ANOTHER NEW THING FOR THIS BLOG!!!!!

I'm going to blog the questions asks during question period at the Legislature. I will title it - QUESTION PERIOD AT THE LEGISATURE.

Here's the one from Wednesday. Anyone who wishes to received the questions in a transcript? Can do so by sending an email to linda.fahey@gnb.ca>

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES

December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005


S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 1/16

Hon. Mr. Lord: Mr. Speaker, before we start question period, this is the first question period of this
new session, and I would like us to extend the time for question period from 30 to 45 minutes, if we
have the consent of the House.

Mr. Speaker: Is it agreed?

Mr. S. Graham: I am reading a statement from the Premier from last session, and I will quote it.
These are the Premier’s words: “Before we move to question period, I would like to suggest that we
extend question period today by a full half hour. This is the only question period this week. Our
government is willing to answer the questions. We are looking forward to the debate, so we are
proposing an extra half hour.”

Mr. Speaker, it is our first question period after a very long period of time. I know we are going to
be here on Friday, but I think today merits a full half hour. We are up to it if the Premier is up to the
work.

Hon. Mr. Lord: I made an offer of 45 minutes. We are willing to extend question period by 15
minutes.

Mr. Speaker: It will be 45 minutes.

Mr. S. Graham: Time is a precious commodity today.

Forest Industry

On November 29, 2002, over three years ago, I raised in this Chamber the urgency of a strategy to
modernize our forest industry. Finally, after three years of the opposition providing clear solutions
on this file, this government has started to listen. That is why I was encouraged by the fact that, this
fall, after my second provincewide tour visiting forestry stakeholders with our caucus, the Cabinet
ministers finally began their own Cabinet tour. We were cautiously optimistic yesterday that the
throne speech would provide tangible initiatives and guidelines pertaining to the forest industry.
Instead, all that New Brunswickers received was eight lines of fluff.
Last night, I was in Bathurst. I have to say that I heard the disappointment of the forestry workers
over the lack of vision that this government has provided. Last year’s throne speech stated that your
government would establish quantifiable wood supply objectives. It is now one year later.

Mr. Speaker: Question.

Mr. S. Graham: When is that commitment going to be met?

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES

December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005

S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 2/16

Hon. Mr. Ashfield: As outlined in response to the select committee’s report, it was made very clear
that we formed a task force under the guidance of Dr. Thom Erdle to address Items 10 and 11 in that
report.
017 11:15
It was made very clear at the time that this would take some time. The final report will be presented
in December 2007.

Mr. S. Graham: My question to the Premier, and hopefully we will receive an answer, is this: For
three years, we have been providing solutions to modernize our forest industry and create an
environment for investment: Let’s grow more wood on private land and Crown land; let’s stabilize
our energy costs; and let’s put in place an investment tax credit program that will allow an
accelerated depreciation of the assets to occur, to create an environment for investment. For three
years, this government has been flip-flopping and delaying making important decisions.
Today, it is our understanding that an announcement will be made on the Miramichi that UPM -
Kymmene will be closing two mills for a three-month period, the groundwood mill and the paper
mill. Thousands of New Brunswickers rely on this industry to put food on the table. This is my
question to the Premier, and it is very important to the people of the Miramichi region today: When
is your government going to bring forward quantifiable wood supply analysis for New Brunswick?
You answer the question. Give us the date.

Hon. Mr. Ashfield: Obviously, the member on the opposite side of the House has difficulty in
hearing. It is quite clear. If he paid any attention to the report of the wood supply committee, the
facts and figures that came out of that, and this government’s response to that report, he would know
very well the time lines that are required for this task force to do its job. I suggest that he take a look
at the report.

Mr. S. Graham: This is my third question to the Premier. Hopefully, he will have the fortitude to
stand and answer a question. The mill in Dalhousie that is run by Bowater has one of the highest
power rates in the province. Last year, the mill spent over $40 million on electricity costs. Your
government has seen a dramatic increase in power rates occur through NB Power. My question to
you is this: What are you going to do to help the people of Dalhousie maintain their jobs by
stabilizing power rates for the mill in Dalhousie?

Hon. Mr. Lord: When I hear the Leader of the Opposition say that he has been saying these things
for three years, one thing is clear: Some of these things were not in their platform, and the election
was two and a half years ago. The fact is that there are some situations that have an impact on the
forestry industry of New Brunswick that are outside the control of the government of New
Brunswick. They are outside the control of any government, for that matter.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES

December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005

S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 3/16

The Leader of the Opposition can stand here today and tell us that he will fix everything when, in
fact, he cannot. The fact is that when they were in office, the increases in power rates were higher
than what has taken place in New Brunswick so far. The issues faced by some of these mills is not
a question of wood supply. It is a question of markets. Our ministers have been doing their work.
We have been doing our work every day, every week, and every month. We will continue to do our
work to support the forestry industry in New Brunswick.

