Question period at the New Brunswick Legislature. < Mercredi >

ORAL QUESTIONS 31 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 1/12
Regional Development
Mr. S. Graham: My first question this morning is for the Minister of Finance, who is also
responsible for the Regional Development Corporation. Last week, the minister responsible for RDC
made the announcement that the entire riding of Rogersville-Kouchibouguac would now be included
under the Miramichi Regional Economic Development Fund. The minister, in the press release, is
quoted as saying that entrepreneurs, residents, not-for-profit groups, and municipalities such as
Richibucto and Saint-Louis de Kent would be eligible to apply. Nowhere in this press release is it
indicated that it is the entire region of Kent—a region that is currently suffering a double-digit
unemployment rate.
What is striking is that this minister is preoccupied with the reelection of the regional minister, as
opposed to helping all residents of Kent. I am asking today why the Minister of Education was
omitted from this press release if, indeed, it concerned the entire region of Kent.
L’hon. M. Volpé : Cela me permettra de corriger certains commentaires qui ont été faits au
préalable par les parlementaires de la région de Miramichi. La région de la députée de Rogersville-
Kouchibouguac était la seule circonscription qui n’était pas comprise complètement dans un des
trois fonds de développement économique. C’était la seule circonscription qui n’était pas comprise
au complet.
011 10:40
J’aimerais connaître la position libérale, parce qu’il y a des parlementaires du côté de l’opposition
qui disent qu’on ne devrait pas étendre le fonds, alors que le chef de l’opposition nous demande de
l’étendre plus. L’opposition libérale peut-elle se faire une idée ce matin?
Mr. S. Graham: The Liberal position is very clear. If the government is admitting that there is a
need for economic development in Kent, it should apply to the entire region of Kent, with a new
fund. It is as simple as that. The minister is saying today, in this press release, that, for the political
reelection of the regional minister, now it is going to follow political boundaries versus geographic
boundaries. Why are communities like Bouctouche, Rexton, Harcourt, Elsipogtog, Saint-Paul,
Sainte-Marie-de-Kent, and Saint-Antoine being omitted, if the minister is stating today that there
is a need for economic development in this region?
L’hon. M. Volpé : Il semble que le chef de l’opposition ne vaille pas beaucoup plus que certains
parlementaires de son parti. Il ne semble pas comprendre qu’il y a d’autres fonds de développement
économique disponibles au Nouveau-Brunswick. Le fonds que nous avons mis en place est pour
aider certaines régions qui avaient besoin d’un coup de pouce supplémentaire. La circonscription
de la ministre était la seule circonscription électorale où il y avait une division : une partie était
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finales le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 2/12
couverte par le fonds, alors que l’autre ne l’était pas. Nous avons fait la même chose que dans toutes
les autres régions où toutes les circonscriptions au complet sont couvertes par le fonds.
Ce que le chef de l’opposition nous dit, c’est qu’il en faveur des fonds de développement
économique pour certaines régions qui ont des besoins spécifiques. Il était contre cela avant, et
l’opposition a voté contre le budget. Cette année, des fonds ont été engagés dans ces trois fonds de
développement économique et il a encore voté contre cela. Toutefois, il se lève à la Chambre et dit
qu’on devrait mettre davantage d’argent. J’aimerais qu’il se fasse une idée.
Mr. S. Graham: Clearly, we on this side of the House believe in the values of Equal Opportunity.
This government is bringing forward a fund that is going to follow the political lines of the boundary
for one of the members present in this House, rather than the needs on a geographic basis. On top
of that, it is taking away from an existing fund when there are already challenges pertaining to
economic development in the Miramichi region. Our position is very clear. You have identified
today that a need does exist in the Kent region. My question to you is this: What separates the
village of Rexton, which is 1 km away from the town of Richibucto. If you are saying that there is
a need in Richibucto, there is a need in Rexton as well.
L’hon. M. Volpé : Il y a une différence : peut-être que la circonscription est moins bien représentée.
