Wednesday, May 24, 2006


Moncton_Wildcats, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.


Churchill Slaves c1868, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

I received this poster tonight and it's a protest set for 12:30 tomorrow in front of the New Brunswick Legislature.

This is one issue that I truly don't understand!

Both the Liberals and the P.C. party agreed last year that women shouldn't be paid equally as males in the work place doing the same line of work.

I truly believe that we eliminated slavery a long time ago?

Not here in New Brunswick I guess?

Protesters often attract MLA’S. I wonder if any MLA would have the guts to show up at the rally?

Stay tune? I’ll be there with my little camera.


life is so short....

STA_3360, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.


STA_3392, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

He wasn't smiing at me...that's for


STA_3396, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.


STD_3402, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

I kissed the cross around 20 times a day thanking God that I have no kids. I'll fight for them but to take care of them? Not interested!!!!

But then again they're so cute???

Too bad they can stay that same size????

Question period at the New Brunswick Legislature. < Mercredi >

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

Question period at the new brunswick legislature < Mardi >

May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 1/11
Equalization Payments
Mr. S. Graham: My question this afternoon is for the Premier, and it concerns the equalization
program. As the Premier is well aware, the fiscal equalization payment has a huge impact on our
province’s budget. In the last fiscal period, it accounted for $1.348 billion. In the current budget, it
is estimated at $1.432 billion.
018 14:15
The principle behind the equalization program is that every Canadian should have the same right
to equitable health care systems, postsecondary institutions, and other social services that we are
entitled to as a right of citizenship. In fact, equalization is so important that this program is enshrined
in section 36(2) of our Constitution. Given that the formula that guides the transfer of equalization
money is now under discussion federally, can the Premier inform this House if he supports using
a 10-province model for the calculation of the formula over the current model using 5 middleincome
Hon. Mr. Lord: I welcome the question this afternoon from the Leader of the Opposition. The
equalization issue is a very important one. About four and a half years ago, the government of New
Brunswick took a very clear position. We issued a position paper on equalization, and our position
has remained clear ever since. The government of New Brunswick supports a 10-province standard,
including comprehensive revenue coverage to be calculated in equalization.
Mr. S. Graham: I welcome the fact that the Premier remains committed to the position that was
taken, a position that we on this side of the Chamber shared as well. However, it is not only
important to move to a 10-province model. It is also important to make sure that we have the right
10-province model. It is the view of the New Brunswick Liberals that all sources of revenue,
including those from nonrenewable resources, should be included in the new calculation. Can the
Premier tell this Assembly whether he feels that the full value of nonrenewable resources such as
oil and natural gas should be included in the new formula?
Hon. Mr. Lord: Absolutely. I answered that in the first question as well. It is part of the official
position of the government of New Brunswick that we fully support including all revenues,
including nonrenewable resource revenues. Those revenues do have an impact on the fiscal capacity
of the provinces that receive those revenues, and the principle contained in the Constitution of
Canada is very clear: citizens, no matter where they live in this country, are entitled to comparable
services at comparable levels of taxation. When a province does receive revenues from
nonrenewable natural resources, it does increase its fiscal capacity and makes it easier for it to pay
for certain social programs or other investments, and that is why those revenues should be included
in a 10-province standard, including comprehensive revenue coverage.
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 2/11
Mr. S. Graham: It is important to raise this issue today, as the Premier is well aware, because a
blue-ribbon panel that was brought forward by the federal government proposed a model in which
only 50% of the resource revenue would be included in the 10-point model. Again, this causes
concern, because if that formula is followed, New Brunswick could only see a possible net gain of
$20 million in revenue under the equalization adjustments. However, under a 100% resource
revenue system, we could see in the range of over $200 million, which is very important for our
province. That means that our province is going to have to take a very proactive approach in
garnering the support of provinces such as Alberta, which have to include their oil and natural gas
revenues as well in the equalization formulas.
My question to the Premier—it is more of a statement, actually—is that we are willing to work with
him. This is an area where I feel that there is common ground achieved on both sides of the House.
As the Premier begins his discussions with his federal and provincial counterparts, I think it is very
important that we have a strong, unified message from the province of New Brunswick. This is one
