Friday, May 05, 2006


STB_2671, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

I enclosed more photos was nice of the woman to let me play with the dog for close to 10 minutes.

Yes, I do miss Chico.....
Picture 164
Picture 054



STA_2676, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.


Picture 094, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

NB Telegraph-Journal | Provincial News
As published on page A1/A2 on May 5, 2006

Commission outlines charges against Branch
A group of about 100 woodlot owners gathered for the public meeting

By Shannon Hagerman

BATHURST - The New Brunswick Forest Products Commission broke its silence Thursday on its investigation of a northern forestry agency once managed by Independent MLA Frank Branch.

The commission has dismissed Mr. Branch, the MLA for Nepisiguit, as board manager of the North Shore Forest Products Marketing Board and suspended 11 board members.

Bernard Valcourt, the commission chair, told about 100 private woodlot owners who gathered inside a conference centre outside Bathurst the investigation has revealed "disturbing facts" about the way the board was being run.

Mr. Valcourt said the commission launched its investigation last fall after a letter surfaced containing serious allegations of impropriety and mismanagement at the Bathurst-based wood marketing board.

Among the allegations was that the veteran MLA signed a lucrative managerial contract in 2001 with the board of directors.

The contract stipulated Mr. Branch would be eligible to receive up to $378,000 if his contract was terminated by the board before it expired in 2011.

"According to the conditions of the contract, notwithstanding the fact that Mr. Branch was terminated after one year, the board would still have to pay him nine years of salary or expenses, or $378,000," said Mr. Valcourt.

The letter alleged the contract was struck in exchange for the hiring of a board member, who Mr. Branch then asked to convince the rest of the board to sign off on the 10-year deal.

The letter also stated some board members and Mr. Branch were using their position to gain personal benefits, Mr. Valcourt said.

"The letter in question also made other allegations that Mr. Branch and other members of the board used their position to gain personal benefits to which they were not entitled, including, literally, acts of fraud," he said.

None of the allegations have been proven.

Mr. Valcourt didn't stipulate whether any of the allegations were confirmed when the commission hired retired RCMP assistant commissioner Tim Quigley and the accounting firm Deloitte & Touche to investigate the allegations.

Bathurst City Police continue to investigate the matter and have sealed the board's financial records, he said.

He declined to discuss details about the police investigation, but said the commission felt it was acting in the best interests of local woodlot owners by taking control of the local board.

The commission has named an advisory committee and will appoint new board members before December 2007 to oversee the agency.

Mr. Branch, who sat in the audience during Mr. Valcourt's 45-minute address, listened but declined to discuss the allegations in detail after the meeting ended.

He told reporters he will make a statement about the allegations later.

"I just don't want to get into direct comments now. I have made some notes. I would like to sit down and think about what took place here this evening and we'll move on from there," he said.

Speaking in French, Mr. Branch denied receiving any "gifts" while serving as manager of the local marketing board.

The local MLA had a lot of supporters in the conference room.

During his speech, Mr. Valcourt was interrupted several times by hecklers and questions.

"If you aren't interested you know what you can do," Mr. Valcourt, said as one man asked how the commission had got a copy of the letter.

When it was time for local woodlot owners to ask questions, two former board members stood at a microphone and defended their record while questioning the commission's motives for launching the investigation.

Bernard Hache, a former board member from District 10, said the commission's allegation has left a cloud over the former board.

"People think "... we filled our pockets. It's like an assault."

Mr. Hache said the board was acting in the best interests of local woodlot owners to improve the board's financial condition and to boost spending on silviculture.

"If we did little favours for Frank Branch, for all the thousands of hours he put in ".... well, all companies reward those who do things," he said. "He didn't take any money ... he might have (received) small favours, I agree."

Francois Richard, who said he works in a tree nursery the agency owns, demanded that the commission allow local woodlot owners inside the meeting to elect a new board on the spot. Mr. Richard said it is unfair for the commission to take local control of the marketing board away from private woodlot owners.

"We didn't elect you guys I don't know what you are doing up there sitting there," said Mr. Richard.

The request was denied by Mr. Valcourt, who ended the meeting.

Mr. Valcourt defended the commission's decision to take over control of the local agency on Thursday, saying the commission will restore local oversight as soon as possible.

"As soon as we can we will give back to the woodlot owners."


STB_0682, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.