Mr. S. Graham: That is the same speech that Bernard Lord gave in this Chamber last session. He
had an opportunity to put forward tangible dates in the throne speech of when that work would be
completed. All this government has stated today is: We are going to continue to study the issue and
allow the world market conditions to affect us. What New Brunswickers need today more than ever
is a proactive government rather than a reactive government.
Over 15 000 New Brunswickers rely on this industry to put food on the table. You are saying that
you are going to continue to allow the status quo to remain until you can make up your mind on a
decision. Well, New Brunswick cannot wait. We have a unique opportunity with the sale of 766 000
acres of Fraser’s freehold property. A month ago, the minister himself said he was looking at the
opportunity to purchase that land. I welcomed his commitment to that. My question to the Premier
today is this: Give us an update. Are we ready to purchase that property on behalf of all New
Brunswickers?

Hon. Mr. Lord: In his question, the Leader of the Opposition said things that are wrong. It is not
the first time, and I guess this session will not change that. He will come into the House, make
accusations that are false, and say things that are totally incorrect. That is his way of doing business.
It is not our way. If the issue of identifiable wood objectives is so simple, can they just show us what
their identifiable wood objectives would be? Do they have that in their back pockets?
018 11:20
No, they have not done that work, because that work requires time. Sometimes, investing some time
to do the right thing works for the people of New Brunswick, and that is what we are doing.
We have stated very clearly that we are open to looking at the situation with regard to land that is
for sale in the province, but we won’t just jump at the first piece of land that is for sale. We want
to make sure, if we buy it, that we get a good price for the people of New Brunswick, that it makes
sense for the forest industry, and that it makes sense for the taxpayers of New Brunswick. That is
what we will do.

Mr. S. Graham: The Premier says: We need more time. We need more time to procrastinate and
to study. What is clearly evident today is that after six years of Conservative government in New
Brunswick, this government is running out of time.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 4/16

My question to the Premier is this: The former Liberal government made a significant investment
by purchasing the Georgia Pacific property as an investment for future generations. In fact, the
former Liberal government also went out and bought the first property when it was up for sale. At
that time, we did not have record equalization adjustments or investments from the federal
government coming to New Brunswick. In fact, it was going in the opposite direction. What did the
government of the day do? It sold off isolated blocks of Crown land to raise the funds to purchase
the Hearst property.
My question to the Premier is this: You have record investments coming from Ottawa. We have an
opportunity to increase the Crown land base in New Brunswick. When are you going to make a clear
commitment that you are looking to purchase this important piece of property?

Hon. Mr. Lord: Obviously, the Leader of the Opposition does not know the facts, or he is purposely
telling things that are not completely accurate. The fact is, the percentage of transfers from Ottawa,
as part of our budget, is lower today than in the last year the Liberals were in office.
Do you know the other thing that is lower today than it was when the Liberals were in office? It is
the net debt of the province. When the Liberals were in office, they were in such a hurry to increase
the debt for our children that in their first six years in office, they almost doubled the debt of the
province. They saddled our children with more debt. We have turned that around.
Do you want to talk about running out of time? They are running out of time, because the people of
New Brunswick have more jobs today than before. There is more investment in health care, more
investment in education, and we are going to continue to work for the people of New Brunswick,
with a balance of economics and social progress. That is what this government is about, and we will
continue to do that.
We are not going to just go out and buy some land because it is for sale. If we can get the right deal
for the forest industry and for the taxpayers, we will do it.

Mr. S. Graham: In all the rhetoric the Premier has provided this morning, he has not provided an
answer, and the answer is very clear. Former administrations purchased land when it became
available, on behalf of the citizens of this province. Richard Hatfield did it when he purchased
property for the Juniper license for Bev O’Keefe to operate that license. Frank McKenna did it when
he bought the Hearst property and the Georgia Pacific property.
Today, we have an opportunity to seize upon an investment so that the people of Edmundston will
no longer have the fear that if an American interest buys this property, it can, in turn, ship all that
freehold wood into the U.S. market, without jobs being created here in New Brunswick.
ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 5/16

My question to the Premier today is this: If you are investigating this opportunity, have you,
yourself, contacted Fraser? Have you, yourself, put an offer on the table that they can evaluate? If
you are studying it, is there an offer on the table?

Hon. Mr. Lord: There is a lot of fearmongering in that question, but certainly not a lot of facts. I
have answered the question. The government is exploring the option that is there. We will not just
jump at it. If we cannot get the right price for taxpayers and get the right value for the forest
industry, there is no need to do it. It is that type of decision making in the past that has led the
province to add more debt.
When the Liberals were in office, they were good that the unemployment was 12.2%; that was the
12-year average. Last year, the unemployment rate in the province, contrary to what the House
Leader of the opposition says, was the lowest in 30 years. We are on track toward meeting that this
year. Those are the real facts.
I have stated very clearly that if there is a good deal for the taxpayers and for the province, we will
take it. If not, we will not.
019 11:25

Mr. S. Graham: Today, on the Miramichi, just before Christmas, hundreds of families are hearing
that their mills are going to be closing for a three-month period. Last night, in Bathurst, I again met
many citizens who were concerned that this government was not on top of the forest file and that
it had allowed the Smurfit-Stone mill to be closed without having a proactive discussion with the
stakeholders. New Brunswick families today want a government that is going to take a decision and
that is going to take action.
You are saying you need more time to study. You are saying that you do not want to rush into a
decision. At some point in time, a decision does have to be made. It cannot be made to our
detriment, with thousands of lost jobs in New Brunswick, while your government continues to be
inactive. That is why we have provided three tangible solutions. Today we are saying that we should
be looking at the purchasing of the Fraser property. We are asking you to move in this direction.
Putting aside the partisan politics, let us work on behalf of New Brunswickers, together.