area where we do agree, and I am happy to see that today.
My question to the Premier is this. If he is looking for support from this side of the House, we are
willing to give it, and we are willing to cooperate in any way possible.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I want to state that the support from the official opposition of New Brunswick is
certainly welcome on this file. I am very pleased that there is a real willingness on behalf of the
federal government to deal with equalization and to deal with fiscal imbalance. I have already
approached all other Premiers at Premiers’ meetings, and some outside the Premiers’ meetings, to
get their points of view. There are certainly many Premiers who agree with the position of the
government of New Brunswick.
I want to add that there has been another report on this issue, a report that was commissioned by the
Council of the Federation and released just a few weeks ago. It fully supports the position of the
government of New Brunswick, which is that we need a 10-province standard with comprehensive
revenue coverage. As well, there was another report just a few years ago, a Senate of Canada
committee report on equalization, which also agreed with the position of the government of New
Brunswick, which was that there should be a 10-province standard, including all
revenues—therefore, comprehensive revenue coverage.
019 14:20
Mr. S. Graham: Reaching an equalization formula that is fair to all Canadians depends upon taking
the full wealth of the provinces into consideration. My question to the Premier is this: In your recent
discussions with Prime Minister Harper, has any indication been given by the federal government
that it would, indeed, be willing to entertain a 10-point comprehensive model, including all resource
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 3/11
Hon. Mr. Lord: I can state unequivocally that there is more openness with the current Prime
Minister than there was with the previous Prime Minister. The current Prime Minister is certainly
willing to sit with Premiers and to work at finding a solution to the fiscal imbalance, which is in
stark contradiction to the former Prime Minister, who completely refused to acknowledge the
existence of a fiscal imbalance and refused to consider a 10-province standard.
We are making progress. This will not be an easy issue to resolve, but our resolve as a government,
and my resolve as Premier to get the best deal, to get the formula that is based on sound
principles—not just what will work for us today or what will work for us tomorrow, but what will
work for all Canadians, and certainly what will work for all New Brunswickers—will be the driving
force behind my negotiations on behalf of New Brunswick and New Brunswickers at the upcoming
meetings later this year.
Mr. S. Graham: I notice the political tone in the Premier’s response, but I think it is important that
we put aside the politics. That is why, today, I am extending an olive branch and saying that we will
work with the Premier on this issue, because it is very important. The goal of equalization is to
ensure that all Canadians have equal access to health care services and education services. That is
a fundamental goal that we respect in this province, because we are the province that brought
forward the Equal Opportunity program.
My question to the Premier is very specific. I know that negotiations are going to be starting. The
Premier is committed to moving toward a 10-province model, which will include 100% of the
resource revenues. That means that provinces such as Alberta will have to include their oil and gas
revenues in the new equalization formula. It is a position that we share. My question is this: Has the
Premier talked to his provincial counterparts such as the Premier of Alberta, Ralph Klein, on how
we can bring this model forward so that it will benefit all the provinces of the Confederation?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I have spoken to Premier Klein on this issue more than once in the last seven years,
as I have had the opportunity to speak on this issue with virtually every other Premier who has
served in the last seven years. This issue is one that I have been working on for quite some time with
other Premiers.
I understand that the Leader of the Opposition took offense to my mentioning the previous Prime
Minister. I am just stating the facts. There is an openness. The Leader of the Opposition wants to
accuse us of being political, just a few minutes after his own member called us kissing cousins. They
like to have a double standard. I guess they are unpredictable in what they want to do.
The fact is that our position on this issue has been crystal clear. We will continue to fight to get the
best deal, and work to get the best deal for New Brunswick. I must state that the Premier who is
showing the biggest reluctance to a 10-province standard is not the Premier of Alberta, but, in fact,
the Premier of Ontario, who was a guest speaker at a fund-raiser of the Liberal Party of New
Brunswick. I just want to make sure that the facts are stated very clearly.
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 4/11
Another very important fact is that, even though the revenues that are collected by the provinces are
calculated for equalization, the money that is paid out does not come from the government of
Alberta, it does not come from the government of Ontario, or from any other provincial government.
All the money transferred from equalization comes from the federal government.
Mr. S. Graham: Again, I have stated to the Premier that we are willing to work on this file. If the
