly how they will select their representatives to
the regional health board.



The key is that we have had to set up interim regional health boards to put in place the community
structure that will, in turn, create the permanent regional board. But the permanent regional board will always
be responsible to the community. That, Mr. Speaker, is the be-all and end-all of this Blueprint Report and that
will be the foundation upon which we will build, indeed, the health care system of this province.



In other words, Mr. Speaker, we have a community which is going to make decisions and these
communities will decide on how regional health boards are constituted. So we are not going to impose, by
legislation, how one selects or the whys or the wherefores of selecting regional health boards. The interim
boards are already in place, they will be replaced by communities selecting their own representation.
Therefore, the honourable gentleman’s objections will be overcome forthrightly by this arrangement.



But, of course, the honourable gentleman brings up a very valid point in that he says there is a
specific area that has not enough members on the regional health board. I have stood in my place here and
said, yes, there has been a resignation from that area. There have been other people who have made
representations that say we have not had sufficient numbers of people come forward, perhaps, who should be
on the board in that particular county, we should correct this. I have said to the honourable member opposite,
yes, we will do that.



The honourable gentleman knows full well, before submitting this bill, that I have been engaged in
the correction of that deficiency, as he has termed it. But I do so not on the basis of regional representation,
geographic representation, but rather, because there is talent and experience in the County of Pictou that needs
to be on that board. Therein lies the secret of the success of the regional health boards. I have given this
undertaking to the honourable gentleman opposite and to this House and to the citizens of Nova Scotia, that
we will correct the problems that may ensue from the composition of the boards, as we see them today.



But I would remind the honourable gentleman opposite and remind the House that the interim
regional health boards have, as their prime goal, the establishment of community boards which will, in turn,
govern the selection and functioning of the regional health boards. That is the secret of representation of
communities.



I would also caution us all to please keep in mind that our interests, the interests of the health care
system, cannot be boiled down to geography or parochial interest or particular groups. There are 132 different
health care organizations and groups in the province, all of whom I would suggest want a seat on some board
or other. That is simply not possible to do, so we must come to a decision as to how best to do that.






How do we come to that decision? We give the decision over to the communities who are, indeed,
going to control the health care system of the province, through the institution of the Blueprint Report. So this
is a question, Mr. Speaker, of immediately correcting some problems in a particular area, so that we may tap
the talent from that particular region, Pictou County in particular in that regard. I have given that
undertaking, as the honourable gentleman opposite knows, despite the fact that he entertains this legislation
today. Thank you very much.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: I welcome the opportunity to enter the debate on the bill that the
Official Opposition has brought forward today, proposing a fairly straightforward amendment to the regional
health boards Act. I certainly welcome the opportunity to address concerns that I have and I know a great
many Nova Scotians have, about where we are, with respect to the establishment of the Regional Health
Boards and where we are going with that. So, therefore I commend the member for bringing forward the issue
of regional health boards and I know that his commitment and concern is a very genuine and long lasting one.



I have to say in honesty though and this is the point of debate among different political Parties from
different perspectives - that I don’t personally think and I am not sure how many people share the view put
forward in this bill - that very many of the problems that are being experienced with respect to the health
reform agenda and in particular, the regional health boards, are likely to be addressed by this particular
amendment. I don’t say that to deny that there may, in fact, be or I will put it more strongly and assertively
than that, I think there are indeed some imbalances, some mal-distribution of the strict geographic
representation of the appointments that have been made to the regional health boards. I certainly would not
be one to stand and advocate that is a desirable thing.



I have to say that I think there are so many concerns about how the government is going about
implementing its supposed commitment to the Blueprint recommendations and the overall health reform plan,
that I am not sure that the amendment brought forward gets very much at some of these fundamental
problems. In fact, I think there is a certain amount of wisdom and perhaps this is one of the areas of which
I do agree with the Minister of Health. There is a certain amount of wisdom contained in the Blueprint
Committee recommendations that representation on those regional health boards not be tightly tied to narrow
geographic interests; that the representation not be seen in a parochial fashion that too easily can be
influenced by turf considerations.



In that sense, I guess I would agree with the thrust of the recommendations from the Blueprint
Committee and therefore, with the argument that the Minister of Health has made. That to go in the direction
of ensuring that board membership is tightly tied and strictly a reflection of population demographics and
geography of the region from which the board is established, may, in fact, end up appealing to a narrow,
parochial view of what needs to be, a much more visionary and broader view of the health reform process.



I have a good deal of sympathy with where the member for Pictou Centre is coming from, because
I think there is concern that this Minister of Health and I guess, his government, doesn’t do too badly on the
blue sky. Doesn’t do too badly on looking ahead and articulating a vision. The problem that I see, Mr.
Speaker, is that there is such a shortfall in what the government has actually done. Such a gap between that
vision - around which there is a broad consensus of support but such a gap - and what the government is
actually doing on a day-to-day basis. That there is a real problem with people’s growing non-confidence in
where this Minister of Health and where this government is taking us, with respect to a completely changed
health care system.



For that reason, I guess I want to take a minute or two to express my concern and indeed that it is
not too strong to say, real alarm, with what has now become an all too familiar pattern with this Minister of
Health, that when he is able to use the blueprint recommendations as the base, as the rationale, as the
justification for what he is doing, then he is very quick to cite the blueprint as the authority, as the reason why
he is doing what he is doing and no more questions need to be asked.



But, Mr. Speaker, it is also true that this Minister of Health again and again, on a number of very
critical issues, has parted company, or at least he has completely ignored the recommendations, very sound
recommendations of the Blueprint Committee, and feels there is no need whatsoever to give a full explanation
as to why and what the reasons are for supporting a completely different course of action. That has become
a growing problem, in terms of people’s confidence in this minister and government to move the health reform
agenda forward.



I want to cite a couple of examples. The minister gave absolute assurances that he recognized the
importance and the severity of the labour adjustment challenges that are part of this health reform agenda;
he gave assurances in the spring session that these issues were going to be addressed in the urgent manner
that is absolutely critically important. Yet, Mr. Speaker, to this day we have no indication whatsoever, some
six months since the Blueprint Committee recommendations were supposedly endorsed and embraced by this
government, that this government has even begun a coordinated work force adjustment planning process in
the health sector.



Now the minister will quickly say, oh well, we addressed what was going to happen to hospital
workers in Bill No. 95. Well, in part, the government did address what was going to happen to hospital
workers but most of the questions went unanswered and the government’s explanation was, we are going to
get on with the labour adjustment strategy that was recommended; we are going to set up the labour
adjustment subcommittee that the Blueprint Committee said was essential. They have done absolutely none
of those things, Mr. Speaker.



Furthermore, as was pointed out by representatives from the Nova Scotia Government Employees
Union, specifically Local 8, who came to this House to present their concerns to the Minister of Health last
week because they are so upset about what is not happening, there has been nothing done to address the issue
of how non-hospital based health care workers are to be dealt with, how they will fare in the reformed health
care system. So public health nurses, for example, drug dependency services workers, staff in the head office
of the Department of Health itself, for example, have absolutely no understanding, no commitment, no sense
of what this minister intends to do about addressing the labour adjustment issues that will affect them
profoundly.