Hon. Mr. Lord: I hear the Leader of the Opposition saying: Let us put aside partisan politics. All
morning, all they have been doing is insulting me and this government. That is all they are
doing—calling names. Then they say: Let us put aside partisan politics. I remember that a few years
ago, in this House, our government proposed to reduce the increase in property tax for large
industries, which benefited mills. The opposition voted against it. Every single one of them voted
against it. They all did. The member for Bathurst—they all voted against it. Now, they want to be
the saviours of the forest industry.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 6/16

The fact is that silviculture is 24% higher now than it was in 1999, when we took office. We are
investing more in silviculture, not less. We are providing tax relief to those businesses, not less.
Those are the real facts, and it is unfortunate that the Leader of the Opposition wants to fearmonger
in this House.

Mr. Speaker: Time.

Environment

Mr. Doherty: Today, I pose an important question to the new Minister of the Environment and
Local Government. If you recall, during the most recent by-election in Saint John, a number of
promises were made by the Lord government. These were clearly attempts to sway voters.
Particularly important to me, both professionally and personally, is the much-needed cleanup of
Saint John Harbour. My question to the new Minister of the Environment and Local Government
is simple. When will the cleanup commence, as promised?

Hon. Mr. Holder: I am very pleased that the member opposite has asked this question. Quite
frankly, our caucus, at the local level in Saint John, has been committed to this project for a long
time. We have made that very clear to the municipality and to the federal government. The fact of
the matter is that we have not gotten a firm commitment from the federal government, except for
the Prime Minister walking out of a news conference yesterday, suggesting that there was $44
million. He has never committed . . . That has never been conveyed to me as minister, nor to the
Premier. We need the federal government at the table. We would be proud to be a partner in this
important project for Saint John, and we will be.

Mr. Speaker: Supplementary.

Mr. Doherty: According to an article in the Telegraph Journal on October 19, 2005, on harbour
cleanup, the Premier pledged an initial contribution of $8.3 million toward cleanup, with an
additional promise to return more money once municipal and federal partnerships were determined.
This was not mentioned in the throne speech yesterday. My follow-up question is simple. Where has
the initial $8.3 million been spent, as pledged, and how are the negotiations progressing, as
promised? Why was it not mentioned in yesterday’s throne speech? I therefore assume that
everything is moving forward, according to the Premier’s promise and pledge.
020 11:30

Hon. Mr. Holder: The throne speech lays out our commitments in terms of what we are going to
do over the next few months and in this session. We are going to bring those details as time goes on.
The negotiations are ongoing. We have committed that money. We have told the federal
government: Come on down, and let’s sign that deal. I will be very proud when we finalize it. The
federal government just needs to tell us the time and the place, and we will sign that agreement.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 7/16

Bibliothèques

M C. Robichaud : Mes questions s’adressent à la ministre de l’Éducation. me tion. Le 31 mars 2005, les
parlementaires du côté du gouvernement ont voté en faveur du principe du projet de loi 31, Loi sur
le droit de lire, proposé par les Libéraux. Ce projet de loi établissait des objectifs pour améliorer nos
bibliothèques scolaires au cours des cinq prochaines années. Les enfants font des acquisitions en
lecture, mais les bibliothèques de la province sont fermées dû au manque de livres et de
bibliothécaires. Si vous avez donné votre appui en principe, pourquoi n’avez-vous rien fait pour
apporter des plans concrets pour améliorer nos bibliothèques scolaires dans la province?

L’hon. Mme Dubé : Cela me fait extrêmement plaisir de répondre à cette question et, surtout, de
parler d’éducation et de littératie, qui est certainement un dossier que moi et le gouvernement Lord
tenons à coeur. Je rappelle à la députée d’en face que nous avons de nombreux investissements en
littératie. Elle a dit quelque chose dans sa question qui me dit que les bibliothèques scolaires sont
fermées parce qu’il y a un manque de livres. Je demande à la députée qu’elle fasse ses devoirs.
Nous avons augmenté le financement des bibliothèques scolaires, nous investissons davantage —
plus que jamais — dans les livres, dans les écoles et dans les ressources que le personnel enseignant
nous a demandées. Nous investissons davantage dans l’ensemble du budget, et, parce que nous
savons que nous avons besoin d’une stratégie globale, je pense que nos devoirs sont faits en
littératie. Je dois ajouter que nous n’avons pas terminé.
Éducation physique

Mme C. Robichaud : Le 31 mars 2005, les parlementaires du côté du gouvernement ont voté en
faveur du principe du projet de loi 33, la Loi sur les étudiants en santé, proposé par les Libéraux.
Ce projet de loi établissait des objectifs pour améliorer l’éducation physique dans nos écoles au
cours des cinq prochaines années. Selon Statistique Canada, l’éducation physique favorise la santé
et une qualité de vie chez nos jeunes. Vous avez donné votre appui en principe ; alors, pourquoi
n’avez-vous rien fait pour améliorer les cours d’éducation physique dans nos écoles de la province?

