MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. We will commence this afternoon's sitting at this time.
PRESENTING AND READING PETITIONS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.
MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to table a petition signed by 118 people, People Against Casinos in Nova Scotia. These are generally from the Colchester North area and I am pleased to table it today.
MR. SPEAKER: The petition is tabled.
PRESENTING REPORTS OF COMMITTEES
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Justice.
HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, as Chairman of the Committee on Law Amendments, I am directed to report that the committee has met and considered the following bill:
Bill No. 121 - Special Places Protection Act.
and the committee recommends this bill to the favourable consideration of the House without amendment.
MR. SPEAKER: Ordered that this bill be referred to the Committee of the Whole House on Bills.
TABLING REPORTS, REGULATIONS AND OTHER PAPERS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to officially table to the House, the Nova Scotia Provincial Health Council's Annual Report for this year.
MR. SPEAKER: The report is tabled.
The honourable Minister of Supply and Services.
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I am tabling the answers to questions put yesterday by the Leader of the Opposition with regard to the explanation of the situation concerning the acquisition of professional architectural services.
MR. SPEAKER: The report is tabled.
STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS
GOVERNMENT NOTICES OF MOTION
INTRODUCTION OF BILLS
Bill No. 129 - Entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 371 of the Revised Statutes of 1989. The Public Highways Act. (Hon. Richard Mann)
Bill No. 130 - Entitled an Act to Amend Chapter 12 of the Acts of 1994. The Regional Health Boards Act. (Dr. John Hamm)
MR. SPEAKER: Ordered that these bills be read a second time on a future day.
NOTICES OF MOTION
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Minister of Municipal Affairs is already suffering from a credibility problem with the municipal leaders of metro; and
Whereas the minister has tied to make amends by apologizing in a round about way for her errors in judgment; and
Whereas the minister, in her local newsletter, cast shadows once again over the minister's interpretation of events - in her own constituency - when she touted her "Hard nosed negotiations . . ." to obtain funding for the extension to "Alderney Drive";
Therefore be it resolved that the minister brush up on details on her own constituency and the importance of Akerley Boulevard and the new extension to Dartmouth and the Burnside Park before she ever jumps forward on municipal amalgamation.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier and his Cabinet colleagues deliberately created and fostered the impression that the Minister of Municipal Affairs acted alone when she awarded an untendered contract to Grant Morash of Deloitte & Touche; and
Whereas the Premier went even further, telling this House that his misunderstanding with the minister took place on the eve of his departure; and
Whereas the Premier and senior minister have now admitted they knew days before he left for China that Deloitte & Touche were to receive an untendered contract for Mr. Morash's services;
Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Premier to make a statement setting forth the whole truth as to his involvement and that of his Cabinet colleagues in the decision to break the tendering rules and ignore the conflict of interest laws, in the rush to award an untendered contract to Deloitte & Touche for Grant Morash's services.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Kings North.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Canadian National can be a strong catalyst for continued economic growth in Atlantic Canada and is one of this province's most important building blocks for job creation; and
Whereas the National Transportation Authority will soon hold public hearings into the proposed purchase of CN's eastern rail lines by Canadian Pacific Ltd. at a cost of $1.4 billion; and
Whereas any takeover by CP of CN rail lines in Eastern Canada would see the Port of Halifax turned into a regional port because CP is committed to using the H&D Railway on the East Coast of the United States;
Therefore be it resolved that the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency, the Minister of Transportation and the Premier get a firm commitment from Prime Minister Chretien that the federal government will block any attempted purchase by CP Ltd. of Canadian National's eastern rail line.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.
MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I think perhaps because of the din in the House, the Speaker may have missed the fact my colleague, the honourable member for Kings North, at the beginning of reading his resolution indicated to the House that he was proposing to ask for waiver of notice on the resolution and I wonder if it might be possible to return to that matter?
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. I have difficulty with those type of requests, for example, the Prime Minister of Canada is not on that committee which is appearing. We are scheduled to appear and make a presentation so I can pre-empt this and say the answer will be, no.
MR. SPEAKER: Well, if there is a denial of unanimous consent then the notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.
MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the community's church is the focal point of worship and fellowship; and
Whereas the Bedford United Church celebrated its 126th Anniversary on November 20, 1994; and
Whereas the Bedford United Church congregation is blessed with Reverend David Hart's guidance and ministry;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to Reverend Hart and the congregation of the Bedford United Church during this milestone year.
I would ask, Mr. Speaker, if the House would be willing to waive notice and to pass this motion without debate.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice to that congratulatory motion.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Is the House ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas improved, expanded pre-hospital emergency care, home support and nursing home care are among the essentials to replace the services of the North Cumberland Memorial Hospital in Pugwash; and
Whereas almost 8,000 residents, virtually a majority of those served, have petitioned to express concern about the future of their essential health services, including emergency care, laboratory, x-ray physiotherapy, occupational therapy, nutritional services, diabetic education and foot care clinics; and
Whereas the government has inflexibly and arbitrarily demanded that the hospital close on November 30th, regardless;
Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the Health Minister to rescind his inflexible and arbitrary order closing North Cumberland Memorial Hospital on November 30th, so the community can first develop and implement alternative community-based health services, closing hospital services, when they are no longer needed.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Hants West.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the level of Workers' Compensation premiums is an obstacle to business profitability and economic growth in Nova Scotia; and
Whereas last spring the Minister of Finance requested the Voluntary Planning Taxation Committee to review the tax system and recommend tax reductions that would implement the "growth dividend" referred to in the 1993 Budget Address; and
Whereas the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning recommended to this government in November 1994, that the provincial government direct the "growth dividend" to reducing the accumulated deficit in the Workers' Compensation Fund;
Therefore be it resolved that the provincial government explain why it has ignored recommendations of the Taxation Committee of Voluntary Planning with respect to alleviating the financial burden on small businesses in Nova Scotia.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Bedford Basin.
MR. GERALD FOGARTY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Port of Halifax is a major world-class port; and
Whereas international trade is the key to our future economic prosperity; and
[2:15 p.m.]
Whereas exports through the Port of Halifax are up one-fifth over last year, while a new shipping line will operate out of Halifax, creating 250 jobs;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House promote the Port of Halifax as the key to future prosperity in the region.
Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Lunenburg.
MRS. LILA O'CONNOR: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Lunenburg Fisheries Museum welcomes visitors to our community from around the world; and
Whereas the November issue of the Museum's Dory Mates Newsletter reports that 97,254 visitors toured the museum; and
Whereas this year's attractions included Bluenose II, which was tied up at the museum's wharf most of the summer;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to the Fisheries Museum staff and volunteers who gave so generously to make 1994 the most successful season to date.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Dartmouth-Cole Harbour.
MR. ALAN MITCHELL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Deputy Prime Minister and Environment Minister Sheila Copps unveiled a new national computer program from Environment Canada before an auditorium full of Cole Harbour High School students; and
Whereas the Green Lane on the information highway gives users access to: Environment Canada programs, services and events, phone lists of environmental experts, regional weather information, Canadian environmental laws, and publications and press releases; and
Whereas Cole Harbour High School was chosen as the site for the national unveiling of the Green Lane, due to their established Internet connections and capabilities;
Therefore be it resolved that this Assembly extend congratulations to the Cole Harbour High School's administration, teachers and students for being part of the unveiling of this new scheme on the information highway.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Education and Community Services Ministers appear regularly with Lloyd Axworthy to announce pilot projects to help social assistance recipients and others get into the work force on a secure basis; and
Whereas the Supervisory Career Paths Program has done just that for some 50 black Nova Scotians who, with its help, have overcome unemployment and limited education; and
Whereas the success of this program has been met with a denial of provincial funding and cancellation of the federal funding that made it possible;
Therefore be it resolved that this House urges the federal and provincial governments to demonstrate the good faith of their many "pilot" programs, to improve labour force opportunities by securing the financial base of the successful Supervisory Career Paths Program.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Cape Breton South on an introduction.
MR. MANNING MACDONALD: I would like to bring to the attention of you, Mr. Speaker, and to members of the House, the presence in the Speaker's Gallery today of Mr. Angus MacDonald from Sydney, the former Managing Director of the Cape Breton Post, distinguished citizen of Cape Breton South, and his wife, Jean. I would ask them to stand and be recognized and be accorded the usual compliments of the House. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: I would like to welcome the MacDonalds here myself this afternoon. I am very glad to see you both here.
The honourable member for Shelburne.
MR. CLIFFORD HUSKILSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the lobster industry contributes millions of dollars to the economy of Shelburne County; and
Whereas Shelburne County is the lobster capital of Canada; and
Whereas this Monday marks the beginning of the Shelburne County lobster season for this year;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly recognize the hardworking men and women of the fishing industry and extend wishes for a safe and successful lobster season.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Digby-Annapolis.
MR. JOSEPH CASEY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas a Tall Ship parade will take place in Halifax in the year 2000; and
Whereas Digby has a deep water harbour which, during wartime, was an assembly point for Allied convoy ships, many of which were at least 10,000 ton registry; and
Whereas the Annapolis Basin has been used as a safe harbour since the arrival of Champlain and party in 1604;
Therefore be it resolved that plans begin to ensure that Digby-Annapolis area share in this historic event by having a goodly number of these Tall Ships call on the surrounding waters, which would add mightily to the influx of tourists.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Minister of Transportation.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the presence of fungus at Isle Madame District High School and Isle Madame Elementary forced the closure of those schools over one year ago; and
Whereas these closures have resulted in students and teachers being moved to other schools, busing difficulties and students attending class at unconventional times as well as a loss of class time and extra curricular activities; and
Whereas these problems have created many obstacles and other problems that students, teachers, parents and employees of the school board and the school board themselves have to overcome for the benefit of all;
Therefore be it resolved that this House offer congratulations to all those involved in addressing the problems created by the closure of the two Isle Madame Schools.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Minister of Education.
HON. JOHN MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Cape Breton Development Corporation is key to the economic well-being of industrial Cape Breton; and
Whereas there is significant strain on labour-management relations of the Cape Breton Development Corporation; and
Whereas all parties involved in the Cape Breton coal industry are concerned with securing the future of the industry;
Therefore be it resolved that the House of Assembly express its support to the Cape Breton Development Corporation and the United Mine Workers of America in their efforts to identify and remedy any causes of dispute.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Kings North.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Westinghouse is the latest employer to pull up stakes in Nova Scotia and move to Moncton; and
Whereas the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency said last evening that the New Brunswick unemployment rate is definitely lower than Nova Scotia's; and
Whereas the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency campaigned vigorously on the issue that his government could bring as much industry to Nova Scotia as Frank McKenna could do in New Brunswick;
Therefore be it resolved that the Minister for the Nova Scotia Economic Renewal Agency table in this House a document showing the industries which have located in this province since June 11, 1993, compared to the jobs which have been created in our sister province.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the tragic murder of Kim Singer of Pictou County by her husband, and his subsequent suicide, have painfully reminded Nova Scotians that many women and children are not safe in their own homes; and
Whereas the circumstances preceding this horrible murder underscore the importance of the ministerial directive that "the alleged assailant is to be arrested if the police officer has reason to believe that there will be a continuation or repetition of the offence"; and
Whereas these deaths underscore the urgency of the efforts now underway to increase public awareness, train law enforcement officers and improve the quality of each police officer's response to spousal assault;
Therefore be it resolved that this House observe a minute of silence in respect of the memory of Kim Singer and of all other victims of spousal assault, and in recognition of the need to be unwavering in the struggle to end these tragic, needless assaults and deaths.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The motion calls for the observance of one minute of silence and I will ask the House now to rise.
[One minute of silence was observed.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs.
HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas John Martin Junior High School, located in Dartmouth North, being badly in need of repair, especially the roof, walls and window areas; and
Whereas the temperature control within the building, both summer and winter, has been a constant problem for both students and teachers alike; and
Whereas the classroom requires new desk equipment, new computer materials and the school had requested additional library books and equipment to better assist the students;
Therefore be it resolved that this House congratulate the Minister and the Department of Education in supplying the necessary funds to complete this project, enabling the staff of John Martin Junior High School and the surrounding community to build a first-class school, which we are all striving for.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Argyle.
MR. ALLISTER SURETTE: Monsieur l'Orateur, j'avise par les présentes que je proposerai, à une date ultérieure, l'adoption de la proposition suivante:
Attendu que le premier ministre, M. Jean Chrétien, a nommé M. Roméo LeBlanc comme notre prochain gouverneur-général; et
Attendu que M. LeBlanc, natif des Maritimes, à l'honneur d' être le premier Acadien appointé représentant de Sa Majesté la Reine; et
Attendu que cette désignation envoie un message clair et précis qu'il existe, aux maritimes, de dynamiques communautées francophones;
Par conséquent, qu'il soit décidé que cette chambre applaudisse la confiance que M. Chrétien place dans l'expérience et ascendance acadienne de M. LeBlanc.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice on this motion.
MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Oui. Contre, Non.
La proposition est adoptée.
The honourable member for Hants East.
MR. ROBERT CARRUTHERS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee recognizes individuals and organizations who have made an outstanding contribution to the enhancement of our rural communities; and
Whereas these individuals and organizations take pride in the natural beauty of our scenic countryside; and
Whereas two recipients from the Hants County area received recognition in 1994;
Therefore be it resolved that this Assembly congratulate the Rawdon 2 Way 4H Club for placing first in the Nova Scotia Youth Competition and for receiving the Leonard D'Eon Trophy, and Ivan and Margaret Stinson of Maitland who placed first for outstanding Home Ground Recognition.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice on the motion.
MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the community served by the Western Kings Memorial Hospital in Berwick have no government response to their plan for the facility to be part of a reformed, community-based health care system and it will be months before the regional health board and a community health board can consider such issues; and
Whereas the government did order termination of the Western Kings Memorial staff without a cent of severance pay, unlike fired deputy ministers; and
Whereas delegates from across Nova Scotia at the NDP Provincial Council meeting in Kentville unanimously supported just treatment for these loyal health care workers, and the Western Kings Memorial Hospital community;
Therefore be it resolved that the Health Minister should ensure an immediate, thorough response to the proposal for continued use in community-based health care of Western Kings Memorial Hospital and a continued role in the reformed health care system for the hardworking employees of that hospital.
[2:30 p.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury.
MR. RAYMOND WHITE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Robyn Maghar has competed in tract nationally and internationally, winning a silver medal at the Commonwealth Games in British Columbia; and
Whereas the Town of Mulgrave has followed her running career with great pride; and
Whereas the Town of Mulgrave has commissioned a sign to be erected stating that this is the home of Robyn Maghar;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly congratulate Robyn Maghar for her many achievements and commend the Town of Mulgrave for recognizing Robyn as a role model for young people in the community.
Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Pictou East.
MR. WAYNE FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas it has been 25 years since the opening of Generator No. 5 at the Nova Scotia Power station in Trenton; and
Whereas Generator No. 5 was the first 150-megawatt generator in Atlantic Canada; and
Whereas since the plant first opened in 1969 it has produced over 20 million megawatt hours in over 176,000 hours of operation;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House congratulate all those employees who have contributed to the success of the Trenton power plant in its first 25 years of operation.
I would ask for waiver of notice, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Nova Scotia Federation of Labour, United Mine Workers, Halifax-Dartmouth, Pictou, Valley and other injured workers' groups and many other representatives of workers and injured workers have all asked the Labour Minister to permit enough time for his WCB plans to be properly considered; and
Whereas it is workers, injured workers, widows, widowers and surviving children who stand to lose if every single WCB benefit is quickly and arbitrarily reduced;
Therefore be it resolved that this House urges that the Labour Minister accept the widespread suggestion from worker and injured worker representatives and provide the several months of time he has promised for them to consider WCB changes.
MR. SPEAKER: Unfortunately, I have to rule that resolution out of order as it seeks to debate a matter now before the House, a Public Bill for Second Reading.
The honourable Minister of Finance.
HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Cape Breton County Economic Development Authority presented a strategic economic action plan for Cape Breton County on August 12, 1994; and
Whereas this plan was the result of hard work by people dedicated to the economic rebirth of a depressed economic region; and
Whereas community action is necessary if we are to build a renewed economy province-wide;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House encourage other regions of the province to develop their own strategic economic action plans.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. RUSSELL MACNEIL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Canadian Weightlifting Association reversed their decision on Jim Dan Corbett; and
Whereas Jim Dan Corbett dedicated his life to acquiring skills in the sport of weightlifting; and
Whereas Jim Dan Corbett excelled in his sport and was proud to represent Nova Scotia and Canada;
Therefore be it resolved that this House wish Mr. Corbett continued success as he resumes his beloved sport of weightlifting.
Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.
MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Bedford Basin Yacht Club was awarded the William Abbott Trophy by the Canadian Yachting Association at their annual meeting held in Halifax this year; and
Whereas the award recognizes outstanding innovative programming over the years; and
Whereas programs include a pilot program to provide training for the 15 to 18 years age group, a program for women in sailing and a pilot program created to introduce sailing through high school Phys. Ed. classes;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to the Bedford Basin Yacht Club for having the best Learn to Sail Program in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I would request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice, which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Shelburne.
MR. CLIFFORD HUSKILSON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas an 11 year old Sandy Point girl will skate with the Nova Scotia team at the Canada Winter Games at Grand Prairie, Alberta this winter; and
Whereas Shaira Gorham qualified for the Canada Games by capturing the Pre-Novice Ladies title at the SunLife Provincial Championships in Dartmouth; and
Whereas a second skater from the Shelburne County Figure Skating Club, 13 year old Linda Ross, of North East Point, won a silver medal at the Dartmouth competition and is an alternative for the Canada Winter Games;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to these fine young skating competitors from Shelburne County and wish them every success at the Canada Winter Games.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice, which requires unanimous consent.
Is there consent?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, through you and to all members of the House, I would like to introduce former hardworking Halifax County Councillor from District 19, Barry Barnet. I would ask you to afford Barry our usual warm welcome. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Digby-Annapolis.
MR. JOSEPH CASEY: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Mr. Gerald Handspiker served our country at war in the Royal Canadian Navy and in the Canadian Merchant Navy; and
Whereas Mr. Handspiker displayed excellent seamanship while serving with the Bayview Lifesaving Station; and
Whereas Mr. Handspiker recently retired from the Council of the Municipality of the District of Digby;
Therefore be it resolved that this House extend congratulations to Gerald Handspiker for a lifetime of achievement and thank him for dedicating his time to our community and also to our country.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Minister of the Environment.
HON. ROBERT HARRISON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Municipality of the County of Annapolis is about to construct the first ever solar-biological sewage treatment plant in Canada, in the Village of Bear River; and
Whereas this biological method of waste water treatment is cost-effective, environmentally responsible and uniquely suited to Nova Scotia communities and climate characteristics; and
Whereas this technology has been adapted for application in our climate by Applied Environmental Systems of Halifax;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House applaud the Municipality of the County of Annapolis and the developers of this solar-biological waste water treatment system for their innovative solution to an age-old problem.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There is a request for waiver of notice, which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Cape Breton Centre.
MR. RUSSELL MACNEIL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas 1994 was a banner year for Cape Breton tourism, with occupancy rates up an average 7 per cent, with some tourism operators reporting an increase as high as 25 per cent; and
Whereas according to Enterprise Cape Breton's tourism division, every 1 per cent jump in occupancy generates $750,000 in revenue; and
Whereas the 7 per cent increase for the summer of 1994 translates into a cash value of $12 million;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extends congratulations to Cape Breton tourism operators, staff and volunteers, whose diligent hard work paid off during the summer of 1994.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
Order, please. I cannot recognize the honourable member for Bedford-Fall River because there is a quota of two notices of motion per member today on the strength of the Speaker's ruling of 1977 made by Mr. Speaker, George Doucet, after Mr. Ron Wallace, MLA for Halifax Citadel, stood up and moved 38 notices of motion, one after another. Since that time, there has been a Speaker's ruling that there is a quota of two per member, per day.
The honourable member for Victoria.
MR. KENNETH MACASKILL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas Cape Breton is a snowmobiler's dream because of its beautifil, rugged terrain and heavy spring snows that last well into April; and
Whereas the members of the snowmobile clubs formed the Inverness County/Victoria County Trails Federation to cut and interconnect trails through rough woods and difficult terrain to accommodate grooming equipment and prepare signs; and
Whereas the economic impact of snowmobilers is making itself evident in Cape Breton's winter accommodation business, at gas stations, in snowmobile dealerships and maintenance services, with community groups such as the UCW and CWL who provide food;
Therefore be it resolved that this Assembly recognize the inspired work done by members of the snowmobile clubs who have volunteered many hours necessary to bring trails in Cape Breton to a world-class level.
Mr. Speaker, I seek waiver of notice and passage without debate.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the protection of wetlands is vital to the well-being of our province's environment; and
Whereas the public-private partnerships can be forged in a multitude of areas as witnessed by the Eastern Habitat Joint Venture Agreement; and
Whereas Stora Forest Industries recently announced that it would set aside five sites in northeastern mainland Nova Scotia for wetland protection;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly applaud Stora Forest Industries, the Department of Natural Resources and all organizations involved for their commitment to preserving wetlands in Nova Scotia.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Minister of Education.
HON. JOHN MACEACHERN: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the coal industry continues to be the economic heart of industrial Cape Breton; and
Whereas hundreds of millions of dollars of preparatory work was done on the Donkin Mine; and
Whereas technical difficulties at one of the two operating mines of Devco have refocused the attention of the Cape Breton mining communities on Donkin;
Therefore be it resolved that the federal government be encouraged to announce its plans for the Donkin Mine so that the mining communities can plan their future.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
L'honorable, le ministre de l'Agriculture et de la Commercialisation.
HON. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Speaker, an English copy of this following resolution has been circulated to all members of the House.
M. WAYNE GAUDET: Monsieur l'Orateur, je désire informer cette assemblée que j'introduirai à une date ultérieure la résolution suivante:
Attendu que la culture acadienne est une partie très importante de notre patrimoine national; et
Attendu que le gouvernement fédéral a jugé bon d'appointer un Acadien, l'honorable Roméo LeBlanc, comme notre prochain Gouverneur Général;
Qu'il soit résolu que ce gouvernement offre au gouvernement fédéral notre sincère appréciation du fait que cette nomination reflète une reconnaissance de la place prépondérante qu'occupent les Acadiens et les Acadiennes au Canada.
Qu'il soit résolu également que cette assemblée offre ses félicitations à Roméo LeBlanc.
Mr. Speaker, I would request a waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: . . . cette annonciation avec les mots parce qu'il a donné de la service très loyale au Parti libéral pendants les années. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Ceux qui veux voterait pour la proposition dites Oui. Contre, Non.
La propostion est adoptée.
The honourable member for Yarmouth.
[2:45 p.m.]
MR. RICHARD HUBBARD: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas athletics are an integral part of life in schools throughout Nova Scotia, made possible by the volunteer efforts of teachers and associates; and
Whereas there are numerous benefits for students who participate in school athletics, including higher self-esteem; and
Whereas the Nova Scotia School Athletic Federation is celebrating its 25th Anniversary this year;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House congratulate the members of the Nova Scotia School Athletic Federation, including teachers and associates, for the great service they have provided students in Nova Scotia over the past 25 years.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury.
MR. RAYMOND WHITE: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee recognizes organizations who have made an outstanding contribution to the enhancement of our scenic rural countryside; and
Whereas these Nova Scotians take pride in the beauty of our natural areas; and
Whereas one organization in Guysborough County has worked hard to enhance nature's beauty;
Therefore be it resolved that this House extend congratulations to Gloria MacKeen of Greenfield Sports Centre in Aspen for placing second in the Provincial Community Facility Award.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Premier is not the only government member being shunned by members of his own Party; and
Whereas the Government House Leader, the Minister of Transportation and Communications, survived a vote taken by members of the Antigonish County Liberal Association to be their guest speaker at their November 19th annual meeting with a majority of one; and
Whereas a senior member of the Liberal Party in Guysborough-Port Hawkesbury recently said, the Minister of Transportation is the most despised person in that constituency since Al Capone ruled Chicago;
Therefore be it resolved that the honourable member for Richmond stop spending so much time defending his noble Leader at every turn in Halifax, and return to his grass roots and begin assisting individuals who enabled him to serve as a member of the government.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
I hear several Noes.
The notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Pictou East.
MR. WAYNE FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to introduce to you, and through you to the House, the presence in the Speaker's Gallery of a former employee of this House, Varina. I would ask Mrs. Sammurtok to please rise and receive a warm welcome from the House today. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honorable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. DENNIS RICHARDS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Leader of the Opposition and his band of merry men attracted a mere 40 people to a public town hall style meeting on Wednesday, November 16th; and
Whereas the member for Kings North expressed his disappointment at the turnout in a hall made for 300 people; and
Whereas the Leader of the Opposition hoped the size of the crowd would have been greater;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House recognize that the Progressive Conservative Party is a spent force in this province and in Canada as a whole. (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I will recognize the notice as tabled.
The honourable Minister of Community Services.
HON. JAMES SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas young Canadians have much potential and resources to offer our country as we climb out of economic recession; and
Whereas young people often do not have the opportunity to access much-needed job experience; and
Whereas the federal government's Youth Service Canada and Nova Scotia's Links Program are two examples of programs that give youth the experience they require in order to gain meaningful employment;
Therefore be it resolved that in the opinion of this House that this House applaud the federal and provincial governments in their programs for youth that lead to meaningful employment.
MR. SPEAKER: The notice is tabled.
The honourable Minister of the Environment.
HON. ROBERT HARRISON: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas community economic development is a strategy that promotes sustainable economic development and to facilitate community-based economic planning and decision-making; and
Whereas the Eastern Valley Community Economic Development Transition Group's founding conference will be held at the Old Orchard Inn in Greenwich, Kings County, from November 24 to November 26, 1994; and
Whereas an inclusive new Regional Economic Development Agency committed to community-based economic renewal will be formed;
Therefore be it resolved that members of this House encourage this new agency to pursue innovative strategies for local economic development and rejuvenation.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Victoria.
MR. KENNETH MACASKILL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas many Nova Scotians take pride in the natural beauty of rural communities; and
Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee recognizes organizations that have worked hard to enhance our scenic rural countryside; and
Whereas the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Committee has recognized one fine organization in Victoria County;
Therefore be it resolved that this House extend congratulations to Wilma Senyshyn and the Iona 4-H Club for placing second in the Nova Scotia Rural Beautification Youth Competition.
Mr. Speaker, I ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for wavier of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Minister of Agriculture and Marketing.
HON. WAYNE GAUDET: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame recognizes outstanding contributions that individuals have made to agriculture; and
Whereas these contributions were recognized by his peers to benefit agriculture in Nova Scotia and Canada; and
Whereas Dr. Herb MacRae, retired Principal of the Nova Scotia Agricultural College, was recently inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame;
Therefore be it resolved that this government congratulate Dr. Herb MacRae for his accomplishments and being inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame.
Mr. Speaker, I request waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Hants East.
MR. ROBERT CARRUTHERS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Leader of the Opposition has said that he believes there is a better way than "tired, old tactics of confrontation and political polarization" when he requested that a free vote be taken on the matter of casinos; and
Whereas the Leader of the Opposition is on record as being in support of casinos; and
Whereas the Leader of the Opposition gives Nova Scotians the impression that he is against casinos;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House of Assembly urge the Leader of the Opposition to confirm his support for the casino project.
MR. SPEAKER: Well, I think that is a little borderline. There is a bill concerning that matter before the House, which has passed second reading. I will take it that the resolution in no way refers to that bill?
MR. CARRUTHERS: That is right.
MR. SPEAKR: Then the notice is tabled.
The honourable member for Pictou East.
MR. WAYNE FRASER: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the Bioregional Resource Recovery has a long history in the Pictou County area providing composting for the food industry, produce a marketable product and address regional waste management concerns; and
Whereas composting results in a fine texture that is soon to be marketed for landscaping and land reclamation projects; and
Whereas participants with Bioregional Resource Recovery project include the Sustainable Economic Development Agency, Scott Paper, the Pictou Solid Waste Commission and Scotsburn Dairies;
Therefore be it resolved that this House of Assembly extend congratulations to all participants who have instead of waste problem, a resource recovery plan.
Mr. Speaker, I would ask for waiver of notice.
MR. SPEAKER: There has been a request for waiver of notice which requires unanimous consent.
Is it agreed?
It is agreed.
Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable member for Cole Harbour-Eastern Passage.
MR. DENNIS RICHARDS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that on a future day I shall move the adoption of the following resolution:
Whereas the member for Kings North considers it important for an Opposition Member to be constructive; and
Whereas the Leader of the Opposition probably thought he was being constructive when he supported the concept of casino gaming on Wednesday, April 20, 1994; and
Whereas recent statements by the Leader of the Opposition regarding casino gaming have been something less than constructive;
Therefore be it resolved that the members of this House, including the member for Kings North, recognize the Leader of the Opposition as less than principled in his flip-flop on the matter of casinos.
MR. SPEAKER: Well, again, it seems somewhat borderline to the Chair.
The notice is tabled.
I would admonish the honourable member not to make reference to the principled or lack of principled qualities of another honourable member. It seems a little provocative.
I have a request from the honourable Government House Leader to revert to the order of business, Statements by Ministers.
STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Natural Resources.
HON. DONALD DOWNE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to advise members of the House that, effective December 1st, services and staff of the Department of Natural Resources currently located in Torrington Place, Burnside, will be relocated at Founder's Square here in Halifax.
This relocation is consistent with our government's objective to provide more efficient service to the public at a cost taxpayers can afford. As a result of this move, total savings to the department will exceed $300,000 per year. It also means that department services in the metropolitan area will be available at one location.
Personnel and services from the Land Resources Division, the Crown Land Records Centre, the Geographic Information and Cartographic Section, and the Map Library at Torrington Place are being moved to Founder's Square.
In order to eliminate duplication and overlap of services, responsibility for the sale of topographic maps and aerial photographs has been transferred to the Department of Municipal Affairs. Aerial photographs and topographic maps formerly available from the Department of Natural Resources will now be available from the Department of Municipal Affairs and Land Information Centres. They are located in Halifax, Sydney, New Glasgow, Lawrencetown, and at the Geomatics Centre in Amherst. Geological and forestry maps, as well as historic land records, will continue to be maintained and available from the Department of Natural Resources in Founder's Square.
The relocation will allow the department to store historic land records, which provide invaluable information on Nova Scotia's land grants, in a climate-controlled environment.
The amount of space currently occupied by the Department of Natural Resources at Torrington Place is 23,000 square feet. Only 17,000 square feet will be required at Founder's Square. This reduction of 6,000 square feet is a result of sharing of common areas such as library, boardrooms and reception areas.
In addition to saving taxpayers more than $300,000 and providing services more effectively, the consolidation of Department of Natural Resources staff in the metropolitan area at one location will improve internal communications and efficiency. The relocation and consolidation of services is being achieved with a minimum disruption to the department staff and the public they serve. Only one person is being transferred to another department as a result of this relocation. The staff transfer stems from the transfer of the responsibilities of the sale of maps and aerial photographs to the Department of Municipal Affairs in Halifax.
[3:00 p.m.]
Bringing all department services available in the metropolitan area under one roof will be more convenient for the general public, Mr. Speaker. It is also consistent with the department's objective to reduce expenditures and streamline operations as part of our government's four year fiscal recovery plan outlined in the publication, Government By Design. Any disruption in services to the public during the transition period of this relocation should be only minimal. The relocation to Founder's Square is effective December 1st and newspaper ads advising of the move will be published this weekend.
Mr. Speaker, this relocation is a very positive move because it provides a public convenience, it delivers department services more effectively, and it will save taxpayers more than $300,000 a year. Thank you. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, I welcome this statement from the Minister of Natural Resources and I commend him for consolidating services and staff. Near as I can tell from the minister's statement, no staff have been displaced. I did note, however, that one has been transferred and this will result in $300,000 savings for the department and the Nova Scotia taxpayers, so I certainly welcome that.
Mr. Speaker, this minister does operate, and I am a little hesitant to ask the question but after some of the goings on in this House regarding public tendering and so on, I would like to know if the 17,000 square feet at Founder's Square was put out for public tender.
So, I do welcome the statement and I do think that there will probably be some initial confusion when people go to obtain or view aerial photographs and maps of topography because now we have to go to Municipal Affairs Land Information Management Service. There will be some confusion at first. I am concerned about the public tendering process but as I did state, the minister usually does abide by the Premier's guidelines.
With those few brief comments, Mr. Speaker, I welcome the statement.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, before I respond to the minister's statement, I would like to make an introduction.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to your attention and all members, Bruce Macdonald, Business Manager for Local 56 of the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of United States and Canada, a member of the Canadian Federation of Labour.
Mr. Speaker, undoubtedly you have seen Mr. Macdonald here in the Legislature in the gallery in the past. He is an avid follower of politics and of the goings on here in the Legislative Chamber and I would ask all members, as Mr. Macdonald rises, to give him the warm welcome usually afforded to guests of the Legislature. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the minister's statement, I do not have a whole lot to say about it. It appears to make some sense. I have not had the opportunity to look at who it is that is serviced by these different locations that will be affected by the relocation. But in terms of the savings, of course, it makes sense to combine services in departments that may make it more efficient, that also makes sense. I guess the previous speaker said, it would be interesting to know whether in fact there was an open tendering process in order to acquire the 1,700 square feet, I believe it was.