Premier wants me to approach the Premier of Ontario, then we are willing to do that, to very clearly
explain New Brunswick’s position. We believe, as the Premier does, that a 10-province model must
be utilized, using 100% of the resources. That is a position that we are prepared to defend. If it
means that I have to go against the Premier of Ontario to defend New Brunswick’s position, I am
prepared to do that. My question to the Premier is this: Are you prepared to do the same with
Stephen Harper.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I am more than willing to do my job as Premier of New Brunswick to defend a
strong position for an equitable equalization program in this country. I have been doing it for seven
years, and I will continue to do it as long as I am the Premier of New Brunswick.
020 14:25
Health Care Services
Mr. V. Boudreau: My question today is for the Minister of Health. As I said in my earlier
statement, unfortunately, this minister seems to want to constantly look at his provincial health plan
through rose-coloured glasses, when it is very clear, from looking around the province, that it is
simply not working. We have talked about Miramichi and we have talked about Tracadie. Last
week, a story broke in Saint John that the head of the ER department is resigning. He is totally
frustrated. There is a lack of resources, and the emergency room has been treating more than twice
the number of patients it is equipped to handle. The ER was built to handle 25 000 to 30 000 per
year. That number has climbed to 70 000 this year, prolonging waitlists for patients.
My question for the Minister of Health is very simple: What does the minister intend to do to resolve
the situation at the Saint John Regional Hospital?
Hon. Mr. Green: Point of fact, I do not wear glasses—rose-coloured or any other kind. I certainly
do not need glasses to see the success of our provincial health plan. In the city of Saint John, just
recently we opened a third cath lab and are about to open a new PET/CT Scan. We have a very
vibrant and successful new community health centre at St. Josephs. I do not need glasses to see the
success of our plan, either in Saint John or anywhere else in this province, because, the fact is, it is
working and it is working well.
Mr. V. Boudreau: If the minister states this afternoon that he does not wear rose-coloured glasses,
maybe he could at least take the blinders off. In the same media report, it mentions that there are
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 5/11
many reasons for the rising number of ER visits, including a shortage of family doctors in Saint
John, an aging population, and the decision to close St. Joseph’s 24-hour emergency room service
last year. On every day but one in the month of April, crowding prompted ER staff to declare a Code
Orange, which sets other departments scrambling to accommodate emergency patients. Code Orange
is only declared when ER doctors do not believe they can treat patients adequately. When will the
minister and his government admit that the provincial health care plan is not working, and when will
he commit to reviewing it once and for all?
Hon. Mr. Green: I am not going to admit to something that simply is not true. It is not true to say
that the provincial health plan is not working. It is working. The member opposite mentioned St.
Joseph’s Hospital, which I also made mention of in my first response to his initial question. The fact
is that St. Joseph’s Hospital in Saint John is a vibrant hospital with a new mandate and a new lease
on life. That is something it could not consistently receive from the previous government.
I have been to the Saint John Regional Hospital. I have met with medical staff there. I have met with
the CEO. I have met with the Chair of the board. I believe that we are being responsive to the needs
of that hospital. When it comes to physicians in this province, we have an exceptional record of
success in recruiting and retaining physicians, with a net increase of 214 since 1999. The last report
that I received from Region 2 for the city of Saint John was that they now are able to accommodate
all the residents of that city in terms of access to a family doctor.
Mr. V. Boudreau: The answers that I am getting today are unbelievable. Obviously, the minister
does not look at media reports and does not look at what is being put out by his own caucus. A press
release was put out May 31, 2004, which stated that Tory MLAs were committed to the future of
St. Joe’s. How do they resolve St. Joe’s? It is by referring all critical emergency and trauma cases
to the Saint John Regional Hospital. They turn around a year later, July 1, 2005, struggling with an
ongoing physician shortage, and state that the urgent care centre at St. Joe’s will drop its hours from
9 to 4 from the previous 8 to 10. Obviously, the recruitment and retention is an issue in Saint John,
just like it is an issue everywhere else in this province.
In an editorial in the Telegraph-Journal on June 14, 2005, it says it best: If the situation in Saint
John’s hospitals reflects what communities can expect from the provincial health plan, New
Brunswickers should be worried. When will this minister take the time to revise this plan? It is
clearly not working. It is not providing the services it should be to New Brunswickers across this
Hon. Mr. Green: I am more than happy to agree to disagree with the member opposite. I am, in
fact, prepared to disagree with all the members opposite, because I know full well, as do my
colleagues on this side of the House, that the provincial health plan is well-reasoned and wellstructured.
