I can't sing....lol...hey...I found the words....
We are trav'ling in the footsteps
Of those who've gone before,
And we'll all be reunited,
On a new and sunlit shore,
Oh, when the saints go marching in
Oh, when the saints go marching in
Lord, how I want to be in that number
When the saints go marching in
And when the sun refuse to shine
And when the sun refuse to shine
Lord, how I want to be in that number
When the sun refuse to shine
And when the moon turns red with blood
And when the moon turns red with blood
Lord, how I want to be in that number
When the moon turns red with blood
Oh, when the trumpet sounds its call
Oh, when the trumpet sounds its call
Lord, how I want to be in that number
When the trumpet sounds its call
Some say this world of trouble,
Is the only one we need,
But I'm waiting for that morning,
When the new world is revealed
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
ohhhh when the saints,,,,when the saints go marching in.....
QUESTION PERIOD AT THE NEW BRUNSWICK LEGISLATURE AND OTHER ISSUES!!! < Mercredi >
ORAL QUESTIONS 19 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 1/9
017 11:15
Land Development
Mr. Murphy: Yesterday, some concern was expressed in this House with regard to environmental
protection for certain lands in Cap-Brûlé and around this province. We feel that, given the evasive
answers by the Premier, more appropriate answers and more direct responses should be made by the
Premier to the people of this province.
There are questions with regard to the power of the political operatives, or, more precisely, the
Premier’s Executive Assistant in Moncton. We would like to know from the Premier: What are the
duties of his Executive Assistant in Moncton? Is that Executive Assistant, who is not a government
employee, empowered to direct government policy or to issue directives to ignore government stopwork
orders?
018 11:20
Hon. Mr. Lord: If the member for Moncton North or any other member of the opposition party
wants a course in how government functions, we would be happy to provide that. It is very clear this
morning that there are no pressing issues for the opposition. There are no issues regarding health
care for the opposition. There are no issues regarding education. Maybe the first lesson that the
member for Moncton North needs is not on the role of an EA, but on the purpose of question period.
Mr. Murphy: One pressing issue before the people of the province is the integrity of government
and whether there is political interference in decisions made by the civil service. I would like to
know whether it is the normal functioning of this government to allow nongovernmental personnel,
political operatives, to be involved in the decisions in these files and give directives under
legislation.
Hon. Mr. Lord: As the member for Moncton North should know, the final responsibility for the
decision is with the government, with the elected officials. The same people come into this House
and ask us to be responsible for decisions that are made, at times, by other officials of the
government, and we are responsible. When we decide to act, they say: Oh, no, maybe you should
not act.
Let us learn the facts of this case. In this case, the people who are laying the claim did not get what
they wanted through the political process. That is the integrity of the government. They did not get
what they asked for.
Mr. Murphy: They did not get what they asked for, but it was not for lack of trying on the part of
the political operatives under the control of the people on the other side of the House. What I would
ORAL QUESTIONS 19 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 2/9
like to know is this. If that political operative, Mr. Donaghy, advised an individual to disregard the
law, and he works for the Premier, will this Premier fire that political operative?
Hon. Mr. Lord: We see the tactics of the Liberals every day. They come into this House and do not
want to debate issues of substance when it comes to education or health care. They want to smear
the characters of people who work for the government of New Brunswick. That is the tactic of the
Liberals. We see that they are on a power grab. The Liberals want to grab more power. They believe
that the result of the 2003 election gave them a majority, gave them the right to block legislation and
block the budget of this House, and it did not. Now, they are trying to grab more power. The way
they want to do that is by insulting and smearing more people and attacking the characters and
reputations of people who work very hard for a living.
Mr. Murphy: That response is almost verbatim what he said with regard to the Minister of the
Environment and Local Government, and we know what happened to her. I want to know if this
Premier has changed any directives to Mr. Donaghy since the allegations of Gilles LeBlanc have
been made public in a public document. Has he changed any directives to that EA?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The directives given to the EAs are very clear. They are there to support the
ministers, to support the government, and to ensure that we respond to requests coming from
individuals. That is the work of the EA. If the member for Moncton North is not sure what an EA
does, he could ask his leader, because his leader was the EA to his dad when his dad was a member
on this side of the House. I know that maybe he was not a good EA, but he was a likeable guy.
Mr. Murphy: We know what an EA should do. Our concern is what the EAs may have been doing
here. I want to know from this Premier whether he has been made aware, by any employees of the
Department of the Environment and Local Government during the past four years, of any alleged
political involvement or interference by the political operatives on the other side of the House.
Hon. Mr. Lord: If the member for Moncton North wants to make accusations and claims, he can
do it. However, just throwing out accusations without foundation and without facts is not a proper
debate in this House. It shows what the Liberals are up to. All they want to do is attack the
characters of other people.
019 11:25
This is the same party that brought us the sponsorship scandal, and now it wants to attack the
character of the hardworking people who work for the government of New Brunswick. We will not
make apologies for having employees who are willing to meet people. I will not make apologies for
having an EA who is willing to meet with people. In the end, the decisions are made by myself and
by the government, and we are responsible for those decisions. In this case, the decision was made,
and it is very clear what the decision was.
ORAL QUESTIONS 19 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 3/9
Mr. Murphy: The Premier is talking about people who work for the government. We are talking
about people who work for the Progressive Conservative Party or are political operatives. I would
like to know, because he talked about facts, if the Premier has ever been advised, in the last year or
so, as to audio tapes of conversations with his political personnel, staff, and ministers, that have been
made during the course of conversations and meetings involving these individuals in Cap-Pele and
the people I just mentioned. Is he aware of audio conversations that have been recorded?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The first question of the member for Moncton North was with regard to the role
of an EA. EAs are employees of the government of New Brunswick and are paid by the government
of New Brunswick. There are people who do work for political parties. They work for the Liberal
Party or they work for the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick, and they are not
employees of the government. I am sure that they meet people in the course of their work. I am sure
that members who work for the Liberal Party of New Brunswick, who are paid by the Liberal Party
of New Brunswick, talk to people in New Brunswick. Do you know what? That is okay. That is part
of their job. In the same way, there are people who work for the Progressive Conservative Party of
New Brunswick who talk to people in New Brunswick.
I do not know what the member for Moncton North is alleging with regard to recordings. I do not
know if the member for Grand Lake was part of those conversations and he taped them, or is the
member talking about somebody else? Be clear in your questions. Use question period for the
purpose for which it is intended. Question period is here, not to fight legal cases of former Liberal
members of this House, but to debate issues of importance and of emergency to the people of New
Brunswick: health care, education, roads, taxes, and balanced budgets.
Mr. Murphy: It is important to know whether there is political interference that would allow the
gutting of the Clean Water Act. It is important to know whether this Premier has been advised
whether audio recordings have been taken of conversations between the LeBlancs and one of his
ministers, his political operatives, his executive assistant, and the PC executive director. Is he aware
that such audio recordings have been taken, if, in fact, that is the case?
Hon. Mr. Lord: Maybe the member for Moncton North would want to tell us who has taken these
audio tapings. Is he suggesting that someone from the government taped, or is he suggesting that
the LeBlancs taped? Make it clear.
The real issue here today is the fact that the member for Moncton North is replacing the Leader of
the Opposition, really, to give another purpose to this House. I know that the member for Moncton
North is a good lawyer, but this is not a courtroom. This is not where we replace the courts of the
province. This is where there is debate on issues of importance for the people of New Brunswick.
The Leblancs, like everybody else, have access to the courts. If they think that something was done
that they do not like, there are laws in this province and in this country. When the member for
Moncton North talks about the gutting of the Clean Water Act, the fact is that the LeBlancs are in
court because they did not get what they asked for, because there was no political interference.
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 4/9
Mr. Murphy: One of the public allegations is that the executive director to the Premier ordered Mr.
LeBlanc to conduct about $300 000 in work in order to acquire a permit. I am asking the Premier
whether his executive assistant in Moncton is authorized to direct individuals as to spending money
on projects so that they can acquire a government permit.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I will not get into the details of this case, because I do not have the direct personal
information of the facts alleged by the member for Moncton North. Maybe the member for Moncton
North should tell us today if he is working as the lawyer for the LeBlancs or working for the people
of New Brunswick, as the member for Moncton North.
020 11:30
Mr. Murphy: The former lawyer for the LeBlancs is his former law partner.
Without dealing with the particulars of this case, did the Premier ever view plans, diagrams, or any
such documentation produced by the LeBlancs? The public allegation is that he met with them on
at least three occasions and asked them directly for further documentation.
Hon. Mr. Lord: Yes, I met with the LeBlancs, as I meet with a lot of people who want to talk to the
Premier of New Brunswick. I will not stay in my office and not talk to the people of New Brunswick
because the Liberals want to bring these silly allegations to this House. On a daily basis, I meet with
New Brunswickers. Our ministers meet with New Brunswickers. Our MLAs meet with New
Brunswickers. Our staff people meet with New Brunswickers. It is our job to meet with the people.