But anyway, Mr. Speaker, it seems to make sense to me. I know there have been concerns raised in this House and across the province at various times with governments who have overly centralized their services, their offices and jobs and so on in Halifax, but that is a matter undoubtedly that will be brought to the member's concern by people that feel that that is an important issue.
With those few comments, I thank the minister for making his statement.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency.
HON. ROSS BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, today I rise to make a statement but I must apologize to my colleagues, I didn't have time to prepare something for them but there is a significant important event happening in Trenton today that I think the House should be aware of.
Today, a company called Greenbrier has signed a letter of intent to purchase the assets of Trenton Works to ensure the future of that facility. (Applause)
Greenbrier is the largest manufacturer of rail cars in the United States. They currently own a fleet of 36,000 leased cars and are very anxious to have the capacity and production of the Trenton plant to add to their inventory.
We have been working on this project for some time. As you know, Mr. Speaker, we took over this facility after the owners went bankrupt in Ontario and sort of through a negotiation with the Ontario Government, the Nova Scotia Government has owned it in trust and has been intent on finding private sector buyers.
Greenbrier will have significant Canadian and Nova Scotian ownership in the facility in Trenton and Mr. John Fitzpatrick will stay on as President and CEO of the facility. The deal is tentative at this time but it looks very promising and will provide a secure future for the up to 500 people who are employed there.
As you know, the work force there is at 500 and the future for car manufacturing, right now is very bright. With the addition of Greenbrier and this facility, it will make the future of this plant very successful and hopefully will provide work for the people in that area for many years to come. Thank you. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I know and all Nova Scotians know about the great capability of that plant because they are the organization that has been building the double-stacked rail cars, as we all know. Those double-stacked rail cars that they have been building in Pictou County have proven to be the best available in North America.
The member for the area is sitting to my right and I would like to defer the rest of the comments on that announcement to him.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.
DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, I thank my honourable confrère for allowing me to say a few words about this announcement.
Certainly, all Pictonians welcome the announcement that in fact the ownership of Trenton Works has been established. As all members in this House are aware, for the last number of months, Trenton Works has been operating without real ownership and operating with the support, first of the previous government and now of this government, in terms of providing an operating credit with the bank to allow Trenton Works to continue in business. Without established ownership, they did not have any borrowing power to allow them to carry on business.
The enlightened management, a very effective management at Trenton Works has carried and in fact, the order book at Trenton Works is well filled with work that will carry us well into 1995. The work force, as the minister indicated in his remarks, is presently in the order of 500. There certainly is enough work on the order book to continue to maintain almost continuous steady employment for some 400 to 500 people for the months ahead.
So, this is one of these occasions when I certainly congratulate the minister for his announcement. I certainly thank the minister, he has been most supportive of Trenton Works and most receptive to any suggestions that have come forward on behalf of Trenton Works. I have encouraged in the past the minister to come up and have a look at Trenton Works and again, I will do that. I certainly hope that when the new owners take charge, that they will let us in the plant door, I am sure they will.
For years, the Trenton Works has been the backbone of the Pictou County economy and while it is much smaller than it used to be, I think if we can stabilize this industry at some 400 to 500 workers and keep them reasonably steadily employed, that it will be a tremendous assistance and have a very positive effect on the Pictou County economy. Again, I congratulate the minister for bringing us this good news at this time. I certainly would hope that Greenbrier Companies' association with Trenton Works is a long and prosperous one. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, let me say at the outset that any ownership of Trenton Works or any other operation in this province that would ensure a certain level of stability and long-term security for jobs in this province is appreciated. We certainly don't know, at this point, a lot about the Greenbrier Companies in terms of what their labour- management practices are. I do see that they have a subsidiary in the United States who also manufactures double-stack intermodal rail cars. I guess just seeing that makes me a little concerned that Trenton might in the future be subject to closure as a result of the fact that they wouldn't want to have two subsidiaries competing against one another.
So, those are, I guess, a couple of brief concerns that I might have and we will certainly check out Greenbrier Companies with a little more opportunity, a little more time, a little research. But again, let me just say that any change in ownership that is able to continue, the level of success that Trenton has shown themselves lately, to be able to get further manufacturing contracts would certainly be an asset to not only the work force of Trenton car works but also to the province as a whole. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Oh, never mind, Mr. Speaker, he is not here.
MR. SPEAKER: If there are no other items under the daily routine to come before the House, that brings us to the conclusion of the daily routine and we will now advance to orders of the day. The first item on which is Oral Questions Put By Members. The Oral Question Period today is an hour and a half long, I will call the time now 3:13 p.m. which will mean that the Question Period will go until 4:43 p.m.
ORDERS OF THE DAY
ORAL QUESTIONS PUT BY MEMBERS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Premier. Last Tuesday, November 15, 1994, the Premier indicated in this House and I quote him, Hansard Page 4445, "The Minister of Municipal Affairs and I, obviously, were not communicating the day before I left.". The Premier was referring to any discussions he may have had with the Minister of Municipal Affairs on the day before he left for China. Later on that same day in this House on the 15th, Hansard Page 4447, the Premier said and I quote him again, ". . . I had meetings with her on Tuesday and Wednesday generally confirming that the conflict of interest issue, because of the two married people, was understood . . .".
It appears to me that not only did the Premier contradict himself in those two statements but he also contradicts the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I ask if the Premier will clarify today if he did or did not have meetings with the Minister of Municipal Affairs on Wednesday November 2nd, the day before he left for this China trip and on that occasion discuss the conflict of interest issue? Did he or did he not?
HON. JOHN SAVAGE (The Premier): I can't actually remember. I certainly did on Tuesday, November 1st but I will have to check and see whether on Wednesday, November 2nd I did. I really don't recall.
MR. DONAHOE: The Premier said on several occasions that he wasn't aware before he left that the minister would award the contract to Mr. Grant Morash and if that is the case I wonder why it is that if his memory now fails him as to whether or not he had discussions with the Minister of Municipal Affairs on November 2nd, to discuss conflict of interest issues. He did have discussions with her, he says, on that date.
[3:15 p.m.]
If he was not discussing conflict of interest issues with her on that date, relative to this proposed contract, I wonder if he could dredge his memory and inform this House what was he talking to her about relative to this issue on November 2nd?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am being honest. I cannot recall whether I did or did not. I do know that I spoke to her on Tuesday, November 1st, and on Wednesday, November 2nd, I certainly had contact through my chief of staff. But I do not recall any other contact, but I will check my records and see.
MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, the Premier has said that a number of candidates were allegedly discussed with the minister as potential candidates for this particular position. I wonder if the Premier could recall for the House whether or not any of those other candidates, by his recollection, posed any conflict of interest risk that appeared to be present in connection with or consideration with the potential appointment of Mr. Grant Morash?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, one of the issues that we did discuss on November 1st, was the fact that there were three or four names and three or four companies. The fact also was discussed that some of those companies may very well be involved in municipalities and would, therefore, not be available for the competition. That is the memory that I have.
In addition to that, I do remember discussing with the Minister of Municipal Affairs the whole issue of conflict of interest and how, as a municipal politician, we had avoided it when I was in municipal politics.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Mr. Speaker, through you, my question is to the Premier. I would like to ask the Premier why it is that he waited until yesterday to inform this House and Nova Scotians that he himself was a participant in the Priorities and Planning Committee meeting of November 1st, at which it was decided to appoint Mr. Grant Morash and why it is he has tried to leave the impression that the Minister of Municipal Affairs was acting alone, instead of in concert with the Premier and his colleagues?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the deductions that the honourable member is making are totally erroneous. It is perfectly obvious and I have explained in this House that we left this meeting with two different impressions, the minister and myself. So it is perfectly obvious that I never concealed the fact that I was at the meeting because, obviously, I was.
I carefully explained that we left the meeting with indeed different views of the same issue. We have gone over this at least 15 to 20 times and the answer remains the same. I was there. We had different views of it and I have made it abundantly clear that this is where the crux of the matter and the misunderstandings between the minister and myself have arisen.
MR. HOLM: If my deductions are erroneous and if things are as the Premier says, that there was no decision made at the Priorities and Planning Committee to sole-source the contract, why was it, I ask the Premier through you, Mr. Speaker, that he felt it so necessary that he call his Chief of Staff at 6:50 a.m. to get in touch with the Minister of Municipal Affairs to inform her not to sole-source the contract?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I have already explained that at the Priorities and Planning Committee there are often issues discussed without decisions being arrived at. The real decision arrives when the piece of paper arrives the next week. In this particular case, I called because I wanted it to be abundantly clear that I had left that meeting with a clear impression that there was a call for proposals. The names of at least three or four of those people were the ones that we had discussed the day before. I have been consistent in my rendering of this, that I called because I wanted the call for proposals to proceed with the names of those people who had been discussed at the meeting on the previous day.
MR. HOLM: If, and I am sure the Minister of Municipal Affairs must know the rules, so one wonders why the Premier would have to call to reinforce what the rules already are. My question to the Premier is simply this, is it not true that the real reason why the government or the Premier and other members of the Priorities and Planning Committee, instructed the Minister of Municipal Affairs to contact some others, after the fact, was to cover your backside? And what was really happening is that the Minister of Municipal Affairs is being hung out to dry alone, for being a loyal servant and doing those things she was instructed to do by the Premier and the Priorities and Planning Committee?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I refuse to be taunted into the kind of answer that he is obviously searching for. I have explained this issue many times. My answers have been consistent from the time that I first stood in this House, when I said that mistakes had been made. I said quite consistently, all the time, that I believed that, in effect, there was a process in calling for proposals, that is the difference that we have between us.
This is absolutely the impression with which I left the meeting. I have explained this, Mr. Speaker, and I have explained it consistently and I have not varied in this answer, despite the frequency and the difference of questions that fly over from the other side.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: My question is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Of course it relates to the same matter. Yesterday, the minister stated in this House, in reference to the November 1st meeting of the Priorities and Planning Committee, and I will quote her, "I left the Priorities and Planning meeting early and I left with the understanding that I would be able to approach Grant Morash.".
So she is in this meeting, the Premier is there and the Minister of Finance is there, and others are there and she says she left early. She is a pretty smart person, I think, Mr. Speaker, and she leaves with the impression and the understanding that she was able to approach Grant Morash.
We know the Premier was there at that meeting; we know that the Chairman, the Minister of Finance was at that meeting. I ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs this, will she tell this House and all Nova Scotians, who was it specifically in that meeting who gave her, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, the understanding that she could, indeed, leave that meeting and go off to approach Grant Morash, to offer this contract to him?
HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I think I have answered this question on a number of occasions. As I have said many times, in actual fact, there was a discussion at the Priorities and Planning Committee with regard to a number of names of individuals who would be capable, qualified and able to serve in the position of the coordinator. I think I have mentioned that to the honourable member on a number of occasions.
It is quite correct, as I said yesterday, that I left the meeting early. My understanding was that of the names discussed, that Grant Morash was a name that I felt very strongly about, that I felt very secure in having that individual do the job. I left that meeting with the understanding that I could approach Mr. Morash on that basis.
MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Yesterday the Minister of Finance, the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee, outlined the process for the way in which decisions are apparently taken at the Priorities and Planning Committee meetings. He said that it comes by way of memorandum and a decision is made; there was no such memorandum, there was no such request for a decision, nor was one made.
I wonder if the Minister of Municipal Affairs could, first of all, confirm for me that indeed, that was the case at the Priorities and Planning Committee meeting of November 1st?
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, in actual fact that is the case. I went to Priorities and Planning with an item that I needed to discuss with that committee. That committee makes a number of different decisions. I have an opportunity to go there on occasion when there is a decision that needs to be made on something of a certain magnitude.
We had just announced the amalgamation of the metropolitan area. I knew there was going to be a requirement for a person to lead that process. I went to the committee with a number of names of individuals who I thought could, in actual fact, do that job. We had a general discussion and I got what I felt was approval to approach a particular, individual, one of the names that we had discussed at that time. Certainly I would have to find out if that individual was even willing to do the job before I would have to go back with a memorandum and recommend that this individual is the person who would, in actual fact, take the job on.
So, typically, Mr Speaker, what I try to do is to go to the Priorities and Planning meeting, if I have this type of incident, talk with the individuals who are at that meeting, get some direction, get some approval, get some idea of whether I am on the right wave length and in actual fact then try to enact an understanding that I have from the meeting. As the honourable Minister of Finance has already said, there is a process. I followed the process and when I went back on November 8th, after having talked with Mr. Morash and having his agreement that, in actual fact, the next meeting of the Priorities and Planning Committee were not able to approve the memorandum that I brought forward at that time.
MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Municipal Affairs will tell us, just so that we are absolutely clear, who else was at the Priorities and Planning meeting of November 1st? We know that the Premier and the Minister of Finance were present. Would she advise the House who else was present?
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I don't think that I am in a position to do that. They are ongoing meetings. I was at the meeting early. There could have been people who came after I was there. Those meetings are confidential meetings.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition on a new question.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Yesterday, this minister, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, said, in connection with the untendered contract awarded to Grant Morash, she said, the original decision was reinforced after the briefings and once I went through the curriculum vitae. Is the minister, when she says those words, referring to the decision she thought was made on November 1st at the Priorities and Planning meeting?
HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, number one, I just want to reclarify that there was no contract. There has been no contract signed between Mr. Grant Morash and the Department of Municipal Affairs. I just want to clarify that.
With regard to his discussion after I had had an opportunity to review the CVs of a number of individuals, I went back to my original intention which was that Mr. Morash, of the individuals who had been reviewed on November 2nd, that Mr. Morash was the most qualified individual to do that job of the people who would certainly allow their names to stand.
MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. Yesterday the Minister of Finance said that the Minister of Municipal Affairs came to the meeting of Priorities and Planning to raise the matter and discuss it but that no decision was sought or given. That was interesting. I presume they were just going to have a little chat over tea or coffee, not looking for a decision.
AN HON. MEMBER: Impression. Perhaps they were looking for an impression.
MR. DONAHOE: Or an understanding. I wonder if the minister could tell us, please, how she squares her answer that she went to Priorities and Planning to get a decision when the chairman says that she was not looking for a decision?
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I think, as I have already answered the question, I had gone to Priorities and Planning with a number of individuals who I thought might be available to do that job. There were names of other individuals who came up during that discussion. I go to Priorities and Planning to get some direction, to get some assistance and in actual fact, I came out of the meeting early with the understanding that I could approach Grant Morash.
MR. DONAHOE: So that we are clear, the Priorities and Planning of November 1st was this informal discussion. There was no, as the rules according to the Minister of Finance are, for Priorities and Planning, there was no memorandum. There was no written request. There was no decision asked for, apparently. There was no decision made, but there was an understanding or an impression secured by the Minister of Municipal Affairs from that discussion without any of the normal rules of Priorities and Planning being followed that she could leave that meeting, which she did early, leaving the Premier and others behind her, and that she could go to the phone and call Grant Morash and offer him a $225,000 contract for this job. Is that, in fact, the minister's total recollection of the events of her day of November 1st?
[3:30 p.m.]
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, that is part of the difficulty here. We are talking about this over three or four weeks. He is already pulling into the November 1st date things that have been outlined, that had been discussed well after that date, such as the contract of $225,000 which was not awarded (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member would like the answer, I am more than prepared to give it. I have been on my feet for the past three weeks any number of times answering these same questions.
As I stated, Mr. Speaker, I went to the meeting with an idea, a thought, something that we were going to have to look at, a direction that we were going to have to go because we, in actual fact, needed a coordinator to handle the amalgamation issue. The combination, the contract that was not awarded but the amount of money that we could have looked at was $225,000 and those discussions that I had certainly were well after the Priorities and Planning meeting of November 1st.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.
MR. JOHN LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, my question, too, is for the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I don't know if the minister finds this line of questioning vexatious but it is a matter which is of great importance to Nova Scotians and we do all very much want to get to the bottom of it.
Mr. Speaker, the minister has confirmed that she left Priorities and Planning on November 1st, she returned to her office in order to phone Mr. Grant Morash to confirm to him that he was going to be appointed as the commissioner for metro. She also invited him to come the next day, that would be November 2nd for a briefing. On that next day, on November 2nd, Mr. Morash came to her office for the briefing as did Mr. John Morash, later in the day. We have two Morashs, Grant Morash and John Morash.
My question to the minister, Mr. Speaker, is this, why, since she had already told Grant Morash that he was going to be appointed, did she then invite Mr. John Morash to come to a briefing meeting for an appointment which she already knew was not going to be given him?
HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I had finally got hold of Mr. Grant Morash on November 1st and asked if he would allow his name to stand for the coordinator of the metro amalgamation. Mr. Grant Morash was very interested in that job, certainly interested in having his name stand but as in all people, you would want to have a briefing, an idea, knowledge of what the job actually entailed. As I have said on many occasions, this job is a very tough job and for many people it is a very long-term job. This job is up to 18 months and it is not something that a person just takes over the phone. I had called and asked him to come to a meeting Wednesday morning in order to have a technical briefing on what the job entailed.
MR. LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago this minister said, and I am asking her which version is correct, that she had left, and she said it before, Priorities and Planning with the clear understanding that she was given the authorization to offer the position to Mr. Grant Morash and now she is telling us that she called him to see if he would like to be briefed in the event that he might be interested in it. Now, perhaps the minister would clarify which is correct?
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, one of the difficulties here is that they keep telling me things that I have said. This is one of the difficulties. Each time they get up, they change from a different opportunity to another opportunity. I think as I have said on many occasions that I left the Priorities and Planning meeting with the understanding that Mr. Grant Morash, if he was willing to take on the job, that I, in actual fact, would be able to offer the job to Mr. Grant Morash. That was my understanding when I left the meeting.
But, Mr. Speaker, after I left the meeting I certainly had to contact Mr. Grant Morash to see if he was interested in the job. I would not presume that just every individual would be interested in this type of job because, as we can see, it is a very large job.
MR. LEEFE: Well, it gets curiouser and curiouser, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday the minister said that her deputy minister received a call from the Premier's chief of staff, Ms. Shannon, which was relayed at 6:50 a.m. I am sure we all make phone calls on a routine basis at 6:50 a.m., on routine matters. That was relayed to the minister by the deputy minister, telling her to contact a few other people about this appointment.
I want to know why she called Mr. John Morash and Mr. Bill Hayward on November 2nd, one day after she phoned Grant Morash and confirmed to him that he had the job?
MS. JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I think as I have stated on a couple of occasions as well, that there was a misunderstanding from Priorities and Planning between what I was going to do when I left that meeting and what the Premier thought I was going to do when I left that meeting.
Obviously, the sense that I was going in a different direction must have focused at some time later and there was a call made to me. Actually, Ms. Brenda Shannon tried to get hold of me but unfortunately I had already left my home at 6:30 a.m., that morning and so she was not able to contact me. She then called the deputy minister of the department and relayed the message to him that she wanted to ensure that a call for proposals was going forward.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, maybe we can settle this by going to the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance, as the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee, if he could answer for us if the Minister of Municipal Affairs was acting completely alone in this, in isolation, in complete defiance of a decision, as explained by the Premier, made at the Priorities and Planning Committee, that this proposal to appoint a commissioner for the amalgamation would be tendered?
HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, let me say that on the particular date in question, November 1st, the meeting of Priorities and Planning was a routine meeting. These meetings are held weekly. There were probably 20 or 30 items on the agenda. Item one, at 8:00 a.m., when the meeting started, was a discussion of the amalgamation and the commissioner. That item was brought forward by the honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs, who does not normally sit on that committee. However, she appeared at the meeting for the purpose of that one item. That item was discussed and there was not a decision. Some items come to Priorities and Planning for discussion, some for decision. That is the routine and the honourable Leader of the Opposition knows that, but that is a routine matter.
After that discussion took place, which I would say must have concluded before 9:00 a.m., on Tuesday, November 1st, I am not aware of Priorities and Planning having any further involvement in the matter. I can tell you from firsthand experience, I had none.
MR. CHISHOLM: Okay, well, that is helpful, Mr. Speaker. So again to the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee, the Minister of Municipal Affairs came there looking for a decision on this issue. She made her presentation and then she left.
I want to ask the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee, what did he do to implement or otherwise communicate the decision, discussion, whatever it was, whatever he wants to call it, that the matter of the appointment of a commissioner on the amalgamation was going to be fully tendered? How did he ensure that that was communicated to the Minister of Municipal Affairs, immediately following Priorities and Planning?
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I think the honourable member is into a touch of theatre in his question. The fact of the matter is, the matter was brought forward to Priorities and Planning for discussion. It was a very important issue, it was one that had some time imperatives with it in order that it should proceed and the honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs brought it to that committee, to receive the views of her colleagues.
Now, she left the meeting with one view of what had occurred, the Premier left the meeting with another view of what had occurred. The Priorities and Planning Committee, itself, after about, as I say, 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 1st, did not deal with it again until the week following. I was not involved in that so, in my case I did not deal with it again, period.
MR. CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, not to be overly theatrical on this, but the Minister of Finance responsible for Priorities and Planning, said to us, first of all, that we didn't make a decision and then he said to us that the Minister of Municipal Affairs left with one impression, the Premier left with another impression about the decision that was made.
I ask the minister again, why did he or one of the other senior ministers there, not take responsibility to communicate to the Minister of Municipal Affairs who had made a presentation on a matter involving $225,000? Why didn't he ensure that she knew what was going on?
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, again, the honourable member misrepresents what he has been told across the floor and then claims that he has got some shocking revelation to share with the world. This is a typical approach.
What I said and I will answer the question very clearly, on the morning of November 1st, Priorities and Planning, at the request of one of the ministers of this government, the Minister of Municipal Affairs, had that as item one on an agenda of 20 or 30 items. It dealt with that item, there was a discussion of the item, the item was there for discussion, the honourable minister wanted the views from her colleagues, it was discussed and she left the meeting, period. And that was it in terms of Priorities and Planning.
SOME HON. MEMBER: What was the decision?
MR. BOUDREAU: I believe I have already said that there (Interruptions) was a decision. Mr. Speaker, I find it difficult with the honourable member hollering across the floor to respond.
MR. SPEAKER: I find it very difficult too. Could we have some order, please.
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, there was a decision made by Priorities and Planning. It was made a week following.
AN HON. MEMBER: Oh.
MR. BOUDREAU: The honourable member has discovered something new, now. It was made a week later. Oh! (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please.
AN HON. MEMBER: I think he's got it, Mr. Speaker.
MR. BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the honourable member is seriously interested in these answers and let me simply say to him, as I think I have said many times before, there was a discussion, it was a general discussion and, in fact, two people left the meeting with different impressions. Now, that is the long and the short of it.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.
MR. JOHN LEEFE: Mr. Speaker, my question is also to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. The minister has told us that on Wednesday, November 2nd, her deputy minister received a telephone call from the Premier's Chief of Staff, that would be Brenda Shannon. Ms. Shannon suggested that the minister contact other persons with respect to the appointment of a commissioner for metro amalgamation.
My question to the minister, and I want her to think carefully about this, is what time was the message from the Premier's Chief of Staff relayed to the Minister of Municipal Affairs by the deputy minister? Just to make sure she is clear on my question, what time was the message from the Premier's Chief of Staff relayed to the Minister of Municipal Affairs by the deputy minister.
HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, I would have to say approximately 7:30, 7:25, somewhere around that time.
MR. LEEFE: I thank the minister for her response. My second question again is to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. What time, on November 2, 1994 did the minister and the deputy minister brief Mr. Grant Morash?
[3:45 p.m.]
MS. JOLLY: I think, Mr. Speaker, as I have answered that question on any number of occasions, Mr. Grant Morash was invited to come in for a meeting at 8:00 o'clock on November 2nd.
MR. LEEFE: I take it that is 8:00 a.m? My second supplementary, what time on November 2nd did the Minister of Municipal Affairs invite Mr. John Morsh to attend a briefing respecting the position of commissioner for the metropolitan amalgamation, and at what time did that meeting take place? So we have two times there.
MS. JOLLY: Well, in actual fact it was the deputy minister who invited Mr. Morash who had spoken with Mr. John Morash and had Mr. John Morash come in for a technical briefing, I believe it was in the morning of that day.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: To the Minister of Municipal Affairs. When the Minister of Municipal Affairs said earlier that it was on the basis of an assessment of curriculum vitae that she came to the conclusion that Mr. Grant Morash was the appropriate appointment as far as she was concerned, we are now learning today that she didn't conduct the interview with Mr. John Morash but did with Mr. Grant Morash, so that her analysis or assessment of curriculum vitae and qualifications and so on was done, on the one hand, part by herself and on the other part by her deputy and then she made her decision after discusions with her deputy. Is that what she is now saying?
HON. SANDRA JOLLY: Mr. Speaker, as I have said all along, there was a technical briefing with Mr. Grant Morash and there was a technical briefing with Mr. John Morash. I knew these individuals personally; I have known them for some time; I had reviewed their CVs; and those were the meetings that were held.
MR. DONAHOE: I wonder if the Minister of Municipal Affairs could tell - my colleague, the member for Queens asked about the timing of certain events on November 2nd - this House whether or not she told Mr. John Morash and/or Mr. Bill Hayward on November 2nd, or her deputy, that the job in question was already confirmed to be going to Mr. Grant Morash, and at what time the communications were made to that effect to those individuals?
MS. JOLLY: In actual fact, in the discussion that I had with Mr. Grant Morash on that Wednesday morning after Mr. Cramm had done the technical briefing, I advised Mr. Grant Morash that there were other people being considered for the job.
MR. DONAHOE: My final supplementary is to the Chairman of the Priorities and Planning Committee. That minister said a few moments ago, in describing the process of how Priorities and Planning meetings are conducted, that an agenda is prepared and that a minister will produce a memorandum and make a report and then the discussion will ensue and then a decision will or won't be taken. A moment ago the Minister of Finance, in that capacity, indicated that on November 1, 1994 this issue that we have been discussing here today was the first item on the agenda. I wonder if the minister could tell us how it got to be the first item on the agenda when, earlier, he and others have acknowledged that there was no memorandum, there was no submission, there was no report, there was no paper work at all? How did this matter come to be the first item on the agenda of the November 1st meeting?
HON. BERNARD BOUDREAU: Mr. Speaker, very simple. There is not a memorandum for every item that appears on the agenda. There may be many items. We may want to discuss university rationalization, and that item will appear on the agenda and that discussion will ensue. In fact, that was what the situation was here. If you want the Priorities and Planning Committee to approve a decision, you come with a memorandum. The memorandum is specific and the Priorities and Planning Committee approves it, or doesn't.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the honourable Premier, in the absence of the Minister of Human Resources. The Premier will know that the appointment of a new Coordinator of Human Resource Development takes effect on Monday. The essence of this Human Resource Coordinator job is to ensure that fair treatment and equal opportunity is given to every government employee in this province, and I quote, "to develop and utilize skills and abilities", in rendering service to Nova Scotians.
Can the Premier then explain why this job has been filled without an open competition, in total violation of his government's supposed fair hiring policy?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I am afraid I cannot answer that question at this point but I am prepared to find out and submit again by tomorrow.
MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I would not have thought it would take until tomorrow for the Premier to find out but perhaps it is reasonable for him to take an hour or two to familiarize himself with this latest violation of his government's fair hiring practices.
I wonder, while we wait for some further information, if the Premier could indicate in what circumstances his ministers and deputies have permission to circumvent the fair hiring policies and open competition requirements in filling positions?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the vast majority of contracts, tenders for services, are, in effect, tendered. So the assumption so glibly contained in the question, that most of them are broken, is, of course, inaccurate. There are some 11 points on the question of sole-sourcing that are contained in the policy I furnished to this House last week.
MS. MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, we are talking about hiring practices, not tendering practices, I would remind the honourable Premier, as I proceed to my final supplementary. An internal notice in June advised that the Human Resource Development Coordinator position would be filled internally, by secondment. My question to the Premier, and I will table that notice, is it acceptable to the no-patronage Premier that five months later this job has been filled by going outside the Civil Service, to hire a former colleague of the deputy minister, without the benefit of either an open competition or a merit-based selection process?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, the insinuations continue. Unfortunately, I cannot give you an answer specifically on that but I will find it for tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.
MR. GEORGE MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. Looking at a House Order that the minister returned on June 30th, regarding LifeSmart or Health Smart or Health Minder, I noticed reading through the key events in chronological order that on July 7th, the presentation of their proposal from Health Minder and IBM was made to the minister and on July 29th, three weeks later, the contract was accepted and signed by the Minister of Health.
I would ask the Minister of Health on what authority he accepted and signed that contract?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I think this refers to a year ago July. It certainly was discussed, this was aired in this House. This was an exploratory examination of a particular type of contract and a particular type of service. We submitted it to a committee for vetting. This has all been aired in this place and we, in fact, have decided not to go forward with that proposal at all and it is not on the table anymore.
MR. MOODY: It may not be on the table any more but I asked the minister in his letter to Mr. Steve Stairs of IBM and Health Minder, There are several issues which have been discussed relative to this decision including the present status of the original contract, the KMPG study and the $250,000 default clause. I would ask the minister if, in fact, this government did have to pay with regards to that default clause?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, as I have said in the past, on this issue, that is a very early version of our earlier discussions. We decided not to proceed with this. We had it vetted by a committee headed by Ms. Mary-Jane Hampton. We looked at every aspect of it and decided, no, this was not indeed the way to go forward and there was no contract awarded. There was no kind of intent on the Minister of Health to pursue this specifically.
MR. MOODY: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary, and I ask the minister, again, why did he sign a letter indicating there was a contract and a default clause if there was no such thing?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the discussion to which he refers, and I haven't the letter in front of me, so I will have to assume the dates and content, the very fact that we were discussing a default clause and the amount that he quotes was not satisfactory to us and we deferred it, asked for an opinion from the committee in terms of our health reform process. We decided, along with the committee, that this did not fit, and, in fact, we negotiated further and did agree not to go forward with that proposal.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Supply and Services. What date was the decision made to award the $8 million contract to build and design the new school in Truro-Bible Hill to the architect, Mr. Connell?
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I want to reiterate the material I tabled here earlier today in response to questions yesterday. There was no date of a contract award with respect to that school.
MR. ARCHIBALD: Well, I guess, we are fooling with, has it been indicated to the gentleman that he will be the person in charge of the design and the construction of the school, without the formal contract being signed yet, but has the intention been sent out to Mr. Connell that he is to commence work on this program with a contract to follow?
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the gentleman who the member names as the person who has been asked by our department to present to us, if you will, the procedures, the kinds of subs that will be used to develop that school project, he has submitted that to the department. It is now being reviewed, and we have not had a word as to whether we accept that proposal yet or not. We will be doing that very shortly.
MR. ARCHIBALD: The minister is being just as vague as he possibly can. I am not sure why, and I, certainly, do not appreciate it. (Interruption) I will ask the question and this is very serious. How was public notification ever given that this job was going to be considered to build a new school in Truro-Bible Hill so that firms and individuals who are interested in the construction project could express an interest to you and your government. Was there public notice given?
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I want to be very clear in the procedure in the arena of procuring professional services is a bit different than some of the other avenues of public procurement. I did table today an explanation of the process which we go through to make sure that there was no confusion in that delineation of experiences. I want to say that for the procurement, if you will, of professional services, we have a staff committee in design and construction services who do, based on current recommendations by the architect industry, review those architectural contractors who have demonstrated the ability to perform comparable projects to the projects that we have on the books. In this case there were two that we identified or that this committee has identified and approached the two of them. They found one to be stronger than the other one.
Mr. Connell, as you mentioned, is the successful person to have been asked to present to us how he sees the prescription, if you will, of that school, how many subs will be needed, the scope and the dimensions and what have you. That is the procedure.
[4:00 p.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings North on a new question.
MR. GEORGE ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, through you to the Minister of Supply and Services. My question was simply, earlier, was there public notification given for people to express interest. I think, after listening, that we can assume there was no public notification so that people in the industry could send in their expression of interest to you.
Now if there was no public interest, could the minister explain to us please how he arrived at simply asking two firms. How did he decide those were the two individuals? How were those two people arrived at if there was no opportunity for people to know you were even going to build a school?
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the public interest is certainly widespread. I am well aware that certainly for the past 12 months, we have consulted with practically every architectural firm in the province. That is part of the recommendation they wanted to see as a remedy, compared to past practices of friends of government being sole-sourced for all those kinds of contracts. (Applause)
Mr. Speaker, I want to say as clearly as I can that these firms have enunciated very clearly to me directly, as well as to my staff, what they went through in the past being denied the opportunity and they have welcomed this exercise whereby it provides them the opportunity in a fair and open manner. (Applause)
MR. ARCHIBALD: Could you tell me please why you did not advertise for the jobs?
MR. ADAMS: Again, Mr. Speaker, I think he missed the point that we are working in an arena that is separate from the general contracting arena. We are dealing with specifically the professional services segment of the community and that is part and parcel of their request, plus our observations of the past versus how we want to see things proceed in the future. It is part of a policy that we are now developing and now moving toward the final stages of that input.
