Assemblée Législative de la Nouvelle-Écosse

Les travaux de la Chambre ont repris le
21 septembre 2017
























HALIFAX, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1994



Fifty-sixth General Assembly



Second Session



10:00 A.M.



SPEAKER



Hon. Paul MacEwan



DEPUTY SPEAKER



Mr. Gerald O’Malley






MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. We will commence the daily routine at this time.



PRESENTING AND READING PETITIONS



PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES



TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Justice.



HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table the Annual Report of the Law
Foundation of Nova Scotia for 1993-94.



MR. SPEAKER: The report is tabled.



The honourable Minister of Justice.



HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I also beg leave to table the financial statements of the same
foundation for the same fiscal year.



MR. SPEAKER: The financial statements are tabled.



STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Premier.






5499

 

HON. JOHN SAVAGE (The Premier): Mr. Speaker, on this National Day of Remembrance and
Action on Violence Against Women, you would see that our flag flies at half-mast in memory of the 14 young
women so brutally murdered at the École Polytechnique in Montreal on December 6, 1989. We remember and
mourn not only those 14 women but the thousands of other women who have been and continue to be victims
of violence in our country and our province today.



But today is not only a time to remember, it is a national day of action as well as remembrance and
we must all, as individuals, as communities, as governments, make a real and visible commitment to equality
and the elimination of violence in our society. December 6th is a day from which we must move forward in
order for these goals to be won.



I would now ask that the House observe a minute of silence in memory of the 14 women slain in
Montreal, in reflection on the scourge of violence against women that continues today and in resolve that
violence against women will be eradicated.



[One minute of silence was observed.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make a few brief remarks, if I may,
in response to the statement made just now by the Premier. Clearly all members of the House support and
endorse the sentiments expressed in the statement and remember today the vicious events of this date in 1989
in Montreal.



I have been struck in the last 24 hours, as this anniversary approached, by reading and listening to
media accounts of interviews with mothers of some of the young women slain at the École Polytechnique in
1989 on this date. What I hear from them in those interviews is an almost, to me, amazing acceptance and
resignation of the impact upon them personally and their families of the tragic loss of their children but also
a plea that the community at large and all governments across this country conduct themselves in such a way
as to ensure that those deaths were not in vain.



When the Premier says in his statement as he does today, that this is a national day of action as well
as remembrance, he says that, “. . . we must all, as individuals, as communities, as governments, make a real
and visible commitment to equality and the elimination of violence in our society.”. Who could disagree with
those words? We must, as far as I am concerned, put flesh to the rhetoric that we have heard before about zero
tolerance relative to violence in our society and particularly violence against women, spousal abuse and child
abuse.



Using this occasion as the catalyst for it to happen, I really believe that it is incumbent upon the
Premier and the Minister of Justice to, in not so many days from now, make further public statements and
make public statements particularly, relative to the steps that they are taking and will ensure will be taken by
every element of the government and every element of the police system and every element of the prosecutorial
system and every element of the judicial system of this province, to ensure that it is understood across our
community that we simply cannot accept violence against women.



I call upon the Premier and the Minister of Justice to follow up today’s statement with further
statements in very short order that describe the steps that will be taken because frankly, notwithstanding talk
about zero tolerance - we have had some discussion about that expression and that principle in this House in
recent weeks - I am not so sure at all that the steps are being taken that really will effect that results.



It is a day to mourn, it is a day to remember, but it is a day to use as the jump off point or the catalyst
to ensure that some very significant steps are taken to move to the point where every human being in this
province understands that violence against women is simply reprehensible, unacceptable and will be punished
in the extreme. I call upon the Premier and the Minister of Justice to make a commitment, not necessarily here
this moment but in not so many days, that they will express that in firm, clear and precise policy statements
as to how they and their government will act upon a zero tolerance policy in the coming days.



We commend and support the Premier bringing this matter to the floor of the House and all of us,
as we observed a minute of silence, are thankful for our own good fortune and trust that the events which are
marked by that moment of silence will, in fact, result in serious, positive and effective action. Thank you.



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



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to also thank the Premier for raising this matter on
the floor this morning and I also would like to associate my words with those of the Leader of the Official
Opposition.



Today, of course, is National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women and I
underline the word action, because that is the key. We have to ensure not only that zero tolerance is going to
be permitted in terms of violence against women and children, in fact, in our society as a whole but if we want
to eliminate violence which is, unfortunately, a continuum, we must put in place the legislative programs, the
legislative actions that will help women to gain the economic security and the personal dignity they deserve.
That is not something that we only should be thinking of one day of the year, that is something that must be
on our minds 365 days of the year as legislators and as people who are trying to put in place programs to do
that.



Certainly, there are many forms of violence and discrimination against women and because of the
lack of programs and services, whether that be child care or the failure to have true pay equity and
employment opportunities, those are all, unfortunately, some of the things that leave women trapped in a very
vulnerable situation and leave them subject to the violence that they so often endure in our society.



[10:15 a.m.]



So, Mr. Speaker, what I am looking for is not only the nice words being said today on National Day
of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. What I am looking for and what I believe all fair-minded Nova Scotians are looking for, is emphasis on the word action and programs and services being put
in place that will eliminate, once and for all, this intolerable violence that, unfortunately, continues to exist
in our society. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Premier.



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, on a matter of information. In our zest to be flexible for tonight to
allow the House of Assembly to start at 10:00 a.m., we had scheduled a press conference announcing measures
at 1:00 o’clock today. We will be going ahead with those measures, but unfortunately because we have
accommodated the wish of the House, the press conference is now after the statement that I made today.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Natural Resources.



HON. DONALD DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great please to advise members of the House
that, again, this year, representatives of the Lunenburg County Christmas Tree Producers Association are
presenting trees to the Premier and to the Lieutenant Governor.



The trees, both 14-foot balsam firs, are being presented this morning to the Lieutenant Governor at
Government House and to Premier Savage here in Province House. They were grown by Dwight Sanders of
H.C. Sanders and Sons in New Ross, Lunenburg County.



On behalf of all members of the House, I extend thanks to Mr. Sanders and the association for their
generosity and goodwill in providing these top quality trees.



As you know, Mr. Speaker, Lunenburg County is known as the balsam fir Christmas tree capital of
the world. Thanks to the efforts of the Lunenburg County Christmas Tree Producers Association, this
reputation has been built and earned over a long period of time.



Mr. Speaker, Lunenburg County produces half the Christmas trees exported from Nova Scotia. Our
primary export market for trees is the United States. Naturally, we want to expand the market for trees, and
I am very pleased to report that last week a small shipment of trees from northeastern Nova Scotia were
trucked to Monterrey, Mexico. As minister, I am optimistic that come next season we can make even more
in-roads and send much larger shipments of trees to the Mexican market.



In Washington, D.C., Christmas trees from Nova Scotia are being used again this year at the
Canadian Embassy. Later this evening, Mr. Speaker, I will be leaving for Washington to take part in a tree
lighting ceremony at the Canadian Embassy tomorrow night. As a representative of Lunenburg County, I am
proud to say that the trees for the embassy have also been also provided by the Lunenburg County Christmas
Tree Producers Association.



Mr. Speaker, this is an excellent way to promote Nova Scotia Christmas trees in a major export
market, as well as an opportunity to promote and encourage trade in other commodities produced in Nova
Scotia.



Again, I thank the association for providing these trees and I wish Christmas tree growers across the
province a productive and profitable season. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)



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



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I welcome the statement by the Minister of Natural
Resources. I think it demonstrates, again, the entrepreneurial spirit of the Christmas tree growers in Nova
Scotia.



The Nova Scotia Christmas Tree Growers Association certainly are not in favour of grants. They do
not feel they are in the best interests and I did want to mention that. They feel that it is a barrier for trade in
different markets, particularly the United States. They do have a strong association. It is a very good
association and the association is good for the industry here in Nova Scotia. The industry is aggressively
seeking an expanded market. I can only wish that particular industry best wishes.



But, I did note that the minister made mention initially, that the Premier will be receiving a 14-foot
balsam fir tree that will be delivered here Province House for the Premier. I know many people in Nova Scotia
who would like to present the Premier with something, but I don’t exactly think it would be a Christmas tree.
But, nonetheless, I am not sure of the height of the ceiling in the Premier’s house, whether or not it is eight
feet, he probably will have to cut some of it off. I would encourage him to dispose of that in an
environmentally friendly way, and I am sure he will.



Speaking of Mr. Dwight Saunders, Mr. Speaker, who grew the trees, I had the very real privilege of
transporting some trees in my prior career for Mr. Saunders. I took a couple of tractor trailer loads of
Christmas trees to St. Louis, Missouri, for H.C. Saunders and Company, New Ross. So, Mr. Saunders is a
Nova Scotia businessman who is certainly highly regarded in the business community of Nova Scotia. I would
like to wish the minister well on his trip to Washington and make sure you plug in the right plug.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I just want to thank the minister for his statement. I have
just a few brief words. First of all, I would like to echo his concluding comments in his statement, to wish
Christmas tree growers, truckers and all workers in this industry across the province, a productive and
profitable season. As perhaps a suggestion to the minister, that when he makes his trip to Washington,
representing Nova Scotia, to the Tree Lighting Ceremony at the Canadian Embassy tomorrow night, that he
makes sure he leaves the Premier behind, because lately it seems that whenever the Premier goes out of the
province, it causes trouble not only for him but also for Nova Scotians.



