I didn't received a Bonjour Charles from the Premier this morning but that's ok.
Who's the two guys following the Premier to the Legislature.
Is that Paul Harpell in the white pants?
Thursday, April 27, 2006
ROGERS TELEVISION < OLD GERMANY > VOICE OF THE PROVINCE IS ON BUT NEW BRUNSWICKERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO PHONE IN!!!!
Only in New Brunswick that Canadians are not allowed to phone in with their concerns.
The faster they shut down the show? The better it would be for freedom of speech!!!!!
Rogers Television < old germany > should be investigated!!!!
The faster they shut down the show? The better it would be for freedom of speech!!!!!
Rogers Television < old germany > should be investigated!!!!
QUESTION PERIOD AT THE NEW BRUNSWICK LEGISLATURE!!! < Jeudi >
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 1/10
011 13:45
Protection of Personal Information
Mr. Lamrock: Yesterday was another remarkable day in the Legislature. One year after the member
for Kennebecasis violated privacy law and wound up losing her job, once again, we see that this
government is incapable of following the laws that it wants the rest of New Brunswick to live by.
The Premier stood up, while under attack because of an ethics lawsuit against him, and he released
information about an innocent bystander, a private New Brunswick citizen who had asked his MLA
to write a letter. He then sent his political staff out to advise all the media and give them copies of
the letter, letting them know the individual’s personal information, both the conviction and the fact
that he had made an application for assistance.
Today, they tried to blame it on the Press Secretary who handed it out, but it was at the Premier’s
direction, and the letter emanated from the Department of Transportation. I want to read from the
Protection of Personal Information Act, which this government may want to get in a pocket copy
for future reference. It says:
Personal information shall not be used or disclosed for purposes other than those for which it was
collected . . . Personal information shall be retained only as long as necessary for the fulfilment of
those purposes.
My question to the Minister of Transportation is this: When you provided that letter to the Premier
for use in political debate as a smear file in the Legislature, what was the legitimate public purpose
under Principle 5 that you were following? What was the use that would have made that action
legal?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak said things that are totally incorrect
in the preamble to his question. I want to set the record straight. First of all, he alleges that there is
an ethics lawsuit against me. That is untrue. All we have seen this week is the Liberals coming in
to insinuate things that are untrue. There is no ethics lawsuit against me or against the government.
The lawyers on the other side can raise their papers. It is not an ethics lawsuit.
Second, he says in his preamble that the Press Secretary was directed by myself and others to
distribute that letter yesterday. That is also untrue. The Press Secretary was responding to a request
by a reporter to get a copy of the letter. Unfortunately, the Press Secretary did not think twice and
gave a copy of the letter without blocking out the name of the individual. This is a serious situation,
one that we take very seriously. I had a conversation with my Press Secretary. He has tendered his
resignation because of this situation. I accept his resignation.
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 2/10
012 13:50
Mr. Lamrock: The Premier’s conduct in this matter requires a mea culpa, not a “they-a culpa”. The
fact is, making his Press Secretary the fall guy is beneath that office. The Press Secretary had the
letter after the Premier had been waving it around in the Legislature. It was sitting there in his desk,
for use in a political debate. The Premier and I have gone through this once before, when he stood
here unable to quote from the Act or to justify it legally. He wound up spending $100 000 and
making the Minister of the Environment go through two months of hearings before finally having
to accept the inevitable. Now, because it is the Premier who is on the line, he is trying to pass it off
to other people.
The Premier had that letter in his desk. Indeed, he offered to table it in the House. He did not think
to black out that information, He was willing to throw that name out there. The Press Secretary was
acting on the Premier’s orders. The Premier had the letter at his desk, for use in political debate.
Principle 5 states that you should only use citizens’ information for legitimate purposes. What
legitimate purpose required the keeping of that citizen’s personal information at the Premier’s desk
in the Legislature?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The letter was at my desk, not so that I could use the information of the individual,
but so that I could use the content of the letter. Having the letter in my possession is not contrary to
the Act. If someone had filed a right-to-information request, the letter would have been submitted
with the name blocked out. What was incorrect was that it did not have the name blocked out. What
was really incorrect was the fact that a member of the Liberal caucus wrote to a minister and asked
that minister to intervene and to give a permit to someone who had been found guilty of drunk
driving. That was incorrect. If the Liberals want to talk about standards and ethics, they should start
setting some on their side.
Unfortunately for me, I am losing a very competent Press Secretary. He made a mistake, he has
owned up to his mistake, he understands that it was a mistake, he has apologized for the mistake,
and he regrets his mistake. I accept that.
Mr. Lamrock: My worry is not that the Press Secretary resigned; it is that people who will not
admit their mistakes and who do not understand privacy laws still have access to all our personal
information. Even worse, it is the head of this government.
Mr. Speaker: Order. Member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak, you will address your questions
through the Chair to the minister responsible. Members, please respect one another.
Mr. Lamrock: My concern is not that the Premier has had his Press Secretary quit. My problem is
that the Premier is still the head of this government, and he does not understand how to respect the
privacy of citizens. The fact of the matter is, the member for Miramichi-Bay du Vin asked whether
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 3/10
there was any legal remedy for a constituent in a situation. The minister could have simply
responded: No, I cannot do that under the laws that are in place.