L’hon. Mme Dubé : C’est vraiment un honneur et un privilège de me lever et de parler d’éducation.
Cela me fait tellement sourire chaque fois que les parlementaires du côté de l’opposition parlent
d’éducation physique, puisque nous savons que ce sont eux qui ont réduit dans l’éducation physique
dans nos écoles.
Voilà un autre exemple, ce matin, où le parti de l’opposition nous arrive encore et met le feu où il
a fait des réductions flagrantes. Les parlementaires du côté de l’opposition se présentent au grand
jour pour essayer de nous faire croire qu’ils sont des sauveurs. Ils ont fait des gaffes majeures, ils
ont réduit en éducation, ils ont négligé l’éducation, ils ont négligé les ressources et ils ont aussi
négligé les programmes d’enseignement.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 8/16

Du côté du gouvernement, nous avons un plan d’action, nous avons un Plan d’apprentissage de
qualité, nous avons des investissements majeurs et nous travaillons également avec tous nos
partenaires. L’éducation physique est extrêmement importante, et j’ajouterais que l’activité physique
est importante aussi. Nous continuerons à travailler avec tous nos partenaires pour nous assurer que
nos enfants sont en santé et qu’ils apprennent aussi dans un environnement sain.
Fermeture d’écoles

M C. Robichaud : Depuis les derniers six ans, cela ne paraît pas. Il n’y a rien qui a changme é.
Toutefois, le 7 juin 2005, les parlementaires du côté du gouvernement ont voté en faveur du projet
de loi 65, la Loi modifiant la Loi sur l’éducation, proposé par les Libéraux. Ce projet de loi forçait
la ministre de l’Éducation à considérer les facteurs suivants avant d’autoriser la fermeture d’une
école rurale : l’utilisation de l’édifice scolaire par la collectivité, la durée requise pour voyager les
élèves à l’école, les résultats scolaires des élèves de l’école et l’impact de la fermeture de l’école.
Ce projet de loi reconnaissait le rôle important que jouent les écoles dans nos collectivités rurales.
Il forcerait aussi la ministre à participer à des audiences publiques et à émettre sa décision par écrit.
Vous avez donné votre appui en principe ; alors, pourquoi n’avez-vous rien fait pour protéger nos
écoles rurales?

L’hon. Mme Dubé : Cela me fait encore plaisir de parler d’éducation. La députée parle des
réductions et des fermetures d’écoles dans les milieux ruraux. Je rappellerai aux parlementaires que
nous construisons justement une école dans la circonscription de la députée d’en face, qui est
certainement une école dans un milieu rural.
021 11:35
Je vais rappeler à la Chambre que nous construisons justement une école dans la circonscription de
la députée de Baie-de-Miramichi. Il s’agit certainement d’une école en milieu rural. Que faisonsnous
de ce côté de la Chambre? Nous travaillons avec nos conseils d’éducation de district où les
décisions locales sont prises et où sont évaluées les infrastructures et les besoins dans les diverses
régions. Ensuite, ces conseils font des recommandations. D’année en année, nous augmentons les
budgets et abordons les besoins. Je dois rappeler à la députée que, effectivement, nous construisons
même des écoles dans les milieux ruraux.

Mr. Murphy: I am glad the minister mentioned that, because school districts throughout this
province are in deficit positions now, and in fact, are using, in some instances, extracurricular money
just to pay the bills. I do not know whether it is their plan to have bottle drives to pay the heating
bills in these schools, but I would like to know from the Minister of Finance whether he will confirm
that he is going to change the formula to ensure that sufficient funds are in place from now on.

L’hon. M. Volpé : Cela me fait plaisir de répondre à ma première question de cette présente session.
Comme d’habitude le député de Moncton-Nord a perdu le nord. Lorsqu’il était président de

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 9/16

l’Association libérale du Nouveau-Brunswick, durant les années de McKenna, son étoile montante,
la dette a augmenté, et le gouvernement a fait des réductions dans les écoles et les universités.
L’ancien gouvernement a même fait des réductions dans le domaine de la santé, et malgré tout cela,
il n’a pas été capable d’équilibrer son budget.
Peut-être que l’argent a mystérieusement disparu, comme cela s’est passé au fédéral, parce qu’il faut
se rappeler qu’il s’agit des mêmes Libéraux.