I wish him well and I know he will represent Nova Scotia - the minister that is - well in Washington
for this important ceremony.



GOVERNMENT NOTICES OF MOTION



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Human Resources.



RESOLUTION NO. 1223



HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I will table the
following notice of motion:



Whereas December 6th is a day of action, as well as remembrance; and



Whereas on this day we pause to remember all Canadian women who have been and continue to be
victims of violence; and



Whereas hundreds of dedicated professionals and volunteers are daily giving of themselves in the
transition houses and women’s shelters in this province, helping victims of violence build new lives;



Therefore be it resolved that we here recognize the invaluable contributions of our transition house
workers and that this government actively support the family violence preventive initiative whose mission is
to end family violence in Nova Scotia.



Mr. Speaker, I seek 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.



INTRODUCTION OF BILLS



NOTICES OF MOTION



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.



RESOLUTION NO. 1224



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



Whereas five years ago today 14 women were senselessly slain at the École Polytechnique in
Montreal; and



Whereas not a day, not an hour and not a minute goes by that some senseless act of random violence
is perpetrated against a woman; and



Whereas we have the responsibility to ensure that policies and laws are strengthened and
implemented in order to ensure that the campaign message of the Women’s Action Coalition, “Not one more
woman”, is heard throughout the country;



Therefore be it resolved that today, when we join with the slain women’s families in lighting a
candle, we acknowledge our individual responsibility and that this light act as a beacon and show us the way
toward providing the framework that will end violence against women.



Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.



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



Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



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



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



RESOLUTION NO. 1225



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



Whereas the ripples created by the terrible deaths of 14 women in Montreal five years ago today are
still spreading through our country; and



Whereas the National Day of Remembrance and Action serves best when it renews our resolve to
tackle the long-hidden epidemic of violence against women; and



Whereas maintenance enforcement and every other public program which help reduce violence
against women should be guided by that clear objective;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the government to seize the time and carry forward
every possible means of enabling women to escape the threat of violence in their home, on the street and in
the work place, through economic security and personal dignity for every Nova Scotia woman.



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



MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



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



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.



RESOLUTION NO. 1226



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



Whereas the “I did not know” or “I was not aware” answer has become the rule instead of the
exception within the government ranks; and



Whereas it has now been revealed by the Premier’s press secretary that the Premier is often quoted
as saying something that he did not know he was saying; and



Whereas Nova Scotians are simply sick and tired of the constant misunderstandings and the level
of incompetence being demonstrated by the Premier and Ministers of the Crown;

 

Therefore be it resolved that the Premier make it abundantly clear to Nova Scotians as to whether
he is in charge of the government of this province, or is he just carrying a title and allowing senior bureaucrats
to run the show.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



RESOLUTION NO. 1227



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



Whereas it has been estimated that between 50 per cent and 90 per cent of women have at some point
been harassed in the work place, while occupational violence against women is increasing; and



Whereas in dire economic circumstances and slowly evolving social attitudes, many women are
vulnerable to such violence and harassment; and



Whereas the December 6th National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women
reminds us that labour standards and work place conditions are an important part of the battle to end this
violence;



Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Labour Minister to join his colleagues in a broad-based strategy to reduce every form of violence against women in Nova Scotia.



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



MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed that there be waiver of notice on that motion?



It is agreed.



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



The motion is carried.



The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



RESOLUTION NO. 1228



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



Whereas the bells at Ford Needham rang in remembrance of the survivors of the 1917 Halifax
Explosion this morning at the hour the Mont Blanc exploded; and



Whereas the Bell Tower is just one small reminder of the devastation caused to families and to the
Cities of Halifax and Dartmouth, killing some 1,600 when the two ships collided on that winter day; and



Whereas in that second, the area witnessed the largest man-made explosion before the atomic bomb
was dropped in the Second World War;



Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House remember those lost and the families
shattered 77 years ago today, but at the same time, too, remember the spirit and hand of friendship extended
by so many in our cities’ critical time of need.



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 Bedford Basin.



RESOLUTION NO. 1229



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



Whereas the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic has its first permanent exhibit on the Halifax
Explosion; and



Whereas the exhibit is made of material from the past seven years of temporary shows at the
museum; and



Whereas the museum has budgeted $50,000 over two years to pay for costs of the museum’s number
one theme;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly congratulate Interpretations Manager, Michael
Murray, the staff at the Maritime Museum, but also commend the survivors and contributors to the display
of the Halifax Explosion.



Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.



MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



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



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Kings North.



RESOLUTION NO. 1230



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



Whereas the Minister of Health closed the Eastern Kings Memorial Hospital; and



Whereas the Minister of Health has never given a satisfactory reason for ordering the closure of this
hospital; and



Whereas the Mayor of Wolfville, Gwen Phillips, wants to know why the Eastern Kings Memorial
Hospital has been singled out as the only hospital closed;



Therefore be it resolved the Minister of Health and the Minister of the Environment meet with the
Mayor of Wolfville and explain the government’s health care plan, if they have a health care plan.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.



RESOLUTION NO. 1231



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



Whereas today marks the anniversary of the Halifax Explosion, when thousands of civilians in the
communities on both sides of Halifax Harbour suffered death and injury in one of the world’s worst wartime
incidents; and



Whereas memories of the explosion may grow fainter with each generation, but not our particular
experience of the terrible destructive power of the weapons of war; and



Whereas the havoc created by that one accident gives all Nova Scotians special reason to seek peace
and security in world affairs;



Therefore be it resolved that this House observe the anniversary of the Halifax Explosion by
commemorating its innocent victims and by recognizing that peace and common security among nations are
the best means of avoiding such tragedies.



[10:30 a.m.]



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



MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?



It is agreed.



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



The motion is carried.



The honourable member for Kings North.



RESOLUTION NO. 1232



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



Whereas the government has, once again, found an alternate target on which to lay blame for its
weekly mix-up; and



Whereas in this government, if the incompetence does not lie with Cabinet or with the deputies, it
appears to fall at the feet of over-eager staff; and



Whereas if the Premier learns anything during his tenure as Leader of the government, it should be,
don’t leave home;



Therefore be it resolved that this Premier take responsibility for the statements attributed to him in
his news release on the $94,000 Berger Canada contract and apologize to Nova Scotians for another breach
of the tendering policy.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



RESOLUTION NO. 1233



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



Whereas after yesterday’s Liberal efforts to explain away the Berger contract, those who do business
with this government can legitimately ask when a contract is not a contract; and



Whereas members of the business community well understand that fair competition for government
contracts promotes excellence and high standards; and



Whereas no senior official of this government could possibly believe or defend an untendered contract
to Berger or anyone else unless the Premier has destroyed any expectation that fair, open tendering rules will
prevail;



Therefore be it resolved that instead of Keystone Kops capers, the Liberals should apologize to the
long-suffering Nova Scotia taxpayers who pay the price when Liberals don’t obtain the best value for money
from each contract, then waste time tripping over themselves to pretend it never happened.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.






RESOLUTION NO. 1234



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



Whereas on November 16th, the Finance Minister announced that one of the greatest benefits of his
Liberal Government’s early retirement plan was that it would clean out the senior levels of the Civil Service;
and



Whereas two of the most thoroughly cleaned out departments are Economic Renewal and the
Premier’s Office; and



Whereas the Premier and minister would have Nova Scotians believe that those departments are now
so efficient that non-contracts are non-announced with non-authorization, and everyone tells the truth all of
the time;



Therefore be it resolved that this House condemns the government’s pathetic attempt to backtrack
from the Premier’s incredible announcement of yet another untendered contract, to the Berger Group of
companies, defying his own fair government rules and directives.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.



RESOLUTION NO. 1235



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



Whereas the lotteries minister and his officials have declared that they have done no studies to justify
opening casinos, yet the Government House Leader recently told The Reporter, “We’ve done studies”; and



Whereas the House Leader admitted that none of three consultations favoured casino gambling, yet
he pointed to them with pride saying, “we’ve had three commissions . . . listening to people”; and



Whereas the minister emphasizes that Nova Scotia’s casinos will rely almost entirely upon an
increase in local gambling, but the House Leader suggests, “a significant influx of clientele”, even people from
“the east coast of the United States”;



Therefore be it resolved that the Liberals who say one thing in the Legislature and something entirely
different in Port Hawkesbury need not look to the Premier’s arrogance or further to find an explanation for
their credibility gap.



MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.



The honourable member for Annapolis.