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 6/11
021 14:30
It is being well implemented, and it is showing positive results. Whether it is in hospitals or in
community health centres around this province; whether it is in the introduction of new programs,
such as expanded vaccines; whether it is in the expansion of the Prescription Drug Program—over
225 new drugs have been added to the formulary since 1999—whether it is in the recruitment and
retention of doctors; or whether it is to address the issue of having more full-time nurses in New
Brunswick, which we have also done very successfully, the plan is working.
Assurance Automobile
M. Landry : Aujourd’hui, dans un article publié dans le Telegraph-Journal, le défenseur du
consommateur en matière d’assurance, Ronald Godin, a eu le courage de commenter une tendance
inquiétante dans le secteur de l’assurance automobile. Il a dit clairement que plusieurs
consommateurs refusent des réclamations, même des réclamations mineures, car ils ont peur de voir
leurs primes augmenter de façon faramineuse. Comme lui, je crois que ce n’est pas normal que les
gens aient peur du produit qu’ils achètent. Ma question est pour le ministre de la Justice et de la
Consommation. Le ministre peut-il nous dire ce que son ministère fera pour traiter de cette
Hon. Mr. Fitch: On this topic, there is an important issue that has to be realized. Auto insurance
rates in New Brunswick have been decreasing. They have been decreasing regularly since 2003. At
one of the forums, one of the issues that was put in place is the fact that Ronald Godin is the
insurance advocate and that people can go to him with issues or problems. However, there is a
concept of insurance that is very important to understand. If there is something that a person can
afford to repair or replace, then they make that choice. It is a personal choice that they make.
Insurance is there to cover the things that you cannot afford to pay for yourself, like injuries caused
to other drivers or injuries that cause the loss of financial ability for the individual driving the car.
I would like to point to the fact that insurance rates have been decreasing. They continue to be
reduced. People have choice in the market. They have the choice to make claims or not.
M. Landry : La semaine dernière, le Bureau d’assurance du Canada a organisé des ateliers pratiques
pour aider les entreprises et les organismes bénévoles de la province à réduire leurs primes
d’assurance en adoptant un nombre de stratégies. Un porte-parole invité, Greg Roe, a prétendu que
l’assurance, par définition, ne devait pas être utilisée pour couvrir les petites réclamations et qu’il
était tout à fait normal que les gens choisissent de payer de leur propre poche des petits montants
au lieu de faire des réclamations. Le ministre est-il d’accord avec cette affirmation? Croit-il que
c’est tout-à-fait normal que les gens choisissent massivement de payer pour des dommages au lieu
de faire appel aux compagnies d’assurance?
Hon. Mr. Fitch: I would like to go back again to the idea that, when you purchase insurance,
whether it be for your home, your car, or your own personal life insurance to look after your
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 7/11
beneficiaries, you have a choice in how you set up that policy. You can set up the policy with a high
deductible, which may reduce the premium. You can reduce the deductible, which may cause the
premium to increase. These are choices that consumers have to make. The thing I want to point out
is that, since 2003, since we put the reforms in place, there is more choice in New Brunswick than
ever before.
The member opposite should know that the Insurance Board will be holding sessions around the
province, starting tonight in the city of Dieppe, where people can meet with the Insurance Board to
state their concerns or issues. The Insurance Board will be providing information on insurance. Also,
Ron Godin, the insurance advocate, will be present at these meetings. The board will hold seven
sessions around the province. I have heard people say that they initially had premiums of
approximately $2 000. They shopped the market, because there are options and there is the ability
to shop the market, and their premium went down to $1 200 for two cars. It is plain to see that the
reforms put in place by this government are working for the people of New Brunswick.
M. Landry : Les gens du Nouveau-Brunswick n’ont pas vraiment le choix de faire ou non de petites
réclamations. S’ils font des réclamations, ils ont peur que leurs primes d’assurance augmenteront
substantiellement. C’est pour cette raison qu’ils ne font pas de réclamations.
022 14:35
Le rapport annuel publié par le ministère de la Justice démontre que le nombre des réclamations a
diminué de 38 % en 2003-2004. Je crois qu’il ne fait aucun doute que si les primes d’assurance ont
diminué un peu ce n’est pas à cause des réformes de ce gouvernement, mais parce que le nombre
des réclamations a diminué de façon spectaculaire. Comme l’a dit Ronald Godin, les consommateurs
sont nerveux lorsque vient le temps de soumettre une réclamation. Ils sont comme on dirait « claim
shocked ». Le ministre va-t-il enfin avouer que ce sont les réclamations et non les primes qui ont
diminué, étant donné que, suite aux réformes du gouvernement, il est moins intéressant pour les
consommateurs de faire des réclamations comme l’a suggéré un reportage de Radio-Canada?
Hon. Mr. Fitch: No. I think that people are smarter about how they deal with their insurance. They
are smarter about how they manage their claims experience. They are smarter about the choices they