When you say the public has not been aware, they are aware. This is the procedure that the majority of architects have asked us to employ. (Interruption) Mr. Speaker, I want to make the point clear, to make the difference so he will understand it better. The professional services are exempt from the normal procurement procedures of the policy. I think the member realizes that because he was part of that change in his former government. (Applause)
MR. ARCHIBALD: Mr. Speaker, I know that the minister has been working with the professional services very rigorously for the last several months. He has had correspondence that I think he furnished today that was dated last January. In April, the professional services that he is referring to corresponded with him indicating some certain guidelines they wanted to follow. It has been April until now and he still has not seen fit to adopt the recommendations.
But one of the primary recommendations that the professional services he is referring to were making in the proposal was that in a job of this size and magnitude, at least public notification be given. Public notification be given is what they are asking for and what you are going to agree to, and select between two to four firms to be in the final selection process.
MR. SPEAKER: Question, please.
MR. ARCHIBALD: I am trying, but I am getting a lot of interference. Why, on the recommendation of the professional services - they said they wanted public notification, two to four firms in the selection process - why did you avoid doing that?
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that two is two out of four. (Interruption) There is no policy that says that. He says a job of that size, they want four. I would refer the member to the guideline which he introduced, the Provincial Procurement Policy, if you will, Section 4.3 and perhaps we can read it. The types of services covered by this policy include the many, but may not be limited to those listed in Appendix A, consistent with the Maritime Procurement Agreement, professional services will be exempted from public advertising. His words, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)
That was published by the government in 1992. We are going to work to make it better, more open. (Interruption) Just to make the point, I think it is relevant that we read that into the record because that is the practice that was initiated two years ago. But I have a file which supplies me with all kinds of notes in terms of the past practices and I think it is a little bit dangerous, I think, to be asking those kinds of accusing questions of how we do not or do open our exercises. Perhaps we may hear from the Opposition how architects were chosen for the Cape Breton Regional Hospital and the new Halifax Infirmary and perhaps how the fees were arrived at, to reach $6 million. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: Somehow I can't help but conclude that the minister is sweeping with the same broom as the former government. I refer to the minister's memorandum of . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Is this a question to the Minister of Supply and Services?
MR. HOLM: To the Minister of Supply and Services, on tendering . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Very well.
MR. HOLM: . . . dated November 29th, 1993. The minister in his memorandum of that date says the use of preferred lists for professional services has been notorious. Bang on, he is right. But he also said effective immediately all department of government are to withdraw from the use of any and all existing preferred lists of services and supply contractors.
My question to the minister is quite simply this, aren't architects used to bidding on private contracts? There are all kinds of businesses out there, Mr. Speaker, that employ the services of architects and they bid. Those architects are quite used to bidding on those contracts. How can you expect to receive the highest quality of service if all you are planning to do is share that service or those awards around?
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I have no record in any of my deliberations where architects are used to tendering for opportunities. They made it very clear to me the day I first met with the first three that they have no business in the arena of tendering for low costs. But they encouraged us in every meeting, every step of the way, the encouragement was strong, that we look for quality in the contractor we would pick to do the services we require because we do set the price on this exercise, professional services, not general goods and services.
MR. HOLM: I would suggest that in the private sector, architects are used to bidding on contracts and, I would suggest, in the private sector they also look for the quality of service that they are going to get with the architects they hire. I refer to the call for proposals for legal services in relation to the public/private venture, Highway No. 101, Western Alignment, put out by the Department of Justice for the Department of Transportation.
Under that they list all kinds of point systems against which the proposals will be judged. One is cost. They also look at experience, they look at qualifications, management, organization and so on.
I ask the Minister of Supply and Services, if you are truly interested in getting the best bang for the buck, the highest quality of service, why haven't you instituted a similar kind of policy for the awarding of contracts for architects?
MR. ADAMS: I will repeat, as I said earlier, we have not shied away from consultation. The message to me is very clear from that industry and what procedures and practices they want to be employed in the recruitment and search of work opportunities. We are complying with that, Mr. Speaker. We are not going to change the rules at the whim of an outside idea.
MR. HOLM: Let me get it straight then, it is obviously the rule or the policy of this government that if a particular segment, if a particular industry, tells this government how it wants the government to award contracts, the government is going to follow that route . . .
MR. SPEAKER: Is that the question?
MR. HOLM: . . . instead of following the tendering policies and a fair, level playing field for all industries, all businesses involved in that trade. So in other words, you take your directions from the architects instead of looking after Nova Scotians.
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, we take the direction as a blend, if you will, of experiences from across this country in this particular case. The acquisition of professional services is not something that can or should be acquired by tender. The selection of a professional must consider factors other than, as I said before, lowest price. The risks to the public are significant if the design of the structures depends simply on cost or the low bid. You want, indeed, the person who is best qualified to meet the requirements of the project and the professionals who have expressed their concerns on tendering on many occasions to me personally, as well as to my staff. And that includes the engineers as well as the architects.
There is no doubt in my mind the position they see themselves in today, compared to where they were. We are going to work to make it better before we make it a policy that is official.(Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Supply and Services. I wonder if the Minister of Supply and Services will acknowledge that his department, presumably with his involvement, prepared a statement of principles for consultant selection policy and procedures, and they did so in association with the Nova Scotia Association of Architects, the Nova Scotia Consulting Engineers Association? Those organizations extended their endorsement, in principle, to the document prepared by the Department of Supply and Services. Would the minister acknowledge that that is so?
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I believe the honourable member was talking about the draft policy of the Architectural Engineering Consultant Selection Process?
MR. SPEAKER: Yes.
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, yes, both the industries have written support letters which we tabled today along with my statement in support of our activities and the refinement of that policy. As of this morning there were several phone calls with further endorsement.
MR. DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister then, patting himself on the back that he has had endorsations all over the place for this policy, from the professions affected in the province; why is it that he learned as long ago as April 25th, from the president of the association of architects, that the draft policy was supported by that association and as he has indicated, it has been supported by others? Why is it this is not now the policy? Why is it still draft, and why is it not the policy for the selection, as it is described, the Consultant Selection Policy and Procedures? Why is it not the policy, if his department recommended it and the affected organizations endorsed it?
MR. ADAMS: I thank the member for that question. I take full responsibility for the time. We have not had a whole lot of building activity in the province, obviously, due to our economics and I did have some personal feelings as minister, that I wanted to see some testing of the procedures along the way. I think we are at that point now, where we have, in your hands if you will, the example. And that is the school that was referred to earlier by the other question.
MR. DONAHOE: With respect, I am not really sure what I should understand the minister to be suggesting he wanted to test because, it is clear, as I read this draft document, that he wasn't testing this document. Because, I asked the Minister of Supply and Services to acknowledge if it is not the fact, that the draft document which his department recommends -the affected organizations' support as far back as April - that that document says that in a situation where you are going to hire a consultant, in the Department of Supply and Services, and consulting fees are estimated to be $250,000, a $0.25 million or more, the process is public notification.
Will the minister acknowledge that is step one in a situation where the fees are estimated to be $0.25 million or more?
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I would not say that was step one at all, no.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, if I may by way of a new question, I am just compelled to ask the minister, what is step one if public notification, as set out in his department's document endorsed by the affected organizations is recommended as step one, public notification. He says, no that is not step one. Would he please tell me and I hope through me and this debate, all the organizations affected, what step one actually is?
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, step one will follow or precede step two and step three when we have a policy that is the official document of this government.
[4:15 p.m.]
MR. DONAHOE: At one, two, three, yes, indeed. (Laughter) Well, I ask the Minister of Supply and Services, very seriously - one, two, three, three, two, one aside - is he saying then to this House today that, as I read this draft document and the organizations affected by it, the architects and the consulting engineers and so on, when they read in this document that in a project which carries with it a consulting fee estimated to be $0.25 million or more and this minister's department suggests and sets out that the process starts with public notification that, on the strength of what he has just said now, they should understand that that is not the way it is going to do. This first step, as far as he is concerned, is not going to be any more, from this point on, public notification and it will be something else. Is that what he is saying?
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, if I had the ability to look to the future and know what my colleagues would do when it has made its final arrival in government as an official policy, then I could answer the question very accurately. I would say that, very likely, it will be the first step.
MR. DONAHOE: It may, likely, but may be it will not be. I wonder if the minister then would outline for me what process is it that he intends to follow which will resolve that question, what the first step will be and, in fact, will transform what he is describing and is described here as a draft document into a final document relative, if I may, not so much to his Cabinet colleagues, but relative to the professions affected. What happens from this point on with the professions in order to lead this document from draft to final stage?
MR. ADAMS: My next role is to get this on the agenda at the Priorities and Planning Committee so that we can do that ratification. I do want to tell my colleagues, through you, that that is our intention. Yesterday, I made reference that we hope to have this official policy by the end of this year and that is still my objective.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Atlantic.
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question through you to the Premier. On November 15th when the Premier stood in this House and made his statement and in response to a series of questions throughout Question Period, he indicated quite consistently that his number one concern was the conflict of interest involving the Deputy Minister of Municipal Affairs and Deloitte & Touche. Yet, we are being told and we know that this was an untendered contract to a major Liberal contributor and a flagrant violation of his own tendering directive.
My question to the Premier is very simple. Why was such a flagrant violation of his own tendering directive not also a concern for this Premier?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, it certainly was.
MR. CHISHOLM: Well, I have difficulty understanding how he can have it both ways when throughout that period he said, quite clearly, that his one motivation in terms of asking people what was going on was the whole issue of the conflict of interest question.
Perhaps, the Premier could explain - after we have heard every other minister tell us that on November 1st this appointment should be handled with open tendering - why he is the only senior minister in this government who now claims that on November 1st it was agreed that the proposed contract would be tendered?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, I do not now claim; what I claimed on November 15th, November 16th and any time I have spoken on this was that my understanding was that there was a call for proposals that would be going out. I reinforced that plea the next day to the Minister of Municipal Affairs. I have not arrived at this now, I have stated it consistently and my answer to the question has been the same every single time.
MR. CHISHOLM: I must ask this final question to the Premier. Is it not in fact more likely that it was the Premier whose stated recollections were in fact incorrect and that he was part of the decision by senior ministers of this government to give a sole-source contract to their good friend, Grant Morash on November 1st?
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, these allegations are mischievous, they have nothing to do with enlightening the public and this is totally wrong.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Kings West.
MR. GEORGE MOODY: My question is for the Minister of Health. On November 8, 1994, the minister will remember that he took a request to Cabinet that he be permitted pursuant - and I am sure he is familiar - to Section 16(1)(a) of the Health Services and Insurance Act to raise the money he is able to spend without Cabinet approval. As he knows, under that Act he is permitted to spend up to $100,000, this was for $1 million. I would ask the minister if he could explain why it was necessary to get a discretionary amount of money of $1 million from Cabinet on that particular day?
HON. RONALD STEWART: It was not necessary on that particular day but this was advised by my staff in terms of our bookkeeping and our needs that might accrue in the next year.
MR. MOODY: Ordinarily, overexpenditures are dealt with by expropriations, obviously, this is not for an overexpenditure. I would ask the minister if he could explain to me and to all taxpayers what this $1 million discretionary money that he received approval from Cabinet was to be used for? I think that is reasonable.
DR. STEWART: Again, I would answer in saying that it was an elevation of the amounts that we could, it was nothing specific in terms of that day but it merely raises the limit and I was advised by my staff that this would be helpful and we so acted.
MR. MOODY: I understand the fact that he wants to raise the limit to $1 million, I understand that fact. I am asking a very simply question on behalf of the taxpayers of this province, what is that money going to be used for? In what areas of his budget under the Health Services Act is that money going to be used for? Surely, he can explain if he asked for the $1 million what the money is for? That is all I am asking, I have no difficulty with the process, no difficulty with the process at all, I would just ask the minister if he could explain to me and to all Nova Scotians what the money is being used for?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the honourable gentleman opposite is confused in terms of what we were seeking. We were seeking an elevation of the limit, we were not seeking money and we certainly did not go before Cabinet and ask for $1 million dollars, it was in case there was a need, everything will go before Cabinet, it will be tabled and public, whenever there is a need. But that is the limit and we cannot go beyond that.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.
MR. DONALD MCINNES: My question also is to the Minister of Health. There is a rumour in Pictou County that the Colchester Regional Hospital will be the regional hospital for Pictou County. I want to know as does Laurel Holliday and many other residents of Pictou County if indeed the Colchester Regional Hospital is to be the regional hospital for Pictou County?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Again, I would be happy if the honourable gentleman would give me an address and a name I would respond directly to the constituent named. If the number of rumours are consistent in all parts of the province including this place, I would be answering on my feet all of the time. The fact is that there is no indication and there is absolutely no plan for designations of specific facilities at this point. In fact, we have said from day one in the reform that we discourage the use of the term regional hospital because it indicates prematurely at best the fact that one hospital would be given a pre-eminence in the particular region. We know that we have in fact shied away from that because the regions are now fewer than they have been before and we certainly could not envisage one particular facility occupying a pre-eminent place. It might be that one facility would have certain services and another would be upgraded in terms of others. That is the essence of health reform.
MR. MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for that answer. The minister has been asked by my colleagues for Pictou County, both the member for Pictou Centre and the member for Pictou East as to whether the minister is going to make additional appointments to the Northern Regional Health Board to give better representation to Pictou County. Will the minister inform the House when he is going to do that, and the people of Pictou County as well?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I have been asked this question several times. We have discussed it with the Chairman of the Northern Regional Health Board. I might suggest that the number of applicants, we had a resignation, as the honourable gentlemen opposite know, from the board in representing, if you would, and I don't use that term representing, the people in Pictou County, those who are chosen to be on the board are representing all of Nova Scotia and with particular interest in the northern region. I want to again reiterate that geographical representation should not be the criterion on which we choose members of a particular board.
But that having been said, if you get into numbers, Mr. Speaker, you will find in the Cape Breton region, for example, the number of applicants, when you look at them, we had only 13 per cent of those who applied appointed to the board. In Pictou County it was 20 per cent who applied were appointed to the board.
I don't want to get into those numbers, Mr. Speaker. I have cautioned the gentleman opposite not to do that because it is not fair. On the other hand, there is a particular need, with the resignation and other considerations, to increase the number of people from Pictou County on the board and we are working on that. I have discussed it with the regional board chair and it should come within the next several weeks, I should believe.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou Centre.
DR. JOHN HAMM: Mr. Speaker, to the Minister of Health. The minister has been engaged in answering questions about the Northern Regional Health Board. Two weeks ago I asked the minister in Question Period how many Pictounians applied to serve on the Northern Regional Health Board and the minister did provide the information and there were 15 Pictounians that did apply. Of those 15, the minister appointed 3 on a board of 16, and as he just again repeated to the House, one of those members has resigned and now we have two appointees representing Pictou County.
My specific question to the minister is, how many applications did the minister receive from the residents of Cumberland County and how many applications from the residents of Colchester County to serve on the Northern Regional Health Board?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I cannot give that number at the moment. I simply do not have it available in front of me. I could count up the numbers, of course, and do that. Again, I would ask the honourable gentleman opposite and those who are in this House to understand that I will not begin to play games in terms of numbers. I will repeat my statement that I have said in the past that geographic representation was not the criteria recommended by the Blueprint Committee or recommended by anyone who engages in health care reform in other jurisdictions in the country.
I would caution all members to be very careful and serious in their comments in terms of asking whether one county has x amount or one county has another. We will disintegrate, Mr. Speaker, if we take that view.
DR. HAMM: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure of the minister's answer if he is going to provide me with the numbers or not, but I would expect that he would oblige and would make that commitment.
By way of first supplementary, I have a question from Howard Moffatt of Dartmouth and he has a question on hospital boards. His question is, and he is asking about his board, is the new board set up by the Savage Government to receive pay?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I have not communicated with this constituent, nor as far as I can remember, been asked that question about what he calls the Savage Government. Does the board receive pay? The board will receive, and I assume that gentleman was speaking about the regional health board, the regional health board will receive funding, obviously, from the Ministery of Health and from the coffers of the taxpayer. In terms of the board members, they will not be paid for their services, these are volunteer boards.
[4:30 p.m.]
DR. HAMM: I think I still fail to have a commitment from the minister that he would provide me with the number of applicants from Cumberland County and Colchester County to serve on the board. Again, would the minister make a commitment to give me those numbers?
DR. STEWART: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to make a commitment. I think that is frivolous and it is not in keeping with my policy of geographic representation being a criterion.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health, the emergency doctor who is the minister responsible for emergency doctoring in the province. My question concerns what appears to be something of an emergency in our emergency health care system, I refer to the comments yesterday by the VGH Trauma Director, advising that there are no longer enough emergency physicians willing and available to continue rotating on a volunteer basis, as the trauma team leader at the VGH trauma unit.
Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister would simply be this, how can he assure Nova Scotians, as he did yesterday that patients will receive the exact same service as they do now, when the VGH Trauma Director has stated quite clearly that three emergency doctors volunteering as team leaders, on a rotational basis, is not enough to run a truly effective system?
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I might correct the impression of the honourable member for Halifax Fairview in that I am no longer an emergency doc, as she terms me, as she terms other people in this province; I am the Minister of Health and that is the difference here, let's make that clear first of all. I am sure that the docs who are over in the Victoria General Hospital would be happy to hear you using that term, which has its own origins, I am sure, in the honourable member's mind.
Let me speak, having said that, Mr. Speaker, from the experience of a trauma doc who works on the trauma team and worked up until 18 or 19 months ago in the Victoria General Hospital. Let us make it clear, lest the public and others, and those of you in this place might have some concern about the level of care being given, in terms of trauma patients at the Victoria General Hospital. What the Trauma Director is saying is that the trauma team, as it was organized, is no longer, in his estimation, and this is a clinical difference of opinion I might say, with him and what he has said, is no longer able to be organized in the same way it was.
Will there be the same people taking care of the patients? Yes, there will be the same people taking care of the patients. Will there be a trained, emergency, Royal College certified emergency physician caring for the patient who comes in the Victoria General Hospital? Yes, there will be. Will there be a surgeon available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, in-house? Yes, there will be. Will there be diagnostic radiology service, including CAT scanning? Yes, there will be. I will go down the list if the honourable member opposite wants to be informed fully.
The question here is the organization of the team, in terms of whether or not there is a concerted team that is called down from in-house. That, according to what I get from the honourable member opposite, is no longer working in that facility. However, the proposal that was given to me on November 4th was in consideration in my department but it involves one thing, Mr. Speaker - and I beg the indulgence of the House to hear me out - a different method of remuneration for physicians. As soon as you say that, you are now into the realm of negotiations with the Medical Society, in terms of how we reimburse physicians. Of course that is without the realm of that particular interest that the honourable member expresses. So, there are ramifications of this, I have in turn tried to give the information so that you may be fully informed. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: I might note before I recognize the honourable member for a supplementary question, that according to Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, a question that invites a very long and tedious answer certainly would restrict the number of supplementaries allowable because this would carry on indefinitely. I will recognize one short snapper, please.
MS. MCDONOUGH: This is the Minister of Health that has been closing emergency services around the province. This is the Minister of Health that has been closing small hospitals saying that a highly specialized trauma unit is what is needed. This is the minister that is in the process of dismantling out ambulance services. How can he expect Nova Scotians to have total confidence in the trauma services at the Victoria General Hospital when the director itself says, that there are no longer enough physicians available to serve as a trauma team coordinator to ensure a fully effective service?
DR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, how can the citizens of Nova Scotia have confidence in a question like that that proposes such preposterous and outrageous accusations. This is completely untrue, I have gone through and I have met as late as 11:30 p.m. last night with the medical director of the Victoria General Hospital and we have agreed in terms of what I have just said. I assure the honourable member opposite, I assure the citizens of Nova Scotia, that the care and the personnel are there, on site, in the emergency department and the surgical suites of the Victoria General Hospital.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley.
MR. BROOKE TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications. The minister stated in a July 15th article in the Daily News that the province would be prepared to possibly take over the management of the airports in both Sydney and in Yarmouth. In a letter to the minister on July 28th, a letter I can table this afternoon, that was written by my colleague, the member for Kings North, he requested criteria, that he never got, that was being established by the province in order to take control of these airports. My question for the minister is simply this, how far along are you in making a determination of whether you will assume control of the airports in Yarmouth and Sydney?
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I ever said that the province was going to take over the control and operation of any airports. I believe what I said is that we would get all the information that we could from Transport Canada and we would meet with and work with interested groups, with community organizations and with local governments, to see if there are ways to keep those airports operating.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, a Chronicle-Herald editorial a month or so ago, indicated there was interest in the Yarmouth Airport by a Portland, Maine company. I wonder has the minister been brought up to date on any discussions that have taken place between this Maine group and the federal Minister of Transport?
MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, neither the group from Maine nor the federal minister has shared any information with me on any meetings they have had with regard to that specific issue.
MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary is this, in 1992 the federal Royal Commission on National Passenger Transportation was an exhaustive report that was under the guidance of the former Deputy Prime Minister, Erik Nielsen. The report stated that federal rules skewed costs at the Yarmouth Airport and increased operating costs by as much as four times.
I am appreciative of the fact that for the time being, the federal government is overseeing both the Yarmouth and Sydney airports but with the Minister of Transportation expressing earlier interest, I wonder if he can provide Nova Scotians, especially residents of Sydney and Yarmouth, with an idea as to what his government's plans are regarding the management, if there are any plans at all, regarding the management of the Sydney and Yarmouth airports?
MR. MANN: Mr. Speaker, if I can remember correctly, I think one of the difficulties here in dealing with the figures released by Transport Canada in the airport issue, that when they released about the Canadian Airport Authority and getting out of the local airports, for example, Yarmouth I believe, had an annual operating loss in the area of $1.2 million with revenues of $212,000 and with 88 employees. I believe Sydney was approximately $1.4 million, an annual operating deficit, with 212 employees and revenues around $800,000.
In their report that Transport Canada released, they indicated that they had a plan and they had methods of eliminating the operating loss for those areas in a five year period. My staff, in my Transportation Policy Division, has been meeting with officials of Transport Canada in an attempt to identify what those methods are that would see those operating losses eliminated over a five year period. We have indicated to anyone who is interested in this issue that it is difficult for us to come up with specific answers or indicate what we might be able to do with them until such time as we get that information from Transport Canada.
I can advise the member that I believe as recently as about 10 days ago, there was a meeting between my officials and Transport Canada and that they will be meeting again in the near future.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.
MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Supply and Services. During the last session, I raised a question regarding the children's training centre in Pictou. That facility has been closed since May 1993. It is a fine facility. It is an excellent building, and I just wonder if the minister can bring me up-to-date on what the plans are for that facility, which has nothing in it, in Pictou?
HON. WAYNE ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the member is right and we did raise this issue last year, but yes, that facility is being turned over from us to the Department of Health for use for Drug Dependency in that region of the province.
MR. MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, as I understood the minister to say that they were considering using it for the detox centre. When will that facility be made available to transfer the detox centre, which is located in an older facility in Pictou? I am not suggesting it is not a good idea, but when could they expect that that facility would be able to be used for the detox centre in Pictou?
MR. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I am rather sure that it is the spring of 1995 that is targeted for the opening of that centre. I do know that they did some negotiations very recently and the cost to bring it to its fit-up, if you will, they started talking between $300,000 and $500,000. The more recent memo I received they were down to between $150,000 and $200,000, and I think that is where we are, ready to proceed for a spring opening.
MR. SPEAKER: Order, please. The time allotted for the Oral Question Period has expired.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During Question Period, a short time ago, you indicated that I should not be permitted to have the customary two supplementary questions to my question posed to the Minister of Health, on the basis that the question invited too wide-ranging and lengthy a response from the Minister of Health.
There was nothing, in my view, in the tone or the substance or the tenor or the length of my question that was substantially different or even minimally different from the tone and the substance and the length and the tenor of practically every other question that was asked in this House here this afternoon and practically every question I have heard in this House for the last 14 years.
I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that your ruling was in error because you failed to call the Minister of Health to order when he went on for an inordinately long time in response to my quite pointed question. Mr. Speaker, I would ask you to be more specific in your ruling, to clearly indicate what was wrong with my question that I had the privilege of my second supplementary question taken away because the Minister of Health was allowed to go on and on without you calling him to order.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Health.
HON. RONALD STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I rise again on the point of order. The honourable member opposite raised serious questions about the safety of care in trauma cases in this province. She raised further questions about the organization and facilities in our flagship hospital in the central region of this province. I had to respond in order to both inform the member, because she obviously was misinformed and, secondly, to inform the citizens of the province on a matter that is of most serious concern to the honourable member opposite and to the citizens.
I would rise in my place and state that and ask indulgence of the Chair, as I did during my response, to put at rest both her fears and the fears of those she might incite. (Applause)
[4:45 p.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: I have heard submissions to the point of order and I am now prepared to address the matter that has been raised. I will simply read from Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, Chapter 10, Questions, Reports and Returns. Heading, Oral Questions, Paragraph 409(2) "The question must be brief. A preamble need not exceed one carefully drawn sentence. A long preamble on a long question takes an unfair share of time and provokes the same sort of reply. A supplementary question should need no preamble.".
And further, from Page 122 of Beauchesne, under the heading, Supplementary Questions, Paragraph 414, "Although there may be no debate on an answer, further questions, as may be necessary for the elucidation of the answers that have been given, within due limits, may be addressed to a Minister. The extent to which supplementary questions may be asked is in the discretion of the Speaker. Sir Erskine May, Treatise on the Law, Privileges, Proceedings and Usage of Parliament (20th ed., 1983), pp. 345-46.".
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, on a further point of order. I would suggest, sir, that you have exceeded your authority to exercise that discretion when you read from Erskine May in reference to supplementary questions when I raised a point of order about why my first question, that was quite precise, was quite brief and quite pointed, was sufficient to justify the Minister of Health going on and on and on. Before I even had a chance to stand to ask a supplementary question, you, sir, indicated that I had jeopardized my right to supplementary questions before I even asked my first supplementary question.
I didn't ask you, sir, to cite authorities, I asked you to direct yourself to my question and what was wrong with it, what was different about it, what was unique, what was exceptional and what was there about it that cost me my privilege in this House to ask the two customary supplementary questions?
MR. ROBERT CHISHOLM: Mr. Speaker, on the same point of order. I follow along with interest the authority that you referred to in Beauchesne and the specific sections. Sir, with all due respect, I do not see anything in there that provides the authority that would allow you to sit the member down because of the fact that the Minister of Health decided he had to go on and on in response to the question. I don't see that any fault could have been identified on behalf of the member for Halifax Fairview.
I would like to know where it is exactly, other than the authorities you have already cited because I don't see that as an explanation of why it is you decided that because the Minister of Health went on so long, that the member for Halifax Fairview would have her right to a second supplementary question taken away. I would like to have an answer to that question, sir. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The Speaker does not entertain questions nor is this Question Period. The Speaker has already ruled on the point of order and rules that there is no point of order.
The honourable Premier.
THE PREMIER: Mr. Speaker, if I may, I am sure the people I am going to introduce are interested in this, but I will proceed to introduce some people. I have just signed a declaration for the Adoptive Parents Association of Nova Scotia. It gives me great pleasure to welcome to this House, Bill Fraser, who is the President of the Adoptive Parents Association and Deborah and Charles Banting and their charming daughter, May, up in the gallery here. (Applause)
OPPOSITION MEMBERS' BUSINESS
MOTIONS OTHER THAN GOVERNMENT MOTIONS
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Greetings, Mr. Deputy Speaker, it is a pleasure to see you in the Chair. Would you please call Resolution No. 979.
Res. No. 979, re Justice - Violent Crime: Position - Enunciate - notice given Nov. 10/94 - (Mr. T. Donahoe)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Official Opposition.
MR. TERENCE DONAHOE: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have a few minutes to address the substance of Resolution No. 979. The resolution, the operative clause reads: Therefore be it resolved that this government, through the Minister of Justice, clearly enunciate its position on violent crime so that all Nova Scotians will know the position being presented to the federal government as it introduces stiffer legislation dealing with sentencing this fall.
I introduced the resolution, some days ago, because I believe people all across our province are becoming more and more frightened for their personal safety, for the safety of their families, for the safety of their homes, that of their neighbourhoods and that of their places of work. It is now impossible to view a local news telecast or listen to a radio report without seeing or hearing the sometimes gruesome and always frightening details of crime upon crime. I do not think I can remember a period of time, as compared, say, to the last 10 months to 12 months when the incidence of violent crime has been as extreme as it has been in this last year.
Nova Scotians are becoming more and more frightened. Murder, rapes, spousal abuse, child abuse and sexual assault are becoming far more prevalent and far too frequent. Crimes of violence are a daily occurrence. Too often we hear, as we did just the other day, that police officers are responding to calls to investigate family violence situations; they leave the scene and within hours there is a murder-suicide and two people are dead. Too often we hear of vicious assaults on spouses, girlfriends, companions and defenceless children. Too often we hear of sexual abuse of women and children and the lifelong physical and sociological scarring which accompanies it.
More and more, people from many Nova Scotian communities share their concern, their fear and their outrage with me and, I am sure, with many other members of this House. Too often we hear of violent crime involving firearms of all types and too often we hear of crime resulting from the abuse of drugs and alcohol. We have even reached the point in the evolution of our contemporary society that courts in this land are now deciding that drunkeness in the extreme is a defence in criminal cases.
I am hearing with increasing frequency from Nova Scotians, expressions of concern about sentencing and parole. More and more people are saying to me that they are sick and tired of watching people convicted of violent crime receiving a sentence of 6 years, 8 years, 10 years or 12 years and watch helplessly as so many of these people are released from prison in three years or four years, many to commit serious crimes again, if not similar or identical crimes which resulted in their incarceration in the first place.
The reason I raise this resolution in debate with this government today is in an attempt to have the Minister of Justice reassure Nova Scotians that serious debate is, in fact, taking place between himself and his officials and in concert with the judiciary, his prosecutorial staff and, indeed, with the representatives of the Department of Justice nationally on the issues which are now and soon to be in front of the Parliament of Canada.
We have heard much, many of us, about federal Minister Rock's discussion paper. In fact, we have heard so much that one section of the discussion paper has been ripped out of it before it even reached Nova Scotia, the aspect of citing culture and religion as a reseasoned defence in the courts. We cannot get our hands on a copy of this report before it has been digested and tossed around in the rest of the country and/or the media.
On May 25th of this year, during debate in this House, the Minister of Justice for the Province of Nova Scotia, said, "Solutions to violence and crime therefore cannot be crafted uniquely in Nova Scotia but require national and international involvement. What we can do here . . .", he went on to say ". . . in Nova Scotia is to attempt to build on our unique way of life, consult with our community and attempt to become activists, minimizing the effects of violent crime.".
Then the Minister of Justice said later in that same speech, "We can give all the suggestions, we can write all the letters. In the end there is a Parliament of Canada that has a responsibility to enact those laws. I will make my views known and I have . . .", said the Minister of Justice. I continue to quote, "We can all express our views but let's not clear the federal government of its responsibility in this regard.". This sounds, if I may, Mr. Speaker, somewhat like, send your comments and concerns to the government, but let's not expect them to pay very much attention.
The minister went on to mention his position paper on youth crime, which we have to assume went to the federal Minister of Justice. He said, "The views of the Honourable Alan Rock, on that issue, are very much in accord with our own.". That is my very concern here today. This government has a very special friendship with the Liberal Federal Government, and we all know that short telephone calls and brief conversations on airplanes have not amounted to much by way of representation of Nova Scotia's views to the government in Ottawa.
In 1992, the vicious murder of three Nova Scotians and an attempted murder of a fourth, in the prime of their lives, while working late one night in a Sydney Mines McDonald's Restaurant, really knocked the province off its feet on the issue of violence in our communities. Senseless crime to this degree, just was not something that happened in our province.
It was difficult to round up a jury, Mr. Speaker, you will recall, because of the publicity and the rage in the hearts of so many, over this tragedy and against the accused and since convicted, killers. The family of the lone survivor is equally enraged because their daughter, too, has been robbed of a healthy, normal and full life.
This crime has upset so many that a petition of tens of thousands of names was sent to Ottawa calling for the death penalty. Well, the petition was refused, and so was their call. However, the point I really want to make, Mr. Speaker, is that this tragedy is evidence of the strong feelings that one incident in Nova Scotia can evoke, an incident that made Nova Scotians feel as though the victim's rights are not even given the same credence and the same respect and regard, as those of the criminal.
This is why it is so important, that this government let Nova Scotians know what ideas it is, in fact, presenting to the federal Justice Minister. That is why I introduced the resolution that I did. I believe it is incumbent upon the Minister of Justice to say to Nova Scotians and say clearly, where he is and where the provincial government is, in relation to issues, particularly issues relative to violent crime.
The legislation on stiffer sentencing which I mentioned in the resolution, is now before the House of Commons and has gone as far as passing second reading. That, in part, deals with the tougher sentencing on hate motivated crimes. When Nova Scotians see news reports of a cache of weapons in Halifax, which included rounds of ammunition designed to go through the bullet proof vests of our police forces, it is no wonder that the honest, law-abiding, God-fearing, Nova Scotia citizens, start to wonder what really is going on in our province.
They need - and it is their call that I make today - leadership from this government and from this Minister of Justice. To know that their views - no matter how detached the minister thinks those are from the federal level of government - are being heard and being represented by this Savage Government in Ottawa.