La circonscription de Rogersville-Kouchibouguac est très représentée. Si la région de Kent a
tellement besoin d’aide, comment se fait-il que le chef de l’opposition avec son père qui a été là
comme ministre pendant des années n’ont pas pu corriger le problème? Aujourd’hui, il se lève à la
Chambre et dit : On a besoin d’un fonds supplémentaire. Son père a été ministre pendant plusieurs
années dans le gouvernement précédent, et il n’a jamais rien fait pour aider sa région, et,
aujourd’hui, le chef de l’opposition nous demande de corriger le problème qui est dû à un manque
de leadership pendant des années.
Mr. S. Graham: I would like to remind the minister that the former member for Kent was elected
for 31 years, so the people made the final decision. After 31 years of public service, yes, indeed,
people did see their lives improve in the Kent region. It is your government that has made the
decision today to politicize economic development by saying that only the regional boundaries of
one minister, the regional minister for the area, will see economic development funds put in place.
Why is the Minister of Education, who also represents Kent, standing by so silently, when only one
minister is benefiting and not the people of Kent County in total? That is the question that has to be
answered today. My question to the minister is this: You have clearly stated that a need does exist
for economic development in Kent. We are in agreement. What you are saying today is that one
minister will benefit and not the entire region. It is going to take a Liberal government, with a new
initiative for economic development, that will treat all the citizens fairly.
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finales le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 3/12
012 10:45
L’hon. M. Volpé : Si le but des fonds de développement économique est de jouer à la politique, on
joue mal notre jeu. Il y a une douzaine de parlementaires libéraux et seulement quatre parlementaires
conservateurs qui sont touchés par les fonds en question. On a quand même un fonds de 90 millions
pour aider les régions libérales du Nouveau-Brunswick. Si c’est ce que l’opposition appelle jouer
à la politique, on pourrait peut-être retirer les fonds.
On est là pour aider les gens. Les fonds en place sont destinés à des besoins très spécifiques.
D’autres fonds sont disponibles. Il y a de très bons projets qui se développent actuellement dans la
région de Kent, comme dans toutes les régions du Nouveau-Brunswick. Le taux de chômage a
diminué. On a un record de création d’emplois. Les choses vont bien au Nouveau-Brunswick. Il
existe des défis spéciaux dans certaines régions. C’est pour cette raison que les fonds ont été mis en
place. Il semble que le député de Kent ne puisse pas comprendre cela.
Lorsque l’ancien gouvernement était au pouvoir, il a négligé les régions en question pendant des
années. Notre gouvernement a aidé ces régions, et nous continuerons à le faire. C’est en travaillant
avec les gens qu’on apportera des projets dans les régions. Ce n’est pas en travaillant contre les gens
ou en leur imposant des choses, comme le gouvernement précédent l’avait fait, qu’on y arrivera.
L’ancien gouvernement a imposé des choses aux gens. Il a agi contre la volonté des gens du
Nouveau-Brunswick. Nous travaillons avec les gens et nous avons du succès.
Mr. S. Graham: It has become very evident today that the top priority of this government is the
political reelection of the regional minister from Rogersville-Kouchibouguac versus helping the
entire region, which is in need of economic development. What we are saying very clearly today is
that the government has now admitted that a need does exist. The region is facing double digit
unemployment. We are stating this: Do not rob from the fund from the Miramichi, which is also
facing challenges. If you are stating today that a need exists, then create a new fund for this region
where all the citizens can benefit. Are you committing to that? If you are not, a Liberal government
is.
L’hon. M. Volpé : Les commentaires du chef de l’opposition me font rire. L’ancien gouvernement
avait un fonds de développement économique de 1,5 million pour le nord de la province en entier,
mais il ne l’a jamais utilisé. Il a utilisé l’argent pour acheter des cafés lors de réunions. Il a laissé de
l’argent dans le fonds chaque année. Notre gouvernement a un fonds de 90 millions.
Je pense que les gens de Miramichi vont comprendre ce que l’opposition essaie de faire aujourd’hui.