May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 1/10
Children at Risk
Mr. S. Graham: For many years, a gap in social services for New Brunswickers between the ages
of 16 and 18 existed. When the current New Brunswick Family Services Act and its regulations were
established over two decades ago, the decision was taken to define a youth in care with an upper age
limit of under 16 and not to extend full social services to child clients or their families in the 16-to-
18 age group if the child applicant was not an existing client when he or she reached the age of 16.
This arrangement has contributed to several service anomalies for children in New Brunswick over
the years, including, among others, social service staff being put in the position of bending the
existing rules in order to obtain needed services for clients who, in the strictest interpretation of the
rules, would have been barred from receiving such services.
Our platform in 2003 made a serious commitment regarding a strategy for youth at risk. That is why
I was pleased to see, in this year’s speech from the throne that was delivered in December, that the
government itself committed to a strategy to deal with youth at risk, particularly those aged 16 to
18, which I am reading from the speech from the throne. My question is for the Premier this
morning. This is a very important initiative. Can the Premier update us on the strategies that he will
be proposing to deal with children at risk?
L’hon. M Dubé : Cela me fait vraiment plaisir de me lever à me la Chambre aujourd’hui pour parler
de nos adolescents. On sait qu’ils sont extrêmement importants, comme tous les enfants du
Nouveau-Brunswick. Il existe toute une gamme de services. Effectivement, nous savons qu’il y a
des améliorations à apporter aux services. Cela a été dit dans le discours du trône. Nous travaillons
à une stratégie avec nos partenaires. Cela me fera plaisir, lors de la présentation de mes prévisions
budgétaires et plus tard cette année, d’apporter des précisions aux différentes stratégies que nous
utiliserons pour améliorer les services offerts à cette clientèle extrêmement importante.
Mr. S. Graham: This is, indeed, a very important issue for children between the ages of 16 and 18.
It is no secret that our province requires a homeless strategy. We also need to look at alternative
settings for our school system, and we need to have programs in place to deal with assistance with
addictions for children between the ages of 16 and 18, who are currently falling between the cracks.
We have a social system that is not serving them.
017 11:15
We are the party that brought forward Equal Opportunity. Now is the time to also bring forward
social opportunity. That is why we are encouraged today that the government is, indeed, moving on
this initiative, which was a major component of our platform in the 2003 election.
My question to the minister today is this: Is she prepared to set up a youth-at-risk unit that will
provide a comprehensive approach to dealing with the management of each child between the ages
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 2/10
of 16 and 18? We feel that it is a sensible approach and that this strategy will go a long way toward
helping the children who are currently falling through the cracks in the system.
L’hon. M Dubé : Dans la question du chef de me l’opposition — je devrais peut-être dire les
commentaires —, il laisse sous-entendre qu’il n’y a absolument aucun service pour les adolescents
de 16 à 18 ans. Je pense que, encore là, il devrait savoir mieux, parce qu’il existe des services pour
nos adolescents. Chacun des services est certainement évalué selon les besoins individuels, c’est-àdire
selon la situation familiale de l’adolescent. Lorsqu’il y a des situations spécifiques, chaque
besoin est abordé. Lorsqu’on regarde aux politiques générales, nous avons certainement identifié
qu’il y a des améliorations à faire. C’est certainement ce que nous faisons chaque jour et ce que nous
proposons de faire tout au long de l’année pour modifier et adapter certains programmes pour
toujours mieux servir la population du Nouveau-Brunswick et certainement les familles dans le
Mr. S. Graham: Today, if a young New Brunswicker between the ages of 16 and 18 has trouble at
school or trouble at home—and perhaps it is not the fault of the parents—unfortunately, this young
child can not remain at home. It has been clear for decades that there is a gap in services for children
between the ages of 16 and 18. The government acknowledged that by including a commitment in
its throne speech—the same commitment that we provided in our platform in 2003—to help youth
at risk.
Today, we are in agreement that this issue has to be addressed. My question to the minister is this:
Over 13 months ago, your government made a clear commitment to put in place a Child and Youth
Advocate. Your Premier, instead, wanted to use this position for political gain. He and the Deputy
Premier sat down at the table to negotiate this position with the member for Fredericton North. I am
glad the member is acknowledging it today, but this position should have been filled a long time
ago. Madam Minister, would you not admit today that, indeed, a Child and Youth Advocate would
be a key component in bringing forward the policies that are needed in order to help youth at risk?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I am pleased to rise, because the Leader of the Opposition, through his lengthy
questioning, realized that he wanted to say something. What he said was incorrect, and I want to
correct it, once and for all. I never approached anyone on the other side to become the Child and
Youth Advocate, but I can say that we were approached by more than one member from the other
side, offering names for the position of Child and Youth Advocate. I think the leader needs to speak
to the member for Fredericton North, because I hope the member will at least tell the leader the
truth—that he approached the Deputy Premier, not the other way around. We have let that one go
by for a while, but if the members opposite want to keep bringing it up, let us set the record straight.
As well, with regard to the Child and Youth Advocate, we have received over 100 applications that
are being reviewed by a team of assessors. There will be interviews, and as soon as the process is
complete, we will appoint a Child and Youth Advocate.
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 3/10
Mr. S. Graham: I am glad the Premier acknowledges today that the Child and Youth Advocate will
be key to the development of the policies that are required in order to deal with youth at risk in the
province. What we would like to see today is a youth-at-risk unit to coordinate services, including
a new youth-at-risk income supplement program, a reduction of the barriers to eligibility for social
service payments to youth identified as being at risk, and development of a youth homelessness
strategy. We would also like to see the examination of best practice options for alternative learning
environments. I know that the city of Bathurst has an incredible program dealing with alternative
learning environments.
Finally, we need to see the development of a comprehensive addiction strategy. Recently, I had an
opportunity to tour the Portage centre in the Sussex area. I know the Premier himself has been there.
To see the young New Brunswickers who are dealing with the challenges of addiction reinforces our
commitment that more has to be done. Today, we know that youth at risk, between the ages of 16
and 18, are falling through the cracks.
My question to the minister is this: I have just given you five clear commitments that should be
included in your strategy. Are you prepared to look at these reasonable requests?
018 11:20
Hon. Mr. Lord: The Leader of the Opposition acknowledges that our government is doing more
than what was done before. The way that we will be able to do even more for youth at risk, for
seniors, for children, and for families who need help, is by having a stronger, thriving economy. We
need more economic success in order to fund more social progress. That is the balance that our
government has always strived for. That is why I was pleased again this morning to hear the good
news shared by the Minister of Post-Secondary Education and Training which shows that, once
again, we have reached a new height for the number of jobs in New Brunswick, with more people
working and fewer people on social assistance. That is how we can help those who are still on social
assistance, those who are still at risk. That is exactly what our government is doing. That is why
there is more funding for those who are at risk. That is why there is more funding in education. That
is why there is more funding in health care. We have more jobs than ever before because we have
lower taxes and we have fewer people on social assistance. Because the economy is stronger, the
social progress is better.
Mr. S. Graham: This is a very serious issue. If the Premier wants to have his platform today to be
all about economic development, he can raise that in statements from the minister. What we are
dealing with today is a gap that exists for services for children between the ages of 16 to 18. I am
sure that the Premier did not mean to allege today that all these children who are falling between the
cracks are on social services, because that is not the case. The case remains that there are many
families where children between the ages of 16 to 18 are not receiving the support services from
government that they should be. I am going to give the Premier some flexibility here that maybe he
did not intentionally try to say that, but that was the impression that was given.
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 4/10
The point I am making today is that we gave five clear commitments that your government should