make when it comes to insurance. There is now greater insurance availability throughout New
Brunswick. That is the issue. What is astonishing to me is that, when he was running his election
platform, the Leader of the Opposition said: I will reduce rates by 25%. There was no plan and there
were no reforms. This government said: Here is what we will specifically do. We will put reforms
in place with the advocate, and with the various coverages. The reduction in premiums in this
province has exceeded the 25% reduction which was alluded to by the Leader of the Opposition.
This opposition has no credibility when it comes to insurance. It talks about having no set position,
yet members of the opposition are speaking in this House about a provincial insurance that will have
an average premium of over $200 more for every New Brunswicker, right across the province. Last
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 8/11
week, this House agreed that it would continue the oil supplement of $200, because we all thought
that $200 was very important. Right here in New Brunswick, public insurance would cost every New
Brunswicker $200 more. We are working for the province of New Brunswick . . .
Mr. Speaker: Time.
Special Needs Children
Mr. MacIntyre: I have a question for the Minister of Education. On May 15, the parents of children
with autism, along with the parents of other special needs children, were notified that the special
needs resource rooms in District 8 would close, effective September 2006. I would like to read a bit
of the letter which was sent to all the parents: Discussions with representatives from the Department
of Education about the special needs resource rooms and the district have led the district to bring
the programs for students with exceptionalities more in line with the inclusionary practice of the
New Brunswick Department of Education. Therefore, effective September 2006, the special needs
rooms will be closed.
My question for the minister is this: Why were parents not consulted when it came to a decision for
closing the special needs resource rooms?
Hon. Mr. Williams: To respond to the question to which the member is making reference, I think
he is making a point about communication. There seems to have been a communication breakdown,
so to speak. We are taking appropriate action to reestablish the communication with the district, the
parents, and the Department of Education.
Mr. MacIntyre: There was no consultation with the parents. There was no consultation with the
Community Autism Centre. The letter itself was signed by Kevin King, who is a learning specialist
for student services. It is difficult for me to believe that this decision did not come from the
minister’s office.
I would like to read just a little bit from the Community Autism Centre, for the record: As the
Community Autism Centre, we are shocked and appalled by the actions of District 8 and their
decision to close the special needs resource room. Last June, when we contacted Terry McInerney
and expressed our concerns regarding the transfer of our classroom to a middle school basement,
these issues were raised in collaboration with the provincial Association of Community Living: the
physical location of the resource room, i.e., in a basement, and some with no windows; the age
groupings from Grade 2 to Grade 8; the accountability regarding the inclusion; a mother was told
that it would be a long walk for her Grade 2 son to go to a regular classroom.
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 9/11
023 14:40
The feeling is that they were punished for raising these issues, which is a shame. This was the last
thing they expected. If there are resource rooms throughout the province, mandated by the province,
why has District 8 made the decision to close these resource rooms?
Hon. Mr. Williams: I would mention that this situation has been addressed by the Department of
Education. I might add that the situation was brought to the former Minister of Education, Minister
Dubé, by a colleague. There has been discussion between the department and District 8, in order to
look at all the questions of inclusive education. There have been talks.
The member is referring to the fact that the parents, following the letter that was sent . . . The parents
were not consulted. I think the member is making a point. As I mentioned, there was a
communications breakdown. We are taking appropriate action in order to reestablish
communications and to engage the parents in the process.
Mr. MacIntyre: The parents were appalled at the decision. I also want to thank my colleague from
Saint John Kings, who was also involved in this issue, because some of these resource rooms are
in her riding. I can tell you that people were absolutely appalled. I also visited a resource room, and
it would be a good thing for all members to do. I saw the good work that these teachers and teacher’s
assistants are doing with life skills training for these special needs students.
Will the minister reverse this decision today and ensure the long-term viability of these special needs
resource rooms? The parents are absolutely appalled. They are shocked. They love their children,
and they work hard with their children; so do the teachers and the teachers’ assistants. When there
is a mistake, you admit it and you change the decision. Change the decision today, minister.
Hon. Mr. Williams: The department is working with the district. It is working with the parents. We
have to respect that there is the Education Act, and there are all these questions of inclusive
education. I must add that we will be holding a forum over the weekend. This is all part of inclusive
education in New Brunswick.