Mr. Murphy: Once again, we hear the members over there talking about the 1990s. My response
is: What have they been doing for the past six and a half years? The answer is: Nothing. They have
also said that the Leader of the Opposition has difficulty hearing, but I will tell you this. He heard
the people of Shediac and he heard the people of Saint John Harbour, and you are going to hear from
all of New Brunswick soon.
The districts cannot cut back on teacher aides anymore, nor support staff. I want to know from the
Minister of Finance whether he will confirm that sufficient funds will be in place so that no more
teacher assistants and no more support staff have to be cut.

L’hon. M. Volpé : Je pense que le député de Moncton-Nord, ne comprend pas la différence entre
une addition et une soustraction. Cette année, dans nos budgets, nous avons investi environ 40 %
de plus pour chaque étudiant. Cela, ce n’est pas une réduction.
Moi, je me souviens que, en ce qui a trait aux universités, dans une seule année, leur budget avait
été réduit par 9 millions, et cela, dans une seule année. Ça c’est une réduction, pas une
augmentation.
Donc, il serait temps que vous compreniez la différence entre un plus et un moins, Monsieur le
député de Moncton-Nord. Notre gouvernement a ajouté de l’argent dans les ministères. On donne
de meilleurs service en éducation et en santé et plus d’argent aux universités. On balance nos
budgets et on réduit la dette ; on ne l’augmente pas. Alors, c’est ça la différence. Les gens du
Nouveau-Brunswick reçoivent un service pour les taxes qu’ils paient, comparativement à lorsqu’ils
payaient des taxes et que leur argent disparaisait mystérieusement.

Mr. Murphy: It has been taking, in some instances, hot dog sales to pay the bills. This government
has done nothing for six years and now talks of some change. The government members are so lazy
that their motto has become: Do not just do something. Stand there.
I would like to know the following from the minister. Because the districts are saying that they
cannot pay the increased costs and that the formula is inadequate, will he simply admit that the
formula is inadequate and will he simply give us a date or any indication of when he is going to
change that?

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 10/16

L’hon. M. Volpé : De ce côté-ci de la Chambre, on a certainement pas de leçon à recevoir en ce qui
a trait à travailler avec les comités locaux. Les conseils d’éducation de district établissent leurs
priorités et le gouvernement apportent l’argent. On n’a jamais encore envoyé les chiens sur les gens
qui nous demandent des choses, et ce, contrairement à l’opposition.
Lorsque le député de Moncton-Nord nous parle de surplus et de déficit, au cours des six premières
années au pouvoir, nous avons réduit notre dette cette année de 212 millions, alors que l’ancien
gouvernement a pris une dette de 2,9 milliards et l’a augmenté de 2,9 milliards.
022 11:40
Il a eu des déficits, mais, en plus, il a réduit dans les services. La question que devraient se poser les
gens du Nouveau-Brunswick est la suivante : S’il y a un déficit et des réductions dans les services,
où est allé l’argent? Où est allé l’argent? Il est peut-être allé dans de petits programmes de créations
d’emplois, ce qui faisaient l’affaire des simples parlementaires et peut-être aussi du président de
l’Association libérale de Moncton-Nord. Cependant, cela ne faisait pas l’affaire des gens du
Nouveau-Brunswick.
Literacy

Mr. Lamrock: Yesterday, we heard members of the government say that perhaps they are not
moving fast enough for the opposition’s standards. In fact, they are not moving fast enough for their
own standards. There were over 20 projects announced in last year’s throne speech that they just did
not get around to finishing. There were a whole bunch of bills that they just never bothered to write,
and a bunch of steps that they never bothered to take.
One that caught my eye is on page 5 of last year’s throne speech when the government said there
would be a focus on adult literacy programs. This is very important. We rate near the bottom of the
country in adult literacy rates. It takes too many people out of our workforce. It makes too many
people vulnerable to the closure of a mill or an industry in their town when they do not have the
skills to find jobs. Even though the government promised action on adult literacy in last year’s
throne speech, if you search literacy on the website, there was not one new adult literacy program
announced, and none are pledged in this year’s throne speech. My question to the Minister of
Training and Employment Development is this: If this is such a priority, why was nothing done last
year, and why are there no new ideas for this year?
Hon. Mrs. Blaney: I would be happy to update the member opposite on where we are with adult
literacy, because an awful lot of work has been done during the past year, as promised in the throne
speech last year with respect to the work that we would undertake to address the issues of adult
literacy. I would remind the member opposite that the issues we face in literacy, especially as it
relates to adult literacy, did not just occur over the last six years. We have undertaken to put all our
programs that relate to adult literacy under one department, the Department of Training and
ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 11/16

Employment Development. As a result of that, we have undertaken to consult with all the
stakeholders who work in this field every single day. These take place in regions all around our
province.
We are moving forward to unveil a part of our Quality Learning Agenda, of which there is not just
one component. The blinders are on for the opposition. There are four components, and they are
unfolding.