be looking at. We also said that the Child and Youth Advocate should be directly involved in
crafting public policy that will be helping youth at risk in New Brunswick. We provided a concrete
suggestion, and we also brought forward the legislation to help implement these policy changes.
Unfortunately, the position has not been filled.
My question to the minister is this: With the five clear commitments that we have given today, will
she be willing to take that into the policy discussion?
L’hon. M Dubé : Cela me fait plaisir de prendre cette question. Je me e veux apporter certaines
précisions au grand commentaire du député de l’opposition. Cela me fait rire ce matin d’entendre
des suggestions du chef de l’opposition. On sait de ce côté-ci de la Chambre qu’ils ont négligé le
côté social pendant de nombreuses années. Pendant 12 ans, non seulement ils l’ont négligé mais ils
ont réduit dans les services. Ce matin, ils essaient de nous faire la leçon.
Je peux vous dire que nous avons d’excellents services. Nous avons de plus en plus de services. On
a des services de plus en plus intégrés avec les programmes fédéraux et provinciaux. Nous avons
des équipes en place dans chaque région qui s’assoient ensemble autour de la table pour harmoniser
justement les services pour s’assurer que les familles sont bien servies et qu’il y a des évaluations
des enfants ou des adolescents et que ceux qui ont des besoins ont les services nécessaires. Jour
après jour, nous améliorons les services, nous travaillons avec tous nos partenaires dans les
collectivités, au fédéral et dans les différents ministères du gouvernement. Nous continuons
d’améliorer les services.
Je suis heureuse au moins que le chef de l’opposition avoue ce matin que nous avons de plus en plus
de services comme le Portage C’est un excellent service que nous offrons à nos adolescents ayant
des besoins. Il y a aussi une aide au niveau de leur scolarité, lorsqu’ils vivent le traitement. Je peux
continuer, parce que la liste est tellement longue. Nous avons des services…
Résultats scolaires
Mme C. Robichaud : Mes questions sont pour le ministre de l’Éducation. Plus tôt cette semaine,
nous avons vu les résultats des tests de la 9e année en lecture et en écriture au niveau intermédiaire
du secteur anglophone. Le résultat était très décevant. Selon une étude de Statistique Canada, les
élèves francophones en milieu minoritaire ont des résultats en-dessous des élèves anglophones. Le
ministre peut-il expliquer à la Chambre comment les élèves francophones du système du secondaire
premier cycle sont évalués en écriture et en lecture? Quand pourrons-nous avons accès aux résultats?
Sont-ils aussi troublants que ceux que nous avons vus plus tôt cette semaine?
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 5/10
019 11:25
L’hon. M. Williams : En réponse à la question de la député de Baie-de-Miramichi, nous avons en
place le Plan d’apprentissage de qualité qui est justement pour aider en ce qui a trait à la lecture et
l’écriture. Le ministère travaille étroitement avec les différents districts scolaires afin de s’assurer
que des mesures et des plans sont mis en place afin que les résultats de nos élèves soient les
meilleurs possible.
M C. Robichaud : Depuis sept ans que ce gouvernement est en place et les résultats ne se me sont
pas améliorés. Il y a presque deux mois, soit le 10 mars 2006, the Atlantic Institute for Market
Studies a rendu public son rapport annuel sur les écoles secondaires du Nouveau-Brunswick. À ce
moment-là, AIMS a critiqué le Nouveau-Brunswick pour avoir abandonné les tests de niveau
provincial pour les élèves de la 11e et de la 12e année. Lors de son assemblée annuelle NBTA
débattra prochainement d’une motion pour réintroduire les examens provinciaux. Lorsque le rapport
fut publié, un porte-parole du ministre de l’Éducation a dit que la province revoyait présentement
ces évaluations et qu’elle explorait la possibilité de réintégrer les examens provinciaux au niveau
Le ministre de l’Éducation peut-il me confirmer ce matin que son ministère a complété la révision
et si ces examens seront réintroduits?
L’hon. M. Williams : En 1999, la population du Nouveau-Brunswick a donné un mandat à ce
gouvernement en éducation.
Depuis 1999, nous avons le Plan d’apprentissage de qualité qui est effectivement pour améliorer la
situation. Nous sommes très conscients des situations dont fait référence la député de Baie-de-
Miramichi, et nous avons pris des actions concrètes, justement pour aborder la question de littératie
et de lecture dans les écoles.
Le Plan d’apprentissage de qualité qui est en application depuis trois ans aura des résultats positifs
dans l’avenir. Nous sommes à l’écoute et nous avons des investissements justement pour aborder
ces situations-là. Nous allons continuer à travailler étroitement avec les conseils d’éducation, avec
les directions d’école, pour justement s’assurer que les programmes en place auront des résultats très
Recruitment of Doctors
Mr. V. Boudreau: My questions are for the Minister of Health. Our new Minister of Health has
been eager to speak about the recruitment and retention of physicians and how many physicians the
province has recruited since 1999. I would like to touch on that, but I would like to be a bit more
specific to the Miramichi region. My colleague from Miramichi Centre had some questions a couple
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 6/10
of weeks ago. The minister was not able to give specifics then, so I hope he has been briefed since
by his department and may be able to give us some more specifics.
First, I want to read something. In the Miramichi Weekend a little while back, the former Minister
of Health was reported as saying that the Miramichi region had grown by 24, from 46 to 70
physicians since 1990. My first question is this: Does the current minister agree with the statement
made by the former minister?
Hon. Mr. Green: If the member opposite had been following the course of question period in the
House, he would know that I very quickly came back to the Chamber to provide detailed
information to the member for Miramichi Centre and follow-up to his question. I was pleased, at that
time, to inform the House that there are more doctors working and practising on the Miramichi today
than there were in 1999. One of his specific questions had to do with internists. I was pleased to say
that at least two new internists have been successfully recruited for the Miramichi, and will be in
place and working by this summer.
Mr. V. Boudreau: I will take that answer, I guess, as an agreement. The current minister does agree
with the statement made that, since 1990, it has grown by 24. Based on the minister’s own
information that we received through an RTI, the number of physicians recruited in Region 7 since
1999—not 1990 but 1999—has been 33.
020 11:30
However, the total number of physicians who have left Region 7 since 1999 is 27, and the total
number who have reduced their services is 7, for a total of 34. That gives me a net loss of 1
physician since 1999, so I can only deduct that any progress made in the Miramichi, in terms of
recruiting physicians, must have happened between 1990 and 1999. Would the minister agree with
that statement?
Hon. Mr. Green: No, I would not deduce that at all. I think the honourable member should explain
what he means by reduced services. Clearly, there were some family practitioners on the Miramichi
who had community-based practices who moved into the hospital. However, they are still practicing
on the Miramichi and are still seeing patients. I will go back to the point that I reiterated just a
moment ago—the same point that I made in response to the member for Miramichi Centre. Region
7 is successfully recruiting new doctors. They will be in place and practicing within the next few
Mr. V. Boudreau: The numbers are clear. They were provided to us by the department: 33 were
recruited, 34 have either left or reduced their services dramatically, for a net loss of 1 physician.
Obviously, if there were any gains, they were made under the former Liberal government. However,
my third question for the minister is this: The minister is well aware that one of the big reasons there
is a problem with recruitment and retention on the Miramichi is surrounding the Badley Report,
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 7/10
which the minister has had for several months now. This is a report that has dealt with physicians
being fired and physicians being let go for suspicious reasons, yet the minister has been sitting on
this report and has not made it public yet. When will the minister make this report public?
Hon. Mr. Green: In the space of about 120 seconds, we went from some physicians apparently
reducing their practices to their dramatically reducing their practices. Again, I would like to have
details as to exactly what the member opposite is saying. What I do know is that, in this province,
as of the end of April, we had 214 more doctors working than we did before. I also know—because
I have had a face-to-face meeting with the CEO, the chair, and other board members in Region 7
within the last few weeks—that Region 7, in terms of delivery of health care services, is in a very
positive state. It was a very positive meeting. Physician recruitment is going well.
With respect to the report that was mentioned or a report that has had a lot of discussion on the floor
of this House, if there is a report that contains confidential, personal information, either about
patients or about health care professionals in this province, it will not be released, it should not be
released, and surely, given the discussion in this Chamber in the last two weeks and prior to that,
that is a lesson that we should have learned by now.
Federal Infrastructure Program
Mr. Jamieson: To the Minister of Environment, the largest obstruction to harbour cleanup in Saint