RESOLUTION NO. 1236



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



Whereas Annapolis General Hospital and the Department of Health have reached an agreement on
the hospital’s role; and



Whereas Annapolis General Hospital’s new role will focus on emergency and home care services;
and



Whereas this agreement was made possible by the open and creative discussions that resulted in the
Annapolis hospital’s new direction;



Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly applaud the plans developed in Annapolis that
demonstrate health system reform working in our community to address our unique health needs.



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



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



Is there unanimous consent?



I think I hear several Noes.



The notice is tabled.



Are there further notices of motion? If not, that would conclude the daily routine and we will now
advance to the orders of the day. The time now being 10:36 a.m., the Oral Question Period today running for
an hour, it will run until 11:36 a.m.



ORDERS OF THE DAY



ORAL QUESTIONS PUT BY MEMBERS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



ERA: DAL. UNIV.-MILLENNIUM PHARMACEUTICALS - PARTNERSHIP



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. Recently the Premier
issued a release advising of a partnership agreement between Dalhousie University and Millennium
Pharmaceuticals of Cambridge, Massachusetts for collaborative studies in genetic epidemiology. It describes
a very sophisticated and important study of common diseases with multifactorial aetiologies or causations such
as diabetes, atherosclerosis, cardiovascular disease, cancer, epilepsy and dementia. In the release, the Premier
indicates that this venture into common disease interested him greatly as a physician since they affect up to
10 per cent of the population. He indicated that the studies are expected to begin in early 1995. I wonder if
the Premier could indicate what commitment of financial resources does he anticipate are necessary to enable
this collaborative effort to go forward?



THE PREMIER: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I did not issue a release, let’s make that quite clear. The
release came from the Economic Renewal Agency , it did not come from my office. Secondly, I met with
Millennium Pharmaceuticals, which is a very interesting group of scientists and venture capital people. The
issue is really between Dalhousie University and the Millennium Pharmaceuticals group. I, in my supportive
role, met with them up here, when they were up here, and agreed to meet with them down in Boston when
I went and I will continue to support anything that improves the opportunity for job creation within the
province.



MR. DONAHOE: So the Premier supports the venture but does not acknowledge any knowledge of
or responsibility for the release in which he allegedly made the announcement of the partnership. I wonder,
then, if the Premier could tell us about his role in a release in which it was announced that the Province of
Nova Scotia intends to join with Berger Canada to identify trade and investment opportunities in Asia. There
was a release quoting the Premier rather liberally, the Premier saying that this development is an excellent
example of the kind of partnership which government and private industry can work on together to identify
opportunities throughout the world. It goes on to talk about the Berger Group and the work that they would
do. I wonder if the Premier could tell us what knowledge he has of arrangements made between his
government and the Berger Group in this connection?



THE PREMIER: First of all, Mr. Speaker, there is no deal, there is no contract. My knowledge of
this was supplied to me by the Economic Renewal Agency. My contacts with Berger Group have been, in
effect, as far as I know, infinitesimal. I consider them a good company but I think the Minister for the
Economic Renewal Agency will perhaps answer the question about how, in effect, their name and this whole
issue came up.



MR. SPEAKER: Do you wish to redirect?



MR. DONAHOE: No, I do not at all. I wonder if the Premier would tell us that he is therefore saying
to the people of Nova Scotia that relative to these two releases, when they issued, as they did last Friday, and
they quote the Premier very specifically, and I read, “`This development,’ Premier Savage said, `is an excellent
example of the kind of partnership which government and private industry can work on together to identify
opportunities throughout the world.’”. To quote further, “`This partnership will allow us to work smarter and
more efficiently . . .’”, and so on and so on. In relation to the one relative to the medical research issue saying
as it did, “Premier Savage said this venture into common diseases interest him greatly as a physician, since
they affect up to ten per cent of the population.”. Is the Premier saying that he never said any of those words
and they are the figment of some official’s imagination?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I give the same response as I did before, I spoke to a group of business
people in Boston at about 1:30 p.m. It is my understanding that the release went out at 10:00 a.m. that
morning without having had the ministerial approval. The contacts that I had with Millennium go back to
their visit to this province. I did meet, I think he is the Millennium controller, at the luncheon but my contacts
with Millennium are indeed genuine, they are an excellent company. The Leader of the Opposition knows full
well, from 15 years of it, that press releases which indicate that one person says something are usually checked
at the Premier’s office but not for content. In other words, if the ministerial decision is made, what we do is
check the releases for style and for language but the content of them is the responsibility of the department,
that is quite clear, always has been.






MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



ERA: BERGER GROUP - CONTACTS



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I want to direct a question to the Premier and it is on the
same topic. I don’t want to belabour the point about the press release but I do want to ask the Premier because
it appears clear that the Premier and his Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency has had contact with the
Berger group. I would like to ask the Premier a fairly simple question, is this how you and your government
handle open tendering, you sit down, talk it out with the firm that you are interested in getting together with,
you get the minister and in this case, the Premier involved and on-side and then in this case, the Premier goes
outside the country and makes the announcements and then after all that is done, there is a call for proposals?
Is that, in fact, how your government tenders contracts?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the question is rather like, have you stopped beating your wife. The
issue, fundamentally, is one in this case of a contract was not made, it never got across the minister’s desk,
it has never been seen by the minister and therefore there is no contract.



Obviously, I have expressed concern about the way in which this was handled. I don’t pretend to be
enthusiastic about the way it was handled. The simple truth is that we had no knowledge of the press release
at 10:00 o’clock and I don’t think I met with Berger, I had met with Michael MacDonald about five months
ago, who is the Aird company. Apart from that I have no contact with Berger.



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, to the Premier, why did you not at the earliest opportunity make it
perfectly clear to your Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency, all your senior officials involved in this
matter, that contract discussions were not to be held unless or until a proper, unbiased, call for proposals was
sent out?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I have done that on many occasions and will continue to do it as long
as it is necessary.



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I think we know enough already with recent events to question that
response. My final supplementary to the minister . . .



MR. SPEAKER: To the minister or to the Premier?



MR. CHISHOLM: To the Premier, Mr. Speaker, through you.



MR. SPEAKER: The First Minister.



MR. CHISHOLM: Would it not be a better reflection on what exactly happened, if we were to
conclude that his instructions were actually that before you give the contract to Berger, that you hold a phony
call for proposals to try to make the process look clean?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, as usual, these insinuations and allegations are couched in questions.
We do not go through phony calls. We do have a process. In this case, Mr. Speaker, the mishap, the release
of the press release was an unfortunate accident within the department. I have asked and demanded that there
will be an investigation and assessment of the whole issue, but this government’s policy remains the same and,
lest it always be believed that everything is getting by with this, remember that the vast majority, compared
to the 15 years previously, are tendered. The vast majority of personal services are tendered and it is only in
this particular case where the press release, which was not authorized because the issue never went before the
minister, that is the truth and that is exactly what I have said all along.



[10:45 a.m.]



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



ERA: BERGER GROUP - DEALINGS



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to go back to the Premier, if I may, relative
to the same matter. I was astounded to hear what I think I heard him say, that when these press releases come
over to his office, they are checked for style and for language. I think Nova Scotian taxpayers are more
concerned about the fact that they appear not to be checked for substance and truth and I do not understand.



I want the Premier, if he will, to tell us how he explains the fact that media contacts made with
Berger have indicated that statements have been made by Berger to the effect that he, Premier Savage, and
Mr. Bragg, the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency, had dealings with the Berger company and were
aware of the deal that was described in this press release?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, that is as near as a categorical untruth as this House will permit. I
have had no contact with Berger. I don’t even know, apart from, as I said, Michael MacDonald. These
insinuations are unworthy of the Opposition Leader.



MR. DONAHOE: I wonder if the Premier, by way of supplementary, will tell us whether or not he,
the Premier, or, to his knowledge, any of his ministers, have had contact with Mr. John Young, President of
the Nova Scotia Liberal Association, who is the official agent here in Nova Scotia of Berger? Has the Premier
had contact with Mr. Young in regard to any of these matters related to dealings between his government and
Berger?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I can state categorically that I have never discussed Berger with Mr.
Young. I have never discussed anything with Mr. Young; in fact, I have not seen him since the very successful
fundraiser that we had on November 27th, (Applause) which I understand raised a lot more money than the
Tory fundraiser which was on a little while ago.



The issue of talking to Mr. Young, who is a representative of Mr. Berger, is a non-issue. I have never
ever discussed anything with Mr. Young. In fact, the last time I spoke to him, I guess, was in China when he
was representing Minmetals.



MR. DONAHOE: It gets curiouser and curiouser. So I take it then that the Premier is saying to this
House and to Nova Scotians today that there is absolutely no truth at all to the substance (Interruption) Yes,
indeed, this is the Premier, International Links, Boston, Massachusetts, announcing the two initiatives and
the one relative to Berger, which, if one of the Pages might . . .



MR. SPEAKER: Can we have a Page here, please?






