QUESTION PERIOD AT THE NEW BRUNSWICK LEGISLATURE!! < Mardi >

STB_2519, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006

S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 1/10
016 14:10
Federal Funding
Mr. S. Graham: My question this afternoon is for the Premier. Federal news reports have indicated
that a considerable portion of Stephen Harper’s budget, which is being presented today in the House
of Commons, will be focusing on the environment and on building on the legacy of former Prime
Minister Brian Mulroney. My question to the Premier this afternoon pertains to the fact that two of
the largest environmental projects in this province which require funding from the federal
government are the restoration of the Petitcodiac River and the cleanup of Saint John Harbour.
This Saturday, Prime Minister Harper was in New Brunswick, and we welcome the fact that he was
here. At the same time, I would like to ask the Premier this afternoon: Can he tell the House whether
he received confirmation from Prime Minister Harper that there would be funding in today’s budget
for the cleanup of Saint John Harbour?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I will certainly not give any details of the budget that will be tabled today, because
I have no details of what will be tabled in the budget today. The new Minister of Finance will table
his budget this afternoon. I wait with anticipation to hear what will be in that budget. Of one thing
I am certain: It will be a great budget for Canadians.
Mr. S. Graham: Clearly, after spending a number of hours with the Prime Minister on Saturday
evening, the Premier has a moral responsibility to give some degree of indication that there is going
to be federal funding available for these two important projects. My question to the Premier this
afternoon is this: On January 16, 2006, the Prime Minister, who was then Leader of the
Opposition—Stephen Harper—stated: We’ll do it. We’ve made a clear commitment. It’s within our
environmental and infrastructure budget. That was the statement from the Prime Minister on January
16, 2006, so the Prime Minister is aware of this issue.
My question to you is this, Mr. Premier: Did you press the Prime Minister on Saturday night,
stressing that this was an important issue for the people of New Brunswick, and asking whether it
would be included in today’s budget? That is what we want to know. Did you make the pitch, and
did you succeed in having it included?
Hon. Mr. Lord: One thing we know is that the Leader of the Opposition was incapable of getting
any money from the previous federal government, for any project. As we know, the previous Liberal
government was incapable of pressing any issue with the previous federal Liberal government. For
instance, did they get any money for the Saint John Harbour cleanup? No, they did not. Did they get
any money for the Petitcodiac River cleanup? No, they did not. Did they get any money for the
Trans-Canada Highway twinning between Moncton and Fredericton? No, they did not.
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 2/10
One thing is certain: The Prime Minister was in New Brunswick again. I am glad he was back in our
province. When he was here on his first trip as Prime Minister, we made an announcement to fund
the first steps of the harbour cleanup, and I can assure you that our government is committed to
funding other steps down the road.
Mr. S. Graham: The Premier is correct in his response this afternoon. Yes, we were incapable,
because the Premier forgets a very important fact: We were not in government. If the Premier wants
to give us that opportunity, let him call an election this fall. The most this Premier can do is to blame
the opposition because he has failed to secure the necessary funding for harbour cleanup.
017 14:15
The option remains: Let the people of New Brunswick decide, on a fixed date this fall, who can best
govern New Brunswick. My question to the Premier is very clear. If he is saying that he is waiting
to see what is in this budget for harbour cleanup today, if he has failed to make the pitch and failed
to succeed in landing the funding that is necessary, if he is saying that his budget includes funding,
can he give us a commitment today of how much money is in this budget as the provincial portion
for harbour cleanup?
Hon. Mr. Lord: Maybe the Leader of the Opposition should look back at the platforms of the
Liberal Party in the past. The Liberals, including some who are sitting right in the front row of the
Liberals today—maybe one or two actually sat in the front row here between 1995 and
1999—campaigned on harbour cleanup back in 1995, and they delivered zero for Saint John from
1995 to 1999 for harbour cleanup. Nothing would change this year if the Liberals were given a third,
fourth, or fifth chance. They failed to deliver in the past, and they will fail to deliver if the
opportunity ever presents itself again. We have delivered, and we will continue to deliver for Saint
John and harbour cleanup. I am willing. I have met with the mayor and told him that our government
is willing to sign an agreement with the city of Saint John, committing the government of New
Brunswick to $20 million over the next decade for harbour cleanup.