John has been this Lord government over the last seven years. To quote Mayor Norm MacFarlane:
“I’m still as confident as ever now that this (infrastructure fund) has been renewed that it’s a matter
of getting an agreement signed . . . I just want a letter.” The Lord government has not indicated that
it will put one cent into harbour cleanup this year, this spring, to get the job started.
In the movie Jerry McGuire, the phrase “Show me the money” was used. Talk is cheap, and Saint
John wants to start work this spring on harbour cleanup. Will you show us the money? Will you
make the commitment this spring, to the Mayor of Saint John and to the people of Saint John, to
start the work this spring?
Hon. Mr. Holder: I do not know how many times we have to go through this. The fact of the matter
is that we have shown the money. We had an agreement. For the first time in the history of Saint
John, money has been committed to this project. The member opposite knows full well that we were
on hand. We announced a first phase. There is a commitment on our part to commit $20 million to
this project. We are going to deliver on that commitment. The mayor knows that. We know that the
mayor is going to deliver on his commitment. I have no reason to doubt the federal government
when it says that it wants to work on a long-term funding agreement.
The question that the member opposite needs to ask his federal friends is, if the money was in place,
as they keep saying that it was, why are we having this discussion? The fact of the matter is that they
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 8/10
depleted the fund. We are committed to it, they were not, and we will make sure that this project is
seen through to completion.
021 11:35
Mr. Jamieson: This minister has to get his head out of the sand. The city of Saint John is asking that
a commitment be made by your government for $20 million for 10 years. This year, it wants $2
million to start the project. That is all it is asking for. It wants a commitment from you. Never mind
the federal government. Saint John needs a commitment from this government to put the money in
place to start the project. The government talks about the former Liberal government. We actually
cleaned up 41% of the problem in Saint John when we were the government. We rebuilt the sewage
lagoon in Lancaster, which services half the city of Saint John, and we initiated the project in his
own area to clean up the problem there. Do not point fingers. You are the government which, for
seven years, has not put money into Saint John harbour cleanup. Is it time to start.
Hon. Mr. Holder: We have also made monetary commitments to this project. We completed the
project that he referred to in our riding. There are 5 000 homes that are now being redirected to the
Millidgeville treatment facility. It is great that the opposition worked on it initially, but we followed
through and committed to it, too. To say that we have not been committed to harbour cleanup is
false. The fact of the matter is that the opposition members failed to put a long-term funding
agreement in place. They had years to do it. They talked about it, but they never did it.
Mr. Speaker: I ask the members, when questioning and answering, to please address the chair.
Mr. Jamieson: The Environment Minister’s biggest announcement to date this year . . .
Mr. Speaker: For the second time, I ask the member who is questioning to please address the chair.
Mr. Jamieson: The Minister of Environment’s biggest announcement to date, since he became
minister, has been the beginning of compost week this week. That is his biggest announcement. New
Brunswick has had a government that has done nothing toward protecting this province on
environmental issues since it came to office in 1999. If something can be done, please point to it,
because from Belledune to Saint John, and from Moncton to Cap-Pele, nothing has been done by
this government to protect the environment. The Petitcodiac is still a problem. The Saint John
harbour has not been addressed. The air quality in Saint John is actually worse than it has been, and
this minister has to answer to New Brunswickers about the problems.
Mr. Speaker: Once again, I would ask the member who has the floor to address the chair. This is
the third warning.
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 9/10
Hon. Mr. Holder: We are doing great things with respect to the environment. The member opposite
wants me to point to one thing. We made an announcement last week to regulate the VOC emissions
in Saint John, which got widespread support. The clean air coalition in Saint John was firmly behind
that. That is just an example of the things we will continue to do by consulting with people from
around this province, through our Five in Five Initiative, to which we are very committed. If he has
anything he wants to add, he should take part in the Five in Five consultation. The fact of the matter
is that item 57 of their promises in 1995 promised harbour cleanup. They never delivered on it. The
fact of the matter is that whether it was Point Lepreau, St. Joseph’s Hospital, ball fields, or harbour
cleanup, these . . .
Gasoline Prices
Mr. Allaby: My question is to the Minister of Energy. Many studies on gasoline regulation have
been conducted over the years. The results, in general, have shown that the various models of
regulation in other jurisdictions tend to even out and stabilize prices, but have not, on average,
lowered them. Will the minister provide for this House the study that this minister has conducted,
and which she intends to use? With this model, will the minister guarantee lower gasoline prices?
Hon. Ms. Fowlie: I have spoken with New Brunswickers with regard to the regulation of the price
of gas at the pumps, and the majority of New Brunswickers recognize that regulating does not lower
prices. We have never said to expect lower prices. We have said to expect stable prices—stability
in pricing.
022 11:40
I am not sure what study the member is referring to. We are still working on the model that is going
to be used with regard to the regulation of the price of gas. We are looking at the models currently
being used in other provinces. Nova Scotia announced that it is going to go to gas price regulation
as of July 1, the same as we are.
I would still reiterate it. There is a question to which I have never received an answer: If the
members opposite were in government, would they regulate the price of gas?
Mr. Allaby: I am pleased to state that my leader has been very clearly on the record as being in
favour of granting the Public Utilities Board regulatory authority to ensure that New Brunswick
drivers are given the very best market prices possible for gasoline and diesel fuel. I think that is very
clear, to the minister.
I have another question for the minister. Will she tell this House how she will regulate this? Will it
be at retail price? Will it be at wholesale price? Will it be on margin? Will there be a uniform price
across the province, or will there be a transportation and storage differential, as in Newfoundland?
Will your regulation require all parts of the province to be serviced? There are many questions to
May 5, 2005 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 5 mai 2005
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\31 2006-05-05 BL\31 2006-05-05 BL.wpd 10/10
be answered, and we have no indication from this government what model will be used. Will the
minister provide this House with a model, or at least what the legislation will look like?
Hon. Ms. Fowlie: I am not sure that the member opposite understood part of one of my responses.
We are looking at these things. The decisions are being made on how it will be done. When
legislation is introduced on the floor of this House in order to regulate the price of gas, all of those
questions will be able to be answered—why it was done this way, how it was done, and so on. We
are looking at other provinces to see what is happening there, and we hope to pick the best model
for New Brunswick.
Mr. Allaby: A final supplementary. The point of my last question was that there was a complexity
to this issue of gasoline regulation. It has a great impact on the people and on the economy of New
Brunswick. Will the minister be providing an opportunity for feedback on the model? We have
consumers’ associations, tourism associations, truckers’ associations, and chambers of commerce
in different communities. These will all have a great deal of interest in what is being proposed. Will
there be a provision for feedback? Time is running out, and the government has made a commitment
to have something in place by July 1. We have not seen any legislation. There has been no
opportunity yet for feedback, from what I can see. We do not yet even have a model. What will take
place? Will there be feedback?
Hon. Ms. Fowlie: One of the things that is being pointed out here is the difference in approaches
between how the Liberals would operate and how we operate. We are having discussions
beforehand, before the legislation comes to the floor of the House, with the wholesalers, the
retailers, and the marketers. That is how we are developing our plan. What is working? What works
for them? What do they need to see in this legislation? Those are the people out there in the industry
who have the inside information. They know the best way to do these things and how it will work.
What we plan on doing is to ensure that we do not cut out the small retailer and that the wholesalers
are still viable. We do not want companies refusing to deliver to rural areas of the province because
they cannot get the prices they are looking for. We are doing our work beforehand. When the
legislation is introduced, we will have people here to be able to answer all their questions. We are
looking at what is best for New Brunswick.