The fact is, the Act itself states that personal information shall only be retained for as long as is
necessary for the fulfillment of a legitimate public purpose. The Premier was holding onto this letter,
which was not even addressed to him, for over a year. He put it in a smear file, like Richard Nixon
with his old enemies list. The fact is, he knows better.
My question to the Premier is this: If he was so concerned about the ethics—if that was really the
legitimate public purpose—can he show us one place where he sent the letter to a legitimate
investigative authority? Did he send it to the Ombudsman? Did he send it to the Conflict of Interest
Commissioner? Did he forward it to the RCMP? Or did he only keep it for a smear file here in the
Legislature? If you only kept it for a smear file, Mr. Premier, how many other ministers have you
asked to forward you letters for use in legislative debate, in violation of the law?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The strategy that we see again from the member for Fredericton-Fort Nashwaak
is this: If you don’t have facts, create them. That is exactly what he is doing; he is creating facts.
When he wants to allege . . . We do respect the privacy of citizens. It is very important, and that is
why, yesterday, when this happened, the Press Secretary, on his own, went out and apologized. He
realized that he had made a mistake, and he tendered his resignation to me, and I accepted it. That
is a big consequence for something like this, but it is a serious matter.
We do not have any lessons to take from the members of the opposition on this. They come in every
day; they bring in allegations and innuendoes that are not founded in fact. One of theirs, yesterday,
threw in one of the worst accusations in this House—one accusation, I am sure, that they will not
repeat outside this House, because they know the consequences of saying it outside the House. They
know they are protected in this House; that is why they say things in this House that they do not
repeat outside the House.
013 13:55
The member from Neguac did not ask to know if there was a remedy. She suggested a specific
remedy—giving a day permit to someone who had been found guilty of drunk driving.
Mr. S. Graham: The issue of concern today is not the total incompetence of the Press Secretary
Chisholm Pothier. The issue of grave concern today is the responsibility and the credibility of this
government.
My question to the Premier is this: Why are you, and members of your Cabinet, keeping a file of
New Brunswickers’ personal information for your political use?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 4/10
Hon. Mr. Lord: I think what is really at stake is the credibility of the Leader of the Opposition and
his caucus. They come to this House every day to smear people and to raise accusations and
innuendos that are incorrect and incomplete, just for the single purpose of trying to force an election
and trying to grab power.
The fact is, the file was not kept on the individual. It is a letter that had been shown to me, coming
from the member of the opposition caucus. The minister responded to that letter, and sent a copy to
the Leader of the Opposition. My question to the Leader of the Opposition . . . I know he will tell
me that it is question period where he asks and I answer. Maybe he will want to answer this question
to the people of New Brunswick: What did he tell his member from Neguac who asked for a drunk
driver to get a special permit? Is that the policy of the Liberal Party of New Brunswick?
(Interjections).
Mr. Speaker: Order, please.
Mr. S. Graham: The issue is as simple as this: A letter was sent in January 2005, which is well over
a year ago. The minister responded to the letter. This Premier and this government sat on that letter,
and for well over a year, they kept information in this Legislature pertaining to a private citizen in
New Brunswick. That is the question that this Premier has not answered: Why does his government
have a smear file folder put together of letters pertaining to private information of citizens, which
it is using for its political gain?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The one person who comes to this House every day for the sole purpose of political
gain is the Leader of the Opposition. Since we have tabled an excellent budget for the people of New
Brunswick, they do not want to ask questions on education. They do not want to ask questions on
health care. They do not want to ask questions on how we are protecting the assets of seniors that
the opposition wanted to take away. Every day opposition members come in, they find an affidavit,
and they try to find something in that. They find another innuendo or another letter or something
else. They prop up an independent member of this House, who is really a member of their caucus,
to say things that they know he cannot say outside this House. That is the tactic and the approach
of the Leader of the Opposition. What we normally say in French is this:
C’est de la petite politique, c’est de la politicaillerie, et c’est ce à quoi on peut s’attendre du Parti
libéral. Il y a une question qui reste sans réponse : Est-ce la politique du Parti libéral d’encourager
ses parlementaires à obtenir des passe-droits pour des gens qui ont été reconnus coupables d’actes
criminels, dont l’ivresse au volant?
Mr. S. Graham: It is very clear today that the Premier is not accepting responsibility for this grave
mistake, this breach of privacy pertaining to citizens of New Brunswick who, in faith and in trust,
gave their information to government, not expecting it to be used for political gain.
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 5/10
If the Premier cannot police his ministers, it is becoming very evident today that he cannot police
himself. The only individual with integrity and credibility in this Chamber is the individual who
broke the Act and stepped down from that post the day after he admitted he broke it.
My question to the Premier is this: Will he hold himself to the same ethical standards as the former
Minister of Family and Community Services did?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I know that the Leader of the Opposition comes here every day and hopes that an
election will be called that day. Every day that goes by, he is one day closer to being removed from
his job by his own party. He wants another kick at the can. There will be a chance to have an
election. I love elections. I love campaigning. I love proposing ideas and putting forward a platform
that we will build on and a platform that we will respect.