When people come to us and when they have a problem with government, of course, they sometimes
bring documentation. Yes, we sometimes suggest to them that they should bring more. It is part of
the dialogue process.
Maybe the member for Moncton North should spend more time in his office as an MLA and less
time as a lawyer, because I know that in my riding . . . The member likes to criticize. We get a lot
of calls from the people in Moncton North because they cannot get access to their MLA.
Mr. Murphy: Maybe the Premier would like to talk to Mr. Collins, whom he promised to contact
in two weeks—three years ago. The Premier mentioned all the various individuals who are involved
in government decisions. I am just wondering where the local PC executive would fit into that
structure, because there is a public allegation out there that the LeBlancs went to the local PC
executive asking for government action, and that they were promised government action.
Hon. Mr. Lord: Let us go to the substance of the allegation made by the member for Moncton
North. He is suggesting that they went to some members of the PC Party, but, in the end, they did
not get what they asked for. How bad is the political interference? It is laughable. The worst of all
of this is that the Liberals are choosing to spend a whole question period on this, just to try to create
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 5/9
some innuendo, just to try to create this perception that maybe, perhaps, possibly, there could have
been something wrong. In fact, there is nothing wrong.
Is the member suggesting that all the members on his side and the people who work for them do not
meet with anybody in New Brunswick? We have a letter from one of their own members, writing
to one of our ministers, asking the minister to give a permit to someone who was found guilty of
drunk driving. Is that the type of innuendo, the type of standard that the Liberals want? I will be
happy to table this letter today; it is from one of the members of the opposition, asking a minister
to intervene in a case where someone was found guilty of drunk driving.
Mr. Murphy: There are many questions surrounding this, and we have a cast of characters, many
of whom do not work for the government. In order for the Premier to dispel all the rumours out
there, all the so-called evidence that is there, I would like the Premier to confirm this, without
talking about the substance or merits of the case. The application date is May 26. Will the Premier
confirm that his government’s legal representatives will attend that hearing on May 26, that there
will be no settlement between now and then, and that there will be no settlement with a gag order?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I am amazed that I would get this question from a practicing lawyer who would
suggest that discussion between parties in a court case should not happen before a court date. I an
sure that that is not how the member for Moncton North gets money from insurance companies for
his clients. I am sure he negotiates settlements with the parties on the other side once in a while.
Again, what the member for Moncton North is asking me to do is to interfere in the day-to-day
operations of a legal case that is handled by lawyers of the government. On the one hand, he is
trying to criticize us for interfering. On the other hand, he is asking me to interfere and to tell the
lawyers not to do their work. Come on, make up your mind.
021 11:35
Mr. Murphy: The Premier is going to be back in Moncton practicing law soon enough, so we will
get a chance to exchange this. What the Premier knows, though, having practiced across the street
from me, is that they have to file an affidavit in response to this four days before the application. I
want confirmation from this Premier that they will file an affidavit in response to these allegations,
and of course, it will be public at that time. Just tell us that an affidavit will be filed in response,
because we have information and reason to believe that Rodney Weston and Brian Donaghy will
not deny the allegations in the affidavit.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I am not the lawyer for the case. Maybe the member for Moncton North is the
lawyer for the LeBlancs. He has not answered that question. Is he working for the LeBlancs today,
or is he working for the people of Moncton North? Clearly, what he is fighting here is a case for the
LeBlancs. I have not instructed the lawyers on how to handle this case. I trust that the lawyers who
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 6/9
are handling the case to handle it in the best interest of the people of New Brunswick, and that is
what they will do.
Mr. Murphy: The lawyer for the LeBlancs is the cousin of the Minister of Wellness, Culture and
Sport, Eugene Mockler. It is someone a little different. What I would like to know is whether the
Premier will direct Mr. Donaghy, Rodney Weston, Terry Andow, and anybody else mentioned in
that affidavit to swear out an affidavit in response to this application.
Hon. Mr. Lord: This is an interesting witch hunt that the member for Moncton North has decided
to go on. We know that that is the reason why he is leading question period today. The strategy of
the Liberal Party members is that they do not want to debate the elimination of the HST. In fact, they
want to obstruct it. They do not want to debate the reduction of class sizes. In fact, they want to
obstruct it. They do not want to debate the additional, record funding for health care. They want to
obstruct it. They do not want to debate the protection of seniors’ homes in New Brunswick. In fact,
they want to obstruct it. They do not want to debate reductions in income taxes for low-income New
Brunswickers. They want to obstruct it. Instead, they give the mandate to one of the lawyers on the
other side to pretend that the Legislative Assembly is a courthouse and do his best. Well, his best
is not good enough for the people of New Brunswick. What the people of New Brunswick want is
this House to deal with education, health care, jobs, taxes, balanced budgets, and relief for working
families, instead of silly innuendos, accusations, and smear-and-fear campaigns.
M. V. Boudreau : Mes questions s’adressent aussi au premier ministre. C’est une question
importante pour les gens du Nouveau-Brunswick, parce qu’elle touche à l’intégrité de ce
gouvernement, de ce parti et de ce premier ministre. La déclaration écrite sous serment et signée par
Gilles LeBlanc date du 5 janvier 2005. La poursuite judiciaire a seulement été déposée en cour le
30 janvier 2005. Durant les 25 jours entre ces deux dates, un représentant de la famille LeBlanc a
rencontré Rodney Weston, le chef de cabinet du premier ministre, et Brian Donaghy, l’adjoint de
circonscription du premier ministre. MM. Weston et Donaghy ont tous deux indiqué qu’ils n’étaient
pas en désaccord avec le contenu de la déclaration écrite sous serment et qu’ils ne la contesteraient
pas. Le premier ministre peut-il nous confirmer si cette réunion a bel et bien eu lieu entre les
représentants de la famille LeBlanc et ses adjoints politiques?
L’hon. M. Lord : J’apprécie la question du député de Shediac—Cap-Pelé, qui est lui-même un
ancien adjoint politique. Peut-être il pourrait informer le député de Moncton-Nord du rôle d’un
adjoint politique. Peut-être que le député de Shediac—Cap-Pelé, qui était un adjoint politique,
pourrait nous parler de son rôle en ce qui a trait à certains projets. Entre autres, quel était son rôle
quand un projet a été construit à la plage Parlee contre l’avis du district d’aménagement Beaubassin?
Quel était le rôle du député de Shediac—Cap-Pelé comme adjoint à ce moment-là?
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 7/9
022 11:40
On voit que c’est une campagne de « salissage » que fait le Parti libéral ; le parti qui est coupable
sous le Programme des commandites, et, maintenant, il veut salir les autres.
La réalité, c’est que nous avons un gouvernement qui est propre et qui agit dans l’intérêt des gens
du Nouveau-Brunswick, et j’aimerais que le Parti libéral s’attarde à des questions plus importantes.
Mais on voit ce que les parlementaires du côté de l’opposition font à la Chambre : ils soulèvent des
questions pour tenter de salir les autres, tandis que, par écrit, ils envoient des lettres comme l’a fait
la députée de Baie-de Miramichi au ministre des Transports, lui demandant d’intervenir dans un cas
où quelqu’un avait été trouvé coupable de conduite en état d’ébriété. Cela, c’est la réalité. Au lieu
de faire du « salissage », les parlementaires du côté de l’opposition devraient faire leur travail.
M. V. Boudreau : Le premier ministre a refusé de répondre à la question et a commencé à parler
de différents sujets qui n’ont pas rapport du tout avec le dossier que nous discutons. Nous parlons
de l’intégrité de ce gouvernement, et cela n’a rien à faire avec les autres dossiers que le premier
ministre a soulevés. Nous avons ici deux personnes, Rodney Weston et Brian Donaghy qui ont fait
toutes sortes de promesses. C’est tout documenté dans la déclaration écrite sous serment, et ils ont
dit aux représentants de la province qu’ils acceptent ce qui est dans celle-ci. Le premier ministre
peut-il nous dire si cela veut dire qu’il se range derrière ces employés et accepte la parole de ces
employés, telle que décrite dans la déclaration écrite sous serment présentée par M. LeBlanc?