Mr. S. Graham: As we continue to allow 16 million L of raw sewage each day to flow into the
harbour, $20 million on an $88-million project over the next 10 years is unacceptable.
Environment
Since the Premier was not able to convince his federal counterpart in Ottawa that this project is a
priority for our province and he has not indicated that it will be included in today’s budget, my next
question pertains to the restoration of the Petitcodiac River. When Prime Minister Harper was in the
Delta Hotel in Moncton on Saturday evening, all he had to do was look out the window and see the
importance of bringing forward a concrete plan for the restoration of the Petitcodiac River. My
question to the Premier is this: Has your government submitted a proposal to the federal government
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 3/10
pertaining to the restoration of the Petitcodiac River and the cleanup of the Saint John harbour?
What actual documentation have you submitted to request federal funding?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The provincial government and I, in meetings with the Prime Minister, have raised
the issue of harbour cleanup, and I have raised the issue of the Petitcodiac River. In fact, we have
been able to obtain some federal funding for the harbour cleanup. The Leader of the Opposition may
say that $20 million is not a lot of money. That is because the Leader of the Opposition likes
spending other people’s money. That is because he is risky and reckless in his approach to public
policy. They like to say that $20 million is not a lot of money, but it is $20 million more than what
was delivered by the Liberals when they had a chance to clean up the Saint John harbour. They
delivered zero dollars for the people of Saint John, and now, $20 million is not enough. It is always
that way with Liberals. It is never enough unless they get the money for themselves.
Mr. S. Graham: May I remind the Premier this afternoon that it was the former Liberal government
that committed the necessary funding, approximately 41% of the federal funding necessary to bring
the project up to date, where it is today. The real question pertaining to the Premier this afternoon
is the fact that he has not been able to get federal funding for harbour cleanup. He has not been able
to get the federal funding for the restoration of the Petitcodiac River, and he has the audacity to
stand up here today and say that $20 million is what is going to be put in place over a 10-year
period. We are saying that we have a responsibility to the environment to make the necessary
investments.
You callously said that we do not respect the taxpayers’ money. Well, it is you, Mr. Premier, who
is spending the taxpayers’ money, trying to influence votes and buy votes with people on this side
of the House. We very clearly welcome an election. The people of New Brunswick will decide who
should govern the province. Make no mistake about it: Environment will be a key issue.
018 14:20
Hon. Mr. Lord: I know that the Leader of the Opposition likes to throw out accusations in this
House, and I expect that will continue for quite some time. We are here to deal with the issues of
importance to the people of New Brunswick. I welcome the fact that there is a new federal
government in Ottawa. With this new government, we have replaced a relationship of talk down,
confrontation that we were faced with before, with one of a new partnership in progress. Maybe the
Leader of the Opposition was not around on the day the Prime Minister came here. We did announce
funding for Saint John Harbour cleanup. For the first time, the three levels of government were
standing on the same stage saying yes to harbour cleanup.
We have also been able to obtain three-way funding of $13 million for a stadium in Moncton. We
have also been able to obtain a $400-million highway agreement for the national highway system
in New Brunswick. That is real commitment.
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 4/10
Mr. S. Graham: The devil will be in the details. Today, New Brunswickers will determine if this
Premier was successful in securing the necessary funding under this new federal budget. The
question the Premier will have to answer is: Will there be money set aside today in the federal
budget for harbour cleanup? He has not answered that question. Will there be money set aside for
the restoration of the Petitcodiac River? In fact, the member for Moncton North had said three years
ago that a trust fund should be established, so that the province would be able to move quickly when
the federal government came to the table. We will wait to see about that.