MR. DONAHOE: . . . we might table that after the Premier has had a chance to look at it. I guess
what I want to ask the Premier, relative to that release, which quotes him liberally and leaves the impression
for Nova Scotians that he, the Premier, is aware of the matter, supports it, talks about the fact that this is the
very kind of international connections necessary to be made by this government to open up its economic
expansion initiatives on a global scale and so on.



I take it, I am hearing today, and Nova Scotians are hearing today from the Premier that the first time
he saw this release or any of the words in it are moments ago when I handed it to him here in the Legislature,
is that true?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I can say absolutely categorically that I have never even seen this, not
even yesterday. I never saw it until I was handed it today by the Leader of the Opposition.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.



COMMUN. SERV.: LUNENBURG FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S

 

SERVICES AGENCY - REPORT



DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Community Services, and this is relative to the
report that was released at the end of the week on the Lunenburg Family and Children’s Services Agency.
Patrick Hickey reported sexual abuse by Steven Henderson around April 1987. I quote from Page 19 of the
report, “The failure of Agency staff to document the allegations, or any investigation of them in its own
records is non-compliance in and of itself.”.



It is clear that the agency failed to conduct a proper investigation of the allegations in 1987, when
an investigation might have resulted in action taken, so that the sexual abuse might never have taken place.



At the press conference the authors of the report indicated a series of incremental decisions, resulting
in the failure of the agency to respond to information it received and allowed the tragedy to unfold.



My question to the minister, having now reviewed the report, is the minister convinced beyond doubt
that the sexual abuse by Steven Henderson was an agency failure, rather than a failure by an individual within
the agency? In other words, no individual should shoulder the blame for what happened to young Clayton?



HON. JAMES SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I have reviewed the report, discussed it with its authors. I think
it has been a very thorough report. They document quite well in that report the deficiencies that resulted in
them coming to the conclusion that the system failed the children and the family.



I would be remiss if I said that no one person is responsible; when the system fails there are many
people who are responsible, Mr. Speaker. So, I think that by virtue of saying that the system has failed, that
does not mean that individuals have not failed within that system. That is how I would read that.






I think there has certainly been issues, and they have addressed this and through various procedures
and protocols that are changing. It was also the opinion, I personally think the social workers from Ontario
who did this review, were very competent, they are very sensitive, they are very caring and they are very
professional people. That is their conclusion and I agree with them, but that does not mean to say that we, as
a society, and people within that agency and community must bear some responsibility. That is what happens
in my opinion, Mr. Speaker, when the system fails.



DR. HAMM: Mr. Speaker, by way of first supplementary, on Page 18 of the report it indicates there
was a double bias on the part of the agency at work throughout the history of Debra Stevens and the
Hendersons. My question, what steps, for example, replacement workers, training programs, et cetera, have
been taken and will be taken to ensure that this will not happen again in Lunenburg or in any other agency,
which will allow restoration of public trust in the Family and Children’s Services Agency in Lunenburg and
elsewhere?



DR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I think this is an excellent question. I think this focuses on the issue of
how can we prevent the issues of child abuse and the double bias, more specifically. I cannot stand in the
House today and guarantee this House of Assembly that these situations and the further abuse of children will
not take place again. We cannot ensure that, that is impossible.



We can say that since that time we have a new Children and Family Services Act; we have a clear
definition of preventive and protection services within the agencies and within the department. We have a
reinforced protocol on child protection, we have training courses, we have prevention programs and, as the
report indicates, as the honourable member would know, they felt at this time that the agency is conforming
as well as any across this country -they have compared it to agencies right across this country - and felt that
at this time the programs that have been put in place, following this situation that arose in that agency, that
there has been improvement, in fact, that staff is performing very professionally.



DR. HAMM: Mr. Speaker, by way of final supplementary to the minister, what happens now to
young Clayton and will there be some form of recompense for the pain and suffering he has endured? For
example, will there be counselling and does the minister have a timeframe on the decision regarding
compensation?



DR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, my response to the questions relative to compensation remain the same
as the other day at the press conference. The report, which is a thorough, well done report, raises issues that
one would assume that we will have a request for compensation. We are putting together a process with the
agency and I must point out to the House that the agency, itself, is a partner in this response to compensation
so it is not only the Department of Community Services as such. So we are putting a process in place, working
with the agency that will address these requests, some of which are coming to the department at this time.
Today, in fact, we are acting on getting counselling services in place. That is the first issue and then the
broader issue of compensation will be dealt with and the process is being in place both within the Department
of Community Services and with the agency there.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



HEALTH - PHYSICIAN AFFAIRS ADVISOR: POSITION - INTERVIEWS



MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Last week the
Minister of Health confirmed in the House that a former Liberal Cabinet Minister, Dr. Dan Reid, had been
awarded a $115,000 job as a Physician Affairs Advisor to the minister. I asked the minister at that time if the
job was advertised and interviews were held and he said, Hansard, Page 5331, “Yes, it was advertised as such
and there were expressions of interest from several physicians because it had to be a physician.”. I am not sure
whether the minister addressed the question as to whether or not interviews were held. Would he confirm
today whether interviews were or were not held for that position?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Yes, Mr. Speaker, on the basis of the honourable gentleman’s question,
I was able to review some of the activities on the part of the deputy and the committee. As I understand it,
there were telephone interviews held as well as some personal interviews with some of the people who
expressed interest.



MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for checking. There were, as I understand it, a
number of interviews held, at least, by phone. I would ask the minister if he would confirm today how many,
in actual fact, were interviewed? Does he know the number of applicants and how many were interviewed
either by phone or by contact?



DR. STEWART: Yes, as I understand it, we have 12 actual expressions of interest by letter in the
file. There are, I believe eight curricula vitae. Of those, about three or four, I am a little doubtful about
whether there was a fourth in which the curricula vitae was appropriate to the criteria that we had set,
including general practice.



MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, now I know that there were not just three or four, there were 12. Now
I know there were three or four that were looked at. The minister, I think, said in the House that they all
withdrew except Dr. Dan Reid when it came to being a full-time position. I would ask the minister if this was
the case? I find it kind of strange that there were telephone interviews for such an important job but was it
the case that all of them withdrew because they could not be full time in this position?



DR. STEWART: Yes, Mr. Speaker, again I am trying to look at the records. I was not involved in
the selection process in terms of interviews or telephone calls to various people. I talked to approximately two
of them. As I understand it, a formal withdrawal by letter was not made but it was clear that they were not
able to relinquish practice.



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



PREMIER: TENDERING GUIDELINES - FOLLOW



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my first question through you, sir, to the
Premier. The Premier, of course, will know that imitation is the highest form of flattery and I would like to
ask the Premier why it is that he would expect that public servants would follow the tendering rules and
guidelines when the Premier and senior officials, in fact, Cabinet Ministers themselves have not followed the
tendering guidelines?



[11:00 a.m.]



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, once again there are insinuations and allegations that are typical of
the questions that come from that side of the House. I think it is fair to say that we follow the guidelines in
the majority of cases, we are not perfect, but the vast majority of those, including personal services contracts
are tendered and we will have the figures that will go to produce that. At the moment they are being collected
in response to God knows how many questions that the Opposition has requested.



MR. HOLM: Mr. Speaker, the Premier’s answer gives reason to why people are saying when the
government officials come forward or senior members of this government come forward, they often say, here
come the clowns.



MR. SPEAKER: I think that is a little heavy. Be careful.



MR. HOLM: I would like to direct my first supplementary to the Minister for the Economic Renewal
Agency. I would like to ask the minister why it was that officials within his department and maybe the
minister himself were involved in discussions with Berger before proposals were called if, in fact, it wasn’t
the intention to have Berger helping draft the terms of reference so that they would have the inside track on
the contract when it is going to be awarded?



HON. ROSS BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, let me make one thing perfectly clear, neither the Premier nor
I have had any discussions with Berger about this proposed project that we are discussing. At no time have
we had discussions with Berger. Let me also make it clear that I don’t understand why staff had undertaken
to negotiate with Berger before it had come up through the system to go out for a proposal call. We, and I
promised the Premier, will undertake to find out why. At no time did we entertain in my office to undertake
a contract with Berger, sole-sourced or otherwise. If, in fact, anything goes ahead it will be done on a call for
proposal on an open basis so anybody can apply to it. (Applause)



MR. HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I want to direct my last question back to the Premier. There seems to be
some similarity here between the Berger contract, the Morash contract and so on. What we see happening is
department ministers or officials within departments having discussions with particular companies before
proposals are called. My question to the Premier is simply this, what and when are you going to finally get
your act together? Ethics, if nothing else, would require that absolutely no consultations or discussions would
be going on with a particular company that the government is expecting to be responding to a proposal call,
if it wasn’t the government’s intention to favour that company.



MR. SPEAKER: We have heard the question, thank you.



MR. HOLM: My question to the Premier is, what are you going to do to ensure that this continuum
of botches and improper behaviour does not continue?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, there were several questions there, I choose to answer the first one.
I will say quite clearly and categorically, this Party got its act together in May 1993. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.