So this is one area in which the government has clearly chosen to cherry pick, it has clearly chosen
to sort of pick and choose as it suited them, I guess in accordance with their priorities, in moving ahead with
the blueprint recommendations. What we know without any question is that something that occupies a very
low priority with this government is what is to happen to the workers in the health care system in the process
of massive change that is underway.



Mr. Speaker, the minister rose to his feet and I was glad to hear him say it again for the record, that
the absolute key to the health reform system that is underway is the community health boards. I agree with
that statement. It is also true that those community health boards have to operate within a context, within a
framework. The notion that a comprehensive labour adjustment strategy for all of the health care workers in
this province can be dealt with in a piecemeal, fragmented, fractured, widely dispersed way by dozens of
community health boards is surely a joke. I don’t think it is even proper to call it a joke because it would be
such a perverse joke to suggest that that is a proper manner in which to deal with the labour adjustment
disruptions, dislocations that are already underway and that we are going to see even more of as the health
reform agenda works its way across the province.



[4:45 p.m.]



Mr. Speaker, it is true that the community health boards are absolutely critically important. But if
the minister means what he says about how critical the community health boards are in this new system, then
I wish the minister would address the question of why the appropriate resources have not been clearly
allocated and the terms of reference spelled out and made public for how the process of bringing about the
community-based effort that is needed to put those community health boards in place, why that is not being
done in a manner that can actually ensure that that community-based development process gets underway.



The minister is very quick to stand and say, well, we know that the health reform commissioner,
sometimes she is called the community development commissioner, other times she is called the seconded
former executive director of the Provincial Health Council, whatever he wants to call her probably is not very
important, although the shifting names would seem to indicate that there is a problem about there being a lack
of clarity on his part and on the Health Department’s part about what precisely the role is of that Health
Reform Commissioner, so-called, in the person of Mary Jane Hampton.



Mr. Speaker, if the minister is sincere about recognizing how critical the community development
role is in the process of getting the regional health boards functioning, not an interim basis, but on a long-serving basis, and in terms of getting the community health boards up and running, then why is it that the
resources have not been allocated to work with communities across the province as they begin to mobilize and
grapple with what it will mean to their community to have a particular health service terminated in the
rationalization or have a hospital shut down in their community.



We know, Mr. Speaker, that there has been an encouraging response from communities, no wonder,
because people are very alarmed about any prospect of the termination of important, essential health services
that are institutionally-based before the alternate community services are in place.



But let me say, Mr. Speaker, that there has been a definite mobilization of people around their issues
of concern, around what they see as the needs in their community for ongoing health services and health
delivery, but those various transition planning processes, as they have come to be called, are being starved for
resources.



I have talked with people in the Annapolis Valley, I have talked with people on the South Shore, I
have talked with people on the Cumberland Shore and they are very concerned. They see a good deal of
expertise and, I think, conscientious effort and enthusiasm on the part of the so-called health reform
commissioner, but they do not see that the funds are coming through to do the community-based needs
assessment, for example. They do not see that there has been the appropriate allocation of personnel that can
work with them on these things.



Do you know what they are saying, Mr. Speaker? They are saying if this constitutes the government’s
commitment to the community health board development, then they are going to kill the health reform
commissioner because she is being completely overburdened by all of this and there does not seem to be any
resources in place, resources of personnel, finances, technical resources or anything else to back-up the
commitments that have been made by the Minister of Health.



Mr. Speaker, I know I am out of time, but I hope that the minister, I know he is not in the House,
I assume that is because he had urgent duties to attend to, is going to begin to address these pleas from the
community that do not have to do with narrow, parochial, geographic representation, but have to do with the
broader issues of health reform and what kind of services are going to be there for people today and in the
future. Thank you.



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



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of second reading of Bill No. 130,
an Act to Amend Chapter 12 of the Acts of 1994, the Regional Health Boards Act. I do realize that the
honourable Minister of Health has several commitments, but I also must express to you that I am disappointed
that the minister is not able to, perhaps, hear my contribution to this debate.



I should say that, Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that goes something like many might have attained
wisdom had they not thought they already attained it. I was very pleased to have my colleague for Pictou
Centre bring forward this piece of legislation to the floor of this Assembly. My colleague and I, along with
others, such as the member for Kings North, have raised the concern outlined in this bill since the candidates
were chosen for the regional health boards.



There was an obvious lack of representation by population factored into those choices. Although the
minister has made it quite clear that under the blueprint, his plan for reform, he had no obligation to adhere
to geography, no obligation to adhere to population factors in choosing the successful regional health board
members. The original bill, Bill No. 95, which was rammed through the Legislature in the dying days of June
of this year, did have one positive amendment included before it was proclaimed. That was to protect
employees’ successor rights.



As a member of the Opposition, I was pleased to see the minister accepting modifications to his
original bill. It was also a credit to the process that many of the gaps and many of the oversights were rectified
in the Law Amendments Committee and the Committee of the Whole House on Bills. I am appealing to the
government today to take another bold step in supporting Bill No. 130, a further amendment to his bill to set
up the province’s first regional health boards.



Our caucus is attempting to bring forward concerns stemming from within our communities in our
support of Bill No. 130. These concerns are coming from the Eastern Shore of Halifax County, encompassed
by the new central board; Kings County, now a part of the western board; and areas like Pictou County, as
my able colleague from the area has already outlined. Even the honourable member, and I have at least a copy
of the newspaper release, for Pictou East raised similar concerns for the county. Just as the Provincial
Electoral Boundaries Commission report reflected the need to adjust the boundaries for the 52 constituencies
in this province and why they did that was to better reflect the population figures. So this bill does the same
thing.



Each MLA in this House is here to represent a fairly equal number of Nova Scotians and their
community of interest. It is these specific and diversified needs and concerns of 52 constituencies across the
province that make room for 52 members of this Legislature. I live in the Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley
constituency and I was elected to this Assembly because the people felt, my area felt at least, that I could
represent their needs at the provincial level. In my area, I address concerns that colleagues from the metro
area might never encounter in their years of service and vice versa.



This has been one of the arguments that I have brought forward to the Minister of Health of the
regional health board representation. These simply are not enough members, there are simply not enough
members on the new board to speak out for rural concerns, 11 of 13, and I emphasize, 11 of 13 appointees
to the central regional health board are from the metropolitan area. Does that sound right to you or does that
sound right to any member in this House? Residents of the eastern region of Halifax County are grossly
underrepresented.



I said this in the House the other day, that there is a definite difference between rural and urban
health requirements and concerns and there must be fair representation from both rural and urban centres.
We should all bear in mind that we all like to have a little milk or a little cream in our coffee and we like to
have a little soil sometimes in our front yard. There is a difference, not just a couple of minute differences,
between rural and urban concerns.



From the problems associated with geography and health services and personnel available to the
issues of the nature of health services required within a community, they vary greatly when you jump from
someone in Halifax, who has some of the region’s largest tertiary care facilities. Some of them are a 10 minute
drive away from the hospital. People in the communities of Dean and people in the communities of Upper
Stewiacke, for example, they have at least a half hour drive just to get to their local hospital. So there is a
distinct difference. I am quite disappointed that the Minister of Health does not recognize the difference
between urban and rural health concerns.