Employment
My last question is, While Prime Minister Harper was in New Brunswick on Saturday, did he give
any clear commitment as to what new public service jobs will be put in the Miramichi to replace the
200 jobs that will be eliminated in that city? The question I am asking today is: If the Premier could
not get a clear commitment on the two environmental issues, what clear commitment did he get for
the 200 well-paying jobs in the Miramichi and the people who depend on them for their livelihood?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I want to correct the Leader of the Opposition, who is wrong again. He is wrong
when he states that the federal government did not make a commitment to harbour cleanup. It has,
and the Prime Minister announced that commitment himself. There is provincial, federal, and
municipal money going toward harbour cleanup, and the funding is in place. We have also made a
commitment for a longer term arrangement which would include the city of Saint John. We want
the federal government to be onboard for that as well.
I have raised the issue of the long-gun registry with the Prime Minister. Unlike the opposition, we
have a clear position on the long-gun registry. We are opposed to the gun registry program that was
put in place by the federal Liberals. It wasted so much money that they could have cleaned up the
harbour and the Petitcodiac River, along with completing the highway between Moncton and
Fredericton, and still have lots of money left over.
Our position is clear. We also want the federal government to maintain jobs in Miramichi. Those
jobs are not yet eliminated because a decision has not been made by the federal government. The
legislation has not been changed. Our position is crystal clear: Let’s get rid of the long-gun registry
and let’s keep jobs in New Brunswick.
Home Heating Oil Benefit Program
Mr. Doherty: We have recently introduced An Act to Amend the New Brunswick Income Tax Act,
whereby we are seeking to extend the deadline for the home heating rebate for customers heating
with heating fuel. This program was announced during the by-election in Saint John in November
2005. Unfortunately, the introduction of Bill 57 was not met with as much enthusiasm as we had
otherwise expected. However, just this morning, we heard on the CBC that consideration was now
being given to the extension of this program.
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 5/10
My question to the Minister of Finance is quite simple: Why would he wait until the deadline has
passed, and after we introduced Bill 57, before he started considering our idea? It is important to be
proactive and timely when it comes to the subsidization of our low- and fixed-income families. Why
did he wait?
L’hon. M. Volpé : Premièrement, une fois de plus, on a un député qui est mal et dans l’erreur.
L’engagement n’a pas été pris durant les élections en 2005 mais au mois d’août. Une fois on doit
corriger les parlementaires de l’opposition.
019 14:25
De ce côté de la Chambre, l’engagement du gouvernement a été de donner un rabais aux gens qui
utilisaient du mazout. Des termes ont été établis, et des gens ont fait une demande. De ce côté de la
Chambre, contrairement aux Libéraux qui étaient au pouvoir il y a quelques années, nous avons
respecté notre engagement. Je me rappelle très bien que, lorsque j’étais à l’opposition, le
gouvernement en place avait pris un engagement pour réduire l’impôt sur le revenu des particuliers
au cours de l’élection de 1995. Il n’a jamais respecté cet engagement. De ce côté de la Chambre,
nous avons pris un engagement et nous l’avons respecté. Ce que nous avons dit, c’est que nous
étions prêts à considérer à allonger la période jusqu’à la fin juin. De ce côté de la Chambre, nous
avons respecté l’engagement qui était d’aller jusqu’à la fin du mois d’avril.
Mr. Doherty: Do I understand from the response that the minister is considering extending the
program until July 1?
L’hon. M. Volpé : D’après ce que je comprends, il y a un projet de loi qui sera présenté par
l’opposition, et nous allons avoir la chance de le débattre dans quelques minutes probablement.
Donc, nous aurons la chance de donner des détails. Étant donné que l’opposition nous donne un peu
la chance de revoir les engagements du gouvernement précédent — et nous avons parlé ce matin de
l’enseignement supérieur —, je demanderais à tous les parlementaires du côté de l’opposition de
conseiller leur chef lorsqu’il prend des engagements. En effet, de 1995 à 1997, un engagement de
la part du gouvernement libéral avait été fait d’aider les collèges communautaires, mais il a réduit
de 2,2 % les fonds destinés aux collèges communautaires. Une fois de plus, l’ancien gouvernement
libéral a renié ses promesses. Que le député de Saint John Harbour vienne nous donner des conseils
comment respecter nos engagements… Eh bien, nous avons respecté notre engagement de l’automne
dernier qui indiquait jusqu’au 31 avril. Cet après-midi durant le débat, nous allons prendre en
considération, si nous allons allonger la période.