HEALTH - PHYSICIAN AFFAIRS ADVISOR:

 

DR. DAN REID - APPOINTMENT



MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. I was a little
disappointed a few moments ago when the Minister of Health couldn’t explain to me the process by which
former Liberal Cabinet Minister Dan Reid was hired. He indicated in this House - I am sure he knows about
the fair hiring practice. I would ask the minister, knowing there were a number of applicants, why at least two
candidates who applied for that position were never contacted by his department and never interviewed? Why
didn’t this process of hiring Dan Reid have to follow the process that everyone else has to follow in doing
interviews for a job? Why were these people not contacted?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, this position that we had advertised openly and had
hoped for applicants, this was a very specialized and restrictive issue here. We had a requirement for
community input into community development that would reflect physicians’ interests in the health care
reform system. We had to have a full-time participant in that. It is not easy to recruit for a salary of even
$115,000 with someone who might be grossing as much as $200,000 in the community. This is one of the
things.



I share the honourable member’s frustration at trying to understand but it is not necessary for me as
minister to go out and interview every potential candidate in the medical profession. We had listed our criteria
well in advance, we had decided on the process and I think the process was open and fair. I am trying to deal
with this as honestly and openly as I can, Mr. Speaker, knowing full well that my deputy and people
surrounding her, who did some of the initial screening, are not currently in my department.



MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, I had a call, last Friday, from two physicians who don’t think it was
open and fair. Two physicians told me they applied for the job, they had letters from the deputy that they
would be interviewed, but they were never called. Two of those doctors, one of them has 17 years’ experience
in urban and rural practice. I want to know, since they were told they were going to get an interview
(Interruption) Yes, I will name one of them and the other I will tell the minister in private, (Interruption)
Why? Because this process hasn’t been open and fair, that’s why. Because they read in the paper where the
minister gave out the wrong information. That is why, Mr. Speaker.



MR. SPEAKER: Is this a supplementary question?



MR. MOODY: I want to know today why these qualified physicians that applied for this job were
not even granted an interview? That is what I want to know.



DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I can only reassure the honourable gentleman that the process was
fair. That we interviewed and looked at people in terms of their possibility of giving full-time service to the
community, in light of the remuneration we were offering. We did so as best we could in light of the
construction of a reform team, that was ongoing at the moment as well.



MR. MOODY: My final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, is to the Premier. The Premier promised a fair
hiring practice. He promised people would get interviews if they qualified for the job. I can give the Premier
names of people who applied for this job and did not get interviewed. I would ask the Premier, if hiring a
former Liberal Cabinet Minister when other qualified physicians were not interviewed, is another example
of this government’s fair hiring policy? If it isn’t, will the Premier ask that this be put out again and allowed
a democratic process to choose the final candidate?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I rise to my feet a little bemused at the thought that the process being
blamed on us, when we had 15 years of the kind of process that they have lived through. Not everybody who
applies for a job is interviewed. (Interruptions) Not everybody who applies for a job is interviewed and you
know that better than anybody.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.



HEALTH - PHYSICIAN AFFAIRS ADVISOR:

 

POSITION - INTERVIEWS



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: My question is to the Premier on the same issue. I wonder if the
Premier will give this undertaking. If he makes inquiry, as I ask him to do, and determines that at least two
physicians did, in fact, upon applying for this particular job, get letters back from the Deputy Minister of
Health saying, in effect, we will be back to you to arrange interviews. If he finds that that was done, those
doctors were given the commitment that they would be contacted for interview and that was the last contact
ever made by the department, will the Premier give the commitment that he will, in concert with his Minister
of Health, ensure that those applications are reviewed and that those interviews will be made, as were
promised by the deputy minister?



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, this is, once again, the kind of questioning that implies that I meddle
in departments. This is a departmental issue. The issue, as I have stated, is that not everybody who applies
for a job is interviewed. Everybody knows that. I am satisfied (Interruptions)



MR. SPEAKER: Please, one at a time. The honourable Premier has the floor.



THE PREMIER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I have the floor I think. I am satisfied that the department
went through a process and I refute utterly the allegation that I am going to conduct some kind of inquiry.



MR. DONAHOE: I have no idea how the Premier can be satisfied about anything that is going on
in the government. Every time we turn around, it is somebody else’s fault, it is some minister’s fault, it is some
bureaucrat’s fault, there was a miscommunication or whatever.



I ask, by way of supplementary, to the Minister of Health, if I may, I ask the Minister of Health if he
will review the files relative to this matter and if, in fact, he finds, as he will, that there are at least two letters
directed to physicians here in the Province of Nova Scotia who applied for this job and who were told in letters
signed by the Deputy Minister of Health that they, those doctors, would be contacted for interviews?



If he finds that those doctors were never contacted for interview, will the minister give the
undertaking today that the matter will be put on hold and it will be further reviewed and that those two
doctors, and any other doctors who may have gotten similar letters, will, in fact, be interviewed and
considered for this particular position? Will he give that undertaking?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, in deference to the honourable Leader of the Opposition,
I have, indeed, reviewed this on the basis of previous questions. I have tried to certainly confirm some of the
questions, or at least answer some of the questions, and I would be happy to review it again. Surely I don’t
have confirmation, perhaps, of the two gentlemen he is speaking of, or women perhaps, but I certainly would
look at this.



The fact is that we have done the hiring, in a way I was comfortable with, in terms of it being open,
and also being able to tap the person I felt was proper for the position. I would rest on that choice and I would
confirm it here in this House today.



MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, the hollowest of undertakings I have ever heard in this place. How
is it possible that the minister can say, I did the analysis, I did the review, and in fact I checked the files, and
he will not now, today, give a commitment in response to letters from his department, from his deputy, which
said to two physicians in this province, in effect, and I will give him the names privately, after this Question
Period, those physicians got letters from this minister’s deputy, saying we have your application, we will
contact you to make arrangements for interview. Those two physicians were never interviewed. That deputy,
this minister, this Premier, nobody knows the qualities or lack of same of those applicants but they were both
told that they would be interviewed.



I ask the Minister of Health again, is this simply a situation where the fix is in, that Dan Reid is
getting the job, that you, the Minister of Health, knew he was getting it and Premier John Savage knew he
was getting it and the whole thing is a sham? Or that you will, in fact, go back, if you find letters of
commitment for interview to any physicians were made, you give the undertaking that those interviews will
take place? Will you give that undertaking?



DR. STEWART: Again, Mr. Speaker, I can only reiterate the fact that every effort was made to
canvass people in the community who would be appropriate to this position, including the ability to come on
board and to give up their medical practice. I had honourable members suggest to me and somewhat in
previous discussions that there were several other friends or acquaintances who might be up for the job,
including the past president of the Medical Society, and all sorts of rumours were circulating in and out of
this place and others.



I can only say that we have a position here that has been filled, that is filled with a competent
individual who has given up his practice to the service of the province and I am very grateful for that.



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



HEALTH - PHYSICIAN AFFAIRS ADVISOR:

 

POSITION - INTERVIEWS



MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Well, Mr. Speaker, I am just astounded, I can’t understand. The
minister tries to have us believe that our hearts should bleed for Dan Reid because he has given up his
practice, he is going to have a $115,000 job. The point I am trying to make with the Minister of Health is that
there are two other physicians that we know of who were told by this minister’s department, we have your
letter and you will be interviewed. At no time, contrary to what this minister has said in this House, did either
of those two applicants indicate they were not interested in the job, upon learning that it was full time. The
reason they never communicated that is because they were never called in for interview.



I ask this minister one more time, will this minister go back to his department and if he finds that
letters of commitment for interview to two or more doctors do, in fact, exist, that he will put the matter on
hold and see that interviews are held with those two doctors?



MR. SPEAKER: Well, with deference, Beauchesne states that a question that has been previously
answered ought not to be asked again. The minister, I feel, has answered this question.






[11:15 a.m.]



MR. DONAHOE: If that is the case, I will ask, if I may, the Minister of Health if he could please
explain how it is or what is the public policy process, or what is the tendering policy process or provision,
which makes it possible that we could have this scenario, a call for proposals or applications, an application
filed by two physicians, a letter from the Department of Health saying, we have your application and we will
get in contact with you to have interviews with you and then the decision is taken that somebody else is hired
without the commitment of the interviews to these two applicants ever being honoured.



How can the minister please help me explain or understand how that can possibly happen? Why
would the interviews be committed and never held?



HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I would have to accept the description by the honourable
gentleman opposite that this, indeed, was the process. We went through several months of interviews of
talking to people, of trying to get interest in this position and in the many other positions we were advertising
for in that way. In this case, we had several candidates and we looked at each. This is a personal services
contract that we engaged for a specific role and the specificity of the role, which we undertook in this case,
actually limits the options that we have and I am happy to say that it was filled properly. I can’t say much
more about it than that.