STC_2463, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.


May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 1/12
Aboriginal Peoples
Mr. S. Graham: Last November, the government of Canada struck a $5.1-billion accord in
Kelowna with the Aboriginal peoples and the First Ministers in an historic initiative to alleviate
social and economic disparities among our Aboriginal peoples. The Premier of this province was
one of the First Ministers who participated in these meetings, praised the achievement, and acted
as a witness to the signing of this historic accord.
The federal budget was released this week, and the government of Canada, under the leadership of
Stephen Harper, has committed less than $1 billion to address the pressing Aboriginal concerns. Of
that, only $450 million is earmarked for basic services on Canada’s First Nations reserves in
southern Canada, which includes New Brunswick. Therefore, I would like to ask the Premier this
afternoon what he intends to do regarding this apparent breach of faith with the First Nations
communities and with the provinces on the part of the federal Conservative government.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I am pleased to stand every day and get questions on the federal budget. I would
love to get questions on the provincial budget as well, but obviously, the Liberals and the Leader
of the Opposition do not want to debate. They want to obstruct. That is okay. We are going to put
an end to the obstruction soon enough. We are going to make sure that the business of the people
gets done in this House. We will respect the mandate that we have been given by the people of New
Brunswick, and we ask the opposition to respect the mandate of the opposition that it received, not
a mandate of obstruction.
With regard to the Aboriginal people of New Brunswick, we will continue to work with the
Aboriginal people of this province, and we will work, as well, with the federal government.
Mr. S. Graham: The Premier did not answer the question, which was very specific. The Premier
was a participant in an historic accord that saw over $5.1 billion allocated for economic
development, infrastructure, and housing, as well as the health care needs of Aboriginal peoples
across the country.
010 13:40
That meant that a substantial amount of dollars would also be forwarded to our province and our
First Nations communities. Prime Minister Stephen Harper has since reneged on that important deal.
My question to the Premier is this: What steps is he taking to deal with this apparent breach of faith
with the First Nations communities? Is he willing to ask Stephen Harper to reconsider his decision?
Hon. Mr. Lord: We are in this House to talk about the matters of the provincial government of the
province of New Brunswick. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to ask questions to the federal
government, he can ask the member for Moncton North to ask his cousin to ask the questions in
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 2/12
Parliament. The fact is that we are here to deal with the business of the government of New
Brunswick. I have stated very clearly that the government of New Brunswick will continue to work
with the Aboriginal people of this province, and we will also work with the federal government as
it implements its strategies to assist the Aboriginal people of Canada.
Mr. S. Graham: As one of the participants of the Kelowna accord meetings, the Premier said the
following with regard to the plight of Aboriginal people in Canada and in New Brunswick: The
leaders around this table may not be responsible for the causes of the current situation; however, we
are responsible if we don’t change it. It is up to us to make it better. Those are your words, Mr.
He also made the following statement: It is my desire that during this meeting we endorse a
principled approach for working together as partners in recognition of mutual respect, mutual
responsibility, and inclusiveness.
It sounds to me like the Premier has committed himself, if not our province, to supporting the
Kelowna accord. Has the Premier spoken to Prime Minister Harper and urged him to abide by this
principled approach of working together? Can he explain why the Prime Minister is not following
the Premier’s advice?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I believe very strongly that the Aboriginal people of New Brunswick and the
Aboriginal people of Canada live in subpar conditions that are, frankly, not acceptable for a
developed country like Canada. I took the time myself two weeks ago to go to the Red Bank First
Nation, the Metepenagiag First Nation, to act as honorary chief for a day. I spent time with the
elders, I spent time with students, and I spent time with the council to hear their concerns and to talk
to them about their concerns.
We look at how Native people live in this province, and how Native people live in Canada, and we
look at the United Nations development index, and we know that Canada, as a country, usually ranks
from one to five—we are usually up there—but the Aboriginal people of Canada would rank 63rd.
Clearly, we can do better. That is why our government, the government of New Brunswick, is
committed to working with the federal government and the Aboriginal people of this province to
improve their economic status, their educational status, they health status, and their social status,
because I see a lot of potential in the Aboriginal people of New Brunswick.
Mr. S. Graham: When 40% of the provincial budget is dependent on the federal budget, this
budget, of course, is important to New Brunswick. That is why we are discussing this issue today.
I realize that Premier Lord visited a First Nations community and was named Honorary Chief Lord.
I would like to ask Honorary Chief Lord this afternoon if he is committed to the principle causes that
he has just discussed. We agree that substandard housing conditions are deplorable for any
government. That is why we have to move forward to give Aboriginal communities in our province,
not only the recognition, but the funding that they require to alleviate this deplorable situation.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 3/12
There was an accord signed to commit $5.1 billion. You were a participant in this historic
agreement. Now, Prime Minister Harper is saying that the dollars that were to be allocated to New
Brunswick will no longer be there. My question to you is this: What is the dollar amount that has
been reduced by the federal government, under the federal budget, that should have been included
if the Kelowna accord had been honoured?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I was a participant at the Kelowna meetings, and I was pleased to be there to
represent New Brunswick. I believe it is important for New Brunswick to be at these meetings, in
the same way that I believe it is important for New Brunswick to be at the meetings of New England
Governors and Eastern Canadian Premiers. I do not agree with the objective of the Liberals to have
New Brunswick represented by an empty chair. I will be there representing New Brunswick at
meetings, as I was at Kelowna.
011 13:45
With regard to this specific issue, we will do what we can, as a provincial government, within our
responsibilities, to help the Native people of New Brunswick to improve their economic, social,
educational, and health status in this province, because we know that they have great potential and
that they want to contribute to our province. That is why I am reaching out to the Aboriginal people
of this province—because I want to work with them.
Mr. S. Graham: Mr. Premier, the reason that chair will be empty is that you have chosen not to
restore integrity to the most important chair in this Chamber. We offered you a permanent pairing
agreement—a permanent agreement that would have resolved your position, and you chose not to
accept it.
Mr. Premier, I am very concerned today: This was $5.1 billion in funding which would have been
allocated across every province. You have chosen not to answer the question of what dollar amount
this will mean to New Brunswick, now that Stephen Harper, the Prime Minister of our country, has
decided not to honour this historic accord. What is the dollar amount that Aboriginal communities
in New Brunswick will now not be receiving from the federal government? That is the question you
have failed to answer, Mr. Premier.
Hon. Mr. Lord: Let us be clear on a few things. Whatever the Leader of the Opposition proposed
did not contain a permanent pairing arrangement. That is incorrect.
As well, I take objection to the fact that the Leader of the Opposition wants to question the integrity
of the Speaker of this House. He says he did not say it, but that was exactly what he implied. That
is the type of Leader of the Opposition we are facing. The opposition members will use all sorts of
innuendoes, then they will say: We did not say that. We know . . .
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 4/12
Mr. Speaker: Honourable members, please show a little respect for the person I recognize who has
the floor.
Hon. Mr. Lord: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. When the opposition Liberals had a chance
to let one of their own stand as Speaker, they chose not to. After that, they decided to attack the
integrity of the Speaker. That is incorrect, and that is small-time politics.
Let us be clear as to what the Liberals are suggesting. There is one principle they do not support, and
that is the principle of every member of this House having one vote. They think it is okay if two
members do not get to vote and if that somehow gives them a majority. We will not stand for that,
because every riding in this province counts the same as every other. That is why every riding will
have one vote on the matters of this House.
Mr. S. Graham: Since the Premier wants to make this a debate about the office of Speaker and the
credibility that is required of the Chair, he is blaming us today for not letting a Liberal member
stand. May I remind the Premier that he himself did not allow one of the government members’
names to stand, and he was susceptible to blackmail, as his own member stated, in determining who
would be Speaker.
My question to the Premier pertains to issues of Aboriginal communities in the province. Three
times, this Premier has deflected the question and has not answered it. How much money would we
have received if the Kelowna accord had been honoured? What are the Aboriginal communities of
New Brunswick missing because of this Premier’s siding with Prime Minister Stephen Harper
instead of siding with the Aboriginal communities of New Brunswick?
Hon. Mr. Lord: It was the Leader of the Opposition who raised the issue of the integrity of the