L’hon. M. Lord : Je sais que les Libéraux veulent s’acharner à faire du « salissage » encore ce
matin. Il faut vraiment aller au fond de cette situation. Il nous accuse d’une façon ou d’une autre de
peut-être avoir fait de l’ingérence, et, en bout de ligne, les LeBlanc n’ont pas eu ce qu’ils
demandaient, et c’est pour cela qu’ils sont en cour. Les décisions ne sont pas prises, et la
responsabilité des décisions ne sont prises par les adjoints politiques et ne sont pas prises par les
conseillers, mais par les ministres. Moi, comme premier ministre, par le Conseil de gestion, par le
Comité des priorités et par le Conseil des ministres, nous sommes responsables des décisions et, en
bout de ligne, dans cette cause, les LeBlanc n’ont pas eu ce qu’ils demandaient. Donc, il n’y a pas
de controverse, sauf celle qu’ils veulent faire. La situation était sans doute différente lorsque le
député de Shediac—Cap-Pelé était l’adjoint du ministre à l’époque. Quel était son rôle dans le projet
de la plage Parlee? Quel était son rôle lorsque ça été construit sans les permis adéquat? Qu’a-t-il
promis en retour aux gens qui ont contribué à la campagne électorale de son patron à l’époque?
M. V. Boudreau : Je maintiens aujourd’hui que mes questions traitent de l’intégrité de ce
gouvernement — rien d’autre. Nous avons mentionné Donaghy et Weston, mais j’aimerais nommer
pour le compte rendu les personnes associées à ce gouvernement et au Parti conservateur qui sont
mentionnées dans cette déclaration écrite sous serment : Terry Andow, Keith Ashfield, Odette
Babineau, Roland Collette, Brian Donaghy, Brenda Fowley, Idee Inyangudor, Kim Jardine, Bernard
Lord, Percy Mockler, Ray Vaughan, Rodney Weston et Hermel Vienneau. Ceci c’est plusieurs
personnes qui sont impliquées dans cette affaire.
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 8/9
Si les faits tels que dévoilés…
Mr. Speaker: Order, please, The member has the floor.
M. V. Boudreau : Le premier ministre est prêt-il à nous confirmer aujourd’hui que, si les faits
mentionnés par n’importe lequel de ces individus, tels que décrit dans la déclaration écrite sous
serment, sont prouvés en cour devant un juge, il prendra des sanctions contre ces personnes?
L’hon. M. Lord : Les questions sont tellement absurdes que c’est difficile de savoir où commencer.
Mais si le député de Shediac—Cap-Pelé veut parler d’intégrité et tenter de salir l’intégrité d’autres
personnes, il est mieux de regarder dans son propre passé avant de commencer à le faire. Quel était
son rôle dans le dossier du projet à la plage Parlee? Si le Parti libéral veut commencer à salir la
réputation d’autres personnes, il est mieux de regarder dans son propre caucus aussi. Cela, c’est la
réalité.
023 11:45
Le Parti libéral est un parti de « salissage » et non un parti…
(Exclamations.)
L’hon. M. Lord : Il pose des questions, il veut nous salir, mais il ne veut pas entendre les réponses.
C’est un parti de « salissage » et non un parti d’idées. C’est le parti qui a été trouvé coupable par le
juge Gomery du Programme des commandites. C’est le même monde. C’est la même stratégie, c’est
la même philosophie. Sa stratégie est toujours de salir les autres. Nous respectons les institutions.
Mr. Speaker: Order.
L’hon. M. Lord : Nous respectons les institutions et le processus juridique qui existent au Nouveau-
Brunswick. Si les gens veulent aller en cour, ils peuvent le faire. La réalité dans cette cause-ci, c’est
que Gilles LeBlanc, le fils d’un ancien député libéral, de Shediac, n’a pas eu ce qu’il demandait,
même après avoir rencontré toutes ces personnes.
Poverty
Mr. Doherty: Today, I had the opportunity to address government on two issues which I think are
emergencies, which have to do with people living in poverty and with the problems they are having
with government. I thank you for the opportunity to do this. The first issue I addressed, as you well
know, was an extension of the home heating oil benefit. Once again, I plead with the government
that this should be done.
HANSARD DAILY / FASCICULE
April 26, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 26 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\25 2006-04-26 BL\25 2006-04-26 BL.wpd 9/9
My question is directed to the Minister of Family and Community Services. It appears that, once
again, the Harper proposal for child care will not work for the poorest and that it is, in fact, the
poorest who will suffer. In a report that was released today by the Caledon Institute of Social Policy,
it was announced that the Canada Child Tax Benefit will be eliminated in Tuesday’s budget, under
the Harper government. Allow me to brief the House on this benefit, which currently pays $20 per
month to parents who do not claim child care expenses for their preschool children. This, in fact,
is going to be eliminated on Tuesday. The elimination of this program will directly affect . . .
Mr. Speaker: State the question.
Mr. Doherty: The question I have is: Will the Minister of Family and Community Services lobby
to prevent the elimination of the Canada Child Tax Benefit, to put $200 back in the hands of the
poor?
L’hon. Mme Dubé : Cela me fait plaisir de recevoir la question, surtout lorsqu’on parle des services
que nous offrons aux enfants et de l’aide pour les familles dans le besoin. Je pense que le
gouvernement actuel a fait et continue de faire beaucoup, jour après jour. Il continue de venir en aide
à ces familles par divers programmes et de différentes façons. On évalue cas par cas. Le député d’en
face parle d’un programme fédéral. On regardera ce qu’on peut faire dans nos régions, dans notre
province, avec l’ensemble de nos programmes, pour améliorer les services. Si on n’aide pas d’une
façon, on le fait de l’autre, toujours pour améliorer la qualité de vie des familles et pour aider les
enfants.
Mr. Doherty: As I previously stated, Madam Minister, the families with a combined salary of
$30 000, with both parents working, will receive only about $200, according to the Harper plan.
Madam Minister, we all know that what these families really need is quality, affordable, accessible
child care spaces. Under the Harper plan, this will not take place. What plans does your department
have to meet the needs of parents who must work to feed their children?
L’hon. Mme Dubé : Le député d’en face fait allusion aux services de garderie et des places qui y sont
disponibles. Je l’ai déjà dit à la Chambre, et cela me fait plaisir de le répéter. Je remercie le député
d’en face de me donner l’occasion de répéter tout ce que nous faisons au niveau des services de
garde pour aider nos enfants et assurer leur plein développement. Je peux redire à la Chambre que
nous avons, depuis 1999 et depuis 2000 — depuis les investissements que nous faisons — 3 000
places supplémentaires dans les services de garderie — 3 000 places supplémentaires. Nous
investissons de plus en plus dans notre réseau de garderies. Ici, je parle au niveau provincial. Nous
avons investi 65 millions au cours des six dernières années. Avec le budget dont on parle ici, on est
rendu à 96 millions. Je suis fier de le comparer au 1 million que les parlementaires libéraux avaient
investi à un moment donné. Ils ont même eu le culot de l’enlever.
MLA Frank Branch says he was framed
Last updated Apr 26 2006 04:11 PM ADT
CBC News
Independent MLA Frank Branch says a criminal investigation into financial irregularities at his former place of employment was prompted by a conspiracy to ruin his life.
In a dramatic, 10-minute address to the New Brunswick legislature Wednesday morning, Branch gave his side of an investigation that began last year, when he was removed from his job as manager of the North Shore Forest Products Marketing Board.
MLA Frank Branch (file)
MLA Frank Branch (file)
The Nepisiguit MLA and 11 board members were all suspended last October following allegations of misconduct.
Branch had served as manager of the board for 10 years, and was fired from the job last month.
* FROM MARCH 23, 2006: MLA fired from forest products marketing board
The RCMP commercial crime unit is continuing an investigation into financial irregularities at the board. No criminal charges have been laid in connection with the case.
Branch, the longest serving MLA in the legislature and a Liberal until last January, told the house that he's been framed.
He said an employee of the marketing board came to him and said he'd doctored Branch's expense receipts to create the perception of improprieties.
Branch said the employee – whom he would not name – gave him a deadline to resign, or be ruined publicly. "He said you shall be destroyed politically, if not completely eliminated."
Branch said the employee wanted his job as manager of the marketing board, and said that unless Branch resigned and recommended him as a replacement, the doctored receipts would become public.
The MLA said the employee claimed to have the support of former Tory leader Bernard Valcourt and Premier Bernard Lord.
Valcourt now holds the job of overseeing all regional wood marketing boards as chairman of the New Brunswick Forest Product Commission.
Reached at his office in Edmundston, Valcourt told CBC News he never discussed the investigation with Lord and that the probe was conducted by independent investigators and auditors.
He also pointed out that by making the comments in the legislature, Branch can't be sued for defamation.
House leader Bev Harrison said Branch's allegations are ludicrous. "He's in dangerous water there. You can't accuse members of doing some things when you have no proof of that. That's not the style of this premier. That's not how he operates."
Branch's allegations are just the latest in a series of dramatic incidents at the provincial legislature.
The Lord government is hanging on to power by just one seat, and was reduced to a minority in February when Miramichi MLA Michael (Tanker) Malley crossed the floor to sit as an Independent.