014 14:00
The simple fact of this case is that, unfortunately, the Press Secretary of the Premier’s Office gave
a letter at the request of a reporter, without blocking out the name of the individual. That was a
mistake, a mistake that has been acknowledged. He has acknowledged that mistake and offered his
resignation, and I have accepted that resignation. That is a serious step for the individual to take,
because this is a serious matter. We know that we must protect the private information of individuals
in this province, and we will continue to do that.
Mr. S. Graham: The Premier stands up and says he would love to have an election. It is too bad that
he would not love to protect the private information of New Brunswick citizens just as much. This
is not the first time that this government has released private information on New Brunswick
citizens. This is the third time. This is not an issue of the incompetence of the former Press Secretary
of the Office of the Premier. This is an issue of the integrity and credibility of this government.
My question for the Premier is this. If Chisholm Pothier made the decision to release the letter, who
gave him the letter?
Hon. Mr. Lord: I had the letter in this House yesterday. Yesterday, I stated clearly—and you can
review the Hansard, and if you want a copy of the letter, I can table the letter . . . Before tabling the
letter, we would take the appropriate steps to protect the information of the individual. The fact that
the letter was there is not an issue. The only issue is that the name of the individual was not blocked
out, as it should have been. I agree on that. However, there is nothing wrong with having the letter.
The real issue is that the Leader of the Opposition refuses to answer or to address whether it is the
policy of the Liberal Party. Can we expect that if there is a Shawn Graham government, the
members of his government will approach ministers to get free passes for people who are found
guilty of drunk driving or other criminal offenses?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 6/10
Mr. S. Graham: I am sure the Premier understands the Protection of Personal Information Act.
Schedule A clearly states that personal information shall not be used or disclosed for purposes other
than those for which it was collected. The question that the Premier just answered and admitted his
guilt on, the fact that this response was given over a year ago, in January 2005 . . . He has had it in
his possession for over a year for political gain. The time has come to put integrity and credibility
back into this government. That is why, today, we are going to send the statements of the Premier
and the release of the information to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman will make a decision as to
whether, indeed, the Act has been violated. My question to the Premier is this: Are you prepared to
live by the verdict of the Ombudsman?
Hon. Mr. Lord: The Leader of the Opposition can do what he wants with my statements. The
statements that I make in this House are distributed and are available to anybody who wants them.
However, the fact that I had a letter that stated that one member of the opposition wanted to get a
free pass, a get-out-of-jail-free for one of her constituents who was found guilty of drunk driving . . .
That is what you can expect from a government led by Shawn Graham. The friends of that party will
get free passes. If you are found guilty of drunk driving, apply to the minister, and you will get a free
pass. You will get a temporary permit.
That reminds me of what took place in Shediac—Cap-Pelé when they went ahead and . . .
(Interjections.)
Mr. Speaker: I ask members once again: When I recognize the member who has the floor, he has
the floor. Please respect the member who has the floor.
Hon. Mr. Lord: What happened yesterday that was incorrect was that the letter was released
without the name of the individual blocked out. The Press Secretary who made that mistake realized
that he made a mistake. He apologized for it yesterday. We had a conversation about it yesterday.
We agreed to talk about it this morning. He offered his resignation, which I accepted. He made a
mistake. It is unfortunate. I am losing a very good Press Secretary who did very good work for the
government of New Brunswick. He made a mistake, he is paying the price, and he is assuming
responsibility.
015 14:05
Economic Development
Mr. Haché: A former senior civil servant, in an interview with the CBC on April 25, 2006, stated
that the Lord government is missing out on business opportunities. In fact, Mr. MacBride makes
direct references to Research in Motion and the loss of potential high-skilled jobs, high-paying
incomes, and economic spin-offs as failures of this current administration. New Brunswick cannot
allow multinational companies to invest in other provinces simply because the minister is either
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 7/10
unaware of their potential or uninterested in actually being proactive and seeking these forms of
investments. My question for the Minister of Business New Brunswick is simple. Why is he
unwilling to take a serious role in economic development in the province and aggressively promote
new research and innovation?
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: I want to assure you that all members on this side of the House take the
economy and economic development in this province very, very seriously. Let the numbers speak
for themselves: 9 800 more jobs this year than last year. Thank you.
Mr. Haché: Mr. Speaker, I hope that you allow me the time that the minister did not use for me to
use for a question. That would be fine.
The Minister of Business New Brunswick seems to hide behind rhetoric—that is not the case, but
that is what is written here—to avoid our very clear and direct question. Mr. MacBride goes on to
state that he worked actively on economic development and business recruitment when Frank
McKenna was the Premier of New Brunswick. He goes on to describe the process with Frank
McKenna as proactive and passionate toward economic development and that it was the number one
priority. It is one thing to say that economic development is important for New Brunswick; it is
another to make it a reality. The loss of Research in Motion is just another example of Lord’s failure
to be proactive and passionate. Will the new Minister of Business New Brunswick commit to lead
on this file and to make this file passionate and proactive once again?