L’opposition essaie de créer une division. Quand est venu le temps de sauver l’hôpital, d’aider les
écoles et de contribuer au développement économique, la région de Rogersville-Kouchibouguac a
été impliquée. La ministre était même, à un moment donné, présidente du caucus régional de
Miramichi. Elle fait partie du caucus de Miramichi. Aujourd’hui, les autres députés de la région nous
disent qu’ils ne veulent pas l’avoir avec eux.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 4/12
Je pense que les gens de la région comprendront le message des parlementaires du côté de
l’opposition, qui nous disent qu’ils ne veulent plus voir les gens de Rogersville-Kouchibouguac
profiter des services de Miramichi, que ce soit à l’hôpital ou ailleurs dans la ville. Voilà le message
qui est en train de passer. J’espère que ce sont seulement les parlementaires du côté de l’opposition
qui ont cela en tête. Ce n’est pas ce que les gens m’ont dit quand je suis allé dans leur région. Ils
veulent travailler ensemble et non créer une division. L’opposition est en train de créer une division.
Notre gouvernement essaie plutôt d’unir les régions.
Environment
Mr. Lamrock: Global warming is no longer an abstract problem that simply deals with melting
polar ice caps or events far away. It is affecting our quality of life here in New Brunswick, taking
moisture out of soil, affecting farmers, costing us millions in health costs for smog-related illnesses,
and causing damage and changes to our ecosystem that will hurt our natural resource-based
industries and our quality of life. The federal government has taken a position on Kyoto Accord that
is at odds with Canadian history. They have said: We will show leadership if everybody else goes
first.
While the federal government will debate that decision nationally, not every province has done the
same thing. Recently, Premier Jean Charest said something very interesting. He said: We have no
intention of waiting for the authorization or permission from anyone in order to act upon reducing
greenhouses gases. We have every intention of pursing our efforts in order to abide by the Kyoto
protocol.
One Premier is taking strong action provincially to show leadership. My question to the Minister
of the Environment is this: When can we expect to see legislated targets for the reduction of the
gases that trap in heat and cause global warming? When will he put into legislation his commitment
to have reduction in these emissions?
Hon. Mr. Holder: The member opposite knows full well that we have a Five in Five initiative
underway. I had the first consultation last week in Saint Andrews. We had members from the
Conservation Council of New Brunswick there.
013 10:50
We had other stakeholders there, such as the Hammond River Anglers Association. We had
provincial stakeholders from across the province. The New Brunswick Lung Association was there.
Our process will continue throughout the summer and into the fall, and we are going to end with a
summit next fall. We are going to have a blueprint for dealing with all these issues. It will be a
made-in-New Brunswick solution, a solution in which New Brunswickers have a part. That is the
way we do business as a government. At that time, we will bring forward any form of legislation that
is necessary to reduce emissions in this province.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 5/12
Mr. Lamrock: I fear the minister does not really understand the file. The fact of the matter is that
this made-in-New Brunswick label is a complete canard. The Kyoto protocol already calls for
individual action by each jurisdiction. This is not new. This was in place for years. The fact is that
this government is now saying: Now we need a made-in-New Brunswick solution. It is too late if
you have not been on top of this file.
That is the problem with the Five in Five Initiative. They keep promising to build mansions, and
then they spend two years arguing over the new pattern for the curtains and never get anything done.
If the minister does not want to take the proof that Quebec is legislating its targets, maybe he would
prefer American examples. I know his fondness for those things. Maryland, under its Healthy Air
Act, has set standards to reduce sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxide, and mercury emissions by 80%. We
have seen the New England governors get together on a plan with legislated targets and credits.
Arizona and New Mexico have legislated targets. Why does he need a year to think about doing
what everybody else is already doing? If we are really going to act on greenhouse emissions, why
can he not do what other jurisdictions and other ministers have proven capable of doing? Set your
target now, put it in legislation, and do not wait five more years to get the job done. Why can the
minister not do that?
Hon. Mr. Holder: We have no intention of waiting five years. We intend to engage New
Brunswickers. I know that is a concept that is foreign to the members opposite—the people who
rammed amalgamations down the throats of New Brunswickers. We do not conduct business that
way. We are going to consult with all the stakeholders, the people who have expertise in this.
The member opposite mentions how the Americans are bringing in legislation. On the one hand, he
says we should honour Kyoto, and in the next breath, he acknowledges the fact that the United States
has done great things toward reducing emissions. The fact is that those emissions are being reduced
at a quicker rate in the United States than they are in countries that have signed on to Kyoto. We
want a solution that reduces greenhouse gases. We want a solution that deals with the issue of
climate change head-on, and that is exactly what we are going to do.