The member for Kings North is also. As I mentioned, Mr. Speaker, he has raised several concerns
regarding the representation on the western board. He brought those concerns in because he was listening to
his constituents. He has asked the minister to address the current representation on that board because there
are only two representatives from Kings County while Lunenburg County, with a smaller population, has five
representatives.



Mr. Speaker, this, as in Pictou, is a serious mis-representation. The minister responded during
Question Period on the opening day of the House that he was not dictated by geographical concerns for
membership to the interim regional health boards. He said that, they, in turn, would be creating the
community health boards to address the more immediate concerns.



MR. ROBERT CARRUTHERS: I wonder if the member would entertain a very brief question.



MR. TAYLOR: Yes, as long as it will not take away from my time, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: Well, it will.



MR. TAYLOR: Quite brief.



MR. CARRUTHERS: I will be brief. I just wonder if the member knows how many members from
his riding are on the board that we are involved in, as compared to from my riding, the neighbouring riding,
if he knows the numbers how they compare?



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable member for that question. I know what the
honourable member is trying to get at here. I am talking about areas that are grossly under-represented. I am
not talking about areas that are adequately represented. If that member has some problem, I would encourage
him to raise some of the concerns he has, bring it to the floor of the Legislature. That is what I am trying to
do because our area and areas of Kings and areas of Pictou are grossly under-represented.



AN HON. MEMBER: Can’t you answer the question?



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, the only problem is that, in the meantime, the people of Pictou County
do not have, this is during the interim on the regional boards and the Minister of Health tells us to wait until
the community boards come into place, but the only problem is, in the meantime, the people of Pictou County
do not have enough voices on the northern board. The people of Kings County do not have enough voices on
the western board and so on down the line. The people in remote areas of Cape Breton do not have voices they
need on the eastern board. The people, of course, of eastern region in Halifax County do not have enough
voices.



Well, I am hearing a member say do not worry about Cape Breton, but somebody should be worrying
about Cape Breton because remote areas of Cape Breton do not have enough good representation on the
boards. (Interruption) That member knows that and he should have enough courage to stand up and speak up
for the people of Cape Breton because somebody has to.



Mr. Speaker, although we are uncertain of the real start-up time for the interim boards, according
to the Central Board Chairman, Jim Cowan, it is going to be January 1, 1995, but the Minister of Health is
talking about the fall of 1995. So who do we believe?



The Health Commissioner for Reforms’ prediction, Mr. Speaker, that community health boards may
perhaps take another year on top of that. So this interim period maybe some two years down the road and very
important decisions are going to be made and a lot of areas in this province are going to be under-represented,
including many remote areas of Cape Breton.



The minister also said, on the opening day of the House, that this is a serious issue. He accused
members of this caucus of trivializing this concern. Mr. Speaker, we are extremely concerned about this. We
feel we have a legitimate bona fide argument. The minister also said, on opening day, that this is a serious
issue and he has left additional membership up to the regional health boards.



Why didn’t the minister take the geographical concerns a little more seriously before his government
shoved the board member names through the Human Resources Committee? You know the Human Resources
Committee, Mr. Speaker, the Liberal branding iron committee. They stamp the names. I attended the meeting,
there was no question about that.



At his press conference on the 20th, the Minister of Health actually belittled the need to look at
applications on a geographical or representation by population basis. He mentioned how handy it was that it
actually worked out that individuals were scattered around the province. He will not, as yet, release the names
of other applicants across the province so that they could be reviewed to see if there was an opportunity for
someone of equal talent in under-represented areas. I have filed an application under the Freedom of
Information Act requesting the names and resumes of all applicants for the regional health boards so we can
just have a little look-see to see who applied and there may be some applicants from remote areas like Cape
Breton or areas of Cape Breton. The Blueprint Report also says (Interruptions) I did correct that. The
Blueprint Report also says that the appointments of community health boards once set up should appoint to
the regional health boards one to three representatives to the regional health board depending on the
population of the community. Depending upon the population of the community that is what they are saying
regarding the community health boards.



[5:00 p.m.]



So, why then does the minister find the idea of appointing the interim boards according to population
such a foreign idea? Why is it a foreign idea when you are talking about equal representation on the RHBs
but when you are talking about the community health boards, yes we will look at it on a population basis.
There is a complete difference there according to the minister. These are the people who would begin, these
people on the regional health boards will begin the process of health reform. These are people who according
to the minister can close hospitals. They can as far as I am concerned make an awful lot of important
decisions. Before any community health boards are up and running, before any permanent regional health
board is put in place, these people on the interim regional health boards can make all the decisions they like.
Many areas of this province are grossly under-represented including many remote areas in Cape Breton and
while asking someone in Lunenburg to think clearly of the needs of the people of Kentville and Wolfville and
Berwick as they make regional decisions, I think it might be fair to say that the needs of Lunenburg might
come before those of Kentville - as would be true in a reverse situation, that is only normal, that is only
natural.



The minister had a serious job to do when he started the process of breaking the province into four
health regions. I think ignoring fair representation by population was a very large oversight on his behalf.



I am afraid that the consequences of under-representation will only be obvious to many people in the
province - and perhaps the minister - once the boards are up and running and the interests of one area override
the interests of another. I sincerely hope that doesn’t happen. I look forward to seeing the regional
inadequacies addressed through the adoption of Bill No. 130, and I hope that the people of this province can
depend on the minister’s word in this House that he is taking the issue seriously. This is why I stand in my
place today and move my support on second reading of Bill No. 130. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of the Environment.



HON. ROBERT HARRISON: I am actually pleased and honoured to rise today and spend a few
moments talking about regional health boards and community health boards and more importantly to talk
about decision-making that leads to sustainability. In our travels (Interruptions) Yes exactly, like transforming
health care in certain areas because the difference between this government and the Opposition members
opposite some of whom in fact have newly joined their Party and so they aren’t aware quite of the legacy. The
difficulty is not with individual decisions that were made by the members opposite, that led to $9 billion worth
of debt. The decisions individually were laudable, the problem was there was no plan.



There was no concept of decision-making either in Halifax or in Wolfville that was co-ordinated that
led to sustainability. In fact, if the members opposite were at all honest with themselves and with the people
of Nova Scotia they would admit that community-based decision-making was lacking during their tenure. If
there is one thing this government will do before its days are numbered and ended, it will leave communities
stronger than they found them. It will make the tough decisions in health and education and transportation
and throughout this government that leave communities stronger than they found them because that is what
leads to sustainability, not whine and sign government. Someone whines, we sign a cheque and we send Mr.
Kerr off to New York to borrow the money, that is not sustainability that is the most degrading type of
government that this province has known, whine and sign government. In fact, what we are talking about is
ensuring that community health boards do represent their communities and that they report to regional health
boards and that the geography of those regional health boards always must take a second seat to quality
decision-making. That is what is most important, not whether certain geographic areas have members on the
regional health boards but whether those regional health boards, in fact, can produce a medical system second
to none in this country, and there is no doubt about it.



This Minister of Health is leading a reform movement that will, in fact, ensure that the health system
of Nova Scotia does all it has to do for the people of Nova Scotia. The reason is because the community health
boards will be geographically based, they will be based in population. They know where the ice is thin, they
will report to the regional health boards and the regional health boards will make decisions far better than the
decisions that were made in Halifax from the building just to our right.