Malley was quickly named Speaker, and a week after casting the deciding vote in support of the Lord government's budget, rejoined the Progressive Conservative party.
It was the first time a sitting Speaker has ever crossed back to a political party, and the Liberal opposition still refuses to recognize the government's one-seat majority.
As an independent, Branch holds the swing vote in the legislature, and can force the Speaker to vote on every issue. Branch voted against the budget, forcing the Speaker to cast the deciding ballot, preserving Lord's then-minority government.
Branch recently accepted a free trip to Montreal, accompanying Lord to a first minister's conference, so the government could not be defeated in Lord's absence.
GOD'S MINUTE!!!!
HAVE FAITH IN THE LORD YOUR GOD AND YOU WILL BE
UPHELD; HAVE FAITH IN HIS PROPHETS AND YOU WILL BE
SUCCESSFUL.
( 2 CHRONICLES 20:20 *NIV )
Dear Charles,
Never let troubles or problems cause you to worry. After all
it is written; THE RIGHTEOUS SHALL LIVE BY FAITH.
( GALATIANS 3:11 ) For when we put our full faith in God
we worry less. Further what is the opposite of faith but worry
anyway!
Now as for worry; WHO OF YOU BY WORRYING CAN ADD A
SINGLE HOUR TO HIS LIFE? SINCE WE CAN NOT DO THIS
VERY LITTLE THING, WHY DO YOU WORRY ABOUT THE
REST? ( LUKE 12:25-26 ) THEREFORE DO NOT WORRY
ABOUT TOMORROW, FOR TOMORROW WILL WORRY ABOUT
ITSELF. EACH DAY HAS ENOUGH TROUBLE OF ITS OWN.
( MATTHEW 6:33-34 )
So Charles, instead of worrying have faith in God and;
CAST ALL YOUR ANXIETY ON HIM BECAUSE HE CARES FOR
YOU! ( 1 PETER 5:7 ) Then; WHEN YOU LIE DOWN, YOU
WILL NOT BE AFRAID; WHEN YOU LIE DOWN YOUR SLEEP
WILL BE SWEET! Sweet indeed my friend! Amen.
( PROVERBS 3:24 )
With My Love & Prayers,
your servant Allen
[ Prayer Requests---Contact Us---Bible Study---*Donations* ]
[ Audio---Subscribe---Change of Address---Unsubscribe ]
at: http://www.godsminute.org
Apostle Paul Ministries, P O Box 55996, Hayward, CA 94545
(c) Copyright 2006 by Apostle Paul Ministries
IS THIS THE REASON BERNARD LORD HAS TO RAISE THE POWER RATE IN NEW BRUNSWICK????
LISA HRABLUK QUITS THE IRVINGS NEWSPAPER FOR MEDIA PLANET????
THERE WAS NOT A WHISPER FROM TONY HUNTJENS ON TUESDAY!
No apology to the so-call speaker. Nothing!!!! I wonder why????
THAT'S THE REASON I COULDN'T MEET WITH STEPHEN HARPER A FEW MONTHS AGO!!! I DIDN'T HAVE $500.00!!!!
PM accused of $500-a-plate 'hypocrisy'
Harper to attend pricey political dinners while pressing for ban on corporate giving
GLORIA GALLOWAY
From Tuesday's Globe and Mail
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper, who has repeatedly accused the Liberals of selling access to former prime ministers, will attend two $500-a-plate political fundraisers on the East Coast this weekend.
Liberal MP Dominic Leblanc said it was hypocritical for Mr. Harper to speak at a dinner for the provincial Conservatives in his province -- one that is asking corporations to buy tables for $5,000 -- when the federal Conservatives' new accountability act would impose a complete ban on all political contributions from corporations.
"Is this how the Prime Minister plans to reduce corporate influence on government or is this just another Conservative flip-flop?" Mr. Leblanc asked during Parliament's Question Period.
Mr. Harper replied that donations to a provincial Conservative party are not the same as donations to the federal party.
"The fundraiser in question is not for the Conservative Party of Canada," he said. "It is a fundraiser for the provincial Progressive Conservative Party and of course is conducted under the laws of the province of New Brunswick."
When he unveiled the new accountability act, Mr. Harper said: "We've seen lobbyists making their pitch to Paul Martin and his ministers at $5,000-per-person cocktail parties. It has to stop."
It is a mantra he has often repeated since the days just before the recent federal election when former prime minister Paul Martin helped boost Liberal Party coffers by attending such events.
The New Brunswick fundraiser will be held Saturday, the day after a similar event in Charlottetown. Premier Bernard Lord of New Brunswick and Premier Pat Binns of Prince Edward Island are both Conservative -- and both campaigned for Mr. Harper during the election.
Mr. Harper "offered a technical defence that this is for a provincial Conservative party. He may technically be correct," said Mr. Leblanc. "I just think that there is an increasing hypocrisy where we go down to raise money for Conservative premiers -- corporate money to help in our federal election, and then we make a great virtue out of receiving no corporate funds."
Mr. Leblanc also said he doubts that Mr. Harper will fly to the events on a commercial jetliner at party expense despite complaining in opposition about Mr. Martin's habit of doing so.
The fundraising dinners were just one area of Conservative accountability in which the opposition tried to poke holes yesterday.
Liberal Leader Bill Graham took Mr. Harper to task during Question Period for nominating Gwyn Morgan, a former oil company executive who has raised considerable funds for the Conservatives, to head the new body that will oversee government appointments.
"Is it not a stretch for the Prime Minister to say that the only qualified person for this job was his close friend and fundraiser?" Mr. Graham asked.
Mr. Harper replied that Mr. Morgan is one of the most highly respected chief executives in the country. "What he has volunteered to do for $1 a year is to clean up the appointments process in the country," he said. "Canadians thank him and I understand why the Liberal Party does not want the process cleaned up."
But Mark Holland, a Liberal MP from Ajax, near Toronto, who has said opposition members will oppose the nomination when it comes before the Commons operations and estimates committee, said Mr. Morgan's "best qualification for the job is a $100,000 donation in December, 2003, when the Conservative-Alliance swallowed the Progressive Conservatives."
There were additional questions from the Bloc Québécois about the communications director for Transport Minister Lawrence Cannon who sent out a release for the minister on April 10 and another for Apple Canada Inc., a former client, on April 11. Ministerial staff members are not permitted to work for private enterprise, according to parliamentary ethics rules.
Mr. Cannon said he has a letter dated in February in which his communications director, Huguette Guilhaumon, resigned from Apple, and he would be checking into the matter.
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
FORGET RITALIN!!!!! GIVE YOUR CHILDREN COFFEE!!!!!
Coffee being used to calm kids
April 25,2006
Jennifer C. Smith
Monitor Staff Writer
McALLEN — Forget the apple-a-day cliché. A daily cup of coffee or tea — even for kids — could be just what the doctor ordered to treat attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder.
“I suggest drinking iced tea, black tea for improving the effects of medications,” said McAllen pediatric neurologist Dr. Leonardo Garcia.
“I prescribe it in very small amounts, specific amounts for each child, and that’s the same thing with medicines.”
But the idea of using caffeinated products for youth to calm the disorder’s symptoms such as physical restlessness, poor concentration and impulsive behavior is a controversial idea in medical circles. The limited studies available have not definitively linked caffeine consumption to abetting or worsening the disorder, so while some physicians suggest a latté, others warn against prescribing a substance that can interfere with sleep.
But there is no denying with Starbucks percolating on street corners and green tea riding the antioxidant frenzy, caffeine is the preferred beverage for many American adults and youth.
Still, several therapists and physicians remain unconvinced caffeine and kids mix.
“At one time, it was believed the coffee would decrease the activity in the brain,” said McAllen family physician Dr. Benjamin Bujanda. “Now we have proved caffeine makes you hyper so it is not indicated for people having these disorders.”
Not so, responds Dr. Joel Young, a Detroit child psychiatrist and a member of the Attention Deficit Disorder Association. The Pennsylvania-based nonprofit is a national advocacy group for attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder research.
“Caffeine in the brain enhances transmissions of (the chemical) dopamine and that has an effect of increasing concentration and focus, probably for everybody to some degree,” he said.
So a cup of joe is not the best treatment, but it can mitigate the disorder’s symptoms, he said.
“For a successful treatment of (the disorder), you would need a really high level of caffeine … 8 to 10 cups day and most people would get too agitated on that.”
Attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder begins in childhood and sometimes last into adult life. There is still not much understood about it, but several factors play a role, including brain changes, heredity, and childhood exposure to environmental toxins.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates 4.4 million youth ages 4 to17 have been diagnosed with the disorder by a healthcare professional. As of 2003, 2.5 million youth ages 4 to 17 received medication treatment.