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: Thank you for that lengthy question. I presume that there was, of course,
a question in there. Last year, our exports in this province grew by 13%. That is $1.2 billion. That
is a greater increase than all other Atlantic Canadian provinces combined. If memory serves me
correctly, Frank McKenna was not the Premier last year.
Mr. Haché: Mr. MacBride continues to provide insight as to how this province can, once again, be
self-sufficient. First and foremost, he claims that the current focus of the Lord government must
shift. He claims that the leadership must come from the top and that it must take more serious
initiatives. The Lord government likes to use economic spin to avoid answering our serious
questions. Using the government’s own figures, the gap between New Brunswick and Canada with
regard to real personal income, real disposable income, and real labour income has widened since
2000. This means that New Brunswickers are making less money relative to Canada since the Lord
government took office. Is this progress? You can provide political spin to avoid reality, but
ultimately . . .
Mr. Speaker: State your question, please.
Mr. Haché: My question is this: Does the Minister of Business New Brunswick have a solution for
this? If not, will he step aside?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 8/10
Hon. Mr. MacDonald: I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight. Our weekly
earnings are increasing. In fact, the Canadian average between 1998 and this year was an increase
of 2%, but we beat that here in New Brunswick. Ours increased by 2.6%.
016 14:10
Let the facts speak for themselves. There are 36 000 more people working in the province today than
was the case on June 7, 1999. That is not spin.
Mining
Mr. Kenny: My question is for the Minister of Post-Secondary Education and Training. It is a fact
that, because of an aging workforce and industry growth, the mining industry is facing a shortage
of up to 81 000 workers in the next decade. That is according to MITAC, the Mining Institute of
Training and Adjustment Council. New Brunswick will experience similar problems in the mining
industry. An extensive study called Prospecting the Future brought together experts in the human
resources sector who were specifically concerned about the mining sector’s limited ability to recruit
a sufficient number of new entrants to meet industry growth or, more importantly, to replace highly
skilled and experienced workers who are likely to retire within the next 10 years. Again, New
Brunswick is not an exception to these shortages.
My question to the minister is this: Has your department reviewed this very important study and
looked at the opportunity for a mining and training facility in Bathurst, as a Centre of Excellence,
to create jobs and to train New Brunswickers for this growing industry?
Hon. Mr. Carr: We are reviewing the report. I can tell you that our priorities for Bathurst are very
clear. We treat Bathurst as a high priority, which is how we treat all areas of New Brunswick. I was
pleased, just last week, that the Minister Responsible for the Regional Development Corporation
provided nearly $300 000 for innovation and research at the Bathurst community college. We are
going to be very clear in our work for all areas of New Brunswick. We will help all of the people
of New Brunswick have the best place to learn and an even better place to work, as we move our
province even further forward under the Premier’s Five in Five Initiative.
Mr. Kenny: Over six months ago, the former Minister of Training and Employment Development
was in Bathurst. I met with her specifically to raise this opportunity. New Brunswick could be well
positioned to create a mining training facility, to meet the demands of the mining industry, and to
keep New Brunswickers in the province, rather than shipping them out to be trained elsewhere. This
would create new jobs, and it would help our mining industry right here in the province. Has the
former minister briefed you, or has anyone in your department briefed you, on this opportunity?
After six months, what has been done to follow up on this?
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 9/10
Hon. Mr. Carr: I can tell you very clearly that since I became minister, we have put a lot of focus
on community colleges and on postsecondary education. In fact, it is not only since I became
minister, but since we took office. We turned things around for postsecondary education, whereas
the previous government cut funding to universities, cut seats in community colleges, and reduced
our trades out of high school altogether. Our Premier and our government have reversed that. We
are focusing on our skills, and we are focusing on tradespeople like never before. We are making
New Brunswick the best place in Canada, and we are going to continue to do it.
Mr. Kenny: Everything you have said is fine and dandy, but we gave this report to you six months
ago, and time is ticking away in the mining industry. I met personally, on several occasions, with
the MITAC institute and its managers in Ottawa to discuss the report. I met with the community
colleges in Bathurst. I also met with the general manager of Enterprise Chaleur, and I met with
industry leaders, to discuss what is taking place in the mining industry and to discuss the
opportunities we have in Bathurst to establish a mining training centre. Has anyone from your
department or anyone from the community college in Bathurst discussed this important file with
your department? Can you give a commitment today to review this file in a timely manner and to
take some action?
Hon. Mr. Carr: I am a very fair individual. Quite frankly, the member opposite has been telling us
about a lot of meetings. I have not received a single request from this member opposite to meet. I
would certainly be more than happy to meet with the member for Bathurst to discuss this issue.
Quite clearly, our commitment to mining is clear. In fact, another $2.5 million was provided for
exploration. Our commitment to the people of New Brunswick is clear. Our commitment to
community colleges, to Bathurst, to universities, and to skills training in high school is very clear.
We are doing a lot. We have 36 000 more people working. In fact, we are going to do even more.
We are going to make New Brunswick the best province in Canada—the smart province, the
investment province, the wellness province, the clean province. Our Premier has a vision. We have
a plan. We are doing good things. We are going to do more.