The members opposite who talk about, and I understand, I mean there is a lot of fear, change is
difficult, no matter whether we are talking education, health care, community economic development, there
are a lot of lesions, there are a lot of difficult decisions that have to be made at the local level as people accept
the challenge of change. This government has no easy task bringing about the challenge of change because
we didn’t just get left with $9 billion worth of debt, we got left with a legacy of poor decision-making.



Decision-making that took nine layers of bureaucracy to decide a simple thing like a paving project
in my area, where standards were sacrificed, standards of safety by civil engineers with degrees, were
sacrificed for some MLA’s concern about vote getting. That is irresponsible, Mr. Speaker, and it must not
continue and the people in the area must have a chance to gain faith again, not only in their transportation
system but in their education services, their health services. They will do so by geographic representation at
the local level.



That is precisely what this minister is talking about, it is precisely what the Blueprint Committee
recommended he do and it is precisely what he is doing, unlike the members opposite who, for years, read
reports and didn’t have the courage to institute decision-making mechanisms that would lead to sustainability.
Individually, many of them had the courage; collectively, they didn’t have the political will. We have the
political will, Mr. Speaker; this minister has the political will and we will leave communities stronger than
we found them, much stronger than the members opposite were able to do. (Applause)






Two minutes to talk about community-based decision-making. I had a wonderful experience in Cape
Breton over the weekend, where groups came together to talk about their future, representing a wide variety
of interests, from people who have been burned by previous environmental decision-making from the opposite
benches, people who have been upset about the fact that, our Environment Critic over here from the Third
Party has mentioned many times, that people have lost faith in the system of environmental decision-making.
They had good reason to lose faith in it because the decisions were made here, not in their communities, and
they were rubber-stamped here, not in their communities.



When communities come together, whether it is economic development, whether it is site-based
management in schools or whether it is community health boards, communities are everything to do with the
bill; if you would read the bill, it is about geography, it is absolutely everything to do with the bill,
(Interruption) absolutely everything to do with the bill. I am aware of rabbit tracks, I have learned that this
member over here would love - rabbit tracks always come around in a circle - I don’t know if he has ever
hunted rabbits but the bells on the dogs sometimes get clogged with snow but you will always find your dog
again because the rabbit always comes around again.



Everything in this bill has to do with geography and it is geography that determines communities
and communities are the backbone of this province and this government will strengthen communities in every
sector, whether it is Natural Resources, in terms of endangered spaces and integrated management techniques,
forestry techniques, whether it is Transportation, whether it is Justice, Labour, all of these departments will
strengthen communities because the pledge of this government is not just to eradicate the fiscal debt, it is to
make sure that the decision-making debt, the thing that produced the debt in the first place, will never ever
be replicated. This government will strengthen communities. (Applause)



I applaud the Minister of Health and I will vote against this bill because it is taking us backwards.
This is out the rear view mirror, Mr. Speaker. We are looking out the front windshield. This province is going
ahead, despite the Opposition, the dinosaurs, the Jurassic Park across the way, Mr. Speaker. (Applause) As
they watch and learn, they, too, will come to terms with the fact that the communities of Nova Scotia must
be strengthened by municipal reform. Thank you very much. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The time for debate on the second reading of Bill No. 130 has expired.



We now move on to the order of business, Motions Other than Government Motions.



MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Resolution No. 1128.



Res. No. 1128, re Fin. - Budget (1995-96): Small Business - Taxes Reduce - notice given Nov. 24/94
- (Mr. R. Russell)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Hants West.






MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, the resolution I will not read but however, I would like to
read the actual resolved part of that resolution and it reads, “Therefore be it resolved that the Minister of
Finance, in putting his 1995-96 budget together, look at ways to reduce the tax burden on Nova Scotia’s small
business community so that more jobs can be created as our economy continues to gain momentum.”. I would
suggest that our economy may not be perhaps gaining momentum but certainly, the revenue flow into the
Department of Finance is certainly increasing this fiscal year.



Mr. Speaker, as you will recall and I am sure every member is aware, that in his last budget the
Minister of Finance came forward with the Growth Dividend Fund, a fund of money which would be allocated
to reducing the tax burden on small business.



I am sure the minister will correct me if I am wrong, but in this province, our tax on small business
and when I say the tax I mean the collection of taxes, in other words, we have all the various taxes ranging
from municipal taxes through provincial health services taxes, income taxes, corporate taxes, et cetera, that
the level of taxation on a business in the City of Halifax compared to the City of Moncton is much higher. In
fact, I am told that it is 10 per cent higher in the City of Halifax than it is in the City of Moncton.



That is a disincentive for businesses to establish in the Province of Nova Scotia and in particular, in
the City of Halifax when you compare it to the City of Moncton. The City of Moncton, as you well know, has
done extremely well of late in capturing businesses, in fact, in really stealing businesses away from the
Province of Nova Scotia.



In the four year fiscal plan that the minister came forward with in his last budget, in the document
called, A Blueprint for Recovery, he forecast that in 1994-95 that the Growth Dividend Fund would be
approximately $32.4 million. That sum would grow over years two, three and four and I don’t know if that
was the termination of the program at year four but if it did terminate at year four, the total amount available
under the Growth Dividend Fund would be something in the order of $102.6 million.



The minister took a very wise step in that the minister went forward to the Voluntary Planning
Organization and asked them for recommendations as to how that funding from the growth dividend should
be applied to effect some positive impact on small business. The Voluntary Planning Organization assigned
that tax to their taxation committee. That committee met on many occasions and put a lot of time and effort
into coming forward with a report to the minister as to what could or should happen to that Growth Dividend
Fund when it became available for the minister to expend to assist a small business.



However, when they were going through the exercise, they came to realize that they had a very
definite constraint in that the amount of money, although it seems like a lot, $32 million, in reality is not a
great deal of money to actually make a dramatic change in the taxation climate for the small business sector
in the Province of Nova Scotia.



[5:15 p.m.]



However, Mr. Speaker, since that time there has been a rather remarkable change in the fortunes of
the Department of Finance effected primarily through increased hospital services tax and through the increase
in other taxes accruing to government from the taxpayers of Nova Scotia. It would include personal and
corporate taxes, but the major boost in the funding for the province this year is going to be a tremendous
increase in the availability of funding from the federal government. That is going to amount, this year, to
almost $1 billion, which is approximately $70 million to $80 million more than the minister had forecast
when he came forward with his budget for fiscal year 1994-95.



Now when you take that $70 million, $80 million or whatever it is, Mr. Speaker, you add to that
approximately $50 million more in general taxation and you are up to $130 million and then, perhaps, another
$10 million to $15 million from an increase in personal and corporate tax, the Minister of Finance finds
himself with a bonanza on his hands and much higher revenues than he had anticipated and he is able to
reduce the deficit accordingly. That is very good but, however, when we take this $100 million, or whatever
it is, that the minister is going to get, there is a portion, 20 per cent, that will accrue to the Growth Dividend
Fund.



So that instead of the $32 million that would originally go to the Growth Dividend Fund, now there
is approximately $60 million, or perhaps even more, which will accrue to that fund this year. That, indeed,
makes the task of the minister much easier from the point of view that $60 million will do twice as much as
$30 million, but whereas $30 million would be just a blip on the curve in an effort to affect the fortunes of
small business, $60 million, Mr. Speaker, can make a very definite change.