Speaker during question period. I will not stand for that when there is no reason for it.
There is a simple principle of democracy that the Leader of the Opposition wants to reject: Every
member who represents a riding is entitled to one vote in this House. The Liberals want to rely on
rules to prevent that from happening, to prevent a budget which will help the people of New
Brunswick, which will help the children by lowering class sizes, which will help seniors by
protecting the homes that the Liberals wanted to take away, which will protect our regions with
more economic development investment. This budget will also build better roads.
012 13:50
That is what this House is about, and that is why we are here, to defend and promote an excellent
budget that builds for the Aboriginal people and for all the people of New Brunswick.
Mr. S. Graham: Once again, the Premier has not answered the question of how much money will
be taken out of this federal budget that should have been committed to Aboriginal communities.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 5/12
Instead, he wants to talk about how this Legislature should function. May I remind the Premier that,
when Frank McKenna had a majority of 58 seats in this House, he brought the official opposition
into the House through other means? Now that it is 27 to 27, we have a Premier who wants to take
the opposition outside of the Chamber, and that is wrong. That is what differentiates this government
from the previous Liberal government. There is honour and there are traditions that have to be
respected. This Premier wants to gut this institution by taking away the rights of opposition members
to vote, and that is wrong.
Hon. Mr. Lord: The Leader of the Opposition is using some words, but he may ask his members,
the lawyers sitting behind him, to instruct him as to what they mean. He should understand
something that is very clear: Every member of this House is entitled to one vote. Every member who
represents a riding is entitled to one vote: one vote on bills, one vote on the budget, and one vote on
the motions. What the Liberals want is a system that prevents two of our members from voting and
that somehow gives the opposition control of the House. That is undemocratic. The opposition was
not elected to obstruct. The opposition was not elected by the people of New Brunswick. We were
given a mandate by the people of New Brunswick, and so were the opposition members. Our
mandate was to govern. We are, and we will. Their mandate was to oppose, but not to obstruct. Their
deal with the public is to stand up and ask questions, criticize, and propose, but not prevent things
from happening. We will ensure that every member of this House who represents one riding will be
entitled to one vote.
Mr. S. Graham: Let’s not forget that it is this Premier who is not honouring the traditions of this
institution that have stood for over 200 years. Because this Premier does not respect the democratic
vote that was given to him in the last election, he is now attempting to change the rules of this House
that have stood for over 200 years. That is undemocratic. Very clearly, he first wanted to give one
of his members two votes. He then said: Let’s not give the opportunity for every opposition member
to vote on the budget in the estimates process. Now, he is saying: Let’s give an opportunity for the
Speaker to vote in the committee. There are traditions that this House has to honour. We gave you
a fair opportunity and a fair agreement to allow this House to function, and you chose not to accept
it. It is you who are undemocratic today. There is only one way to clear this obstacle: Allow the
highest voice of the land to speak. That is the people of New Brunswick. They should decide who
should have a clear majority today in New Brunswick.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I think it rings hollow when the Leader of the Opposition talks about honouring
tradition, when he will not even honour the tradition of pairing in this House. That is an honourable
tradition, and a tradition that the opposition does not respect. It will say that we broke that tradition.
That was the day when the member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak gave his commitment to pair
with the member for Saint John-Kings. He went on the radio and said that, if they could defeat the
government that day, they would, when he had a pairing arrangement with her. She was at the
bedside of her dying brother. That is the type of Liberal opposition that we have. If the Leader of
the Opposition wants to talk about traditions, committees on estimates are a tradition, a tradition that
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 6/12
I believe was ended by the leader that he talked about, Premier Frank McKenna. Maybe the member
needs to do a little bit more research.
013 13:55
The facts are that the House has committees and that the committees are not the master of the House;
the House is the master of the committees. Only in the House does every member have a vote. When
the Leader of the Opposition wants to say that we want to prevent members of the opposition from
voting on the budget, it is untrue. Every single member of the opposition will have one vote.
Mr. S. Graham: That explains why our Premier does not understand how democracy functions. He
forgot to mention the most important reason we are here. The House should be the master of the
people. The people will decide who is going to govern the people of the House. The people will . . .
Mr. Speaker: Members, I would ask, when a member is recognized, that you please have a little
respect and allow the member to speak.
Mr. S. Graham: Everyone makes mistakes in this House. I will admit that I just made a mistake.
The people opposite want to laugh.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
Mr. S. Graham: It has to be said that the people of New Brunswick should decide. We, in this
House, are elected to represent the people. What is most important of all today is that this Premier
will not allow that function to occur. This Premier wants to change the rules so that his government
can cling to power.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I accept that the Leader of the Opposition made a mistake. That is okay, because
it happens. I accept it. Sometimes, everybody makes mistakes. That happens in life, and I respect
There is an important principle here. When the Leader of the Opposition says that we do not respect
the decision of the people, it is the other way around. The people of New Brunswick decided, on
June 9, 2003, to give us a majority mandate. We have the exact same 28 people who were elected
on that day, which created a majority government. He says: Let us have an election now. Well,
legally, the mandates in this province are for five years. Traditionally, they are for four. It has not
yet been three. I love elections just as much as they do—maybe even more. I look forward to the
next election, when we can earn another mandate from the people of New Brunswick. I will continue
my discussion . . .
Mr. S. Graham: What we have here is a principle disagreement. I respect the fact that the Premier
recognized that I wanted to say that the people are the masters of this House. I respect that.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 7/12
The point that I wanted to make to you today, Mr. Premier, is the following: You attempted to
increase your majority by having a by-election in Shediac-Cap-Pelé and by having a by-election in
Saint John Harbour. The people of New Brunswick chose not to give you an increased majority.
They said to you that the House should function as it stood.
Well, today, we have a principle disagreement. We have a government that believes its budget is
correct, and we have, on this side of the House, the position that the people of New Brunswick
should not waste another year on the many pressing issues facing our province. We are dealing with
the fact that, as I have said, last year, our economy had the second-slowest growth rate in the
country. Then, there is the fact that wait lists for certain surgical services have doubled under this
government’s mandate, during the last seven years. There is the fact that we have the worst access
to postsecondary education in North America, according to a report that came out, saying that there
are only two other jurisdictions which are worse off than we are. There are many pressing issues
today facing our province.
We believe in our platform, and you believe in your budget. Allow the people of New Brunswick
to decide who is right.
Mr. Speaker: State the question.
Hon. Mr. Lord: The people of New Brunswick gave us a mandate, and there was an election.
Again, I will repeat that I love elections as much as the Liberals, and I look forward to the next
election, probably even more than the Liberals, because I want to earn another mandate from the
people of New Brunswick. I would love to have more members in this House. The fact is that I
respect the mandate that I have been given by the people of New Brunswick. The Leader of the
Opposition does not respect his. I believe that he is concerned that his mandate from the Liberal
Party is about to run out.
014 14:00
That is not my concern. My concern is making sure that we eliminate the HST on power. My
concern is making sure that we protect the homes of seniors. My concern is making sure that we add
more teachers and reduce class sizes. My concern is that we lower taxes and add to the 36 000 more
jobs that we have added, with the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years. The people gave us a
mandate for five years, traditionally four, not a mandate until the Leader of the Opposition decides
that he is going to block the workings of this House.
Résultats scolaires
M C. Robichaud : Mes questions sont pour le ministre me re de l’Éducation.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 8/12
According to documents obtained by the Telegraph-Journal, these are the results of the middle-level
English language proficiency assessment of Grade 9 students in the Anglophone school system. In
New Brunswick, 40% of students were experiencing difficulties in reading, and only 20% showed
strong performance. About 46.8% of students were experiencing difficulties in writing, with only
0.3% showing strong performance. Is the Minister of Education satisfied with these results that show
that nearly half of New Brunswick’s Anglophone students are experiencing difficulty with literacy?
Hon. Mr. Williams: The results that appeared in the Telegraph-Journal this morning have been
distributed to all district levels. Those results raise some concerns in the Department of Education,
but I must add that we are working to improve the situation regarding reading and writing in the