Mr. Doherty: We look forward to the debate. It is also important that this program be effectively
utilized. According to the Department of Finance, there has been only about 50% participation. This
is barely a passing grade. In addition to extending this program, Bill 57 also looks at extending the
home heating rebate to other sources of fuel. The Department of Finance claims that the extension
of this program is under consideration. Are we to assume that with the extension of this program to
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 6/10
July 2006, the Minister of Finance is also considering our idea, per Bill 57, to open discussions on
alternate forms of heating? As you know, three-quarters of New Brunswickers heat their homes with
baseboard electrical heating. Once again, I encourage this government and the Premier to take our
ideas, if it means that New Brunswickers, especially those who are living in poverty and on fixed
incomes, are positively affected.
L’hon. M. Volpé : Ce que l’on voit une fois de plus, c’est un groupe de l’opposition en manque
d’idées, et ce, à un tel point, que ces gens prennent nos idées et essaient de se ramasser du mérite.
Je viens d’entendre le député d’en face nous dire que l’idée du rabais sur le mazout venait de leur
côté. Une fois de plus, c’est faux. Cela a été annoncé par le présent gouvernement, et nous avons
respecté notre engagement. Justement, en fin de semaine, j’ai vu que le chef de l’opposition a
rencontré un groupe de personnes âgées. Là, il dit aux personnes âgées : Si nous sommes élus, on
va vous laisser vos maisons et on va réduire les taux par mois. Cela a été annoncé par notre
gouvernement. C’est une honte. Il y a un groupe de gens à l’opposition qui sont en manque d’idées.
Il y a un vide intellectuel. Les gens du Nouveau-Brunswick commencent à se rendre compte ce qu’il
y a de l’autre côté de la Chambre : un vide intellectuel et un manque flagrant d’idées.
Gambling
Mr. Murphy: Gambling in New Brunswick has become very problematic. We have many casinos
under a number of roofs, with bars assembling themselves with different licenses. We have a Texas
Hold’em problem. We have the crack cocaine of VLTs out there that takes large bills. We have a
dying horse racing industry. We have Internet gambling. All these things have come about to a point
of crisis.
020 14:30
I have a question for the Minister of Finance. I know that gambling is something that the
government is very worried about, but it is also something that it has to have a deadline on. It is a
very simple question. Will the Minister of Finance advise this House as to whether the gambling
strategy study that has been undertaken for so very long will be released by June 1 of this year?
L’hon. M. Volpé : La réponse sera donnée lorsque le travail sera terminé. L’engagement du
gouvernement actuel est de prendre une approche prudente et de vérifier les cas. À plusieurs
reprises, nous avons apporté de l’information que nous avons évaluée. Il y a un autre document de
travail auquel nous sommes en train de travailler et que nous apporterons au comité des priorités
pour évaluation. Il semble y avoir des endroits où nous pourrions bouger un peu plus rapidement.
À d’autres endroits, il y a encore des questions à poser. Cependant, notre intention est de mettre en
place une politique du jeu au Nouveau-Brunswick qui aura un impact positif sur les gens du
Nouveau-Brunswick.
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 7/10
Mr. Murphy: I have no doubts as to the good intentions of the minister or even the government in
this regard, but the road to hell is paved with good intentions. The difficulty here is that this has
taken so very long. While it takes that long, people are losing their lives in every fashion, and
families are suffering. Once again, I am urging the government to move ahead quickly on this. With
regard to the parameters of the study, will the minister confirm whether they have excluded private
investment and private enterprise in favour of the Atlantic Lottery Corporation being involved in
the entire strategy or whether it is a combination of both?
L’hon. M. Volpé : Pour être bien clair, de ce côté-ci de la Chambre, nous pensons qu’une politique
du jeu bien réglementée est la meilleure approche. Donc, nous continuerons à évaluer les différentes
options. Je peux comprendre que c’est frustrant pour le député de Moncton-Nord, qui possède, luimême,
des chevaux et qui voudrait que nous poussions le plus rapidement possible afin de pouvoir
assurer la participation de ses chevaux sur une piste de course. Toutefois, de ce côté-ci de la
Chambre, nous prendrons le temps nécessaire de nous assurer que la politique que nous mettrons
en place sera la meilleure pour les gens du Nouveau-Brunswick.