This is necessary, Mr. Speaker, in a day and age where the federal government is fighting the courts on successful defence of extreme drunkenness, when pimps who murder young women are sentenced for a few years, only to return to the same crime, when an individual within our own correctional facility is murdered by another inmate. Nova Scotians must know that they are protected as best they can be and that the system can work in favour of the victim. This, surely, is something that this government must have a view on, and which they can share, and I say must share, and consult with the people of the Province of Nova Scotia.
I introduced the resolution, as I mentioned some time ago, Mr. Speaker, because our office is receiving a considerable number of communications where, as I said just a few moments ago, many people in Nova Scotia are coming to be concerned. They are becoming to be concerned that the Young Offenders Act does not serve them or, indeed, the young offenders or the victims of young offenders at all well. They are becoming concerned that people can commit heinous crime, go to prison after conviction for 6, 8, 10, 12 years and in a few years be out walking the streets. And, in too many cases, committing the same or similar crimes.
They are frightened, Mr. Speaker, and the point of my resolution is to call upon the Minister of Justice to take the first step today to articulate what steps it is that he and his government have taken to ensure that the Government of Canada makes appropriate amendments to the Criminal Code of Canada, so that some modest amount of reassurance can be provided to a very fearful Nova Scotian population.
[5:00 p.m.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Justice.
HON. WILLIAM GILLIS: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to have the chance to rise today to respond to Resolution No. 979, introduced by the Leader of the Opposition. The Leader of the Opposition in part of his comments before he closed talked about leadership from the Savage Government and from the current Minister of Justice. I just want to say this, that I am willing to compare the record of our government so far and my record, as Minister of Justice, with the record in the justice field of the former Tory Government, the Government of John Buchanan and Donald Cameron, a government in which this honourable gentleman who is lecturing us this evening, was Attorney General for a considerable period of time. I wonder how much he did to arrest the slide we had in problems with violence and all the rest.
I am going to say a few words tonight about some of the things we are trying to do. It may serve the honourable member's purposes to misrepresent the prevalence of violent crime in Canada and in Nova Scotia, it doesn't coincide with the facts. The honourable member can be excused since he is not alone in the misconception.
The recently released Statistics Canada data shows a clear gap between perception and reality. Almost one-half of the national sample taken by Statistics Canada thought that crime had increased since 1988. In reality, Canadians are at no greater risk of crimes such as robbery, assault, theft and sexual assault, than they were five years ago. Nova Scotians are actually below the national average risk of being victimized by one of those crimes. We don't like the crimes, but that is the facts in terms of the numbers.
It is clear that the honourable member is one of the majority of the members of the public that overestimates the amount of violent crime in Canada, including Nova Scotia. Nationally, based on the latest statistics, crimes of violence accounted for 11 per cent of crimes reported by police in 1992 but a survey of the public found that three-quarters of the public over-estimated the amount. For example, the homicide rate in Canada has been stable since 1976. The rate of break and enter, a crime that causes considerable public concern, has declined from 26 per 1,000 households in 1980 to 22, in 1992. Any is too many but those are the facts.
To bring a Nova Scotia perspective to the situation I would ask the honourable member to consider these facts. In 1993, violent crime comprised only 12 per cent of all criminal offenses reported to the police in Nova Scotia. This represents a decline from the previous year. The vast majority of violent crimes in Nova Scotia that are reported to police are for minor assaults. In 1993, those low level assaults accounted for 64 per cent of crimes in this category. Having clarified the points let me make it clear, as I said earlier, even this reduced level of crime is unacceptable to all Nova Scotians.
I make these points, not to diminish the concern that we have for the situation, or the Leader of the Opposition, for that matter, but to put it into proper perspective. Having done that I want to move on to where the real challenges lie for Nova Scotia.
Domestic Violence, certainly and the Leader of the Opposition made reference to that. Those challenges lie in that area. The kind of violence that has the potential not only to destroy people's lives, but also to destroy the cornerstone of our society, our families.
Earlier this month, Assistant Commissioner Burchill of the RCMP, testified before a legislative committee. Assistant Commissioner Burchill expressed his concern with regard to the level of domestic violence in Nova Scotia. There were statistics quoted, for example, in the first nine months of this year, the number of spousal assaults reported to the RCMP was 9 per cent higher than the previous year.
In the 1993 Violence Against Women survey, a national study conducted by the Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, it was reported that one-quarter of all women have experienced sexual or physical violence by a past or current marital partner. Although we know that some of that increase is the result of increased public awareness of the issue, it is a clear indication of the challenge we face.
So, although I share my colleague's concerns about violent crime, it is clear that our priorities must reflect the real situation, not a distorted, sensationalized perspective. Mr. Speaker, the Government of Nova Scotia is moving on the real situation.
For example, our Premier in September officially launched the public awareness campaign of the Family Violence Prevention Initiative. The Family Violence Prevention Initiative has created a coordinated and collaborative response to family violence including several government departments and community organizations; this is positive. The Community Advisory Committee works with government departments and the committee represents a cross-section or organizations involved in all aspects of family violence. We know well, Mr. Speaker, that one government agency or one community group working alone cannot deal effectively with this pervasive problem. It takes a coordinated effort and the Family Violence Prevention initiative provides that focus.
For example, Mr. Speaker, the Initiative is providing training of literally hundreds of front-line workers from a wide array of professional fields. As well the Initiative has developed comprehensive protocols for use by community inter-agency groups that are using an interdisciplinary approach to domestic violence on the a local level. In other words, this Initiative is facilitating the cooperative efforts that are being made between the various agencies that must come into play if this very crucial social challenge is to be met.
On the legislative level you may be aware that it is the intention of this government to, in the upcoming spring session, table a discussion draft of legislation intended to provide civil remedies that compliment the traditional criminal justice response to domestic violence. That is an intention of ours.
As you are well aware and this has been referred to, the sole jurisdiction for legislation that deals directly with criminal behaviour lies with the federal government. The federal Parliament deals with legislation concerning gun control, as members know, young offenders and sentencing. This is not to say that we can stand back and leave it completely to our federal legislators to tackle these challenges. We have made and we must continue to make our views on these issues very clear.
One of the issues of young offender legislation to cite prominent example, it has been mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition, the Government of Nova Scotia has called for more appropriate sentencing options for violent and repeat offenders and this has been expressed to Allan Rock. We have recommended that the legislation be changed to increase flexibility in the transfer to adult court of young offenders charged with murder or other serious violent offences. We have urged the federal government that the names of young offenders who commit such offences or have three prior convictions for indictable offences should be made public and that the identity of youths who escape from custody should be made public immediately. We think that is something that should be done.
Time is running along and I think I just have a minute or so left.
MR. SPEAKER: A minute and one-half.
MR. GILLIS: I just want to mention we all are concerned by firearms and we have to have the balance between responsible youths and irresponsible youths. We have expressed through the federal-provincial meetings our views on proper use of firearms so that those in rural areas can use them properly but that we be concerned that there not be criminal elements using them for violent purposes.
Mr. Speaker, we have expressed views on sentencing and we have indicated to the federal government that the courts should be guided by a number of fundamental principles, for example, the sentences should reflect the seriousness of the offence and the degree of the responsibility and the courts must give similar sentences to offenders who have committed similar crimes.
Also, and before I close I want to mention long-term prevention. Community placing, we have to get out as a community, we have to work together, legislators, all-Parties, the police, the justice system in general; we have to work together to try to prevent crimes from happening and keep our communities safer.
Mr. Speaker, we have to act as the champions of the people who are afraid of crime but if we, the elected representatives of Nova Scotia, do not accept this as one of our priorities, who will? Who will champion the cause of non-violence? Who is in a better position to stand up and be counted on the side of a more peaceful and productive society? There is no one in a better position. We are the ones, the buck stops here.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Halifax Fairview.
MS. ALEXA MCDONOUGH: Mr. Speaker, I know I have very few minutes to address this extremely important question. I applaud the Official Opposition for bringing this concern about violence in our society, violent crime in our society, to the fore in this debate this afternoon.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this afternoon we observed a moment of silence in this House for the victims of spousal abuse who had literally lost their lives. I am pleased to say that members of this House gave unanimous consent to a resolution that we would resolve, in recognition of the need to be unwaivering in the struggle to end these tragic, needless assaults and deaths, to work together to try to do exactly that.
So, Mr. Speaker, it strikes me as quite unproductive and not very much in the spirit of that, for a debate on this issue to very quickly deteriorate into a discussion about what are the statistics? Is there more crime, is there less crime? Are we doing a better job or are we not doing as good a job as the last government. Because I think it misses the point. What I think we have to accept is that we, as a society, are absolutely failing to deal with these problems that literally result in the murder of women and children in their own homes, in our province today.
Mr. Speaker, there are a number of measures that can be taken and I applaud the minister and his department, and other ministries as well, for, I think, doing a better job in terms of sensitizing law enforcement officers to this problem. I think there is better training and better procedures. But one of the things that has come to light in discussing with people the horror of these continuing murders and domestic violence is that although the policies are in place and there are many law enforcement officers who are acting in good faith and diligently trying to implement those policies and observe those procedures, there really is no effective mechanism at the community level to monitor that and to which people can turn when that isn't happening. I think that is one of the things we have to look at.
Secondly, Mr. Speaker, it is absolutely an outrage and I think it is reassuring that there is such a widespread outrage across the country, that we have happening in this country today violent crimes and domestic assaults and murders where the defence of drunkenness is being not only argued but upheld by the courts. It seems to me that it is absolutely clear that we have to work together to get the necessary legislative change, to ensure that that defence of drunkenness cannot be allowed to stand.
Mr. Speaker, in the final analysis, when we try to probe for solutions to this problem, not for how we can argue about who is doing what in regard to responding to violence, in the final analysis, we are not going to put an end to the kind of violent domestic crime that is happening in our midst until we do something meaningful about the economic dependency of women and children. That is not going to be done overnight but it is in those situations where women are experiencing spousal assault and physical and mental and emotional abuse, that they see no alternatives, they don't see the opportunity to make it on their own and be economically independent and able to provide for themselves and their children, so they don't escape very often from those violent situations. No matter how conscientious and responsible and effective the law enforcement officers are in discharging their duties, you are not going to be able to protect women from those potentially violent situations if the only real protection is for women to escape them and reconstruct their lives in non-violent situations.
So, Mr. Speaker, that is why I would conclude my brief comments on this subject tonight by pleading with the government to understand that the real solutions to this problem lie in doing something meaningful about pay equity, about employment equity, about adequate levels of income support, about automatic effective enforcement of maintenance agreements which this government has yet to commit itself to, because the legislation introduced is not what it needs to be in that regard. It is going to continue to subject women to the threat of violence in far too many cases.
[5:15 p.m.]
Mr. Speaker, we also have a problem with what continues to exist in the way of women and children being driven out of their own violent domestic situations because we have not been able to find a way to reverse the onus. The perpetrator of the violent crime, under our current laws and our current procedures, is enabled to remain in the home and the victimized women and children are forced out of that home. They become the refugees from that home and have to seek protection and support outside of the home that has been invaded by violent crime.
Mr. Speaker, we have got to diligently seek a solution to that problem. It is not one that is easily solved. It is one that has to be handled extremely sensitively in regard to civil liberties and in regard to the balance of rights and protections. But in the final analysis, we have got to find a solution to this problem.
I know that when the law enforcement officers came before the Human Resources Committee recently, they agreed with the assertion that we have to change the law in order to be able to deal with this problem. I do not think they were suggesting that there is an easy solution, but they very much encouraged us to address this problem through seeking legislative change. In that regard, there are some things we can do about it.
I want to make a final plug, before I take my place, for the Human Resources Committee to do what was strongly urged by the RCMP officials who met with that committee and what I think there had been agreement would be an important thing to do. That is to sit down with victims of violence, with representatives of transition houses in this province that are on the front line of dealing with those women who become refugees with their children from domestic violent situations, and sit down with the departmental officials in both Justice and Community Services to talk about what kind of remedies can be found to reverse the onus so that the perpetrators of domestic crimes, domestic assaults, do not get to remain in the comfort and security of the home which they have violated while the women and children who are being victimized are doubly victimized because they are forced to leave their home.
Mr. Speaker, there is no question that that becomes double victimization. Because that sets in motion, it is not a solution for a woman and her children to leave the scene of domestic violence to go to a transition house. That is the beginning of very painful distressing process which is trying to figure out what alternatives are out there. There are not the kind of supports that are needed to help ease that transition.
I think we have to recognize that it is solutions we need, not superficial responses to the problems and to the symptoms of the problems. So I hope we will work together in recognition that we simply cannot tolerate this degree of violence, the nature of this violence. We have got to find a way to put it to an end and say that it will not be tolerated. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, would you please call Resolution No. 1052.
Res. No. 1052, re Exco - Members: Standards Rigorous - Apply - notice given Nov.18/94 - (Mr. J. Leefe)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Hants West.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, Resolution No. 1052 deals with a subject that I hoped the Premier would be in the House to listen to and perhaps discuss. Because it deals with a double standard that we appear to have now between the government and the Civil Service and between the lack of policy from the government, particularly with regard to matters of tendering and public contracts.
Mr. Speaker, back on November 19, 1993, the Premier was taken to task during that particular period by the Opposition because of untendered contracts. The Premier said at that time, remember this is almost exactly a year ago, that he had learned yesterday that at least five government departments are still unaware of his policy and that all contracts for more than $5,000 must be tendered.
Mr. Speaker, that came about because of the fact that the Minister of Tourism had gone out and let an untendered contract for repairs on the Bluenose. However, there were a number of other minor contracts, as well, from four other departments at about that time that disclosed that they, too, had violated the policy which the Premier had set out.
Mr. Speaker, the unfortunate thing is that this happened, as I say, a year ago and the Premier, in subsequent days to this November 19th revelation that nobody knew what the rules were, at least in five departments anyway, made it abundantly clear that he was going to crack the whip and that he would make sure that all his ministers, all his civil servants, became aware of the fact that indeed there was a policy for tendering.
Mr. Speaker, we are one year down the road and the Premier is still standing in his place and he is being besieged on all sides by ministers who have violated his policy on tendering. You might think that in light of that, the Premier would say that perhaps there is something wrong with the policy. Perhaps it is not clear. Perhaps it is written in Arabic or Greek or something that the ministers do not understand. Perhaps it is not being communicated sufficiently well to the ministers, deputy ministers and others within departments who make these kinds of decisions. You might think that he might say that perhaps the policy is too slack. Perhaps it is wide open so that ministers can still do whatever they want to do and are still acceptable, according to the policy that I have dictated.
But, Mr. Speaker, what is the response of the Premier to some of these violations, a whole slew, I might mention, that have occurred since that date in November of 1993 and the present. His response is that the Savage Liberals might loosen, not tighten, the tendering guidelines in light of the various violations of government policy that have occurred.
Mr. Speaker, I do not know if I am particularly bright and everybody else is particularly dumb, but it seems to me that you do not have to be a rocket scientist to come up with a tendering policy. I would think if you took a couple of ministers, and there must be a couple of bright ministers over there. I see the Minister of Finance there smiling. Well, maybe the Minister of Finance would be a suitable one of this small group, and it will be pretty small group, perhaps the Minister of Labour and the Minister of the Environment and the honourable Minister of the Economic Renewal Agency, perhaps.
But anyway, what I am saying, is you take some ministers, a small bunch from Cabinet, and you put them in a room and say, look. What we want to do is to have every department and every person who is going to make decisions regarding purchases for the government to abide by a certain set of rules. One of the rules that we want is nothing costing more than a set amount shall be awarded without going to public tender.
If the minister says, well, maybe we should have some exceptions to that because the Minister of Transportation the other day said, well you know, what happens if a bridge falls down in the middle of the night and we have got to go out and put a Bailey bridge in or something that is going to cost $10,000? Surely we don't have to wait to go to tender to get that replacement bridge in.
Certainly for emergencies there should be some process whereby a minister can expend a sum of money above whatever that set amount is. But it is a very simple policy just to require that particular minister to scratch a note that goes to Priorities and Planning or, if Priorities and Planning is not meeting, to call a special meeting of Priorities and Planning or perhaps a number of Cabinet Ministers, say five members of Cabinet, to agree to that expenditure for the specific reasons as outlined by the minister, saying that this is an emergency and we need the money. But apart from that, Mr. Speaker, everything goes to public tender.
Now somebody will say, well, that is fine but, however, when we want contracts from various individuals or companies and we want a particular company or a particular individual to do a job, we would like to be able to sole-source and we would like to pay them more than the base amount, whatever that base amount is, $5,000 or $10,000 or whatever. Mr. Speaker, I really have no quarrel whatsoever with that because there are times when you might want to sole-source a particular company or individual. I have no quarrel with that at all, but there should be a process that every minister understands and they should know step by step how they go about sole-sourcing for a person to fill a contract.