schools in New Brunswick. We have good initiatives in place, and in the budget, we have some good
measures. I am very disappointed that the members opposite are going to vote against those
M C. Robichaud : Si quelque chose a été fait, ce n’est pas suffisame nt.
These students were tested in Grade 4. They were tested again in Grade 7, and these students will
be graduating in three years. That is not a lot of time to turn this around. We cannot afford to wait
another year for those students. What does the Minister of Education intend to put in place to help
these students graduate?
Hon. Mr. Williams: The member opposite is talking about measures, and again, she will be voting
against measures in the budget to improve education in New Brunswick. We have the Quality
Learning Agenda initiative that this government put in place three years ago. This is producing good
results. I might add that the government received a mandate in 1999, and one of the key elements
was to improve the quality of education in New Brunswick. This plan is working, and I hope that
the member from the opposite side will support the measures that we are proposing in the budget.
Conflict of Interest
Mr. Arseneault: In March 2003, the Deputy Premier turned a three-day wireless conference into
a nine-day pleasure trip to the casino capital of the world, Las Vegas, courtesy of New Brunswick
taxpayers. The Deputy Premier says he did other work when he was in Las Vegas—perhaps scouting
out tourism destination facilities on behalf of Atlantic Loto or noted Las Vegas cultural institutions
on behalf of the Minister of Wellness, Culture and Sport. Will the Deputy Premier immediately
provide this House with his entire agenda for this nine-day Las Vegas adventure?
Hon. D. Graham: I certainly was in Las Vegas. I was attending a wireless committee conference.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 9/12
015 14:05
The conference was the sixth day. There was a three-day preregistration and a three-day show. I also
had a tour of the fire department. On another day, I also had a tour of the police station. I can tell
you that I received a lot of information. As a matter of fact, we are still working within the
department to meet the needs of DNR, NB Power, DOT, and Public Safety.
Therefore, the member for Dalhousie-Restigouche East can get up and smear me. I see the member
for Saint John Lancaster flaunting a big cartoon today. I can tell you that, in the last 48 hours, I have
received a number of phone calls from around the province. I must say that, if you are elected for
14 years, you get to know a few people around the province. I can tell you that I appreciate that. I
also had four members of the opposition come to me in the last 48 hours, who stated how
embarrassed they are to be caught up in the sleazy, down, smear campaign of the Shawn Graham
Mr. Arseneault: Three days to sign your name on a registration form seems quite a bit. The Deputy
Premier claimed a per diem and hotel expenses for each day over and above his registration fee for
the three-day conference. The Deputy Premier’s excuse is that he took advantage of a seat sale,
which he says saved taxpayers’ money. Documents show that the seat sale saved taxpayers
approximately $300. However, the taxpayers are footing the bill for the extra six-day holiday of the
Deputy Premier, with a per diem of $40 and a hotel bill totaling $US800. I ask the Deputy Premier
to show New Brunswickers how saving $300 on a flight, but claiming more in per diems and hotel
bills, ends up saving New Brunswick taxpayers money. Is that managing smarter?
Hon. D. Graham: I know that the member for Dalhousie-Restigouche East will never have the
honour of being a Cabinet minister. He does not understand what per diems are. A per diem is $40
per day. I must say that I only charge per diems when I am out and about doing business. I know
somebody, a former member of this House, who charges per diems seven days per week, and I think
I can name the name if I have to. I have no problem defending my expense account. I will stand by
my expense account and put it against any former Liberal Cabinet minister’s in this House.
Mr. Arseneault: The Deputy Premier sounds like my kid. Every time he knows he is in the wrong,
he changes the subject. On top of this misuse of taxpayers’ money, the Deputy Premier paid for his
ministerial expenses through the credit card of Grama’s Bake Shop, a company held in blind trust,
where the Deputy Premier cannot be involved in its management or operations, or make decisions
that benefit his company. In today’s media reports, the Deputy Premier states that he did not bill all
this travel to the Grama’s Bake Shop credit card, but his ministerial secretary did. Given that the
company of the Deputy Premier is to be held in a blind trust with no interaction between the
company and his ministerial office, why does a government secretary . . .
Mr. Speaker: Ask the question, please.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 10/12
Mr. Arseneault: (Inaudible) . . . Grama’s Bake Shop . . . (inaudible) . . . lying around.
Hon. D. Graham: I once again challenge the member to go outside and make those allegations. I
have spoken to the Conflict of Interest Commissioner again today. I spoke to the gentleman. If he
has any allegations that he wants to make with me, go outside and make them.
Mr. Speaker: Introduction of bills . . . State your point of order.
016 14:10
Points of Order
Mr. Huntjens: I have been listening this afternoon to the honourable Leader of the Opposition.
Every time he turns around, he makes innuendos and statements that are false, as far as I am
concerned. He again did it in connection with something that happened to me personally. He made
the insinuation that the Premier ordered me to remove my name from the list. That is exactly what
you said, sir. To me, that is an outright, inaccurate statement. I expect an apology from you,
considering the fact that it was I who removed my name from the list, and it was not done under the
orders of the Premier.
Mr. Lamrock: I do not know if we are to use points of order to clear up factual things. If so, I
would point out the Premier threw an attack at me today that he told me privately he knew was false.
I think the Leader of the Opposition would certainly acknowledge his larger point was that members
of the opposition were not given the chance to know they did not have the opportunity to vote for
the member for Western Charlotte in the Speaker election.
As to what transpired behind closed doors, certainly, I would acknowledge to the member for
Western Charlotte that no one else but he can know what happened and we cannot possibly know,
so I would set the record straight factually there.
Again, for greater certainty, I am taking the member for Western Charlotte at his word. The point
the leader wanted to make is there was not a Liberal on the ballot for Speaker because they believed,
up until the final moment, that they would have the chance to vote for the member for Western
Charlotte. But when the member for Western Charlotte says that he was not ordered to, we would
have no way of knowing to the contrary. He is a member of this House, and I take him at his word,
as I wish others would take me at my word.
Mr. Speaker: On the points of order, both members clarified their points, and we will continue to
move on with the business of the House and introduction of bills.
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 11/12
Oral Questions
Provincial Health Plan
Hon. Mr. Green: I have a response to a question posed in the House yesterday when the member
for Shediac—Cap-Pelé asked about support for the New Brunswick Rural Health Research Network.
I am pleased to inform the House that our department is assisting the network and has dedicated a
staff person to assist in its development.
In fact, I have a letter here, a copy of which I will gladly provide to the member opposite, from the
New Brunswick Heathcare Association, thanking us for this important commitment on our part to
its work. The letter also clearly states that it is its intention to pursue “a federally funded rural health
research institute for New Brunswick”. We support the New Brunswick Rural Health Research
Network in its efforts to secure a commitment from the federal government for long-term funding.
This is absolutely vital, because we have seen too many times in this province where the federal
government, in years past, has provided start-up funding for an initiative and then walked away,
leaving the provincial government holding the bag.
017 14:15
We are assisting this group with a resource person, and we have certainly not ruled out further
involvement from there.
On the issue of the provincial health plan and support for research in this province, as I stated
yesterday, in the past few days, I have signed several letters informing successful applicants that
they will receive research funding this year under the New Brunswick Medical Research Fund. This
year, we are awarding $126 000 in research grants through this fund, and these monies represent the
interest that has been earned on the $3-million trust fund held by our department to support made-in-
New Brunswick research.
Mr. V. Boudreau: I want to start by thanking the Minister of Health for the information he
provided; he did offer to table it, and I hope he will do that.
The point of my questioning yesterday was that, on the one hand, we have the New Brunswick rural
research network, and, on the other hand, we have the $3-million research fund. Nowhere did I see
that it was a trust fund and that only the interest was supposed to be spent. My question yesterday
was this: If we have this network on one side that is trying to get off the ground, and if we have this
$3-million medical research fund that is not being used at present—or was not being used until very
recently—would the minister consider taking some of this $3 million and giving it to the network,
to help the network further advance its objective of becoming a full-blown institute, recognized by
the national government and by national associations?
May 4, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 4 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\30 2006-05-04 BL\30 2006-05-04 BL.wpd 12/12
Hon. Mr. Green: We will entertain any request for assistance form the network, but I will repeat
the comment I made just a moment ago: The network itself has stated very clearly that when it
embarked upon this project, it was to be a federally funded research institute. We support that; if it
is going to be successful, that is what is required. We are already working with them cooperatively.
We have provided a staff person from our department to assist the network in any way possible. If
these people come back and ask us for something more, we will be more than happy to consider it.