Mr. Lamrock: The minister is, again, a little too obtuse to pick up on the exact point here. In the
United States, they have reduced greenhouse emissions because state governments have gone
beyond shortsighted federal actions. In Canada, Quebec has announced that it will go beyond
shortsighted federal actions. That is the point. U.S. states have shown leadership. This minister is
showing none.
This is the real issue here. State governments and provincial governments are showing initiative. If
you are really engaging New Brunswickers, you would already know that New Brunswickers want
a cleaner environment. If you have been in government for seven years and you have to engage New
Brunswickers to know that people are a little worried about global warming, it begs the question:
What have you been doing, and whom have you been engaging for the past seven years?
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 6/12
My question for the minister is this: Why can he not legislate clear targets that he will live by now
to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? If he will not do that, how can he ask us to believe that we will
be any further ahead in five years?
Hon. Mr. Holder: I have made it very clear that, through this consultation process, we will bring
in whatever legislation we need to deal with this issue. We are very clear on that. Instead of lecturing
me, maybe the member should talk to his own leader, who, in the last couple of days before the
session broke, was asking questions of the Minister of Energy. He said that the Minister of Energy
was more concerned about the rain forests in Brazil than she was about New Brunswick. That is the
kind of backward, parochial, isolationist attitude that they have and that they have historically had.
If they do not think that the rain forests of Brazil are important to global warming, they need to dig
their heads out of the sand. The fact of the matter is that this is a global issue. We are going to deal
with it, and we are going to deal with it by consulting New Brunswickers.
Mr. Jamieson: It is not what you are going to do, it is what you have not done for seven years that
New Brunswickers are concerned about. According to scientists throughout our world, the most
daunting problem our planet faces is the cause and effect of global warming. From changes in
weather patterns to the rising water levels due to the melting of our polar ice caps, nothing more
important or more significant could affect the survival of life on this planet as we know it. We need
to lower the greenhouse gas emissions throughout our world, our country, and our province.
014 10:55
The fact that the federal government is retreating from the stand that Canada made with the Kyoto
agreement is unbelievable and embarrassing. In a world where our future depends on what we do
today, the provincial Minister of the Environment embracing the government of Canada on this
stand is beyond reason. My question is: Is the Minister of the Environment truly aware of the impact
of global warming? Is he really up to the job of protecting, enforcing, and establishing standards that
will reduce the impact that our province is having on this planet’s air quality? I do not believe that
he realizes the seriousness of this problem. It is not a joke, and he should answer in a serious
manner.
Hon. Mr. Holder: I know that this is a serious issue. We, on this side of the House, all agree that
it is a serious issue. That is why we made it one of our five priorities, because we know that it is a
priority of New Brunswickers. The member mentions my comments with respect to the federal
government. This is an issue to which we need to find a global solution. It makes no sense to have
targets that we do not reach. We need to have a solution in place that gets results, and that is exactly
what we want to do. We want to work with the federal government to deal with that. We also want
to work with all of our stakeholders in New Brunswick. This is a serious issue. The fact of the matter
is that we know that global warming is happening at a far faster pace than we ever dreamed it was.
We know that. No one on this side of the House is denying that. Nobody at the federal government,
quite frankly, is denying that. We know that it is a serious issue, and we are going to deal with it.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 7/12
Mr. Jamieson: It is a serious issue, and the minister opposite is saying to Canada and to New
Brunswick: Lower the standards. The standards are too high. We need to lower the standards. That
is the problem with this government: Lower the standards, and go right to the bottom. What we are
saying to New Brunswickers, as an opposition party—and we have been saying it for a number of
years now—is that we need to address this problem of global warming. We need to lower emissions,
and we need to bring in new, effective standards. This government and this minister are not up to
the task of lowering emissions and bringing in new standards. If the minister were up to that, he
would have done it. If he is, he should stop following in the footsteps of the previous minister in
doing nothing.
Hon. Mr. Holder: I have never made any statement that we want to lower standards. Nobody on
this side of the House has ever made any such statement. If the member opposite can find a time
when I suggested that we lower standards, he should tell me. I will not accept lowering standards.
I want to raise standards. That is why I am proud that the federal government is in Europe right now,
trying to find ways that we can get other countries to comply. That is our position. The member
cannot find one single statement where I ever said that we should lower standards.