Mr. Murphy: This morning, I was at the barn shoveling horse manure. I never get homesick when
I come up here, because I can smell the same thing when this government starts answering
questions. My question to the Minister of Finance is this: Will he simply confirm to this House . . .
(Interjection.)
Mr. Murphy: Mr. Speaker, can I get the attention . . .
Mr. Speaker: Order, please. I recognize the member for Moncton North. Please have a little respect.
Mr. Murphy: Will the minister simply confirm to New Brunswick that the status quo with regard
to the number of VLTs out there and in all these mini-casinos is simply unacceptable as it is now?
L’hon. M. Volpé : Justement, nous voulons changer le statu quo. Ce ne sont pas seulement les
casinos situés dans des hippodromes que nous sommes en train d’évaluer. Nous regardons tout le
côté des tournois de poker, les bingos et tout ce qui touche au jeu au Nouveau-Brunswick et dans
les secteurs où il y a vraiment des défis. Nous voulons nous assurer d’avoir vraiment la réponse qui
convient aux gens du Nouveau-Brunswick. Nous avons des dossiers dans les secteurs… Je vais vous
donner un exemple. Du côté des bingos au Nouveau-Brunswick, il y a des endroits où il n’y a pas
assez de bénévoles pour s’occuper des bingos. Nous prenons le secteur privé. Cela a causé des
problèmes car les bénévoles n’ont pas reçu l’argent qu’ils devaient recevoir. Il y a des cas en cour
présentement. Donc, il faut s’assurer d’avoir une politique de jeu qui protège les gens du Nouveau-
Brunswick.
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 8/10
J’entends le député de Moncton-Nord nous dire qu’il semblerait qu’il a brassé du fumier ce matin
et je crois qu’il en brasse beaucoup plus de son côté de la Chambre. Pour lui, je pense que c’est une
pratique. Ensuite, il vient continuer son travail à la Chambre.
Conflict of Interest
Mr. Arseneault: My question this morning is for the Deputy Premier. Could the Deputy Premier
please state to the Legislature the relationship between the Deputy Premier and the company
Grama’s Bake Shop Ltd. on 767 Central Street, in Centreville, New Brunswick?
Hon. D. Graham: I can assure the honourable member on the other side that I do have that company
in blind trust.
Mr. Arseneault: The New Brunswick Business Corporations Act Form 24.2 filed in 2005 indicates
that the Deputy Premier is one of two directors of Grama’s Bake Shop Ltd. in Centreville, New
Brunswick. If the company is held in blind trust, the Deputy Premier cannot be a director of this
company.
021 14:35
My second question to the Deputy Premier follows. Since 2003, the Deputy Premier billed over
$2 300 in ministerial expense claims for goods and services obtained at Grama’s Bake Shop. The
Members’ Conflict of Interest Act clearly states that no member of the executive council may engage
in the management of a business carried on by a corporation, and that no member should be making
decisions that result in personal benefit. The Deputy Premier’s business received over $2 300 in
ministerial expenses. Can the Deputy Premier tell us why he broke the law?
Hon. D. Graham: I can inform all members of the House that the company is in blind trust. I
certainly do not do any day-to-day operations. I am a full-time MLA, and I certainly take my job
as minister very seriously. I do, on the odd occasion, on a Sunday, have a meal there.
Mr. Arseneault: My final question for today is to the Deputy Premier. Given that he is the director
of a business, in contravention of the Members’ Conflict of Interest Act, and given that he is
funneling taxpayers’ dollars to his business through ministerial expense claims, which is also in
contravention of the Members’ Conflict of Interest Act, has the Deputy Premier discussed these
matters with the Conflict of Interest Commissioner? Did he receive permission from the
commissioner to undertake these activities?