Mr. Lamrock: That was a long way of announcing no new initiatives. Let’s actually look at the
facts. If you search “literacy” on the department’s website, the first page of results does not even
turn up this minister’s department. In fact, I sent in a request for information to her office for the
waiting lists for adults who want literacy training and cannot get it. Here is what the minister wrote
back to me: As a result of my department’s arm’s length involvement in the direct delivery of adult
literacy training, we don’t maintain waiting lists for adult literacy programs in the province.
Is this what constitutes action now—arm’s length involvement, and not even bothering to see how
many adults are waiting for literacy? The minister should really read the letters her staff puts in front
of her to sign. My question is clear. How can you say you are addressing a problem when you have
not even bothered to find out how many people are waiting for adult literacy training in this
province?

Hon. Mrs. Blaney: We take a very different view to that of the opposition when it comes to working
with our stakeholders and working with the people of this province. The view of the members
opposite is that they would know all. They would be the all-knowing being, the entity that would
direct what others would do. We take an entirely different perspective. We work with our
stakeholders. Yes, we are at arm’s length. They are the professionals. We do not purport to know
everything about what they do. That is why we undertook to consult and to meet, at length, with the
people who work every day in this field. They are professionals, and we do respect what they do.
That is why, as a result of these consultations, we are moving forward with a very comprehensive
plan on adult literacy and lifelong learning, a part of a continuum that you seem to know nothing
about.

Mr. Lamrock: I went from all-knowing to knowing nothing in the space of 60 seconds. I have to
say that we do have a different view. We are second last in the country. I do not think arm’s length
is good enough. No one has to direct frontline officials, but should we not at least ask them how
many people are on their wait lists? Is that too much to ask for a government that is doing due
diligence on literacy? If they are the professionals who know, let’s ask them how many people are
waiting for their services, because when I talk to them, they tell me that their waiting lists are long.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 12/16
023 11:45

This minister could have asked, but she never thought to ask. Because of her arm’s-length
involvement, she does not know how many people are waiting to learn how to read in New
Brunswick.
Let’s talk about some ideas that I can maybe convince the minister would be good to look at. What
if we did like some U.S. states and gave tax credits to employers that have literacy programs in the
workplace? What if we had a fund to help labour unions? They are doing amazing work training
their own members. What if we had a volunteer literacy corps of recent graduates who wanted to
pay off their student loans through workplace frontline literacy? What if we had a wait time
guarantee to find the very people this minister was too lazy to ask about how quickly they can learn
to read? Will the minister consider any of those ideas in the next 12 months? Would she consider
adding those to the throne speech?

Hon. Mrs. Blaney: I am very proud of the initiatives that this government has put in place to
address quality learning in our province. What if we had an opposition we could work with? What
if we had a federal government that would be willing to be our partner as we move forward in
getting the flexibility that we need to do the training that needs to take place in the private sector?
St. Anne-Nackawic

Mr. Targett: It is really quite simple. The people of this province are looking for straight answers
to some very serious questions. I would implore the members of this House on the government side
to take one day of question period and simply answer in a straightforward way the questions that are
being asked, without going to the past every time they have to respond.
Nackawic has been hit with a situation that most of us could never imagine. The mill has now been
sold. However, many former workers and pensioners from St. Anne-Nackawic still don’t know the
fate of their pension benefits. This government has kept the residents of Nackawic waiting long
enough. Will the Minister of Training and Employment Development tell this Chamber when a
decision will be made on the issue of pension funds in the Nackawic situation?
Hon. Mrs. Blaney: I will be pleased to answer that question. I fully anticipate that we will have a
decision before Christmas, before this House rises.
The story of Nackawic is not only about pensions, although that has certainly played a very large
role in the story as it has unfolded. It is also a story of renewed hope and restored optimism in a
community that was hit very hard. There is restored hope in the knowledge that the mill is going to
reopen.

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 13/16

What has amazed me more than anything about the story of Nackawic has been the perseverance,
the determination, and the courage that the people of Nackawic have shown. It is really a reflection
of the kind of people we are in New Brunswick, and I think we should all be applauding the people
of Nackawic for the courage they have shown, for the determination, and for the sense of optimism
with which they have been determined to move their community forward. I think we should be very
proud of the people of Nackawic.
Pensions

Mr. Targett: Thank you to the minister for that very straightforward answer.
My second question for the minister is as follows: Last year, the Leader of the Opposition
introduced Bill 16, the Pension Benefits Guarantee Act. Despite promises that this bill would be
further analyzed by the Standing Committee on Law Amendments, nothing, to our knowledge, has
yet been done.
More and more pensions are facing deficit situations. As the minister said, this has been an ongoing
saga for the people of Nackawic who have been affected. Despite this situation, there was no
mention of pensions in this session’s throne speech. It is something that affects people across this
province. Will the minister again please advise the House of what the government is planning to do
to ensure that this situation, like the one in Nackawic, never happens again?
Hon. Mrs. Blaney: As I have indicated on several occasions in this House, we have undertaken a
review of the Pension Benefits Act. To my knowledge, the Standing Committee on Law
Amendments, which includes members of the opposition, is still looking at this, considering the
overall issue of the bill that was brought forward, although it did die on the table.
A larger picture needs to be looked at here, beyond the provincial Pension Benefits Act. That is the
role of the federal government, as the law dictates it today, relating to pensions. Two major issues
have come to the fore, and one is the fact that you cannot put any surplus in pensions away for a
rainy day.
024 11:50
That is according to federal tax law. The other one is that there are no provisions for secured
creditors as relates to pension recipients. Those are two major federal issues that really need to be
dealt with. Having said that, we are reviewing the Pension Benefits Act to look at whether we can
provide more protection here in New Brunswick, but the bigger issue is a federal issue.