Typical treatment usually involves prescription drugs such as Ritalin, a nervous system stimulant that produces a calming effect on attention-deficit and hyperactive patients, and at times, support groups and parental training. Improving nutrition, getting adequate rest and daily exercise can also be beneficial.
Behavior therapy, such as lifting or pushing heavy objects to increases a child’s focus and attention, is preferred to caffeine, said occupational therapist Melissa Finley of Building Blocks Rehab and Autism Center in McAllen.
“Modifying a classroom environment also helps them to focus,” she added.
But Mission resident Consuelo Gonzalez, 48, and her two children swear by coffee-flavored mints and an occasional caffeinated beverage to soothe their nerves.
“Once in a while I like to have a cappuccino with milk,” she said. “It helps me to concentrate on whatever I’m doing.”
Since caffeine is a mild stimulant, it may work in the same way as more conventional drug therapies, several doctors said.
Experimental diets advocate the elimination of foods thought to increase hyperactivity, such as sugar and caffeine, according to the Mayo Clinic’s Web site.
Still, “studies haven’t found a consistent link between diet and improved symptoms of (the disorder),” the site states.
But don’t tell that to Dr. Leonardo Garcia’s patient, Martha Muñoz of Pharr, who gives her 2-year-old hyperactive son, Vitale, black tea flavored with kiwi and strawberry flavors.
“He calms down a lot with that,” she said, as Vitale examined play blocks in Garcia’s office. “I like it better than taking medications.”
——
Jennifer C. Smith covers health, environment and science issues at The Monitor. She can be reached at (956) 683-4462.
THE IRVINGS IN NEW YORK FOR A HUGE LOAN????
Someone sent me this email asking this question? Does anyone was an answer????
Charles,
Was listening to Talk of the Town and Rick mentioned Irving and Repsol
were in New York for a 700 plus million dollar loan for the LNG plant in
Eastern Canada.
I may of misheard but see if you can information for us on
what is
going on?
Thank you.
BERNARD LORD JUST DON'T CARE WHAT KIND OF DRUGS OUR YOUTHS TAKES???
Adderall abuse among teens a widespread, dangerous problem
Dr. Wes Crenshaw and Marissa Ballard
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
Dear Dr. Wes & Marissa: Do you believe Adderall is being abused by college students? Can this abuse lead to more serious problems later on?
Dr. Wes: Absolutely. And it’s not limited to college students or that particular medication. We see this problem in high schools and junior highs and with Ritalin-based products as well. It’s one reason clinics need to be very careful writing these prescriptions for teens and young adults. When our office prescribes any medication to teens, we have a very frank talk with their parents about the potential for abuse or dependency. With college kids, we have the same conversation, and we stay vigilant for signs of abuse. To understand the problem, one has to realize that these medications are stimulants, known commonly as “speed” when abused. They are similar to methamphetamine, though less potent if they are taken orally, as they are supposed to be.
Reasons for stimulant abuse can vary from dangerous (enjoying the high they create) to pseudo-sensible (using them to improve focus for studying or testing). Any reason is a bad one, however, because misuse can lead to significant health concerns and addiction. The only people who should be on these medications are those who have legitimate diagnoses of ADHD or some other disorders, such as hypersomnia.
I have seen many young people and adults with ADHD helped immensely by these medications. I’ve also seen folks misuse these medications with very negative consequences. For the non-ADHD crowd, these medications can cause anything from anxiety and sleeplessness to mania (extreme energy, excitement or arousal), and even paranoia and full-blown psychosis. Physically, abuse can create heart problems and unhealthy weight loss. In people with a tendency toward bipolar disorder, these risks are even greater. This is why psychiatrists and nurse practitioners always try to rule out bipolar disorder in kids and adults with symptoms of ADHD, and why they usually start patients on lower doses of these medications to be sure they don’t make things worse rather than better.
A major allure of stimulants for college kids and teens is that they do help one focus their attention, stay up later and get more work done. That’s great until one realizes that during a fairly short period of time they become addictive when not used as prescribed by a doctor. If you’re asking this question because you have abused or want to abuse stimulants, I’d ask you to think again.
The other interesting thing about stimulants and studying is that you don’t always turn out as good a product as you think. This is because the manic state they cause makes you grandiose and elaborate. I recall one of my teachers sharing that she’d used amphetamines before a big oral exam in college. On the very first question, she recalled offering amazing insight that her professors surely would be talking about for years to come. Then the lead professor turned to her and said, “… that’s all very nice, Ms. Jones, but what did it have to do with the question we asked?” She flunked the exam.
Marissa: When I was in junior high, three of my friends got in trouble for sharing one of their prescriptions for Adderall. The problem with kids using pills only has gotten worse since then, and I don’t think I am exaggerating when I say this.
I know people who hardly ever come to school without having taken something. I’ve been offered dozens of different kinds of pills. Some people are just “generous,” and others are looking to sell them and make a profit. Even when I had my wisdom teeth removed, people were asking if they could buy the hydrocodone that I had received for the pain.
Prescription pills are more enticing than any other drug, in my opinion, because they are easy to conceal, and often it’s impossible to tell whether a person has taken them. There’s no scent, no bloodshot eyes, nothing. One of the biggest dangers of pills is that because it’s so easy to get away with, teenagers don’t take the repercussions seriously. Sure, it’s fun now to be able to take pills and be high, but what about when you go off to college or get a job? How long before it really messes up your life and your ambitions?
I believe schools don’t take the issue of drug abuse as seriously as they should. It goes on every day, and no one seems to notice. I believe that what students actually report using and the number of students that are caught are way lower than the number of students actually taking prescription pills. It can be anyone — the person with straight A’s and the person who is flunking all of her classes. We need to start taking this issue more seriously or it will only get much worse.
Next week: A 15-year old girl asks the golden question of the teen years: Should I be this moody? Or is something wrong with me?
Contest: Last call for essays to compete for Marissa’s job. Deadline is May 1. Read the challenge question online at www.ftimidwest.com, and e-mail your answer to doubletake@ljworld.com.
— Dr. Wes Crenshaw is a board-certified family psychologist and director of the Family Therapy Institute Midwest. Marissa Ballard is a Lawrence High School senior. Opinions and advice given here are not meant as a substitute for psychological evaluation or therapy services. Send your questions about adolescent issues to doubletake@ljworld.com. All correspondence is strictly confidential.
QUESTION PERIOD AT THE NEW BRUNSWICK LEGISLATURE!!!! < Mardi >
ORAL QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 1/11
015 14:05
Telecommunications
Mr. S. Graham: My first question this afternoon is for the Premier. I am sure the Premier can
appreciate that the telecommunications industry is changing throughout the world. New Brunswick
enjoys a leadership advantage over other jurisdictions. In fact, I am sure the Premier will agree that
the former administration and the current administration have made great strides in promoting the
technology that exists in New Brunswick. In fact, broadband is not confined to the three major
metropolitan areas of our province. We have high-speed Internet in many rural areas of the province
which greatly impacts rural entrepreneurs. We also see that high-quality cell phone coverage has
been enhanced throughout our province, which gives us an economic advantage. Today, Voice over
Internet Protocol is currently coming online that will allow Internet providers to provide longdistance
calling.
My question to the Premier is very simple: Does he not agree that if our province’s economy is
going to continue this important diversification, telecommunications is going to play a key role in
the development of our provincial economy?
Hon. Mr. Lord: Of course, the telecommunications industry is a very important component of our
economy in New Brunswick and it is part of the overall objective of the government to diversify the
economy. We simply cannot rely on our economy of the past, but we have to build the economy of
the future. I believe we do that by investing in people. I believe we do that by embracing innovation.
I believe we do that by building strategic infrastructure, which includes broadband infrastructure in
our province. I believe we also do that by creating a competitive business and fiscal environment
to attract investments in New Brunswick.
Mr. S. Graham: The Premier’s answer this afternoon is very appropriate. As he said, we all agree
in this Chamber that telecommunications will be the key to the diversification of our province. The
past Liberal administration and the current Conservative administration made great strides in
enhancing the infrastructure in this province.
My question to the Premier is this: Currently, the federal government has taken a nationwide review
of the telecommunications policy. Would the Premier not feel that a timely review of our own
provincial policy is warranted, to make sure that New Brunswick continues to have the leadership
advantage compared to other jurisdictions?
Hon. Mr. Lord: Policies are reviewed by the government from time to time. There are certain parts
of our policies that are part of our overall plans. If the Leader of the Opposition has any suggestions
that he would like to make, I would love to hear them. If there is anything precise that he feels needs
to be reviewed at this time, we are more than willing to do that as well.
ORAL QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 2/11
I know that our Department of Business New Brunswick, along with other departments, is looking
at the different policies we have in New Brunswick. We do this in a continuing effort to make sure
that this is the place where we invest in people and people invest in us. I believe that our policies
have resulted in record-low unemployment and more jobs than ever before, and we want to continue
because we know that there is still more potential that we can tap into in New Brunswick.