Hon. D. Graham: I certainly meet with the Conflict of Interest Commissioner on a yearly basis, and
I have done so since the Act was put together. The commissioner is certainly very well aware that
the company is in blind trust. We do, actually, have a discussion every year about how the company
is operated, and about how successful it has been. I must remind the members that I started that
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 9/10
company in 1981. In September of this year it will be 25 years. I think that is pretty good—25 years,
for a small business.
RCMP
Mr. Allaby: My question is to the Minister of Public Safety. Is the minister aware that the RCMP
house and office on Deer Island has been condemned?
Hon. Mr. Steeves: That would be under the day-to-day operation, which is an RCMP matter. I leave
that entirely up to the RCMP, whether the house is condemned, or whether they have moved to new
offices, or whatever.
Mr. Allaby: This is the minister who is responsible for public safety in New Brunswick. I should
think he would have an interest in the matter. Deer Island is isolated. Then the RCMP office and
house are housed in the same building, and the building has been condemned, with the materials
moved to St. George. The RCMP officer and her husband have to find another location in which to
reside. This is an intolerable situation. This minister is responsible for public safety, and he is
shuffling off his responsibilities to the RCMP. What is he going to do to ensure that the RCMP have
the resources to fix this problem?
Hon. Mr. Steeves: I am so pleased that he has asked what we are going to do to make sure that they
will have the resources. I might add that when you were in government, you reduced the resources
to the RCMP. I am pleased to say that since this government has taken office, we have improved the
RCMP and their resources. I will tell you that it is a day-to-day operation. The RCMP will make
those decisions, and if they feel they want to put another office on that island, then they will do that.
That is a day-to-day operation. I can assure the member—and he knows full well—that they did not
move because of a lack of resources. They moved because there was something wrong with the
building.
Mr. Allaby: This is the whole point. We have a situation here. The minister, first of all, says that
he does not have anything to do with the day-to-day operations. Then, he comments on the
resources, or lack thereof. Now, he says that they did not move for lack of resources, but because
the building has been condemned. Where are the resources to fix the problem? You cannot talk out
of both sides of your mouth. What is the minister going to do to ensure that the RCMP get this
problem fixed?
Hon. Mr. Steeves: First of all, I did not say . . . I said that they had the resources. We did improve
the resources. It was your government that took the resources away, many years ago.
ORAL QUESTIONS 22 QUESTIONS ORALES
May 2, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 2 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\28 2006-05-02 BL\28 2006-05-02 BL.wpd 10/10
022 14:40
I will tell you that we have put them back in, but it is a day-to-day operation. They did not move
because of a lack of resources. They moved because the building was condemned. It is entirely up
to the RCMP to do that and to make those decisions.
Support Orders
Mr. Lamrock: My question is, again, for the Minister of Justice. Last week, I raised an issue that
has been raised by family lawyers across this province about the fact that too many custodial parents
are not getting the help they and their kids need, because this government has unacceptably long
wait times to get interim support orders in place. At the time, the Minister of Justice was not able
to tell me what his department is doing, other than to say that it is very, very concerned.
I want to bring another suggestion forward. Some family lawyers have suggested changing the law
to allow for real costs against those who prolong the process, those parents who drag out the process
to try to get out of paying. It would not cost the government any money, but it might be a
disincentive to things that tie up the court system. Between this and masters, we have suggested two
ideas that do not cost any money, but which might help parents and kids get the money they deserve.
My question to the minister is this: If we pledge our support to help get it done, will we see
legislation before this legislative session ends?
Hon. Mr. Fitch: I am very pleased to answer the question posed by the Justice Critic. When I took
over the portfolio, I met with a number of people who are involved in the family courts. I sat down
and talked with Judge Tuck and talked at length about the conditions and the length of time people
waited to get into court. We know about the family court’s federal appointment, and we have
exchanged letters back and forth with the minister in Ottawa.
Certainly, if opportunity allows when the House work finishes, if the critic wants to come with this
minister to Ottawa and pair with me, if the opposition wants to pair with us to do some of the work
that is for the betterment of the province, I would be more than happy to consider some of the
suggestions that have been brought forward. Our aims are the same in making sure that the public
interest is promoted here in areas that are of mutual concern for all New Brunswickers.