Mr. Targett: I respectfully understand what the minister is saying about how big this issue is.
However, the question becomes a very simple one once again. This is such an enormous issue that
requires such attention that it baffles me as to why the committee has not met once to begin the

ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 14/16

process of this review. There has been zero committee consultation given to this yet, and it is over
a year since the tragedy happened. We need to resolve this, and it cannot be done in the philosophy
of go for it, we are going to think about it and work on it later. We need to take action on these
items. We are here in this Legislative Assembly to govern this province and to protect our people.
Our troops in Afghanistan are fighting to allow that country to have this pleasure. Yet, we wait this
long to deal with such an important issue and do not even bring it to committee. I cannot understand.
Why has this not been brought to committee for consideration?

Hon. Mrs. Blaney: We have undertaken a review of the Pension Benefits Act. My understanding
is that bill has been referred to the law amendments committee. I can certainly check to see where
it is with the law amendments committee, but you could as well. You could also make an inquiry.
I know it is an issue that has concerned this member, but he can ask just as well as I can. I can
certainly ask.
Maladies chroniques

M. V. Boudreau : Le Plan provincial de la Santé, rendu public en juin 2004, souligne des stratégies
de gestion des maladies chroniques telles que le diabète, sous la rubrique Priorités stratégiques,
Améliorer la santé de la population. Cependant, ni le discours du trône de 2004 ni celui de 2005 ne
font mention des stratégies de gestion des maladies chroniques. Ce matin même, le rapport sur le
diabète 2005 de l’Association canadienne du diabète a été rendu public. À la page 10 de ce rapport,
nous remarquons que toutes les provinces participent au système national de surveillance du diabète
et que la plupart d’entre elles ont produit des rapports sur le diabète s’appuyant sur les données
recueillies grâce à ce système. Nous savons que le ministre a ces statistiques pour le Nouveau-
Brunswick. Le ministre de la Santé et du Mieux-être peut-il nous expliquer pourquoi nous sommes
une des seules provinces qui n’ont pas rendu public un rapport provincial sur le diabète?

L’hon. E. Robichaud : Premièrement, si le député avait écouté hier, à la Chambre, il verrait qu’il
est clair que le discours du trône parle de mettre en place des stratégies de gestion des maladies
chroniques. Deuxièmement, si le député d’en face avait pris le temps de regarder le rapport, il verra
que non seulement le Nouveau-Brunswick mais toutes les provinces de l’Atlantique sont au même
niveau en termes de rapporter le taux de diabète. En termes d’épidémiologie au Nouveau-
Brunswick, on veut avoir des données plus précises, et c’est ce que le plan de santé devrait arriver
à faire d’ici 2008.

M. V. Boudreau : Je n’a pas vraiment eu une réponse à ma première question. Le ministre a les
statistiques, nous voulons donc un rapport de la province.
Je veux rappeler à la Chambre que le diabète est une des plus importantes causes de mortalité et de
maladies au Nouveau-Brunswick. Au moins 5 % des Néo-Brunswickois de 20 ans ou plus, soit
environ 40 000 personnes, souffrent du diabète. Nous prévoyons que ce montant pourrait doubler
d’ici 10 ans au Nouveau-Brunswick. Encore dans le rapport sur le diabète 2005, à la page 11, nous
ORAL QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 15/16

remarquons que six provinces au Canada ont déjà élaboré des stratégies multisectorielles sur le
diabète. Les six autres provinces élaborent actuellement des stratégies. Quand au Nouveau-
Brunswick, nous disons simplement qu’il intègre le diabète dans sa stratégie de prise en charge des
maladies chroniques. Je crois que nous parlons ici de cette même stratégie inexistante qui est
mentionnée dans le plan mais qui n’est pas mentionnée dans les deux derniers discours du trône. Je
répète donc ma question : Est-ce que le ministre peut nous dire quand, nous voulons une date
précise, nous recevrons cette stratégie de gestion des maladies chroniques au Nouveau-Brunswick?
025 11:55

L’hon. E. Robichaud : De nouveau, le député de Shediac—Cap-Pelé dit des faussetés. Je lui
demanderais de lire le discours du trône d’hier. C’est clair que c’était dans le discours du trône.
Deuxièmement, je m’accorde avec mon collègue, mais ce n’est pas seulement avec une stratégie
unique que nous allons réussir. En ce qui a trait à l’éducation, nous avons pris des mesures pour
contrôler ce que les élèves mangent dans les écoles. Le taux d’obésité chez nos jeunes au Nouveau-
Brunswick est l’un des plus haut au Canada. En termes de stratégie de prévention, il ne s’agit pas
seulement d’avoir une stratégie spécifique à une maladie. En effet, lorsqu’on regarde les causes de
différentes maladies, plusieurs facteurs sont communs. Nous allons nous attaquer à ces causes
communes, et, oui, en plus, dans nos stratégies visant les maladies chroniques, le diabète fera partie
de nos stratégies qui seront développées dans l’année en cours.