Mr. S. Graham: It is exciting to see that the Premier and I agree on the same objective. Clearly, as
he said, to grow the economy, telecommunications will play a key role. The Premier asked for a
suggestion, and I appreciate that invitation. The suggestion I would like to give to the Premier, and
that I would like to see his support on, is that we strongly feel the time has now come to strike a blue
ribbon panel of key experts within the telecommunications field. These would be people such as
Peter Jollymore, the former VP of NBTel; Lino Celeste, the former Aliant Chairman, who was
formerly the CEO of NBTel; Bill Stanley, the co-founder and President of Fundy Communications;
Jack Travis, who is a former NBTel President; and John Bragg, who is the founder and President
of EastLink. The recommendation I would like to give to the Premier this morning, since he asked
for a suggestion, is: Let’s reach out to individuals such as these in the telecommunications field so
that we can make sure that the best policies are being developed to let New Brunswick continue its
leadership advantage.
Hon. Mr. Lord: I certainly will be able to take note of the names recommended by the Leader of
the Opposition. I know all those names, and some of those names actually are currently sitting on
boards that we have set up. For instance, Peter Jollymore is a member of the New Brunswick
Innovation Foundation that we have set up in the province. The foundation is doing some very good
work throughout the province. In fact, in the budget tabled by the Minister of Finance, we added
funding to the Innovation Foundation. It is important to note that our province must continuously
find ways to stay ahead of the pack. Some things are going well, some things are not going as well.
Even the things that are going well need to be reviewed at times. That is why I certainly welcome
the recommendations and the suggestions of the Leader of the Opposition, and we are more than
willing to give it due consideration.
016 14:10
Land Development
Mr. Murphy: There is a court date of May 26 in the Court of Queen’s Bench in New Brunswick.
While the question is not to the merit of the case, it goes to the Premier and pertains to questions that
have arisen from the affidavit of Gilles LeBlanc as to the integrity of government. In early
September 2002, a verbal stop-work order was issued by the Department of Environment and Local
Government with regard to a protected area in Cap-Brûlé. On or about October 1, 2002, the
executive assistant, a political operative to the Premier, Brian Donaghy, told the individuals, the
LeBlanc brothers and their father, to continue to work. In other words, that was in breach of the
verbal order of the department. On October 15, 2002, a written order was given to them, and work
ORAL QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 3/11
was continued until November 3, 2002. My question to the Premier—and it goes to the integrity of
government—is this: Was he aware, at that time or subsequently, that his political operative, his
executive assistant, had advised these individuals to breach the law?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I must say that I am a bit surprised by the question from the member for Moncton
North, who is a renowned lawyer, a well-known lawyer, in Greater Moncton. I think he knows the
rules of evidence better than to suggest that, just on the weight of one affidavit from one claimant,
we can pass judgment on what happened. I know that the member for Moncton North likes to jump
to conclusions, but I think he is stretching it this time. This case is before the courts. I can assure him
that the people will be able to have due process in court.
Mr. Murphy: There is no doubt that the evidence is untested, and the Premier and I are both aware
of that. That is why we are here in this House today, asking the Premier for answers for the residents
of Cap-Brûlé. This is with regard to the integrity of government, and not with regard to the merit
of the case. We want to know whether that transpired. According to Mr. LeBlanc’s statements, he
has said that political operatives, between early September 2002 and November 3, 2002, when the
work was completed, contrary to the orders of the department . . . Was the Premier aware of any
political operatives during that time who were advising the LeBlancs that the matter would be
looked after?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The question is so vague as to what is the matter, and what would be looked after.
I have not read the affidavit of Mr. LeBlanc and, therefore, I do not have personal knowledge of
what is written in the affidavit of Mr. LeBlanc. I do know that the case is before the courts. I do
know that there are lawyers on both sides working on this case. I do know that some sides have
changed lawyers. This is a case that is before the courts. I do know that the people of New
Brunswick must respect the law of the province of New Brunswick.
Mr. Murphy: This has nothing to do with matters before the court. While he has not read the
affidavit, that is fine, but I will refresh his memory as to a few events. We are informed by that
affidavit, and verbally, that the Premier met in May 2003 and on July 21, 2003 with Azor LeBlanc
and his two sons and, on both occasions, said that the matter was being looked after. They then met
with Rodney Weston, the chief of staff, and he said that the Premier would deliver the order himself
within two weeks. They also met with Terry Andow, the PC executive director. They also met and
spoke with Odette Babineau, the defeated candidate for the PCs. They then, strangely enough, met
on January 12, 2004, with Terry Andow, Roland Gaudet, Brian Donaghy, and the executive of the
local PC association. Those individuals assured the LeBlancs that the matter was being worked on.
Those political operatives apparently said this. Apparently, the Premier met with them later, on July
24, 2004, and said that the permit would be granted and the charges withdrawn. Can he tell me, can
he tell this House, can he tell New Brunswickers, if any of this is true, regardless of a court case?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I do appreciate the fact that the member for Moncton North likes to work part-time
as a lawyer and he wants to practice his work here today in the Legislature, but I will not transform
ORAL QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 4/11
the Legislature into a court of law. The evidence that is there is presented in an affidavit from one
individual. I can tell you that things are alleged in that affidavit that are clearly not true, in terms of
what happened.
017 14:15
There are two things that are very clear in this. These individuals met with everybody they could.
What is also true is that we have an open government and that we meet with people who want to
meet with us. The second thing that is obviously true is that these people are suing the government
because they did not get what they were asking for.
I do not know what the charge from the opposition is, whether we should have done something to
help these people or not. I know what the opposition members are trying to do. It is not based on law
or on fact. They are just trying to smear the reputation of people who work for the government. That
is the tactic of the Liberals. It is the only thing they are good at. They are certainly not very good
at bringing forward ideas and policies that would move matters forward for the people of New
Brunswick.
Mr. Burke: I certainly find it ironic this morning. The Premier said he had not read the affidavit.
Now, he is saying that there are things in the affidavit that are not true. For the Premier’s benefit,
in an attempt to obtain his political assistance in overcoming these problems, the LeBlanc family
contacted the Office of the Premier and spoke to Brian Donaghy, the Premier’s Moncton executive
assistant. Mr. Donaghy, despite the stop-work order issued by the Department of the Environment
and Local Government, instructed he LeBlanc family to proceed with work—a direct violation and
contrary to the stop-work order.
My question to the Premier is this, since he did not read the affidavit and he is now saying that there
are things in the affidavit that are not true: Which Cabinet members did you ask to meet with the
LeBlanc family to authorize the continuation of work in this area?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I may as well have a chance today to talk to every lawyer who works here parttime.
As the lawyer from Fredericton North is not really sharp today, what I heard of the affidavit was
read to me by the member for Moncton North. If, in fact, that is what is contained in the affidavit,
I can state that some of those things are incorrect.
The opposition members are bringing this here today, not because they want to discuss matters of
public interest, but because they want to take this opportunity to smear me and other members who
work for the government, without due process, without letting this case go to trial. That is why we
have courts in this province. That is why the member for Moncton North and the member for
Fredericton North keep making a pretty decent living outside this House serving as lawyers—not
ORAL QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 5/11
that there’s anything wrong with that. I am a lawyer myself. They are bringing this to this House,
not to advance any issue of public interest, but to try to smear the reputation of people who work
for the government.
Mr. Burke: I have not had an opportunity to view the Premier in his capacity as a lawyer, but I have
had the opportunity to view him in his capacity as Premier, and it is a pretty poor performance.
In court documents filed with the Court of Queen’s Bench in Moncton, Gilles LeBlanc, a member
of the LeBlanc family project, alleged that he and his brother, Michel, met with Minister Mockler,
in early December of 2002, to discuss this matter.
I want to state again that this is not about the courts; it is about the integrity of government. I quote
from the affidavit:
After (Minister Mockler) looked at the 1977 plan, the pictures, he told us to relay the message to
Azor (the LeBlanc family’s father) that he should stay in Florida and relax. He would consult Brad
Green on the matter and have this lot plan grandfathered.
My question is to the Minister of Culture and Sport. Why would you, as the then Minister of
Transportation, be meeting with the LeBlanc family in the Premier’s Office to discuss stop-work
orders issued by the Department of the Environment and Local Government if it were not for
political purposes, solely to circumvent an order that was put in place to protect the environment
from harmful construction? Why were you involved, Mr. Minister?
Hon. Mr. Mockler: I meet a lot of people, and I will continue to meet with people who want to talk
to me or to the government of New Brunswick. This matter is before the courts, and I will respect
that.