MR. DONAHOE: So the obvious answer, says my distinguished friend in the back row, the obvious
conclusion is then, I put it to the Minister of Health, that if anybody gets a letter from the Department of
Health, saying to an applicant for a job, we, the department, will contact you to make arrangements for
interview, that that letter is not worth the paper it is written on. It is not worth the word of this minister that
he will make good on the commitment made by his department. This minister, I hear today, is saying he is
not prepared to honour the commitment made by the senior officials of his department. Is that the conclusion
that we reach?



MR. SPEAKER: It is difficult to detect a question there.



DR. STEWART: I can just reiterate that I would not be part of a process which would be window-dressing, as the honourable gentleman opposite suggests. In fact, the gentleman is making assumptions that
are his perception of what the process was. I can only say that his perception is flawed. There was a process
of calling for a specific position, which we have filled. That, to my mind, was fair and open.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.



COMMUN. SERV.: FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERV. -

 

INDEPENDENT REVIEW



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question, through you, to the
Minister of Community Services. On Friday, we had the release of the report compiled representing the review
of the Family and Children’s Services of Lunenburg County. I think it is clear to all that the report confirms
that the Lunenburg Family and Children’s Services Agency failed Debra Stevens and many other people
associated with that case, in a most fundamental way. But, at this particular time, I do not want to deal with
that part of the review.



I would like to raise with the minister in my question, Mr. Speaker, the fact that there has been no
review done of the role of the Community Services Department in this whole matter. It was not in the terms
of reference for the two social workers who handled the review of the Lunenburg Family and Children’s
Services Agency. I would like to ask this minister, because it appears clear that the department did not fulfil
its responsibilities with respect to ensuring that the policies and procedures were properly followed. I am
concerned that this is just the tip of the iceberg, that, in fact, there are many more cases like this out there.



I would like the Minister of Community Services if he will agree today to invite the authors of that
review back to conduct an independent review of the role of the Department of Community Services in this
whole matter?



HON. JAMES SMITH: Mr. Speaker, the report, which is very thorough and done by very
professional people, has certainly indicated there were many people responsible for what happened,
particularly within the situation relative to Mrs. Stevens and her family.



The report, in my opinion, does not leave the Department of Community Services or any other agency
involved free of blame. The system is to blame. With that, there is no question that out of this will probably
evolve responsibility, relative to compensation, both within the responsibility of the agency and also the
Department of Community Services. More specifically, will we invite the authors back for whatever the
question was or further review or inquiry, the answer is no, Mr. Speaker. That is my answer as of today.



MR. CHISHOLM: Well, Mr. Speaker, the minister said in his press conference, in releasing the
report downstairs on Friday morning, that the department is ultimately responsible and the buck stops with
that minister. Yet the report, because of the terms of reference, the way they were written, completely excludes
any investigation of his department officials with respect to this case and any other case.



I ask the minister again, if he won’t agree to an independent review of the role of his department, will
he commit in this House today, to respond in writing to the specifics of this report, as it relates to his
department officials not enforcing the policies and practices of this agency?



DR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I have a little trouble understanding his request to me to respond in
writing, either to the honourable member or what. If I can offer my opinion in Question Period, I was not the
Minister of Community Services at that time and neither were we the government during these times. I don’t
know where that honourable member was; I know where I was. I guess I was like a lot of other people, not
being totally aware of the magnitude of child abuse that was going on in this province.



So, Mr. Speaker, I have no hidden agenda to stand here today and defend the actions or cover up in
any way the actions of past ministers and past governments. But I chose to be fair. I don’t know if that
honourable member was so insightful back in the 1980’s that he knew what was going on. I was engaged in
the family practice of medicine as well. When I arrived in this House in 1984 and 1985, I brought the
concerns of child abuse before this House. (Applause)



It has been a commitment of mine and to this day to make things better for child welfare and also
children who don’t interact with the child welfare system as well. In my opinion the report, Mr. Speaker, was
not narrow, it did focus on a particular agency but to me, if reading that report gives that honourable member
the idea that the Department of Community Services was completely not to blame or not involved in the
system - and that is the gist of the report, that this system failed - I would go further, I would say that society
has failed. That is my opinion, Mr. Speaker, and I think we all have to take some blame.



To go on a witch hunt at this juncture, and some of these things may come out eventually, relative
to the compensation issues, but at this time we have received the report, it is a good report, it is thorough, it
has been done by professionals and we are acting on that report at this time.



We shall see what we shall see down the road, as we learn as a society how to deal with the issues
of child abuse in our society.



MR. CHISHOLM: Well, let me assure the minister that nobody is on a witch hunt here. We are
talking about questions of accountability. Regardless of the fact that the minister and the Premier have tried
to put this member in diapers whenever I ask a tough question, let me just say, Mr. Speaker, because of the
fact (Interruptions) that the actions of the Community Services Department in this matter were not reviewed,
we have not heard any explanation why it is that when Debra Stevens went to this department, went to a
former minister with this complaint, that no action was taken. I want to ask this minister if he will provide
us some answers . . .



MR. SPEAKER; I have many members asking me to enforce the Rules of the House, will you please
put your question.



MR. CHISHOLM: . . . about the role of the Department of Community Services in this matter? That
is my question, if you can hear it over the uproar from the people that are trying to blunt this question.



MR. SPEAKER: The minister indicates he could not hear a question there.



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, excuse me, but he didn’t hear my question? I was yelling at the top
of my lungs and because of this crowd who were yelling at me, it is not my fault.



MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.



MR. CHISHOLM: Should I not get the opportunity to rephrase my question?



MR. SPEAKER: On a final supplementary that has consumed so much time, I don’t see how I can,
it transgresses . . .



MR. CHISHOLM: It is not my fault, Mr. Speaker, it was the noise from the members here.



MR. SPEAKER: I will permit the honourable member, in fairness, to pose one final supplementary
question which should be a single sentence, one question please. What is the question?



MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Community Services is, it is clear
that information was brought to the attention of department officials by Debra Stevens, why did they not
respond?



DR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I believe I heard the question, why did the Department of Community
Services not respond specifically to the request of Ms. Debra Stevens? I suspect what the member is referring
to, on some occasions they did not. I think, as Mr. Hillier, one of the authors of the report indicated, if you
look over the period of time what happened was a double bias, as has been mentioned to the honourable
member for Pictou Centre earlier in Question Period, there were factors at work of that nature. There was,
over a period of time, a little or some of them, larger mistakes made. You put it all together and then look at
it, revisit it within the whole nature of what we know now of what happens when abuse takes place,
particularly in foster families which are very vulnerable, and Mr. Hillier made that quite clear. Yes, I think
the department did respond in some instances, but on the big picture did not and that is why the system,
including the Department of Community Services, failed those children and that is my answer. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.



HUMAN RES. - PHYSICIAN AFFAIRS ADVISOR:

 

DR. DAN REID CONTRACT - INVOLVEMENT



MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Human Resources, I
would like to ask that minister a question. Did the department, the staff, draw up the $115,000 contract for
the former Liberal Cabinet Minister, Dan Reid, to become the Physician Affairs Advisor to the Minister of
Health? You indicated last week that you would endeavour to find out what involvement your department had.



HON. ELEANOR NORRIE: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Human Resources is in the process of
drawing up that contract and looking at all the concerns that have to be dealt with in drawing up a contract
of this kind.



MR. ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Human Resources, did your
department rate the job salary at $115,000?



MRS. NORRIE: Mr. Speaker, the Department of Human Resources was involved in drawing up the
external advertisement that was done and the compensation would have followed the guidelines that are set
in place for this type of position.



MR. ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the honourable Minister of Human Resources. Last
year we passed legislation in this House that was heralded as being on the leading edge of fairness for hiring
and guidelines and so on. It was all to be done through the department or coordinated through the Department
of Human Resources. However, we have learned today that all the applications are with the Minister of Health
in his office; all the interviews were done by the Minister of Health in his office; and apparently, the job
description was done by the Minister of Health in his office.



Could you tell me, please, what your function is and why are you still sitting in Cabinet as Minister
of Human Resources when you have totally abrogated your responsibilities? Could you tell me please what
function you fulfil in this government when you are not consulted and when the man has been hired and you
haven’t drawn up the description yet? What role do you play in fulfilling the Human Resources Department
for the government?






[11:30 a.m.]



MRS. NORRIE: The question is, what role do I play in the Department of Human Resources? I am
the Minister of the Department of Human Resources. (Applause)



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



TRANSPORT.: ROUTE 4 (RICHMOND CO.-SYDNEY RIVER) -

 

SNOWPLOWS



MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transportation and
Communications. Approximately three weeks ago, a pulp truck and a school bus collided on Route 4 and
Route 4 is a highway stretching from the Richmond County line through to the Sydney River line. I am sure
the minister is very much aware of just how narrow this highway is. A lot of people have to exercise safety
when travelling that 60 kilometre stretch of highway.



My question for the minister today is simply this. We know eight salt and snowplows are being used
on this stretch of highway this winter. Will two men, as in the past, or a single individual be operating the
vehicle?