Trucking Industry
Mr. Foran: My question is addressed to the Minister of Transportation. I stand here today in
defence of the small trucking industry, that is, the independent truckers in the province who are
running into some hardships.
017 14:15
I have had input from my own colleagues. I have even had input from one of the ministers from
northwest New Brunswick. We are all running into the same problem. Recently, the loss of the lift
axle on tandem trucks has had a devastating effect on the truckers involved. In the transporting of
forest products, when we look at the high cost of fuel and the reduction of the allowable weight that
ORAL QUESTIONS 20 QUESTIONS ORALES
April 27, 2006 Not finalized / Non finalisé le 27 avril 2006
S:\HANSARD\HANSARD DAILIES - FASCICULES\2005-2006 55-3\26 2006-04-27 BL\26 2006-04-27 BL.wpd 10/10
the truck can haul, this can certainly impact the profit margin for these truckers. Will the minister
consider reinstating the lift axle in order to allow them to continue to serve this industry?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : J’apprécie la question du député de Miramich-Centre. Vous savez, comme
ministre des Transports, bien souvent, nos décisions sont basées sur des études pancanadiennes en
ce qui a trait à la sécurité routière.
D’ailleurs, en 1997, une étude pancanadienne a dévoilé que certaines pièces d’équipement étaient
un peu dangereuses pour non seulement les gens qui les utilisaient mais pour le public en général
qui utilisait notre système routier. Suite aux recommandations de 1997, nous avons apporté certaines
modifications en ce qui a trait aux essieux qui sont admissibles sur les routes et également au niveau
du poids, parce que nous avons également la responsabilité de protéger l’investissement des
contribuables lorsque nous construisons des routes.
Toutefois, je suis prêt à étudier le point que le député de Miramichi-Centre vient d’apporter, mais
je dois l’assurer d’une chose : nos décisions sont basées sur des études relatives à la sécurité
routière.
Mr. Foran: We are all aware that we have to promote safety on our highways. However, no
information has been brought forward by the minister that supports the lift axles in question. Can
the minister provide the House with the necessary information that this configuration will endanger
other users of the highway?
L’hon. P. Robichaud : Comme j’ai répondu à la question précédente, je suis prêt à travailler et à
collaborer avec le député de Miramichi-Centre pour voir quelles sont ses propositions. Toutefois,
nous basons essentiellement nos décisions sur des études qui touchent la sécurité routière et les gens
qui utilisent notre système routier pour leur travail ou pour tout simplement se promener. Nous
avons aussi des politiques qui sont conformes aux autres provinces canadiennes. Ce que nous
voulons voir, c’est une harmonisation des politiques dans tout le Canada, afin que nos gens qui sont
dans l’industrie du camionnage puissent être sur un même pied d’égalité avec les autres provinces
canadiennes en ce qui a trait à la concurrence. Toutefois, je suis prêt à regarder à ce que le député
veut proposer.
CHISHOLM POTHIER RESIGNS!!!!
I was wondering why Chisholm was walking on King's Street with some roses in hand?
Maybe it was for Bernard Lord?
On a Personal note. I'm sad to see the guy go. He's a nice guy!!!
Maybe it was for Bernard Lord?
On a Personal note. I'm sad to see the guy go. He's a nice guy!!!
The meeting will take place at Millidgeville North School on the Boarshead Road North end.
BRUCE COURT GOT SLAUGHTERED!!!!! WHAT DOES THIS MEANS????
NB Telegraph-Journal | Politics
As published on page B1/B2 on April 27, 2006
Knudson wins Liberal nod in a walk
Candidate in last election will carry party banner in Saint John Portland
By Jeff Ducharme
Telegraph-Journal
Colleen Knudson demolished the competition in winning the Liberal nomination for Saint John Portland by taking 81 per cent of the vote.
Ms. Knudson, who won 313 of the 384 votes cast, will now carry the Liberal banner and try to knock off incumbent Conservative and Environment Minister Trevor Holder in the next provincial election.
Premier Bernard Lord contends the election won't be held until the fall of 2007. But Liberal leader Shawn Graham says he won't miss an opportunity to bring the government down and force a snap election.
"It doesn't get better than that," Mrs. Knudson said after winning the nomination.
"I was confident in the room "...but you're never really sure."
Ms. Knudson was a nurse at the Saint John Regional Hospital for more than 36 years. She is currently working at the hospital as a planning consultant for community programs.
Ms. Knudson - the Liberal candidate in the last provincial election - faced little competition, but a stirring speech by Bruce Court left some wondering if there might be a second ballot. But even Mr. Court's fiery speech couldn't sink the Knudson political juggernaut.
Mr. Court took to the stage second after Mrs. Knudson delivered the slickest speech of the evening to the approximately 500 people at the Centre Communautaire Samuel de Champlain.
His tough words about stopping the natural gas pipeline through Rockwood Park and about stamping out poverty brought cheers from the crowd. His salvos fired in the premier's direction further revved up the partisan gathering.