Mr. Jamieson: In answering the previous question that I asked the minister, he said that the
standards were too high for the federal government and that they needed to be lowered. That was
what he said. He is asking me where I can find a statement that he made, and he made it in his
previous answer, when I asked him the question.
Mr. Speaker: I ask members of the House, once again, when I recognize a member who has the
floor and who asks a question, to please respect the member, as he has the floor to ask a question.
Mr. Jamieson: The targets have been set by the previous Liberal government. The federal
government is now lowering the targets. The standards are being lowered, and this minister supports
and embraces the federal government in its stand. He should be fighting like they are in Quebec to
make New Brunswick a forerunner in protecting this planet, which is an important thing. Our
emissions are too high all over the province. This minister needs to set standards, put them in place,
and make sure that they are enforced.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I think something needs to be said very clearly. The government of New
Brunswick, with the regional plan of the New England Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers,
has embarked on lowering emissions in New Brunswick. Our commitment, over the next five years,
is to have the largest reduction of air and water pollution in Canada. The members across can stand
up in this House and yell as loud as they want. It will not reduce CO2 emissions in this province. The
clear action from this government has lowered CO2 emissions in New Brunswick.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 8/12
015 11:00
I would really like the opposition Liberals to tell us how buying CO2 credits from Russia—sending
money to Russia to buy CO2 credits—will reduce CO2 emissions in Canada. How will that help us
reduce our greenhouse gas emissions? It will not. It will only transfer money to another country.
Mr. S. Graham: Since the Premier chose to respond to this, I think it is fair to ask him one other
question on this issue. One year ago, the Premier attended meetings with the regional ministers and
state governors on this important issue. At that time, he committed New Brunswick to bring forward
its standards for the reduction of greenhouse gas. A year has now passed, and at the last meeting,
which was last week, and at which the Premier was in attendance, he stated that New Brunswick has
still not established the targets, and that there would be a follow-up meeting with the Ministers of
Energy. My question to you, Mr. Premier, is this: One year after signing an important agreement,
why did you choose to delay bringing forward targets which could have been implemented at that
meeting, where New Brunswick could have taken a leadership role?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I am glad that the Leader of the Opposition realized that I am here. I am here to
answer questions every day. I welcome the question from the Leader of the Opposition, because I
think that these debates are important. The actions we have already taken, as a government, to
reduce greenhouse gasses, are important. We have reduced certain emissions in New Brunswick,
some very significantly. We have set, with the New England governors and the Eastern Canadian
Premiers, targets that go beyond Kyoto, but it will take a little bit more time to get there. That is the
approach that we have taken. It is a regional approach. We have made decisions, as a government,
to look into the future to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. When we made the decision to refurbish
the Point Lepreau nuclear power station, that was a decision to maintain the production of electricity
and energy, without creating more CO2. Nuclear is a very important option to maintain low CO2
emissions. That is why the government of New Brunswick made the decision to proceed with the
refurbishment of Point Lepreau.
Power Rebate
Mr. MacIntyre: I want to say, first of all, that it was the Liberals who introduced the Clean Air Act
and the Clean Water Act, with some of the most stringent regulations in Canada. I am very
concerned that air quality is starting to deteriorate. I think we really need to clamp down on this
trend. That is just a statement from me.
My question, however, is for the Minister of Energy. The application of the HST rebate on
electricity from NB Power has not been explained to the public or to this House. Whether or not it
will be an at-source rebate or some other method is yet to be determined. July 1 is less than two
months away, and we have yet to see how New Brunswickers will access this program. I have a very
simple question for the Minister of Energy. Will this rebate on electricity be at source, or something
else? If not at source, then how will it be done?
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 9/12
Hon. Mr. Lord: I want to follow up on the comment made by the member for Saint John
Champlain. As a government, we are committed to the reduction of air pollution. We have made
decisions to reduce air pollution in the province of New Brunswick, and specifically in the city of
Saint John. One of the decisions we made, which the Liberals like to criticize, was the decision to
refurbish and renovate Coleson Cove. One of the great benefits of Coleson Cove was to clean up the
air in Saint John. We have seen the benefits, and we will continue.