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you specifically which equipment is on every
road in Nova Scotia. I know there have been some changes in the equipment and there are some one person
plows that have been purchased this year, plows that are electronically equipped. I think there are probably
8 or 10 of those around the province. Specifically, where they are, I don’t know, but I could certainly check
for the member if he would like to find that out.



I would like to say that I believe the accident on Route 4, outside of Sydney or in the Big Pond area
several weeks ago, did not have anything to do with snowplows or snow on the highways.



MR. TAYLOR: I thank the minister and to the minister, I am aware that a snowplow was not
involved in that accident. Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is to the minister again. The minister took extreme
exception to the fact that 10 days or so ago, when I pointed out that salt was in short supply in various
transportation depots across the province, he later insinuated that I was misleading the public. The fact is that
the minister gave a directive or some orders, so to speak, to members of the Transportation Department to
replenish some of the salt sheds on a Saturday, which is highly irregular. He even admitted to the shortage
in a roundabout way by stating there were only 300 tons of salt or less in the South Shore region.



MR. SPEAKER: Is this a question?



MR. TAYLOR: My question is, will the minister reinforce with Nova Scotians today, the Nova
Scotian motoring public, that he will not forsake safety on the highways in his attempt at number crunching?



MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, that member opposite in the House, a couple of weeks ago, said there was
not one granular of salt in the shed. I indicated at that time that there was, in fact, salt in all the sheds of the
Department of Transportation in the Province of Nova Scotia. As recently as yesterday, we have had an
updated list from all four districts on the amount of salt in each and every dome and each and every shed in
the province.



I can certainly reiterate that there will be no knowing neglect of safety practices or measures on the
highways of Nova Scotia, Mr. Speaker.



MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, in fact, the Bridgewater depot employee did tell me that there was not
a granule, hardly a cup of salt in the Bridgewater depot. I want to ask the minister today if he would, perhaps,
and I understand, in working in conjunction with his front-line supervisors, he prefers to be at certain arm’s
length away from them and I appreciate that. But would he look into the situation regarding Route 4, as to
whether or not all eight salt trucks would be plowing that particular section of highway? (Interruptions) No,
he didn’t tell me he would.



MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, our first knowledge of the accident on Route 4 several weeks ago was as
a result of a media report. Before we had any requests from anyone, we had, in fact, dispatched our district
director to try to arrive at the details of what had happened on Route 4. We received, within a couple of days,
letters from a county councillor and from a concerned parents representative.



The district director was dispatched to meet with those individuals. He has met with those
individuals. They have sat down and they have looked at recommendations, at the need for increased signage
and other methods to make that highway safer and to safeguard against safety hazards that might come
forward. That has been done and they are acting on those recommendations. Certainly, we will take whatever
measures we can to make the highways of Nova Scotia as safe as we can. (Applause)



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West, you have one minute to speak.



JUSTICE - SPOUSAL HOMICIDE: REPORT - STATUS



MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. In keeping with
the recommendation of the Nova Scotia Advisory Council on the Status of Women, the former government
initiated a study in 1992 on spousal homicides. The study was to examine, on a case by case basis, spousal
homicides in Nova Scotia between 1986 and 1991. I would like to ask the minister if he would tell us and all
Nova Scotians if that report has been completed?



HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I can’t specifically say, although I can tell you that it is our
intention to table legislation in the winter session on domestic violence, which will deal with many of these
matters that are of concern, including homicides and battering and all of the rest of the terrible matters that
we are aware of and have come forward and are reported to the police. But I can check and get back on the
specific study but I can assure you that the domestic violence legislation, which is based on a paper by Mr.
Norton of the Department of Justice and done in 1993, will be the basis of legislation coming forward in the
new year.



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



MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. In a recent Question Period
my Leader used the term “skirting the issue” in reference to this government’s ducking and dodging its
responsibilities in addressing a particular issue.



At the time, the member for Bedford-Fall River rose in this House and alleged that use of this term
was, in fact, offensive and sexist and demanded that my Leader withdraw the term. Mr. Speaker, you will
remember he did so.



Today, on the very day that we officially mark the horror of the murders in Montreal five years ago,
we heard solemn pledges from this Premier about taking all possible measures to eradicate violence against
women. Yet, Mr. Speaker, moments later in Question Period, in response to a question from my Leader, this
Premier stood on his feet and dismissed the question by saying, it sounds very much like the Leader of the
New Democratic Party is asking me when I stopped beating my wife.



Mr. Speaker, I would ask, in the spirit of this solemn occasion, whether the Premier would withdraw
that remark and apologize to this House for the offensive, sexist language.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Premier.



THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, it was an unfortunate remark and I certainly withdraw it.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call the order of business, Government
Business.



GOVERNMENT BUSINESS



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call the order of business, Private and
Local Bills for Second Reading.



PRIVATE AND LOCAL BILLS FOR SECOND READING



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 135.



Bill No. 135 - Eastern Shore Recreation Commission Act.



Bill No. 118 - Amherst Cemetery Company Act.



Bill No. 123 - Springhill Parks and Recreation Commission Act.



Bill No. 125 - St. Mary’s Municipal Holiday Act.



MR. SPEAKER: The motion is for second reading of these bills. Would all those in favour of second
reading of these bills please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



Ordered that these bills be referred to the Committee on Private and Local Bills.



The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 127.



Bill No. 127 - Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities Act.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs.



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I so move.



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



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I do not have lengthy remarks on the bill but I am just wondering,
given the fact that the courtesy was not shown to the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities when the service
exchange legislation was introduced, I am wondering if the minister, when she wraps up debate, could tell
us whether or not the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities have been consulted and have given their consent
for the bill. Certainly, it seems like a reasonably good piece of legislation, but I am wondering if the
government has gone back to its age-old tradition of consulting with the union when legislation is introduced
that affects them directly?



MR. SPEAKER: If I recognize the honourable minister, it will be to close the debate.



The honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs.



HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, as I believe I stated when introducing the bill, I received this
piece of legislation from the Union of Nova Scotia Municipalities themselves.



MR. SPEAKER: The motion is for second reading of Bill No. 127. Would all those in favour of the
motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee on Private and Local Bills.



The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 132, and I assume that is
Liverpool, not “Liberpool”.



Bill No. 132 - Liverpool Parking Regulation Act.



MR. SPEAKER: Yes, I noticed that, a typographical error.



The honourable member for Queens.



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



MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that Bill No. 132 be now read a second time. Would all those in
favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee on Private and Local Bills.



The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 133.



Bill No. 133 - Community of Sackville Landfill Compensation Act.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Sackville-Beaverbank.



MR. WILLIAM MACDONALD: Mr. Speaker, I so move.



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



MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I am please just to stand briefly and indicate my support for the
legislation that was introduced by the member for Sackville-Beaverbank. Certainly, this legislation, if it
should receive the support of all members of this House or enough members to proceed on, will enable that
some of the obvious flaws that existed in the last piece of legislation, the set-up for the compensation, can be
addressed. Certainly, there are many people, because of the way the legislation currently exists on the books,
residents, who had lived in the community were often forced to leave because they couldn’t live close to the
intolerable conditions that existed because of the landfill, who were being denied compensation. So this will,
in fact, help address some of the injustices that that legislation had brought.



The one concern I know that has been brought to my attention, and I note there is the provision
within this bill to enable the Metropolitan Authority to buy out, to purchase properties of landowners in the
area. This, I guess, is really something that is going to have to be addressed more by the committee that is
looking into compensation and by the Metropolitan Authority because the legislation doesn’t spell it out, but
there are concerns as to how a fair market price will be arrived at for those whose properties are to be
purchased, one that would take into consideration not only the so-called market value of the property today,
but what the market value of that property would have been had that property not been located close to the
landfill which, of course, meant that the property values took one heck of a kicking over the years and the
assessment values were much lower because of that.



[11:45 a.m.]



Also, of course, if residents are to be forced to accept the compensation package and to purchase or
to have their homes purchased outright, that is also going to require some additional expenditures on their
behalf, whether that be the legal costs for the closings and so on, but also the relocation costs.



I am just raising these concerns. They certainly have been brought to my attention by some who are
concerned about what kind of buy-out options will be made available to them. It is one that I hope the Minister
of Municipal Affairs will try to keep abreast of, keep on top of that issue, to ensure that residents who have
endured and suffered loss of quality of life and loss of enjoyment of their homes because of the failure of not
only the Metropolitan Authority, but also the various provincial governments to be properly monitoring and
enforcing strict rules and procedures at the landfill so that the neighbouring properties and property owners
were not going to be adversely affected.



An injustice has been done to those residents over the years, Mr. Speaker. Hopefully, this legislation
will allow some of those injustices finally to be addressed and, hopefully, it will not be necessary for the
residents to use their litigation lawyers, that I know they have available to them to try to seek justice through
the courts. Thank you.



MR. SPEAKER: Are there any further interveners on Bill No. 133? If not, we will put the question
now. The motion is for second reading of Bill No. 133. Would all those in favour of the motion please say
Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee on Private and Local Bills.