"We do not need the premier speaking out of both sides of his mouth . . . building golf courses for his buddies in Moncton to buy more votes," Mr. Court said.
But his entrance song, Thunderstruck by AC/DC, and the tough words weren't enough to shake Mrs. Knudson from delegates' minds when they marked an X at the ballot box.
Mrs. Knudson almost won the seat in the 2003 provincial election narrowly losing to Mr. Holder, who won by a narrow margin of 169 votes - 2,476 to 2,307.
A political neophyte in the last election, Mrs. Knudson said this time she'll be much better educated in the rules of the political game.
"I know how to run a campaign, for one thing," she said.
Sylvia Sparks, executive director of PRUDE Inc., was the third candidate in the race.
Former Saint John police chief Clarence (Butch) Cogswell bowed out of the race just days before the nomination meeting. He was touted as one of the favourites, but offered no explanation as to why he chose to pull out of the race.
Mr. Holder has held the Saint John Portland seat since 1999 and was appointed to cabinet in 2005. The nomination meeting coincided with an announcement in the legislature by Mr. Holder that he would be tabling a pollution initiative that would directly benefit Saint John.
Provincially, the Liberals have said they are going to run a campaign that shows their leader, Shawn Graham, as down to earth and Mr. Lord as aloof and out of touch with the common voter. In the opinion polls, the best Mr. Graham has been able to do is equal Mr. Lord's popularity with the province's voters.
Mr. Graham, 16 Liberal MLAs and federal MP Paul Zed attended the event.
Before Mr. Graham took to the stage to pump up the crowd, the MLAs lined up on stage. When Mr. Graham hit the stage, he high-fived each MLA like he had just hit a home run and was crossing home plate.
"You can feel it in this room tonight," said Mr. Graham. "There's a buzz, an excitement, an energy."
Mr. Graham thinks Saint John Portland is a seat the Liberals can take.
"For the past seven years we've had a Conservative government that's been on cruise control," he said.
GOD'S MINUTE!!!!!!
YOU ARE MY HIDING PLACE; YOU WILL PROTECT ME
FROM TROUBLE AND SURROUND ME WITH SONGS
OF DELIVERANCE.
( PSALM 32:7 *NIV )
Dear Charles,
Now when problems surround us and we feel
overwhelmed by them, we all would like to escape from
them even if it is for only a little while! When we turn our
problems over to God we can escape!
Thus, just like king David who wrote; THOUGH I WALK
IN THE MIDST OF TROUBLE, YOU PRESERVE MY
LIFE; YOU STRETCH OUT YOUR HAND AGAINST
THE ANGER OF MY FOES, WITH YOUR RIGHT HAND
YOU SAVE ME. ( PSALM 138:7 ) FOR IN THE DAY
OF TROUBLE HE WILL KEEP ME SAFE IN HIS
DWELLING; HE WILL HIDE ME IN THE SHELTER OF HIS
TABERNACLE AND SET ME HIGH UPON A ROCK.
( PSALM 27:5 )
For; THE LORD WILL GUIDE YOU ALWAYS; HE WILL
SATISFY YOUR NEEDS IN A SUN-SCORCHED LAND
AND WILL STRENGTHEN YOUR FRAME. YOU WILL
BE LIKE A WELL-WATERED GARDEN, LIKE A
SPRING WHOSE WATERS NEVER FAIL.
( ISAIAH 58:11 )
So Charles, the next time problems start getting you
down, and you think it is impossible to handle them,
remember the words of our Savior Jesus Christ; "WHAT
IS IMPOSSIBLE WITH MEN IS POSSIBLE WITH GOD!"
Amen ( LUKE 18:27 )
NOTE: Charles, Won't You Please Help Us with a Tithe or
Contribution, to help us continue this World Wide Ministry
for Jesus Christ? For without your caring support it will
be impossible to continue this Daily Ministry & Bible Study.
Also remember that; GOD LOVES A CHEERFUL GIVER.
( 2 CORINTHIANS 9:7 ) So please help us continue to
plant seeds of faith all over the World. For; THEN BECAUSE
OF THIS THE LORD YOUR GOD WILL BLESS YOU IN ALL
YOUR WORK AND EVERYTHING YOU PUT YOUR
HANDS TO. ( DEUTERONOMY 15:10 )
You may use your Credit Card at:
https://www.godsminute.com/donations/
( OR )
Please make all checks or money orders payable to:
Apostle Paul Ministries, P O Box 55996, Hayward, CA 94545
After all when you do God is using you to touch lives and reach
people worldwide with the hope and love of Christ. 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
LET ADHD KIDS BE KIDS!!!!!
Consumer Health
Ped Med: When to just say no to ADHD drugs
By Lidia Wasowicz Apr 26, 2006, 23:30
SAN FRANCISCO, CA, United States (UPI) -- It takes skill, experience and a certain amount of luck to know when to fold them and when to hold them in the high-stakes gamble of treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity with drugs.
Virtually everyone agrees not every child diagnosed with the disorder needs to be medicated, but how to pick out the exception has been a matter of fierce debate.
The treatment criteria call for moderate to severe symptoms that both parents and teachers agree disrupt home life and impair school performance. Yet, medication may not suit even a youngster who fits the description to a 'T.'