Our government knows that the people of New Brunswick want to breathe clean air and drink clean
water. That is why our government has, in recent years, adopted the most stringent regulations in
Canada to protect drinking water. We intend to continue to protect drinking water for the citizens
of New Brunswick. We will continue to make the necessary investments to make sure that the water
is clean when people drink it, and that the water is treated before it goes back into the ecosystem.
Those are our government’s commitments. That is why one of the Five in Five Initiatives is to make
New Brunswick the clean province. We are going beyond the talk of the nineties to the actions of
the 21st century, which are led by . . .
Mr. MacIntyre: I wonder if that was the answer to my question. I cannot see it here. The
application of the HST rebate on electricity from NB Power has not been explained to the public or
to this House. Whether or not it will be an at-source rebate, or some other method, has yet to be
determined.
016 11:05
July 1 is less than two months away, and New Brunswickers still do not know how to access the
program. I have a very simple question for the minister—the same question as before. Will this
rebate on electricity be at-source, or will it be something else? If it is not at-source, how will you
do it?
Hon. Ms. Fowlie: That tax rebate was actually part of the Department of Finance, but one of the
things I will say is that we are working to try to find the best way. We know that a rebate at the
source is an ideal way to go, but I have met with some small individual companies that have heating
oil, and it would be difficult for them, because, as you are aware, we cannot just remove the HST.
It has to be a rebate, because of the federal-provincial agreements that are in place. We are trying
to look for the most economical way to do this, not only for the province, but for the people who are
getting the rebate and for the small companies that are affected by it.
Mr. MacIntyre: My question, then, is for the Minister of Finance. An at-source rebate may cause
some difficulties with regard to any agreement with our federal partners on consumption and income
taxes. The collection and rebating of an at-source rebate may not be practical for New Brunswickers
or for New Brunswick ratepayers. Then, you have to take into consideration other companies like
Saint John Energy that administers a program; I think Perth-Andover also has one.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 10/12
I am concerned that we have not completed the necessary due diligence on this file. We are two
months away from the date when you said you were going to introduce this program, Mr. Minister.
Could you describe what the parameters of the at-source rebate will be or how you are going to do
it?
L’hon. M. Volpé : Avant de donner des détails, une chose est claire, c’est que les Libéraux ont voté
contre. C’est clair. Aujourd’hui, le chef de l’opposition parle de donner un crédit sur la TVH, mais
les Libéraux ont voté contre. À savoir quel système on utilisera pour donner l’argent, le rabais de
TVH, je réponds ceci : Il y a déjà un système en place pour le mazout, qui fonctionne très bien. On
reçoit la demande, et le chèque est envoyé quelques jours plus tard. À court terme, on peut
certainement utiliser le même processus sans aucun problème. À long terme, on a toujours dit que
l’intention du gouvernement est de trouver la façon la plus efficace et la plus économique de livrer
le service.
L’opposition semble être inquiète. À court terme, à partir du 1er juillet, les gens pourront commencer
à avoir un rabais. Ils recevront leur facture du mois de juillet au mois d’août, j’imagine,
probablement au milieu août. Il y a quand même encore du temps. À court terme, il y a déjà un
système en place au ministère des Finances qui donne un rabais aux gens. Le chèque de 100 $ à
200 $ est envoyé pour le mazout. Le même système peut très facilement être utilisé. Une chose est
claire : L’engagement est que les gens recevront la partie de la TVH.
Mr. S. Graham: What the Minister of Finance is admitting this morning is the exact opposite of
what he stated in the first question period when we asked whether there would be an at-source
rebate. It is going to require legislative changes for NB Power, because, clearly, right now, they are
required by law to collect the entire provincial portion of the HST.
My question to the minister is this: He is announcing this morning that come July 1, New
Brunswickers are going to have to apply for a rebate on the HST, undergoing unnecessary and
cumbersome paperwork, as opposed to this government having the fortitude to bring forward the
legislative changes that will give NB Power the opportunity to deduct at source. Why is the minister
not bringing forward the legislative changes?
L’hon. M. Volpé : J’imagine que, si on apportait le changement, les Libéraux voteraient contre. Ils
ont toujours voté contre. Il y a une chose que le chef de l’opposition n’a pas comprise.
NB Power is not the only one. We also have Enbridge, Saint John Energy, Perth-Andover, and
Edmundston. They are all part of it.