Now, when the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning looked at what they thought should be
done with this money, they were looking, as I say, at a fairly small amount, but, however, I am not going to
go through all the details of their recommendations; I would just like to go through the headings of each one -
I am running out of time - the most important one, certainly, was the second one, and they had approximately
12 recommendations in their report, but the second one, I think, is the one that the minister would probably
agree with, that steps should be taken by appropriate reductions in taxes to stimulate business investment,
employment creation, research and development, exports, training in new technology, development of the
information highway and sustainable development and eco-tourism, et cetera.



Mr. Speaker, all these things to generate not only an increase in business investment, but an increase
in jobs, because I am running out of time, I am going to have to cut what I had to say much shorter than that.
One of their recommendations though - and I think one that the minister should really listen to - is the fact
that a certain amount of that money should go directly to decreasing the taxation on small business. But the
strong recommendation was that having taken a portion of the funds at the minister’s discretion to do those
things, the remainder of the funds should go to reduce the unfunded liability of the Workers’ Compensation
Act because, as they say, one of the primary taxation features that businesses look at when they are going to
locate in the province is what is workers’ compensation going to cost them. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Finance.



HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and I thank the honourable member, the
Finance Critic of the Official Opposition for bringing this very important matter to the House. It gives us an
opportunity to discuss an issue which is of great concern, I know, to each and every member and particularly,
to the people of the province.



I cannot resist in beginning my comments to express some surprise when I hear the honourable
member quoting from the Report of the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning which I commissioned
some considerable time ago and upon which the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning has not yet
reported. They will be reporting and delivering that report to me on Friday morning and I invite the
honourable member if there are any portions of it that he has not already read, that he join with us at 11:00
o’clock this Friday morning when the report will be officially returned to the Minister of Finance.



The honourable member brings up the question of tax on small business. The rate of provincial
taxation on small business is not the problem. As a matter of fact, if you do some comparisons Nova Scotia’s
rate of taxation compares very favourably with other provinces in the country.



I will just look at a few areas and give a sense of what I am talking about, Nova Scotia’s rate of small
business corporate tax stands, and these figures are as of July 1, 1994, so I give that reservation. As of July
1, 1994, Nova Scotia’s corporate small business tax was 5 per cent; New Brunswick, for example, was 9 per
cent; Quebec, 5.75 per cent; Ontario, 9.5 per cent by comparison; Manitoba, 9.5 per cent; Saskatchewan, 8.5
per cent; Alberta, 6 per cent; and British Columbia 10 per cent. Nova Scotia on its corporate small business
tax is, I think, quite favourable in terms of a comparison to other provinces.



There are other areas, as well, where we compare favourably, for example, the issue of capital tax,
tax on corporation’s capital. We have no such tax in this province. Many other provinces do, including, for
example, Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia all level a corporate capital tax
on small business, Nova Scotia does not.



Payroll taxes, Ontario, Quebec, Manitoba, Newfoundland and the Northwest Territories all levee
payroll taxes on the salaries paid by small business; Nova Scotia does not. When you look at that category we
compare reasonably favourably. Some provinces, and I do not want to go through a complete litany on this,
but some provinces charge a property tax, provincially, in addition to the municipal property taxes on small
business, we do not. Deed transfer tax, we removed that; while municipalities still charge small business a
deed transfer tax, the province does not any longer do so and that was a benefit to small business in the
province. Indeed, some provinces, notably Alberta and British Columbia actually charge health care premiums
directly to small business.



There are many areas where we compare favourably if we review our tax situation for small business
with respect to the other provinces in the country. That is not the whole answer and the honourable member
would be quite correct to point that out. We have a much too high level of taxation in Nova Scotia. Let me
tell you, every year the government of Nova Scotia takes from its citizens, takes from its taxpayers over $1
billion. It reaches into their pockets and that involves small business, it involves the working poor, it involves
every one of us - reaches into our pockets and takes $1 billion a year from us. What does it give us in return
for that $1 billion? Nothing, zero, zip. The people of Nova Scotia get nothing in return for that $1 billion that
is taken. As a matter of fact, that $1 billion does not even stay in the province, it goes to New York, it goes
to Geneva, it goes to Tokyo, a bit of it goes to Toronto. Now, why are we taking $1 billion from our small
businesses and giving them nothing in return, not even keeping the money in the province? Well, it is very
simple. That is how much it costs to service our debt, that is how much it costs to service the $8 billion of debt
that was acquired virtually exclusively by the previous government.



Now, the honourable member says this growth dividend that we have provided for carefully in our
four year plan, is too small to make a real difference. Well, he said it was small, I agree with him, I agree with
you. I don’t think this is large enough because you know, Nova Scotian business is now going to have to
compete against the world. We are now in the global economy; GATT, NAFTA, we are competing in the
global economy. We cannot cripple our businesses in this competition. If we do cripple our businesses by
unacceptable levels of taxation, the first people to suffer, will be the people who work for those small
businesses, so we have to do a better job.



This is how I think we should do it, Mr. Speaker. When we talk about small business, the honourable
member says we are getting a bit of a windfall this year in revenue and we are. We are applying that to the
deficit, which I believe is where it should go, because as long as we have a deficit, things are not getting
better. As we improve the deficit, things are getting worse at a slower pace, that is all that means. So until we
can eliminate the deficit altogether, we haven’t even gotten to the starting line.



Now, for the sake of small business in Nova Scotia and for the sake of everyone who works for small
business in Nova Scotia, we have to get to that starting line as quickly as possible, to make our small business
competitive. I will tell you what happens when we get to that starting line, then we start working on that $1
billion that we are sending out of the province every year; we start bringing some of that back. We start
bringing back $10 million, $50 million, $100 million, $500 million of that money and we leave it here in
Nova Scotia. And what do we do with it? We take part of it and we improve education, health and all the other
services - roads - all sort of services provided to the people of this province. But part of that $1 billion we give
back to the people, back to the businesses, to the small businesses of Nova Scotia, so they can be more
competitive. When we are in a position to do that, that growth dividend then will look like peanuts.



The real money for our people in this province, the real opportunity to make business competitive,
lies in recapturing that $1 billion, lies in bringing that back to Nova Scotia and giving it to our people.



You know, I have a whole list of tax measures that we took in the last budget to help small business.
They are not going to make the difference. We are going to do more. We will attempt to use the growth
dividend. But if we are going to give Nova Scotia and Nova Scotians a chance to succeed in the 1990’s and
beyond, we must allow them to be competitive.



Mr. Speaker, I know the honourable member believes in everything I am saying here, in terms of
allowing business to be competitive. Sometimes, some members in this House don’t realize that if we can
make business competitive, workers will benefit. The best thing we can do for a worker in this province, is
give him a job with a future. That is what we are intending to do - not a hand-out, not another social program
but a job - so that he can feed his family. So he can plan beyond next Tuesday, so that Nova Scotians can take
their rightful place in the world economy.



I am confident, Mr. Speaker, that Nova Scotians can compete. We have the people and the resources.
What we have to do is start trying to take off, take that burden away that was placed on them by the former
government, over 15 years, and let them compete in the world economy. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
(Applause)



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



[5:30 p.m.]