I want to reassure the member that we are committed to working with the parents, to working with
District 8 and with the community. We have inclusion in New Brunswick, and we want to make sure
that the principles and practices are applied in all areas of New Brunswick. Just to reaffirm our
commitment, tomorrow night, my staff and I will be meeting with District 8 and with the parents.
I will be meeting with them tomorrow evening, because I want to be sure that the parents are
engaged and are part of the project.
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 10/11
Personnel d’usine de traitement du poisson
M. Albert : Déjà plus de 70 % du quota de crabe ont été débarqués. Des centaines d’employés
d’usine de transformation n’ont plus de travail. Ils ont travaillé trois semaines. On prévoit que près
de 2 500 employés auront travaillé de quatre à sept semaines. Présentement, il y a des mères et des
pères de famille qui sont très inquiets et qui ont peur pour leur avenir. Vont-ils pouvoir mettre du
pain et du beurre sur la table? Ils vivent une situation très difficile. Cette situation est très
humiliante. Ils veulent vivre dans la dignité et avoir une qualité de vie pour leur famille. Ma question
pour le ministre de l’Éducation postsecondaire et de la Formation est la suivante : Votre ministère
travaille-t-il à un programme? Allez-vous le mettre en place afin de venir en aide à ces travailleurs
et travailleuses?
M. Carr : J’ai rencontré le maire de la Péninsule acadienne. C’était une bonne occasion pour moi,
et j’aimerais aussi dire merci à mon collègue, le ministre des Transports, pour ses efforts.
Certainly, it is an issue of which I am very much aware, and I am very concerned about it. I want
to assure all members in this House, and in particular all the workers and all of the people of the
Acadian Peninsula, that we are taking this very seriously. Our staff work very diligently, every
single day, on this issue, and we will continue to monitor the issue. I can guarantee the House and
the people that we will be there, and we are there, continuously, for these workers.
024 14:45
M. Albert : J’ai entendu cela deux années de suite. On est très préoccupé et on prend cela très au
sérieux, mais rien n’est fait. On laisse les gens tomber, on ne veut pas les aider. Pourquoi les
pénaliser? Ils ne sont pas la source du problème. Pourtant l’entente fédérale-provinciale donne plus
de 100 millions de dollars à la province pour s’occuper de ces travailleurs et travailleuses. L’entente
est très flexible. L’année dernière, l’ancienne ministre parlait de l’élaboration d’une stratégie à long
terme. Où est-elle? Vous les avez laissés tomber en 2004 et en 2005. Allez-vous les laisser tomber
encore? Votre manque de vision et de leadership et votre inaction pénalisent ces personnes. Vous
avez le devoir moral de les aider. Ce problème n’est pas leur faute. C’est plutôt votre faute. Allezvous
les aider, oui ou non?
Hon. Mr. Carr: This is hardly an issue on which we should accept finger-pointing. In fact, my
colleagues, the Minister of Transportation and the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and
Aquaculture, have worked very diligently and closely on this issue. We continue to discuss it with
our federal counterparts. I have also met with my Quebec counterpart; there is a common interest.
We do have programs in place. Quite clearly, when we took office, we changed our direction on our
programs, to have long-term career planning. In particular, with the workers on the Acadian
Peninsula, we assess and keep in contact with our officials—individually, to work with each worker,
to ensure that they have long-term employment and long-term career goals. We are very proud to
be able to work with the people of New Brunswick and the Acadian Peninsula, to provide hope and,
May 23, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 23 mai 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\36 2006-05-23 BL\36 2006-05-23 BL.wpd 11/11
more importantly, to provide long-term opportunity. The fact is that there are fewer people on social
assistance and more people working. We will continue to do our job.


charles, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

The meeting will only last for 15 minutes but what can I say? It's better than nothing? I will have my say and lets see what's going to happen? Wish me luck!!!


42, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

and Fredericton has these...



STA_3359, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

( JOSHUA 1:9 * NKJV )

Dear Charles,
Whenever you become fearful know that; THE LORD, HE

After all, when we are fearful we worry and tend to build
mountains out of mole hills in our minds. Now things rarely
ever materialize nearly as bad as we then have anticipated.
Thus we have become fearful for nothing, and remember that
fear is the opposite of faith!

Now God has even promised us; WHEN YOU PASS
SCORCH YOU. ( ISAIAH 43:2 ) This verse is referring to
the Children passing through the Red Sea, and also the
protection HE gave to Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego,
in the fiery furnace. Both are good examples of how God
has helped HIS Children in the past!

Therefore King David was able to boldly say; "YEA,

So Charles, when you become worried or fearful know
that God will help you, just as HE has done for His Children in the
past! Therefore; you may boldly say; THE LORD IS MY LIGHT
Amen! ( PSALM 27:1 )

With My Love & Prayers,
your servant 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


Picture 041, originally uploaded by Oldmaison.

George Piers and his two lucky charms.....

Picture 021