What should that process be, Mr. Speaker? Well, it can be as simple as the minister having to take a memorandum to Priorities and Planning, or to Cabinet, whichever route you want, and Priorities and Planning, and Cabinet, having examined that proposal, say yes, indeed, this is a particular occasion when sole-sourcing is a good idea, it is something that should be done, but they should be prepared to make available to the members of this House and to the public of Nova Scotia the reasons why they have to sole-source that particular individual or that particular service or that particular company.
In other words, Mr. Speaker, if there is transparency in sole-sourcing, if there is transparency in exceeding the limits for going to tender for a specific project, that is fine, I am sure no reasonable Nova Scotian would have any quarrel with that whatsoever.
So, Mr. Speaker, I don't think there is any great difficulty in coming up with a policy. I don't think there is any great difficulty in telling every Cabinet Minister and every person within the Civil Service who is responsible for purchasing, what that policy is.
Lastly, Mr. Speaker, there should be some kind of a penalty. I would suggest if the Premier wants his policy to be abided by, he says, if a minister violates this policy, that minister is out of Cabinet, period, finished. Thank you.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Bedford-Fall River.
MRS. FRANCENE COSMAN: Mr. Speaker, I hear comments about the wannabe member for Bedford-Fall River over there, from the member for Sackville-Cobequid. I am sure he realizes that I am the member for Bedford-Fall River, despite his wannabe comments.
I am pleased to stand here this evening and debate the resolution that the rigorous standards set for civil servants and MLAs of principle - I guess the drafter of this resolution meant the rigorous standards of principle be applied to the Premier and members of inner Cabinet, rather than the double standard we have seen over the last 18 months. There is no stronger sound than that of a person who has gone through a period of reform, in terms of their own performance. But certainly this resolution is a discussion about double standards and it is a resolution about don't do as I do, or did, but do as I say.
One couldn't really debate this resolution without looking at some of the past performance and the past standards applicable to the previous government. It doesn't take more than just a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, to come up with a list of a variety of things that the previous government did that hardly met any kind of a test for standard. I think about the sandblasting of Province House during the former Premier Buchanan's years. I think about the examples of getting names for a fund raising mail-out from the Department of Finance's provincial tax records. I think about the lack of effective affirmative action. I think about the roles the various government committees and boards have played in the last several years. I think often those boards served the agenda of the government rather than their own independent arm's-length agenda. I think about policies, or the lack of policies, that the previous administration did not put in place for fair hiring. I think about the double-dipping practices of the former administration. I think about the patronage issues that they routinely had no problem with and we are talking here, do not forget, about a double standard.
[5:30 p.m.]
I recall in 1978 when the previous administration took power there was a massive firing of Department of Transportation workers. That is truly a very prime example of the patronage that was widely accepted by the previous administration. When I stand here to discuss a double standard it is not hard to find examples. Now, perhaps this resolution should come around to talking about transparency and the role of members of this Legislature when they come here to work in the field of service for their constituents.
I think about the fact that this House in two years under the former Premier Cameron only met once and it was about to meet again when the election was called and now we have a new standard. We have a standard of sitting in this Legislature twice a year to improve accountability, to improve transparency, to improve the standard of governance that our government is doing. When I look at double standards I look at budget forecasts a few years ago that were $300 million short in the estimate. Now, if that is not an unreality test, I do not know what is.
I think about annual reports, we are talking standards, we are talking transparency. Annual reports are a requirement of this House and the word annual, obviously has a very clear definition. Annual reports mean you put in this House for every year of the job that a board or an agency or a commission is doing, you put in a report that the public can read and scrutinize and determine what is going on in that agency or board or commission. I just happen to have in my hand, one annual report that is not an annual report at all. It covered a period of three years 1989, 1990, 1991 up to 1992 and it is lumped into one document to make it look good as one annual report.
Now annual reports play a very important role for the people of this province to see if their tax dollars are being spent appropriately in those agencies, boards and commissions. The previous administration, with its double standard, had the gall and the audacity to produce a so-called annual report that was really three years' worth of work. I think about the $2.4 million dollars that was spent from a federal offshore development fund used for trunk sewer lines. You talk about double standard, there is another example.
I think about office rental policies, controversial lease-purchase agreements, taxpayers ending up paying $50 million for a building that was assessed at $11 million. You talk about double standards, there is another example. I think about appointing a staff person as a deputy minister just a few weeks before an election to give that person a little bit of an extra edge, there is another double standard.
You see, it is almost a challenge and very much a difficult one to take seriously a resolution imposed by the member, Mr. Leefe, about double standard because it has become so obvious that this is a case of do as I say, not do as I do.
I am actually quite proud tonight to stand here and review the higher standards that we have demanded of ourselves and this administration as we are trying to give and deliver a better government to the people of Nova Scotia. Again I hear the sarcasm that is emerging from the other side of the room to try and put some rabbit tracks down and, obviously, you strike a nerve when you get that kind of vocal response over there. We do have a realistic and workable plan to lead this province out of a sea of debt and to lead it into prosperity.
One of the things that is abundantly clear is that we could no longer go along the way we were, and hindsight is clear sight. We all know that the 15 years of misspending and overspending left a legacy of cynicism and despair in the people of this province as they looked at government performance. Obviously, one of the larger questions we had to answer was, how do we give a message of hope to the people of Nova Scotia? How do we tell them in clear and articulate terms what it is we, as a government, plan to do and what it is we, as a government, will be accountable for.
Yes, we did produce a document called Government By Design, which is an action plan for reform and fiscal recovery, because without reform and without fiscal recovery this province will sink faster than it has in the last 15 years. When we inherited a debt of $8 billion we knew, obviously, that the only way through it was to devise tough measures that each and every one of us would have to support and make sure that our voters and our constituents understood. So, we have devised a Government By Design plan and that clearly spells out where we intend to take Nova Scotia over the next three years remaining, or three and one-half years remaining.
Nova Scotia has been on the brink of fiscal disaster for so long that people actually forget that there is a sense of hope now and that sense of hope is something that we are delivering on, on a daily basis. Certainly there will be times over the next few years that under the intense pressure of government that our record will not be perfect, because no record is perfect. When those times come, we will stand here in this House and be transparent with our answers because that is the only way to be. We do not want to repeat the performance of the last 15 years; spending with no plans and spending with no thoughts for the consequences.
Our fiscal plan will deliver a 10 per cent cut in the operational side of the budget and we will deliver a balanced budget for the first time in 20 years. This is not possible to do without good goverance, good accountability and top-notch leadership. I believe firmly that our government is delivering exactly that. We have acted in a Liberal manner. It is more effective, it is more compassionate, it is much better and more appropriate than the slash and burn tactics of the last 15 years. We have put in place a fair hiring policy where merit is the basis of hiring rather than patronage. We have put in a new and revised Freedom of Information Act and we are eliminating barriers that prevent all people from reaching their full potential.
The largest transformation in this House, to close my remarks, has been taken by the former Tory Government now sitting in Opposition. Hindsight is clear sight and, daily, we watch them polishing their halos that have become very tarnished in the past 15 years. (Applause)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the New Democratic Party.
MR. JOHN HOLM: I welcome the opportunity to rise this afternoon to say a number of words on the topic and the debate that is before us, and that is really one dealing with double standards. I want to say to the member who spoke just a moment ago and just took her seat, the member for Bedford-Fall River, that I happen to agree with large parts of what she has said. I certainly agree that one could conclude that we have double standards when you have a member of the Official Opposition, the Conservative Party, standing and criticizing this Liberal Government for doing exactly the same kinds of things that they did while they were in government.
One can understand why the member for Bedford-Fall River might be scratching her head in disbelief, when she hears the former government talking and telling this government how they should be following fair hiring practices, how they should be following fair tendering practices, how they should have been following compassionate programs.
Mr. Speaker, I heard the member saying all of these things and then I heard the member going on, however, saying how they had a realistic plan and how things were different. Somehow, from the same corner that we are in, from the window in the far left hand corner of this House, the reality is that we have seen no difference, no change. The member may say that the Liberals put out a realistic plan. Well, I would suggest then, that she and her colleagues might read it and they might also take a look at the tea leaves, and take a look at what is going on and see exactly what they are doing.
Where was this member over the last number of weeks, while we have been discussing, while we have been debating, day in and day out in this House, about the decision by this government to award a contract for over $200,000? It was untendered and in direct violation of the tendering policies and guidelines. Where was this member at that time? Nobody made any money, I say to the member from the right wing of the Liberal Party, because they got caught.
Here we have this situation today where we find, again, the Minister of Supply and Services defending the way they are planning to go about to hire an architect for design work on a school that the government plans to build - untendered, no proposals called - supposedly on the basis that you can't do it because it is professional services, Mr. Speaker. Yet, system and tender proposal calls for other professional services have been put out by this very same government. So in other words, when they decide they want to do it, they will; when they decide they won't do it, they won't. I guess one of the primary determining factors, is when they get caught.
Let's take a look at the 1-800-Duck number that the province has. You can call the Premier on 1-800-Duck, whatever the call numbers are after it, I just call it duck. Because it is a waste of time, because from what we have discovered by trying to get reports on those calls through the courts, they don't have reports. In other words, no reports have been compiled. What the government did at a time when they said they had absolutely no money - excluding the cost of the telephones - they spent over $35,000.
The member for Bedford-Fall River talked about the cutting and slashing that was done by the former government, and they did. Take a look at the cutting and slashing that has been done by this bunch. I ask you, Mr. Speaker, how many of the cleaning staff who were sacked just the other day by the Minister of Government Services, would have had a job for the full year for that $35,000? But no, it was more important to spend that $35,000 on a public relations exercise for this government.
We heard the member talking about fair hiring practices. It was raised earlier today. There was put out last spring a notice of a competition. I believe it was tabled on the floor; "The following secondment opportunity is open to current Nova Scotia Government employees only. Interested employees should discuss their intentions to apply with appropriate officials of their department." In other words, it was to be a secondment position. This is for the position of the Coordinator of Human Resource Development, the Department of Human Resources. The closing date was June 30, 1994. Quite simple, quite clear, it is obvious, this is a secondment from within government; somebody is going to be moved from one area to another to fill this job and they are asking those who are interested in this position to apply from within government staff. But did that happen? Their hiring practice, remember, and the answer is, no. Today, instead, find out that a memorandum has gone to all staff of the Department of Human Resources from the deputy minister, Mildred Royer, announcing the appointment, now closed. Remember, only government employees could apply.
[5:45 p.m.]
What have they done? They have announced the appointment of a woman who did not work for the Province of Nova Scotia, she worked for the City of Halifax. A former employee, I would guess, of the deputy minister. Do you know what? The point that I am making, has absolutely nothing to do with the name of the individual who was appointed. She may be the most qualified and the best qualified person for the job and she will never know it because there was no competition. There was absolutely no competition and we have checked.
The lists of job postings, the opportunities that we receive, I know I do and I am sure others do, we have them in our offices so any constituent who may wish to apply for a job can come in and go through them and see what positions may be available so they could apply for. It is not listed, there was no competition. That is an insult to the person who was employed. This has nothing to do with that young woman's capabilities, nothing whatsoever. It has totally to do with a process that this government said that they would ensure would be in place and that is one of fair hiring policy. This directly violates that and it had prevented anybody else who may have wished to have that job or apply for that job to apply because there was no advertisement, no competition, no posting.
Here we have a government and a minister who has said that there are to be no preferred lists as were notorious under the former government for professional services. But yet, they still maintain them and we saw an admission of that on the floor of the House today.
We have a Premier who refuses to hold those accountable who break their policies. What happened in the case of the Minister of Human Resources, when she awarded a contract untendered to Berkeley Consultants? Was there the required written presentation provided to Priorities and Planning? I suggest there was not because I have asked for it and the regulations say that I am entitled to receive it and I did not.
I say to the member and I say it in all sincerity, Nova Scotians did expect that a new broom was taking over the Province of Nova Scotia. They didn't expect that you were going to be taking your broom and be simply shuffling the dust and the things that had been going on into a different corner, from the blue corner to the red corner.
Nova Scotians are expecting this government to live up to the commitments of an honest, open government, one with integrity. In the last 18 months, what they have seen is that a Liberal is a Tory too. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Pictou West.
MR. DONALD MCINNES: Mr. Speaker, could you please call House Order No. 127 and I so move.
H.O. No. 127, re EMO - Staffing - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. D. McInnes)
[The Clerk read the House Order.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister responsible for the Emergency Measures Act.
HON. ROBERT HARRISON: I believe we are already undertaking to complete that House Order. We will be happy to comply with that House Order, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Would you please call House Order No. 128 and on behalf of the honourable member for Colchester-Musquodoboit Valley I so move, Mr. Speaker.
H.O. No. 128, re Nat. Res. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov 16/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)
H.O. No. 131, re Housing and Cons. Affs. - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. D. McInnes)
[The House Orders were read by the Clerk.]
MR. SPEAKER: The motions are carried.
The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Would you please call House Order No. 133 and I so move, Mr. Speaker.
H.O. No. 133, re Transport. - Wood Motors Ford Leasing Contract - notice given Nov.16/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)
[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if I can follow that last one, number three. I am not sure if the Clerk understands what it means, but we certainly have no difficulty in letting the contractor, the lease agreement, on the table at all, and if they can figure out what that number three meant, then they probably can find it in there.
MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question? Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Would you please call House Order No. 134 and I so move, Mr. Speaker.
H.O. No. 134, re Transport - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 16/94 - (Mr. B. Taylor)
[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, the request for this House Order brings me back to 1990 when the member for Kings West, the former Minister of Transportation, we were in Opposition, the honourable George Moody was Minister of Transportation. At the request of the now Minister of Fisheries, to a sort of all-encompassing request for a House Order, he literally blew up in this House and went on at great length at the extra work that his hardworking staff were being subjected to for what, in fact, are documents that are open and public.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the tremendous amount of work involved in putting this forward, I am not going to agree to issue this. Most of it, I think the first part, what has been done in 1993, has been tabled several times in this House, the last session. These tenders are opened in public and the companies are there when they are opened, in most cases. This is all out in the open, so I am not going to put my staff through this. I believe the documentation that has been requested in this one, we would probably have to move here in one of the salt trucks because he has asked for the details of all contracts. There are three former Ministers of Transportation on that side of the House who would know that these details are contained in two booklets for each job. We put out dozens and dozens, perhaps there are as many as 100 contracts in this.
I don't know if the member that requested this really knew what this involved, how much staff time or the tremendous costs that would be involved but, in consideration of that, I am going to recommend that this House Order be denied, Mr. Speaker.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion has been made. The honourable minister has declined. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay. (Interruptions)
Order, please. I think I will put the question again. There was a motion made for the return to the House Order and there was a decline on the part of the minister. I put the question of the motion for the return to the House Order and I got an overwhelming affirmative vote. (Interruption) So I will ask for a hand show.
Would all those in favour raise your hands. All those opposed, raise your hands. Okay.
The motion has not carried.
The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, that is the first show of hands I have seen in this House. Would you please call House Order No. 142.
H.O. No. 142, re ERA: Bluenose Organizations - Corres. (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 17/94 - (Mr. J. Leefe)
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Queens.
MR. JOHN LEEFE: I so move, Mr. Speaker.
[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of the Economic Renewal Agency.
HON. ROSS BRAGG: Mr. Speaker, I know the member opposite has a keen interest in the Bluenose and I will do everything I can to accommodate him and get him that information.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been duly moved and agreed by the minister to supply the information. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
The honourable Opposition House Leader.
MR. RONALD RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, since the Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency is being so accommodating, would you please call House Order No. 146 and I so move.
H.O. No. 146, re ERA - Tenders (11/06/93 on) - notice given Nov. 18/94 - (Mr. G. Archibald)
[The House Order was read by the Clerk.]
MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister for the Economic Renewal Agency.
HON. ROSS BRAGG: We would be delighted to provide those.
MR. SPEAKER: It has been agreed. Would all those in favour of the motion please say Aye. Contrary minded, Nay.
The motion is carried.
We have not the opportunity to carry out any more House Orders.
The honourable Government House Leader.
HON. RICHARD MANN: Mr. Speaker, we will be sitting the hours, tomorrow, of 12:00 noon until 8:00 p.m. and the order of business following the daily routine and Question Period will be Public Bills for Second Reading and we will continue in the order the bills are shown on the order paper.
Mr. Speaker, I move that we adjourn until 12:00 noon tomorrow.
MR. SPEAKER: The motion for adjournment has been made and carried. The House will now rise to sit at 12:00 noon tomorrow and before all members leave their places, I would remind them that there is a meeting to be held in a few moments of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.
[The House rose at 6:00 p.m.]