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to take part in the debate this afternoon
and to have listened to the Minister of Finance’s speech this afternoon. (Applause) Very eloquent and very
well given and I did not even have to pay $100 to go and listen to the minister give his speech. It sounds very
familiar to the kinds of commitments and rhetoric that the government expressed, of course, when they were
over here, seeking to get over there. It sounds very much like an election speech, (Interruption) some suggest
maybe a leadership speech.



I want to say to the minister that indeed there are a number of words, a number of phrases, a number
of points that the minister said with which I totally and 100 per cent agree. Having said that, Mr. Speaker,
I have some difficulty, therefore, understanding why this government is following some of the policies and
the directions that it is taking.



Certainly, Mr. Speaker, small business is the backbone to the economy of Nova Scotia. There is no
question about that. Nova Scotia depends on our strong, healthy, small business community and, therefore,
maybe it is time that this government starts, and we are not only talking about the tax rate, whether it is 5 per
cent or 5.2 per cent or 4.9 per cent or 6 per cent. Maybe it is time to really look at developing a fair tax policy,
not only here in Nova Scotia, but in Canada as a whole, that will treat small business and individuals fairly.



Mr. Speaker, if we take a look, the minister knows this, members of this House know this, loopholes
have existed. They existed before the Conservatives took office, they existed when the Conservative took
office, both provincially and federally. They did not plug those loopholes for the large, wealthy corporations.
Those loopholes existed then and they grew.



Mr. Speaker, what we have to do, we have to, if we want small business to be able to survive, to grow
and to prosper, if we want Nova Scotians to be able to have jobs so that they can support their families, let’s
get together and develop a fair tax strategy, a fair tax policy to make sure that the tax burden, the costs of
running government and maintaining programs and services are shared fairly. In other words, stop the off-loading from the large, wealthy corporations onto the individuals and to the small businesses in the Province
of Nova Scotia and across Canada. We, as a provincial Legislature, should be pressuring the federal
government to get on with such a policy and here in Nova Scotia we should be doing that which is within our
powers to do that as well.



The minister talked about the deficit and the deficit is a major problem. I will tell you, Mr. Speaker,
deficits will not go away if this government continues policies and programs aimed at harming small business.
I will give you but one example, because here we have the minister standing eloquently in his place and very
correctly talking about the problems of $1 billion leaving Nova Scotia and we have got to stop that.



Then I ask the minister, why is it that he and his government colleagues are following a policy
against the wishes of Nova Scotians that is going to increase the flow of money out of Nova Scotia, and I am
talking about casinos? Because the casino operators are not going to be Nova Scotian. Mr. Speaker, if the
minister, and I know the Premier and others, they say, oh no, it is only a few people who are opposed to the
casinos on moral ground. But if they attended and if they actually listened to the presenters, the people who
came forward with arguments on those casinos, they would know that one of the big concerns is economic
and that the casino will harm small business in the Province of Nova Scotia.



But in an attempt to grab a few tax dollars at the provincial level, they are prepared to sacrifice
hundreds and hundreds of jobs, jobs in small businesses in the metropolitan area throughout Industrial Cape
Breton and, in fact, throughout Nova Scotia. Without so much as an economic study enabled that they can
get a little skim off the top profit for the provincial taxpayers. They are prepared to increase the deficit, the
deficit of lost jobs, people working in the Province of Nova Scotia. That, I say, is a shame on this government.



If the government, the minister, are truly committed to combatting deficit they will do things and
have policies that are aimed at helping small business, restaurants, the tourist industry and so on, Mr.
Speaker, in the areas rather than bringing forward programs aimed to harm them for their own very small
marginal, if anything, gain. That is, in fact, a very key phrase that the minister should pick up on from his
own rhetoric that he spouted in this House. If he is truly committed to small business.



The outflow of revenue, if we maintain those dollars in Nova Scotia instead of whether it is going
to be to Austria or somewhere else in the way of profits, if that money stays in Nova Scotia the same as
reducing the deficit, Mr. Speaker, it is going to circulate around. It is going to create more jobs in Nova Scotia
and those more jobs are going to generate more revenue, reduce expenses. That will do more to reduce the
deficit of the Province of Nova Scotia than all the rhetoric that the minister spouts on these different matters.



We have, as well, Mr. Speaker, the minister talking about needing to be competitive. Well, one of
the biggest problems, and that is right, that is bang-on. (Applause) One of the reasons why - and I appreciate
the applause - small business here are not as competitive is that they are in a disadvantaged tax situation.



Small businesses in Nova Scotia do not get, or any where, in fact, really across the country, the tax
write-offs and the huge tax benefits whether that be a Wal-Mart or these other large companies. Let us level
the playing field, let us get rid of the loopholes that the very wealthy, the Irvings and the others in this world
have, or the Ultramars. Let us get rid of their tax loopholes and write-offs. If that is done, if they start to pay
their fair share, then the small business (Interruptions)



MR. SPEAKER: Order. Order, please.



MR. HOLM: will then be in a more competitive situation. I am sure everybody recognizes that. That
the small businesses are at a disadvantage in a competitive situation relative to that.



Taxes, certainly, are too high, no question about that. I hear the people over on the other side they
are doing their little rabbit tracks or they are doing their little conversation and all of the logic, obviously, goes
over their head. They somehow assume that if you are going to remove the tax loopholes that benefit an Irving
or benefit a Wal-Mart that somehow those Wal-Marts and Irvings are going to close.



I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, those huge companies that are making millions of dollars in profit are
not going to close down because a few of the loopholes that they benefit from which save them many millions,
in fact, billions of dollars in taxes, that they should be paying. On the national level, yes. If those tax dollars,
those monies were then redistributed then small business will pay less. Individuals will pay less.



If the minister and his colleagues would not turn around and try and cut and slash programs and lay
off workers and waste money, Mr. Speaker, by moving with untendered contracts and these kinds of things
then Nova Scotians would have more (Interruption) To their friends, of course, confidence and be more
willing and able to spend their monies in small business.



Mr. Speaker, the list can go on and on (Interruptions)



MR. SPEAKER: Order, order please.



MR. HOLM: I know that my time is up. My closing comment will be that whether or not they heard
anything from what I had to say is doubtful. However, at least by stirring them up maybe they will start to
think and if they start to think then maybe they will start to question what they are doing and if they do that
then maybe small business will benefit.



MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The time allocated for the debate of Resolution No. 1128 has expired.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 162.



H.O. 162, re Human Res.-Positions Filled (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 24/94 - (Mr. T.
Donahoe)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: I so move, Mr. Speaker.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Human Resources.



HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: I would like to have it stand if I could, please.



MR. SPEAKER: The minister would like to have the House Order stood.  Would all those in favour
of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



House Order No. 162 stands.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 161.



H.O. 161, re Health - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Moody)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



MR. GEORGE MOODY: I so move, Mr. Speaker.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.



HON. RONALD STEWART: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I assume that this includes individual contracts or
professional services plus how wide a net do we cast, does this include for example, institutions and so on?
It would be a massive job to get all of them.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



MR. GEORGE MOODY: This would be contracts signed by the Department of Health, not by
institutions only by his department. I don’t want him to think that it would be institutions it would be just
contracts signed by his department, be either personal contracts or contracts for consulting companies and that
sort of thing, so it would just be within his department and I think that is quite normal.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health will provide. 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, would you please call House Order 157.