STA_2649, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

Rick Brewer and Rick Doucet....



STB_2391, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

( DEUTERONOMY 7:12-13 *NIV )

Dear Charles,
Sadly, as you know this World is filled with people who feel
unloved, and will do almost anything to find it. What a shame
it is that they do not know God, for it is written; GOD IS LOVE.
( 1 JOHN 4:16 )

After all, whether they know it or not, everyone is surrounded
by God's Great Love for it is like the oxygen we breathe; there is
plenty of it for each of us, and still so very many are starving for

Why not reach out to another today, and share a little of God's
love with them. After all Jesus said; "YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR
NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." ( MATTHEW 19:19 ) and He also
( JOHN 15:17 )

After all sharing God's Love is as simple to do as saying thank
you to a store clerk, or just smiling at another and saying "How
are you today!" Little acts of kindness like these go along way
towards brightening up another's day, and by doing such things it
brightens our day as well!

So Charles, the next time you pray thank God for filling you
His Love, and remember to; GIVE THANKS TO THE LORD, FOR
( PSALM 136:1 )

With My Love & Prayers,
Pastor Allen
[ Prayer Requests---Contact Us---Bible Study---*Donations* ]
[ Audio---Subscribe---Change of Address---Unsubscribe ]
Apostle Paul Ministries, P O Box 55996, Hayward, CA 94545
(c) Copyright 2006 by Apostle Paul Ministries


STB_2609, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

No peace I guess????


STE_2191, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.



The Chief got ticketed!!!!!

STA_2527, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

I'm sorry but this individual seem to be proud of their license plate. I just had to take this picture

Who was the Chief who was near the Legislature?

Bernard Lord???? The Irvings????