The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Bill No. 136.



Bill No. 136 - Yarmouth County Agricultural Society Annual Grants Act.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Yarmouth.



MR. RICHARD HUBBARD: Mr. Speaker, I move second reading.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Yarmouth moves second reading of Bill No. 136. Are
there any interveners on the debate? If not, I will now put the question. The motion is for second reading of
Bill No. 136. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.



The motion is carried.



Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee on Private and Local Bills.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I move that you do now leave the Chair and the House
resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole House on Bills.



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



The motion is carried.



[11:48 a.m. The House resolved itself into a CWH on Bills with Deputy Speaker Mr. Gerald O’Malley
in the Chair.]



[5:58 p.m. CWH on Bills rose and the House reconvened with Deputy Speaker Mr. Gerald O’Malley
in the Chair.]



MR. SPEAKER: The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on Bills reports:



THE CLERK: That the committee has met and begs leave to sit again.



MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?

 

 

It is agreed.



Tomorrow is Opposition Day.



The honourable House Leader for the New Democratic Party.



MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to announce that the New Democratic Party’s
Opposition Members’ Business tomorrow, we expect to begin with Resolution No. 1175, followed by Bill No.
134 and depending on what kind of time is left, we will wrap up with House Orders.



MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.



HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I move that the House now adjourn to sit tomorrow at 2:00
p.m.



MR. SPEAKER: The motion is carried.



The House will now rise to sit tomorrow at the hour of 2:00 p.m.



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






NOTICE OF QUESTIONS FOR WRITTEN ANSWERS

 

Given on December 5, 1994

 

(Pursuant to Rule 30)



QUESTION NO. 20



By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)

 

To: Hon. Ross Bragg (Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency)



(1) I want to know, as does C. Clarke of Amherst, what was the amount of the financial
settlement made with Captain Don Barr?



QUESTION NO. 21



By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)

 

To: Hon. Bernard Boudreau (Minister of Finance)



(1) I want to know, as does M. Campbell of Wolfville, what special interest groups are funded,
in whole or in part, from provincial financial resources and how much financial support do they receive?



QUESTION NO. 22



By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)

 

To: Hon. Bernard Boudreau (Minister of Finance)



(1) I want to know, as does B. Burns of Kingston, where did the $10,000 come from for the
weekend at the Dartmouth Ramada for the provincial Fisheries Minister and the provincial Fisheries
Department employees and where did the funding come from to work out a retirement package for Dr. Roland
Perry and where did the money come from to pay pension benefits to Don Barr?



QUESTION NO. 23



By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)

 

To: Hon. Bernard Boudreau (Minister of Finance)



(1) Mr. Premier, I want to know, as does D. Bezanson of Kentville, about government fiscal
restraints. Why are government offices in Kentville, costing $850 per month, being abandoned for a rental
in a mall area for $2,200 per month?



QUESTION NO. 24



By: Mr. Brooke Taylor

 

To: Hon. Richard Mann (Minister of Transportation and Communications)



(1) The minister recently had his department’s Manager of Human Resources write to Mr.
Hatfield in Truro and attempt to explain why he was not rehired this summer with the Department of
Transportation after having worked there for the past six years.






Can the minister clarify for me a point in Mr. Novak’s letter that the responsibilities of steel bridge
painting foremen were being incorporated with those of the responsibilities of operations supervisor. Could
the minister provide me, as Transportation Critic, with a detailed job description of the operations supervisor?



(2) One of the CUPE employees who worked under Mr. Hatfield apparently was in charge of
the steel bridge painting crew this summer and fall. He was given payroll books and two-way radios, for
example. Could the minister explain why Mr. Hatfield was not given any consideration to be rehired? Are you
prepared to state that Mr. Hatfield’s ability was that substandard?



(3) The present government has not had much luck with hirings lately considering the fact that
you allegedly were entering a new era. You had the controversy in Municipal Affairs, one in Human
Resources and too many to mention in the Department of Health.



Will the minister table a copy of scores in this Legislature of the job that Mr. Hatfield lost out on and
any correspondence within his department concerning the elimination of Mr. Hatfield’s position?



QUESTION NO. 25



By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)

 

To: Hon. Jay Abbass (Minister of Labour)



(1) I would like to know, as would Jean Martineau of Digby, when the government will make
it mandatory for employees to wear safety glasses, hard hats, steel-toed boots, et cetera, on all construction
sites, large and small garages and all maintenance crews? Such a policy would result in long-term savings
on health care, workers’ compensation and insurance premiums. It is the view of the Progressive Conservative
caucus that the current section of the Occupational Health and Safety Act dealing with safety equipment needs
to be definitive. It is the view of Jean Martineau that failure to comply with such a policy should result in
denial of government benefits.



QUESTION NO. 26



By: Mr. Ronald Russell (Hants West)

 

To: Hon. Jay Abbass (Minister of Labour)



(1) I would like to know, as would Kenneth Muise of Yarmouth, what alternatives are being
proposed by the federal and provincial governments with respect to the seasonal work force, given that the
federal government has proposed devastating reductions in unemployment insurance benefits?



QUESTION NO. 27



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) I want to know, as does G. Allen of Truro, why, when Mr. Allen wrote to you regarding the
closing of the Nova Scotia Teachers College, you didn’t deal with in any way his concerns in your response
and Mr. Allen wrote again and you failed to respond. Why do you not keep your promises?



QUESTION NO. 28



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) I want to know, as does C. Abriel of Truro, when some in the government have found money
to take spouses on political junkets, how can the government allow that to happen and at the same time expect
teachers who have in good faith signed leases on the strength of promised sabbaticals face financial disaster
when those sabbaticals are unexpectedly cancelled?



QUESTION NO. 29



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) Our children are the future of our province. Cuts to the funding of our province’s educational
system will make early intervention more difficult if not impossible. Without proper early intervention
programs for our children and adolescents, how are we going to cut down on the number of future social
assistance applicants and recipients? I want to know, as does S. Mitchell of Lower Sackville, will the minister
confirm there will be sufficient education funding to ensure early intervention?



QUESTION NO. 30



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) I want to know, as does G. Ritcey of Truro, why is the province spending thousands of tax
dollars through the Council of Higher Education and why does Janet Halliwell, Chairperson of the council,
believe her initiative for streamlining the province’s post-secondary education system will strengthen the
quality and effectiveness of that system?



QUESTION NO. 31



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) I want to know, as does G. Ritcey of Truro, why doesn’t the Cabinet decide on the level of
university funding for 1995, 1996 and 1997 and leave the board of governors of the universities to make
changes necessary to live within the proposed funding?



QUESTION NO. 32



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) I want to know, as does Dr. B. Verstraeke of Wolfville, about the Green Paper on Higher
Education just released. Dr. Verstraeke is a member of the NDP for Nova Scotia, but he really appreciates this
communication and commends the above initiative. As a university professor, he is especially concerned for
a thorough debate on the factor of higher education in Nova Scotia, including funding issues. Will the
Minister of Education describe the process which he proposes to implement which will ensure there is a
broadly based public debate on post-secondary education issues in Nova Scotia?



QUESTION NO. 33



By: Mr. John Leefe (Queens)

 

To: Hon. Robert Harrison (Minister of the Environment)



(1) I want to know, as does S. Sollows of Yarmouth, in this time when landfills are closing and
being redesigned, recycling of materials is on the rise, why isn’t there more incentive to reuse, i.e. why don’t
we charge substantial deposits on packaging materials such as bottles and cans?



QUESTION NO. 34



By: Mr. John Leefe (Queens)

 

To: Hon. Robert Harrison (Minister of the Environment)



(1) I want to know, as does G. Irving of Halifax, what is the status of the board you set up to
investigate the environmental illness syndrome, i.e. has the board been selected, who are the members and
when can we expect to hear the results of their findings?



QUESTION NO. 35



By: Mr. John Leefe (Queens)

 

To: Hon. Robert Harrison (Minister of the Environment)



(1) I want to know, as does B. Blades of Meisner’s Section, what measures are planned to
alleviate a repeat of the serious flooding of the spring of 1994 in the community of Meisner’s Section,
Lunenburg County?



QUESTION NO. 36



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) I want to know, as does T. Miller of Falmouth, Hants County, why doesn’t the Province of
Nova Scotia put time limits to acquire an education and other restrictions, such as a maximum number of
months of qualification on social service payments/ allowances for those individuals who are capable of
becoming employed?



QUESTION NO. 37



By: Mr. Terence Donahoe (Halifax Citadel)

 

To: Hon. John MacEachern (Minister of Education)



(1) R. Fosson of Digby County feels that the Holy Word of God, in the form of the Bible, has
been taken out of the schools and replaced by at least two weeks of Halloween, ghost, goblin and perverted
sex stories and I want to know, as does Mr. Fosson, will the minister advise if it is his and his government’s
intention to return some form of religious/moral training to the school curriculum of the Province of Nova
Scotia?