'We have lots of options,' noted Donna Palumbo, associate professor of neurology and pediatrics, director of the Strong Neurology ADHD Program and head of pediatric neuropsychology training at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, N.Y.
'Some work beautifully for some children but not for others,' said Palumbo, who is leading a four-year, federally funded study of the viability and appropriateness of ADHD diagnosis and treatment in preschoolers. 'We don`t know what works for what child ahead of time. There are lots of things to try, including non-medication treatment.'
In a consensus statement, the National Institutes of Health, the nation`s medical research behemoth, noted, 'Experts disagree on the best approaches to treating ADHD -- medication, behavioral therapy or a combination.'
All sides concur no single treatment is the answer for every child, and much thought, reflection, observation and careful consideration of personal needs and family history should precede a prescription for a course of action.
'You should be skeptical if a doctor or therapist diagnoses ADHD at the first visit and immediately prescribes a drug,' the advocacy group Consumers Union warned in a comprehensive analysis of ADHD drug treatments.
With insurance-coverage restrictions and managed-care limits tightening the constraints on a doctor`s time and reimbursed treasure, critics contend too often it may be too tempting for physicians to reach for that prescription pad prematurely -- or exclusively.
Popular fears of an over-reliance on drugs notwithstanding, the medical mainstream stands by its mainstay of pharmaceutical solutions.
Respected professional journals are devoid of evidence that would convict doctors of the massive overmedicating charged by skeptics, these specialists assert. If anything, they see a criminal neglect of youngsters who struggle needlessly when quick and easy help awaits in a capsule.
They say the power of stimulants to produce often dramatic results was established by 1997 when scientists at McMaster University in Canada concluded from an analysis of 92 studies the drugs could change behavior in some 70 percent of their users.
Two years later, what many regard as a watershed survey evaluated the safety and relative effectiveness of the leading ADHD treatments in 579 elementary school children ages 7 to 9 for up to 14 months.
The Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD, or MTA, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, indicated pharmaceuticals trump non-drug options for speedily alleviating the core symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsiveness, inattention and aggression. But it acknowledged more than a pill is needed to address such overarching problems as arrested academic achievement, poor social skills or conflict at home or school.
Those challenges appeared better served with a combined approach that supplemented medication with teacher consultations, 27 group and eight individual behavioral training sessions for parents and an eight-week intensive summer program aimed at boosting the child`s social, sports and scholastic skills.
All four treatment strategies -- chemicals, talk therapy, both together, and standard care -- brought some relief. The difference lay in degree.
Children receiving managed medication and pharmaceuticals paired with psychotherapy made greater strides than the other two groups. Drugs proved superior for squelching standard symptoms. The combined package worked best in broader areas, including anxiety, oppositional disorder, social and parent struggles and classroom failings.
But just as in the race between the tortoise and the hare, the gap began to close during the second-year, a follow-up study found. By then, the groups that had made the greatest headway started to lose steam, and its gains began to dwindle.
With a shortage of even short-term studies comparing all treatment options and with the chronic disorder often persisting for many years, the results underscore the need for a scientifically sound assessment of how long, and how well, the cornucopia of ADHD treatments works, the authors said.
The MTA findings that strictly supervised stimulant use bested community care, which relied on methylphenidate (the main ingredient in Ritalin) in 68 percent of cases but under a less watchful eye, underscore the critical importance of proper monitoring of medicated children, the investigators said.
The authors noted despite 'public concerns regarding stimulant treatment, wide variations in treatment practices, and lack of evidence to guide long-term treatments of this chronic disorder,' theirs was the first systemic comparison of options to last longer than four months.
'The MTA is considered the gold standard treatment study for ADHD,' Palumbo said.
Even so, the survey has been nearly as much criticized as cited.
Detractors like psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin contend the stimulant-showcasing results were skewed because, among other flaws, the study lacked a comparison group of untreated children, included participants who already had shown a successful response to the drugs, failed to measure adverse effects, which most of the subjects experienced, and lacked a 'double-blind' design. Such a setup is considered a key element of rigorous research.
Rather than being kept in the dark to minimize the possibility of biased assessments, parents and teachers knew in advance whether the children they were evaluating were taking the medication that was supposed to help them.
Next: Getting a non-drug fix.
--
UPI Consumer Health welcomes comments on this column. E-mail: lwasowicz@upi.com
Ped Med: When to just say no to ADHD drugs
By Lidia Wasowicz Apr 26, 2006, 23:30
SAN FRANCISCO, CA, United States (UPI) -- It takes skill, experience and a certain amount of luck to know when to fold them and when to hold them in the high-stakes gamble of treating attention-deficit/hyperactivity with drugs.
Virtually everyone agrees not every child diagnosed with the disorder needs to be medicated, but how to pick out the exception has been a matter of fierce debate.
The treatment criteria call for moderate to severe symptoms that both parents and teachers agree disrupt home life and impair school performance. Yet, medication may not suit even a youngster who fits the description to a 'T.'