H.O. 157, re Transport. - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)



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



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: I so move, Mr. Speaker.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Again, Mr. Speaker, I am going to vote against returning this for the
simple reason that trying to return all the details and all the contracts put out by the Department of
Transportation, if there is anything specific the member wants all he has to do is ask and we will try to get
it for him but in attempting to identify all contracts and the details of all contracts put out in the Department
of Transportation, if I understood it correctly, if that is what they want, is just too massive a job with the staff
we have. The members over there the ones over there, and there are three former ministers who realize there
are two booklets that go with each and every contract. If you want to take a couple of hundred contracts and
try to get staff to put all that together, if that is what they are looking for I have to say, no. Now, if that is not
what they are looking for perhaps they can clarify that.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my understanding is not all the contracts, it is all the
contracts that were signed that weren’t tendered. I expect the minister would tell us and I assume that most
of the contracts are tendered but there are a few occasions where there are always exceptions and I would not
think that that would be large volumes that the minister is talking about. So, we are talking only those that
were let out that were untendered, not tendered.



MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, I had a copy of this House Order, I don’t have it today and the Clerk
perhaps can correct it. I believe when he said he thinks that the member meant to say a list of all contracts
not tendered but what it actually says is a list of all contracts not tenders.



MR. MOODY: I agree that we would agree to ask for all those contracts that were not tendered and
that would clarify it and so the minister wouldn’t have to go away. We certainly understand all of the contracts
that are tendered and signed, we are not asking for all of those copies and don’t expect them but if the minister
would agree and we could agree in the House that it does mean the untendered contracts that were signed,
then we would be quite happy with that.



MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, it becomes a very easy job and I would agree to it.



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



The motion is carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



[5:45 p.m.]



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 156 and I so move.



H.O. 156, re Housing & Cons. Affs. - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. D.
McInnes)



H.O. 155, re Fish. - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. J. Leefe)



H.O. 154, re Environ. - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. J. Leefe)



[The House Orders were read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The motions are carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 153 and I so move.



MR. SPEAKER: While the honourable Minister of Justice is not here will the honourable
Government House Leader agree to this?



HON. RICHARD MANN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Justice I would agree
to return that House Order.



H.O. 153, re Justice - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. T. Donahoe)



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



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: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 150 and I so move.



H.O. 150, re Mun. Affs. - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Dr. J. Hamm)



H.O. 149, re ERA - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Archibald)



H.O. 148, re Agric. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Archibald)



[The House Orders were read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The motions are carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 147.



H.O. No. 147, re Human Res. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Archibald)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I so move.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Human Resources.



HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: Is that all tenders or all those tendered under a certain amount?



MR. ARCHIBALD: All the contracts that were untendered.



MRS. NORRIE: Agreed.



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. 145.



H.O. No. 145, re Agric. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Archibald)



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The motion is carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 144.



H.O. No. 144, re Supply and Serv. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G.
Archibald)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I so move.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. Did the minister hear that?



HON. WAYNE ADAMS: I didn’t hear it all, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: We can’t hear. Order, please, in the House. Would the Clerk read that again.



[The House Order was again read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, that is poorly written or we have missed a word because
that is for untendered contracts and that is not the way it reads, so I will skip that one or withdraw it or
something, and I will put in one that is properly written. Withdraw that one.



MR. SPEAKER: I would ask the approbation of the House for withdrawal of the motion.



It is agreed?



It is agreed.



House Order No. 144 is withdrawn.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, 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: Does the minister wish it read?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Yes.



MR. SPEAKER: Would the Clerk read that House Order?



THE CLERK: The Clerk doesn’t have it.



MR. SPEAKER: House Order No. 142, Bluenose Organizations, the Economic Renewal Agency.



THE CLERK: That is in error on the order paper. It was issued, last week.



MR. SPEAKER: It was previously issued? It has been issued.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 141.



H.O. No. 141, re Fish. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 17/94 - (Mr. J. Leefe)



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Fisheries.



HON. JAMES BARKHOUSE: Mr. Speaker, that seems like something that we should be able to
comply with. (Interruption)



MR. SPEAKER: Has it been complied with before?



MR. RUSSELL: We will withdraw it.



MR. SPEAKER: Is the honourable Opposition House Leader asking for withdrawal?



MR. RUSSELL: Yes, would you please call House Order No. 158.



MR. SPEAKER: Well, just one moment, please. There has been a formal motion placed on the floor
for that House Order and has it now been withdrawn? You will need the approbation of the House. You have
the approbation of House. It is agreed.



House Order No. 141 is withdrawn.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call House Order No. 158.



H.O. No. 158, re Nat. Res. - Contracts (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)



H.O. No. 159, re Lbr. - Contract (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. R. Russell)



H.O. No. 129, re Lbr. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. R. Russell)



[The House Orders were read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The motions are carried.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: The Minister of Finance is not here. Would you please call House Order
No. 135.



H.O. No. 135, re Health - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. G. Moody)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



MR. GEORGE MOODY: I so move, Mr. Speaker.



[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable minister is unable to supply.



Has the House Order been withdrawn? There has been a request for withdrawal?



The honourable member for Kings West.



MR. GEORGE MOODY: It is my House Order and if I can have a chance, just for a few moments.
I don’t see anything wrong with that particular House Order because it pertains to the Department of Health
which actually, the department does very few tenders and it is not a large number. There would be very few
tenders that would be put out by the Department of Health.



I am not talking about hospitals or those sorts of things. I am talking about the department itself and
I would ask the House to consider that because we are not asking to do hundreds and hundreds of tenders.
There would only be a few tenders, if any, actually put out by the Department of Health and there are a few
things, but very few. I would ask the House or the minister to consider that request.



MR. SPEAKER: It has been duly moved that the House Order stand. The minister has heard it read.



The honourable Minister of Health.



HON. RONALD STEWART: I can’t comply with it. No.



MR. SPEAKER: You cannot comply. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye.
Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



House Order No. 135 is defeated.



The honourable Opposition House Leader.



MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, that completes our business for today.



MR. SPEAKER: We have reached the motion of interruption.



[6:00 p.m.]



The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: I would like to advise members that the House will be sitting tomorrow
from the hours of 12:00 noon until 8:00 p.m. and the order of business following the daily routine and
Question Period will be the Committee of the Whole House on Bills.



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



MR. SPEAKER: The motion for adjournment has been made and carried. The winner of the late
show or the Adjournment motion debate is the honourable member for Lunenburg on the resolution which
reads as follows:



Therefore be it resolved this House of Assembly recognize the importance of tourism and the people
who are vital to the success of this industry in Nova Scotia.



ADJOURNMENT



MOTION UNDER RULE 5(5)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Lunenburg.



TOURISM: IMPORTANCE - RECOGNIZE



MRS. LILA O’CONNOR: Thank you. It is, indeed, a great pleasure to respond to the resolution
complimenting those people associated with the tourism industry in this province. However, it is unfortunate
that I do not have sufficient time to accurately describe the many initiatives throughout the province that
reflect this successful year in tourism.