Mr. Burke: The allegations contained in Mr. LeBlanc’s affidavit outline very clearly that Minister
Mockler met with the LeBlanc family on several occasions after the December 2002 meeting to
resolve this matter. In fact, the minister became so personally involved in ensuring that the stopwork
order was lifted that he discussed the issue with the LeBlanc family while they were
vacationing in Florida in 2003.
The most telling of the accusations in Mr. LeBlanc’s affidavit was that he was assured that a permit
would be provided to the family by the Premier to complete the building project if the family would
come home from Florida and help with the convention and election in 2003.
018 14:20
I just have to wonder how many more political favours will be done by this Premier and this minister
at his $5 000-a-table dinner with the Prime Minister of Canada when he comes to New Brunswick.
ORAL QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 6/11
Can you tell the residents of Cap-Brûlé if a promise was made that a permit would be issued in
exchange for election favours?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The smear-and-fear campaign of the Liberals is really outrageous. There is one
party in this country that has recently been found to be in contravention of regulations and using
money for a distasteful purpose, and that is the Liberal Party. A lawyer like the member for
Fredericton North should know a lot better than to make false accusations without evidence.
The opposition members do not want to talk about the budget. They do not want to talk about the
HST coming off power. They do not want to talk about the protection of seniors’ homes. They do
not want to talk about the reduction of class sizes in New Brunswick. They want to take an affidavit
of a case that is before the courts to try to smear the people of this government, members of this
government, and people who work for the government of New Brunswick. It is distasteful.
Highways
Mr. Allaby: My question is for the Minister of Transportation. The old shell game is alive and well
in this government’s approach to Route 8 and the Nashwaak Valley bypass. Are they not actually
going to do anything? The minister’s capital budget for this year did not say a word about the Route
8 bypass, the Nashwaak Valley bypass, or even the Marysville bypass. Realizing that they were in
trouble on this matter, under relentless pressure from the opposition and from the work of people
like Larry Jewett, they scrambled to include a nicely worded phrase about this project in a press
release accompanying the minister’s estimates. Will the minister admit that, despite the nicesounding
words, the government was not really serious about doing any actual work on this project
last year, when this budget was brought forward?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : Cela me fait tellement plaisir de me lever pour parler des routes au
Nouveau-Brunswick. Vous savez, lorsque j’ai présenté mon budget de capital en décembre dernier,
à l’Assemblée législative du Nouveau-Brunswick, il y avait, à Ottawa, un gouvernement qui disait
non aux demandes du Nouveau-Brunswick. Maintenant, nous avons un gouvernement à Ottawa qui
dit oui aux demandes du Nouveau-Brunswick en ce qui concerne les routes.
On n’a sûrement pas de leçon de morale à recevoir des Libéraux pour ce qui est de la construction
de routes et des engagements avec le gouvernement fédéral pour la construction de routes. Notre
engagement est sans équivoque. Non seulement allons-nous faire des améliorations partout dans la
province mais la route 8 sera améliorée. La voie de détournement de Marysville sera construite par
notre gouvernement.
Mr. Allaby: The minister said that he was not getting any cooperation from Ottawa. That is kind
of interesting. The Premier staged a great photo op with the Prime Minister to announce a $400-
million highway deal, except that we have discovered that there is not a penny in this budget for this.
The minister, in a press release in December, said that the completion of the full NashwaakORAL
QUESTIONS 18 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 7/11
Marysville bypass is a priority for the government, except we learned that Infrastructure Canada
confirmed that the province did not bother to send in the documentation that Ottawa could assess
and forward to the federal Treasury Board to approve. Will the minister confirm that, in fact, the
department did not actually send in the information to Ottawa to assess that would lead to it
spending the $7 million that was set aside for New Brunswick on that project?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : Nous nous retrouvons devant une opposition désespérée, qui fait la chasse
aux sorcières pour trouver 5 millions de dollars alors que nous avons une entente de 400 millions
de dollars avec le gouvernement du Canada. L’information que le député vient de mentionner n’est
pas véridique. L’information que je reçois de mon ministère fait état de toutes les échanges de
correspondance. Toute l’information dont le gouvernement fédéral avait besoin à ce moment-là a
été reçue. Dois-je rappeler au député d’en face qu’on ne va pas au Conseil du Trésor à Fredericton
ou à Ottawa pour recevoir l’approbation d’un plan? On va au Conseil du Trésor pour avoir une
approbation de financement. Je ne veux pas en prendre la responsabilité.
L’ancien ministre responsable du Nouveau-Brunswick au fédéral, Andy Scott, député de
Fredericton, a failli à sa tâche de garantir le financement pour la voie de détournement de
Marysville. Je suis très fier de l’engagement de 400 millions de dollars de notre gouvernement et
de celui du gouvernement fédéral.
019 14:25
Mr. Allaby: The minister indicated that this was not, in fact, true. However, it is from Harper’s own
government that we get this information that this documentation was not sent in. The minister said
that the province will spend much of 2006 and 2007 planning the 36-km Route 8 bypass from
Fredericton to South Portage. I have seen the alignment of this route planned eight or nine years ago.
Is this just another stalling tactic for the minister not to actually have to move because he has no
money in this budget for this project? Is this just another stalling tactic, slowing down the work,
doing this work at the speed of study?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : La vérité vient de sortir. Le Parti libéral, lorsqu’il était au gouvernement,
n’a rien fait pour la route 8. Ce que le député qui faisait partie du gouvernement a vu était tout
simplement une ligne sur une carte. Le Parti libéral et le gouvernement libéral n’ont pas procédé à
l’étude d’impact environnemental. Ils n’ont pas procédé à l’achat de terrains nécessaires à la
construction. Ils n’ont rien fait en ce qui a trait au dossier de la route qui se rend de Fredericton à
South Portage. Ils veulent nous blâmer parce que nous bougeons, nous allons de l’avant et nous
avons maintenant une entente. Pour répondre plus précisément à la question du député, toute
l’information dont Ottawa avait besoin a été fournie avant le 22 juillet de l’an dernier. Ils devraient
vérifier leurs sources d’information avant de lancer toutes sortes de fausses rumeurs et de faussetés
non fondées, comme ils le font depuis le début des questions orales.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 8/11
Support Orders
Mr. Lamrock: One of the most important times that a family looks to government for help is in
getting an interim support order. When a family breaks down, often, the poorer parent, the one left
behind with the kids, desperately needs child support. Often, they are not able to get social
assistance to help if parents choose not to support their kids. In a timely way, when families break
down, we need to make sure that these poorer parents are able to have a support order in place very
quickly, so that they and their kids can have some kind of quality of life. In recent days, we have
heard a number of senior family lawyers say that the wait times for interim support orders in New
Brunswick is absolutely unacceptable. In some cases, they are waiting as long as 10 months before
the money can start to flow. Everyone knows that is too long for kids to wait. My question is for the
Minister of Justice and Consumer Affairs. We know that we have unacceptable wait times now.
What kind of decrease is he willing to commit to in wait times for interim support orders this year,
as a result of this budget?
Hon. Mr. Fitch: The mandate of the Department of Justice is to promote the impartial
administration of justice and to ensure the protection of the public good. That is what our vision
statement is, and that is what we do. I sympathize with people who are involved in the courts and
who have to endure some of the wait times, because we know that, in society, there are many people
who, unfortunately, cannot agree, cannot mediate, cannot adjudicate, and cannot take advantage of
some of the systems that we have in place to settle some of their differences. They do end up in
court. We know that is causing some wait times, and we know that we are working on that. We work
with our federal counterparts in order to try to alleviate some of the problems with which society
is faced. Therefore, we continue to do that, and we will continue to do that in the future.
Mr. Lamrock: I have to admit that the minister seems far more excited about building courthouses
than he does in talking about how we are going to get justice at those courthouses. There are too
many vulnerable women and children who are waiting months. It is not about a failure to mediate.
This minister needs to be more on top of his files than that. This is making sure that there is an order
in place, so that the money is there while the parties wait for a court date, while they wait for
mediation, and in many cases, while they wait for social assistance, because this government still
will not change the economic unit policies to make sure that the money flows as soon as the family
breaks down. That is what the real issue is. We all know the vision statement. You have been
minister for a few months now. However, what you are supposed to do is commit to how much we
are going to get those wait times down, so that vulnerable women and kids can have the money that
they need to survive day to day. The minister could not tell us how much he would bring them down
this year, because he did not deal with it in the budget.
020 14:30
Let me ask this. They always ask for ideas. I proposed one several months ago, and I want to know
what has been done about it. Interim support orders could be done under the family guidelines by
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 9/11
masters. You do not need to wait for a judge to do it. Some provinces have masters in place who can
go through the support guidelines. You could have a quick order, and you could always fix it later.
You make sure that the family has the money then. Since I proposed that idea, have you looked at
when, over the next three to four months, we can expect some real, concrete legislation, and real,
concrete benchmarks in this area? Kids should not have to wait any longer.