L’hon. M. Volpé : On doit rejoindre toutes ces industries. On est en train d’évaluer la façon la plus
efficace et économique d’envoyer l’argent. À court terme, je l’ai dit aux médias il y a deux mois et
je n’ai pas changé d’idée, on a un système en place qui fonctionne déjà sur le rabais pour le mazout.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 11/12
Les Libéraux ont aussi voté contre ce programme. C’est un engagement, les gens recevront la partie
de la TVH sur tous les produits.
017 11:10
Le problème ou le défi, c’est que certaines personnes peuvent utiliser plus d’un produit. Une maison
peut utiliser le mazout, l’électricité et avoir un foyer qui chauffe au propane ou au gaz naturel. Alors,
c’est trois factures. Comment peut-on s’assurer d’avoir la façon la plus efficace pour livrer cet
argent aux consommateurs? On est en train d’évaluer cela. À court terme, on peut certainement
utiliser la formule existante.
Mr. S. Graham: The minister is stating today that he does not have the ability, with private sector
companies, to implement . . .
Mr. Speaker: Question period has expired. I recognize the Minister of Education, who has a
response to a question that was asked.
Éducation
L’hon. M. Williams : J’ai indiqué à la députée de Baie-de-Miramichi que je me renseignerais sur
les questions qu’elle a posées le 19 mai au sujet des camps estivaux d’immersion en français.
Premièrement, j’aimerais préciser que le district scolaire 2 continue effectivement à offrir un camp
estival de français aux élèves, mais que le camp a été déménagé du camp Boisjoli à Saint-Martin.
Le camp de français est accessible aux élèves de la 4e, 5e et 6e année. Les organisatrices et
organisateurs du camp signalent que le nombre d’élèves de 7e et 8e année qui veulent y participer
a diminué au fil des années. Ils ont donc mis l’accent sur les niveaux inférieurs mais ils acceptent
un nombre restreint d’élèves de la 7e et 8e année qui veulent y participer.
Deuxièmement, le ministère de l’Éducation investit davantage de fonds dans le programme estival
de français à l’Université de Moncton pour qu’un plus grand nombre d’élèves puissent participer
au camp. Cette année, un montant de 300 000 $ sera investi dans le programme, ce qui permettra
à 90 élèves d’y participer. Cela représente une augmentation d’environ 127 000 $ par rapport à
l’investissement destiné à 60 élèves au cours des années écoulées. Le programme estival de français
existe à l’Université de Moncton depuis la fin des années 70. Il a subi de nombreux changements
depuis sa création. Initialement, le programme ne s’adressait qu’aux élèves du programme de
français de base. Toutefois, la croissance du nombre d’élèves inscrits au programme d’immersion
française dans la province a bientôt assuré un meilleur équilibre entre les élèves du programme de
français de base et les élèves du programme d’immersion en français.
Finalement, tout en maintenant notre soutien au programme d’immersion en français, nous estimons
qu’il est essentiel de donner un soutien additionnel aux élèves du programme de français de base.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
May 24, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 24 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\37 2006-05-24 BL\37 2006-05-24 BL.wpd 12/12
En conséquence, les places au programme d’été sont attribuées à raison de 60 places pour les élèves
du programme de base et à 30 places pour les élèves en immersion française.
M C. Robichaud : Je remercie le ministre de l’Éducation de m’avoir me donné ces réponses. La
question était également au prorata. Dans le district de Moncton, y aurait-il des possibilités d’avoir
une augmentation des élèves en immersion? Il y a un pourcentage plus élevé d’enfants en immersion
qu’en français langue seconde dans le district scolaire 2. Même si les 60 places pour les élèves en
français de base ne sont pas remplies, pour quelles raisons les élèves en immersion ne peuvent-ils
pas y entrer?
L’hon. M. Williams : Comme je l’ai mentionné, je pense que tous les éléments sont considérés. La
députée apporte un excellente point. Je pense qu’il faut s’assurer que tous les gens peuvent y
participer. Toutefois, comme on l’a indiqué, on a augmenté les fonds au programme. Je peux assurer
à la députée que tous les efforts seront mis en place pour s’assurer que le nombre maximal d’élèves
peuvent participer au programme.