Tourism is an $835 million industry to this province. Year after year, the dollar value of this industry
increases as we respond to the tourism needs of our guests from around the world. As a result of many fine
efforts, I am pleased to inform you that during 1994 the tourism industry has been an overwhelming success.



Recently, we have received information regarding the summer season and, not surprisingly, overnight
guests arriving by car or bus from across Canada and the United States increased over the 1993 levels. The
means of travel by tourists to our province is interesting because we have also noted that automobile traffic
accounted for 86 per cent of the total, exhibiting a gain over last year; with recreational vehicle traffic
increasing as well.



Air travel to Nova Scotia increased significantly, so much so that the Halifax International Airport
saw the largest growth for any major international airport in the country. Accommodation room sales
increased this year, not surprisingly; however, it was interesting to see that room sales significantly increased
for the month of September.



Recently our Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency, the Honourable Ross Bragg, announced
that the Village Fair theme was a huge success. The latest report for the first two weeks of October alone
report that the Village Fair promotion generated $7.5 million. Visitation to the festivals across the province
increased in 1994.



The province’s toll-free information number received a total of 13,950 calls as a result of the Village
Fair campaign which, at a 55 per cent conversion rate, translated into 7,673 visits.



Interestingly to note, is that a party travelling to Nova Scotia made up of four people who stayed six
nights, spent $990 per party per trip.



The people with a tourism occupation here in Nova Scotia are the best and have a friendly attitude
while providing top-notch service to tourists. Because of our small town hospitality and community spirit, the
Village Fair Program was developed. The Economic Renewal Agency has helped communities promote more
than 450 festivals and events in 1994.



The Village Fair campaign throughout Atlantic Canada cost our province $1.1 million in total and,
this year, generated seven times that amount. The quality of a tourism advertising campaign such as this is
measured and judged on the number of people it inspires to actually visit the province. At a 55 per cent
conversion rate, the 1994 Village Fair can certainly be considered a success. Let us not forget that not only
does tourism provide tens of thousands of jobs for Nova Scotians, it generates provincial and municipal tax
revenues.



Communities throughout our province cooperate and coordinate efforts to the Village Fair
promotional theme. It is important to note that the majority of communities across Nova Scotia expressed
satisfaction with the Village Fair Program and, as a result, the Village Fair promotional theme will be
expanded to the 1995 season. The people in these communities indicate that the Village Fair had a positive
impact on their economy.



Visitations at provincial Visitor Information Centres from January to September were up 28,318
people. Check In, the province’s central reservation and information system operated by CorporaTel reported
48,246 more inquiries over last year. Check In also reported that reservations increased by 14,788 compared
to last year. Motels and hotels throughout Nova Scotia received record bookings.



More cruise ships docked in Halifax this summer and many of these sailors also enjoyed day trips
throughout the province. Accordingly, attraction and event promoters received heavier road traffic. Cruise
ship passengers in Halifax alone increased by approximately 23 per cent. Other destinations within the
province also had a banner year with cruise ships.



Hundreds of tour buses travelled to Nova Scotia roads between June 1 and October. The tour bus
industry has provided an increasing number of itinerary specific tours. The Tauck Tours motor coach
company, based in Connecticut, sent 85 tours to Nova Scotia this summer, each with 35 to 40 guests.



Canadvac Travel Services, a tour operator based out of Caledonia, which deals primarily with the
European market, had an increase of 25 per cent in overall bookings. EcoTours and BMT Canada, based out
of Amherst, had an amazing increase of 500 per cent in bookings. Ambassatours Ltd., in 1994, had its best
year ever. They secured 40 per cent more tour packages over last year, requests for tour quotes also increased
by 50 per cent.



Ambassatours Ltd. also inform us that convention bookings are showing an improvement of 40 per
cent from this time in 1993. They see the size of the conventions getting larger, with an increase in the
number of delegates participating. Also, there is significant interest in partner programs.



To date, the minicoach that Ambassatours operates is already booked for most of the summer of
1995. Nova Scotia’s convention trade has grown in the past few years and is expected to continue to expand.
The reason is because the major urban centres can offer many more facilities than ever before. Moreover,
aggressive marketing has boosted sales throughout the area.



Halifax, Sydney, Yarmouth and Truro today, can easily stage conventions and banquets, often
exceeding 1,000 people. In Halifax, for example, the World Trade and Convention Centre has capacity for
at least 1,800 dinner guests. But you see the marketing of these facilities has become more integrated over the
past few years. This means that if a facility has to host 1,200 to 1,300 people, it can’t handle all the business
alone.



A large convention cannot be handled without hotels. Recently, the convention facility and area
hotels have begun to work together in a partnership venture. Now, more and more, it is going beyond the city,
to province-wide. All of our convention centres are ready. The larger hotels boast their own meeting and
convention facilities. These typically include thousands of square feet of function space, audio-visual and
multi-media equipment, dining, banquet space and services.



Meetings and conventions generate millions of dollars in revenue, not only for hotel, resorts and
convention facilities, but also for food service and entertainment suppliers. Is there any wonder why Nova
Scotia was chosen the site of next year’s G-7 Economic Summit? Hosting the G-7 will provide a terrific lead
into what we expect will be another strong year for tourism in 1995. The G-7 will draw attention to Nova
Scotia and will encourage travel during one of our peak tourism months, which normally are July, August and
September.



As the result of the G-7, all of Nova Scotia will be open for business. This means rooms within one
hour of metro Halifax will be fully booked during the Summit and the rest of the province will be welcoming
tourists, as well.



According to convention industry studies, nearly 50 per cent of U.S. meeting planners had booked
meetings in Canada over the past 12 months, an increase of well over 100 per cent from the year before. All
of Nova Scotia is showing signs of increased convention business throughout the province. Selling familiar
images about Nova Scotia seems to work in the small, but growing, sector of retreat and resort destinations.
From Tartan clad soldiers for dinner in an 18th Century fortress, to probing a murder mystery in a sea
captain’s mansion.



Nova Scotia is becoming more and more marketable and, as a result, when tourists return home, they
become ambassadors of our province.



Mr. Speaker, although the majority of visitors come to Nova Scotia from the U.S. and Canada, we
did see an increase in visitors from Europe. Last year, 8,500 visits by Europeans to Atlantic Canada resulted
in $41 million in receipts. In 1993, there was a 60 per cent growth in visits to Canada from France and the
United Kingdom.



MR. SPEAKER: Time is up.



MRS. O’CONNOR: I cannot say the rest?



MR. SPEAKER: Sorry.



MRS. O’CONNOR: Oh, there is no one here but me. Okay.



MR. SPEAKER: Are there any other interveners? If there are no other interveners, the Adjournment
motion has been made and carried. The House will now rise to meet sit again tomorrow at the hour of 12:00
noon.



[The House rose at 6:10 p.m.]






NOTICE OF MOTION UNDER RULE 32(3)



HOUSE ORDER NO. 165



By: Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax Fairview)



I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move than an order of this House do issue for a return
showing, with respect to the Minister of Health:



(1) A list of every physician, every person who cares for patients in the Victoria General
Hospital (Emergency Department) showing for each one, whether they are Royal College certified or
otherwise certified in emergency medicine, as the minister stated on November 29th.