Hon. Mr. Fitch: Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this issue, because it is important to us.
It is important to this government that the most vulnerable people in this community are looked
after. That is why we have increased the amount of money to various areas, including legal aid,
family services, the courts, and the area that promotes administration and adjudication to try to
mediate between parties before a matter ends up in court. We want to have the issues resolved and
the differences quieted down, so that the money and respect can go forward. We are anxious to get
to estimates so that I can talk about this in more detail, and so that the opposition can see some of
the bold initiatives we have put forward to help the people in this province who are the most needy.
I am anxious to get there, and I will be more than happy to answer many more questions on that
topic.
Mr. Lamrock: We will be happy to look at this minister’s estimates whenever he wants to bring
them forward, but if he is ready, he is going to have to know his files better than this. I will tell you
something: I want to hear a concrete answer from this minister—not how much money you have
sprinkled around, but what you will commit to, in order to decrease the amount of time vulnerable
families, that is, vulnerable single parents and kids, will have to wait to get a support order in place.
Until I hear a real answer to that, from a minister who is on top of the file, a minister who
understands that is done before mediation, it is going to be a long estimates process. If he is going
to come here looking for support in estimates, instead of changing the rules to ram them through,
he had better be able to answer the question about what he is doing for people who are relying on
him.
We talk about putting faith in this government’s word, and this government made a great show of
bringing new legislation forward to enable it to lift driver’s licenses and to make sure that support
orders are enforced. We learned from this minister’s deputy minister that this government will now
take several years to be in a position where that support mechanism can be used. My question to the
minister is this: When can we actually expect government to start enforcing the support legislation?
Why did it choose to slow down, by years, the amount of time it takes to put in place an idea the
member for Fredericton North was ready to do right away?
Hon. Mr. Fitch: With all due respect, I am sure that the member opposite has misinterpreted some
of the information which has been put forward. We have not slowed down. We have continued to
move family support orders forward. We will, hopefully, continue to have in place a number of
measures within the coming year, which will enforce and make stricter the payments which are
owed to those to whom payments are due, mostly single parents and children. This government has
committed additional funds to the system. These are additional funds which will enable us to have
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 10/11
more enforcement officers in the field who will enforce those orders. Again, this will put the money
into the hands of the people who need it most.
Home Heating Oil Benefit Program
Mr. Doherty: I direct this question to the Minister of Finance and to the Minister of Energy. The
home heating oil benefit program has not completely addressed those living in poverty and the
working poor. It has not been well promoted and, according to a document received by your
department, it has had less than 50% participation. Let me remind you of the significance of $200
for those who are trying to make ends meet on the lowest minimum wage in Atlantic Canada, and
with the lowest income assistance rates in Atlantic Canada. I strongly recommend that this program
be extended to July 1, 2006, as per my letter dated April 19. My question to the minister is simple.
Has this potential extension been addressed?
021 14:35
L’hon. M. Volpé : Cela va certainement me faire plaisir de répondre à la question du député de
Saint John Harbour. On a reconnu qu’il y avait un problème l’automne dernier pour ceux qui
utilisaient le mazout, dû à une très grande augmentation. Immédiatement, on s’est engagé à aider
ceux qui étaient dans le besoin. On a mis en place un processus, et les gens ont fait une demande
pour avoir accès au programme. C’est un très bon programme, qui est à court terme. On a aussi mis
en place une Agence de l’efficacité et de la conservation énergétiques, avec un budget de 11,9
millions, pour que les gens du Nouveau-Brunswick réduisent leur consommation d’énergie à long
terme. L’automne dernier était une première étape. L’étape réelle, c’est que les gens doivent
commencer à réduire leur consommation d’énergie. C’est un excellent programme qui a été mis en
place. On va continuer à aider les gens à réduire leur consommation d’énergie à long terme.
À savoir pourquoi les gens n’ont pas fait la demande ou si on devrait étendre le projet, je pense que
tout le monde était bien au courant du projet l’automne dernier. On a fait une très bonne propagande
du projet. Durant l’hiver, on a fait la promotion de ce projet. Alors, si les gens n’en ont pas fait la
demande, ce n’est pas la faute du gouvernement. Le programme est encore en place, et les gens
peuvent encore en faire la demande.
Mr. Doherty: This program provides financial relief for those who heat with oil only. It has been
our major criticism of this program since its inception. It is the equivalent of stating that one group
of New Brunswickers needs subsidies more than another. In fact, less than a quarter percent of New
Brunswickers heat with home heating fuel. The majority of New Brunswickers heat their homes
with baseboard heating. Last fall, when the Lord government saw that electrical rates were going
up by almost double digits, once again it did nothing and responded far too late. This home heating
oil program must be extended to include those who are living in poverty and to the working poor.
ORAL QUESTIONS / QUESTIONS ORALES
April 25, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 25 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\24 2006-04-25 BL\24 2006-04-25 BL.wpd 11/11
L’hon. M. Volpé : Le fait d’entendre ce genre de commentaires quand les Libéraux formaient le
gouvernement, et plusieurs d’entre eux étaient là… Ils n’ont rien fait pour les personnes dans le
besoin au Nouveau-Brunswick. Ils ont réduit l’aide lorsqu’ils étaient au pouvoir. Cela a été reconnu
par un ancien ministre du gouvernement qu’ils ont négligé le côté social.
J’ai une lettre de l’opposition qui demande pourquoi on a aidé les gens à payer seulement le mazout.
Je pense que tous ceux qui prennent la peine d’écouter peuvent comprendre. De septembre 2004 à
septembre 2005, le prix du mazout a augmenté en moyenne de 35 % à 45 %, alors que le prix de
l’électricité a augmenté de 6 %. Pourquoi a-t-on aidé les gens qui chauffent au mazout? Parce que
l’augmentation était de 35 % à 45 %. Il me semble que c’est facile à comprendre.
Pourquoi n’avons-nous pas aidé tout le monde? Dans notre budget, on veut aider tout le monde en
réduisant 8 % de la taxe provinciale harmonisée sur l’électricité. Pourtant, vous avez voté contre le
budget. Les gens d’en face ont des visages à deux faces. Ils votent contre un budget qui aiderait tous
les gens du Nouveau-Brunswick dans tous les secteurs d’énergie. La réduction de 8 % s’applique
à tous les secteurs d’énergie, et vous avez voté contre.
MY BLOG WILL BE ON MARITIMES NOON ON CBC AT NOON TODAY!!!!
Someone just email me and told me they heard it on CBC!!!
The interview was done last fall!!!!
It's on today at noon!
To all the visitors who came to this site after listening to the interview on CBC?
Welcome and stroll down and have a look in the archieves......there's all kind of different issues in there.
Have fun!!!!!
GOD'S MINUTE!!!
ARISE, SHINE; FOR YOUR LIGHT HAS COME! AND THE GLORY
OF THE LORD IS RISEN UPON YOU. FOR BEHOLD, THE
DARKNESS SHALL COVER THE EARTH, AND DEEP DARKNESS
THE PEOPLE; BUT THE LORD WILL RISE OVER YOU, AND HIS
GLORY WILL BE SEEN UPON YOU.
(ISAIAH 60:1-2 *NKJV )
Dear Charles,
Now think spiritually here, for the "light" is the magnificent
glory
of our Heavenly Father! As His children we are reflectors of His
"light," so; COME AND LET US WALK IN THE LIGHT OF THE
LORD. ( ISAIAH 2:5 )
Remember that our Savior, Jesus Christ said, "YOU ARE THE
LIGHT OF THE WORLD. A CITY THAT IS SET ON A HILL CANNOT
BE HIDDEN. NOR DO THEY LIGHT A LAMP AND PUT IT UNDER
A BASKET, BUT ON A LAMPSTAND, AND IT GIVES LIGHT TO
ALL WHO ARE IN THE HOUSE. LET YOUR LIGHT SO SHINE
BEFORE MEN, THAT THEY MAY SEE YOUR GOOD WORKS
AND GLORIFY YOUR FATHER IN HEAVEN."
( MATTHEW 5:14-16 )
So Charles, it is my prayer that you are already walking in
God's
Glorious Light! If not now would be a great time to start! Ask
God to fill you with it. For you will find that to be a truly
wonderful
experience, and don't worry; though God's Great Light is brilliant,
it is guaranteed not to give you a sunburn!
Now Charles, may you have a bright shiny day that is filled
with God's Love! Amen.
With My Love & Prayers,
your servant Allen
[ Prayer Requests---Contact Us---Bible Study---*Donations* ]
[ Audio---Subscribe---Change of Address---Unsubscribe ]
at: http://www.godsminute.org
Apostle Paul Ministries, P O Box 55996, Hayward, CA 94545
(c) Copyright 2006 by Apostle Paul Ministries