'We have lots of options,' noted Donna Palumbo, associate professor of neurology and pediatrics, director of the Strong Neurology ADHD Program and head of pediatric neuropsychology training at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry in Rochester, N.Y.
'Some work beautifully for some children but not for others,' said Palumbo, who is leading a four-year, federally funded study of the viability and appropriateness of ADHD diagnosis and treatment in preschoolers. 'We don`t know what works for what child ahead of time. There are lots of things to try, including non-medication treatment.'
In a consensus statement, the National Institutes of Health, the nation`s medical research behemoth, noted, 'Experts disagree on the best approaches to treating ADHD -- medication, behavioral therapy or a combination.'
All sides concur no single treatment is the answer for every child, and much thought, reflection, observation and careful consideration of personal needs and family history should precede a prescription for a course of action.
'You should be skeptical if a doctor or therapist diagnoses ADHD at the first visit and immediately prescribes a drug,' the advocacy group Consumers Union warned in a comprehensive analysis of ADHD drug treatments.
With insurance-coverage restrictions and managed-care limits tightening the constraints on a doctor`s time and reimbursed treasure, critics contend too often it may be too tempting for physicians to reach for that prescription pad prematurely -- or exclusively.
Popular fears of an over-reliance on drugs notwithstanding, the medical mainstream stands by its mainstay of pharmaceutical solutions.
Respected professional journals are devoid of evidence that would convict doctors of the massive overmedicating charged by skeptics, these specialists assert. If anything, they see a criminal neglect of youngsters who struggle needlessly when quick and easy help awaits in a capsule.
They say the power of stimulants to produce often dramatic results was established by 1997 when scientists at McMaster University in Canada concluded from an analysis of 92 studies the drugs could change behavior in some 70 percent of their users.
Two years later, what many regard as a watershed survey evaluated the safety and relative effectiveness of the leading ADHD treatments in 579 elementary school children ages 7 to 9 for up to 14 months.
The Multimodal Treatment Study of Children with ADHD, or MTA, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, indicated pharmaceuticals trump non-drug options for speedily alleviating the core symptoms of hyperactivity, impulsiveness, inattention and aggression. But it acknowledged more than a pill is needed to address such overarching problems as arrested academic achievement, poor social skills or conflict at home or school.
Those challenges appeared better served with a combined approach that supplemented medication with teacher consultations, 27 group and eight individual behavioral training sessions for parents and an eight-week intensive summer program aimed at boosting the child`s social, sports and scholastic skills.
All four treatment strategies -- chemicals, talk therapy, both together, and standard care -- brought some relief. The difference lay in degree.
Children receiving managed medication and pharmaceuticals paired with psychotherapy made greater strides than the other two groups. Drugs proved superior for squelching standard symptoms. The combined package worked best in broader areas, including anxiety, oppositional disorder, social and parent struggles and classroom failings.
But just as in the race between the tortoise and the hare, the gap began to close during the second-year, a follow-up study found. By then, the groups that had made the greatest headway started to lose steam, and its gains began to dwindle.
With a shortage of even short-term studies comparing all treatment options and with the chronic disorder often persisting for many years, the results underscore the need for a scientifically sound assessment of how long, and how well, the cornucopia of ADHD treatments works, the authors said.
The MTA findings that strictly supervised stimulant use bested community care, which relied on methylphenidate (the main ingredient in Ritalin) in 68 percent of cases but under a less watchful eye, underscore the critical importance of proper monitoring of medicated children, the investigators said.
The authors noted despite 'public concerns regarding stimulant treatment, wide variations in treatment practices, and lack of evidence to guide long-term treatments of this chronic disorder,' theirs was the first systemic comparison of options to last longer than four months.
'The MTA is considered the gold standard treatment study for ADHD,' Palumbo said.
Even so, the survey has been nearly as much criticized as cited.
Detractors like psychiatrist Dr. Peter Breggin contend the stimulant-showcasing results were skewed because, among other flaws, the study lacked a comparison group of untreated children, included participants who already had shown a successful response to the drugs, failed to measure adverse effects, which most of the subjects experienced, and lacked a 'double-blind' design. Such a setup is considered a key element of rigorous research.
Rather than being kept in the dark to minimize the possibility of biased assessments, parents and teachers knew in advance whether the children they were evaluating were taking the medication that was supposed to help them.
Next: Getting a non-drug fix.
--
UPI Consumer Health welcomes comments on this column. E-mail: lwasowicz@upi.com
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
GOOD HEARTED MINISTER MADELEINE DUBÉ STILL HAVEN'T CALL!!!
I noticed that many people on the streets are asking me the same question?
I chatted with the poor woman this evening and she's in bad shape!!!!
ohhhh when the saints,,,,when the saints go marching in.....
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
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????
Power turned on the streets lights all around the New Brunswick Legislature at 2:00pm!!!!
LISA HRABLUK QUITS THE IRVINGS NEWSPAPER FOR MEDIA PLANET????
Again? This is just a story I've heard on the streets today.
THERE WAS NOT A WHISPER FROM TONY HUNTJENS ON TUESDAY!
No apology to the so-call speaker. Nothing!!!! I wonder why????
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)