M. V. Boudreau : J’ai compris dans l’année en cours ; donc, nous avons hâte de voir cette stratégie.
The death rate is two times higher for a New Brunswicker with diabetes than it is for the general
population of this province. Diabetics in New Brunswick are six times more likely to be admitted
to hospital than the general population of this province. Yet, this government continues to stick its
head in the sand and refuses to help these people manage this deadly illness. The 2005 Canadian
diabetes report, released this morning, concludes that a Type 1 diabetic in New Brunswick has an
annual out-of-pocket expense of $3 355 for supplies and medication. That is the third highest in the
country. A Type 2 diabetic in New Brunswick has an annual out-of-pocket cost of $3 674, which
is the second highest in the country. According to the Atlantic diabetes council, the proper
management of this disease would save $36 million.

Mr. Speaker: Question.

Mr. V. Boudreau: Would the minister please tell this House what his government intends to do to
help the 40 000 diabetics who deal with the worst out-of-pocket expenses in the country?

L’hon. E. Robichaud : Comme je l’ai dit lors de ma réponse à la première question du député de
Shediac—Cap-Pelé, il n’y a rien d’extraordinaire là-dedans, car là où les citoyens paient le plus,
c’est dans les provinces de l’Atlantique. Terre-Neuve vient au premier rang, ensuite il s’agit de l’ÎleORAL
QUESTIONS 1 QUESTIONS ORALES
December 7, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 7 décembre 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\02 2005-12-07 BL\02 2005-12-07 BL.wpd 16/16
du-Prince-Édouard, du Nouveau-Brunswick, et quatrièmement, de la Nouvelle-Écosse. Donc, ce
n’est pas une surprise pour personne que, l’an dernier, en 2004, lorsqu’ils ont rencontré le premier
ministre Martin, les premiers ministres des provinces de l’Atlantique ont demandé un Programme
de médicament sur ordonnance amélioré pour l’ensemble des Canada. Justement, dans les provinces
de l’Atlantique, c’est beaucoup plus difficile de fournir des taux adéquats pour les besoins de la
population. Donc, cela n’est pas surprenant. Que faisons-nous? Dans le plan de santé, nous allons
introduire un Programme de médicaments sur ordonnance pour les gens qui font face à des situations
catastrophiques suite à certaines maladies, comme le diabète.
Services d’ambulance

M. Paulin : Nous avons une situation extrêmement préoccupante dans la région de Restigouche-
Ouest et même ailleurs au Nouveau-Brunswick. Nous avons des services d’ambulance dans les
régions de Sainte-Anne et de St. Leonard qui sont devant un groupe de conciliateurs. Nous avons
le même problème dans le comté de Kent et à Grand-Sault. Dans restigouche-Ouest
particulièrement, nous avons le local 4212 des services d’ambulance qui, dans le moment, est en
grève. J’aimerais connaître la position du ministre de la Santé et du Mieux-être en ce qui concerne
un service aussi essentiel pour une région rurale du Nouveau-Brunswick.

L’hon. E. Robichaud : Évidemment, il y a une situation de grève qui a débuté ce matin à 10 heures
dans la région de Saint-Quentin—Kedgwick. Un plan de contingentement a été mis sur pied, et une
ambulance sera disponible 24 heures sur 24, alors que le service était offert 12 heures par jour dans
les deux localités. Il y a un service d’appel la nuit ; donc, durant la nuit, le service devrait être
amélioré. On a évidemment prévu que les services d’ambulance voisins viendraient couvrir lorsqu’il
y aurait un appel. Troisièmement, les ambulanciers de la région d’Edmundston vont effectuer les
transferts, et le personnel de mon bureau surveille de très près la situation pour s’assurer que l’on
couvre de façon adéquate les urgences qui pourraient survenir.
026 12:00

M. Paulin : Ce gouvernement prônait une espèce d’uniformité en ce qui a trait aux services
d’ambulance au Nouveau-Brunswick. Ma question est simple. Pourquoi y a-t-il des régions au
Nouveau-Brunswick où des ambulanciers qualifiés, qui servent une population rurale, sont payés
moins qu’ailleurs dans cette province? Ce gouvernement finira-t-il par mettre en vigueur ce qu’il
prêche à la Chambre?

L’hon. E. Robichaud : Comme le député l’a constaté, nous avons 54 contrats différents pour les
ambulanciers au Nouveau-Brunswick. C’est une situation que le gouvernement du premier ministre
Lord s’est engagé à rectifier. J’espère apporter prochainement, pour les gens du Nouveau-
Brunswick, un système unifié et intégré de services d’ambulance où le service que l’on recevra sera
le même partout au Nouveau-Brunswick. Donc, c’est quelque chose que nous sommes en train de
changer à l’heure actuelle.