Bob Bromley

We are on page 9-32, activity summary, Justice, services to the public, grants and contributions, contributions, $105,000.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I’d like to follow up with my earlier questions but broaden the category to a discussion of the issues that this government has or should have with Ottawa. The first one I’d like to discuss is the Canada-European Union Free Trade Agreement. Noting that Europe is now demanding extension of brand use names of drug patents and along with extension of the time that the brand name companies can keep the recipes for those drugs secret so that generic drugs cannot be produced, this would drive up the cost of drugs. Premiers across the country have been reacting and...

That’s great and fast work on the benchmark there. Thank you for that.

With regard to the earlier one, I hope the Minister doesn’t think I was accusing him of discrimination or anything here. I certainly wasn’t. I think, in terms of the languages, I did see that as an opportunity. I guess my last on that front might be, I think it’s important, if the Minister agrees, that it would be good to have some statistics and monitor that over time. Provide some updates on committee of what our capacity is in the department from the standpoint of court workers with potential language services.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just wondering what the term "fully targeted" means under federal and territorial funding. If I can get a brief explanation of that, that would be great.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think harking back to the Minister’s comments earlier, this is core funding to enable this non-government organization to do their work. I’m wondering how long they’ve been stuck at $105,000 a year while we’ve been enhancing our budgets every year, and whether they can anticipate enhanced funding in recognition of the realities that they do face. Thank you.

Madam Speaker, I think certainly I am all for taking the time necessary to do a good job, and easy is easy. You usually don’t get what you really want. I would encourage the Premier to give a lot of weight to that consideration within the restrictions of the MVRMA, which I am not suggesting we change.

The Premier said yesterday that this government shares the Government of Canada’s objective, as he put it, of improving the regulatory system, and Ottawa is being receptive to receiving our suggestions on changing that regime. But meanwhile, Ottawa is gutting the Fisheries Act. They are imposing...

I guess on that, where do they come from? Do we provide training? Does Aurora College provide training to a court worker? What are the qualifications that they require?

Just to follow up a little bit, the Minister mentioned a very expensive project. These sort of demonstration projects typically are, and hopefully we learn how to do it more effectively and with our dollars. But as I understand it, it was an EGH 84 or something like that high efficiency, maybe higher. What’s the goal with that project? Obviously, we’re investing some serious dollars into it. Maybe I can get the cost too. Thank you.

Thanks to the Minister for those comments. I couldn’t write fast enough. If you could just repeat the three priorities that the coalition identified and maybe I will squeeze in a question at the same time. I wonder if there are any results on the courses offered for men who use violence. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I would like to follow up on the Premier’s/Minister’s statement yesterday on devolution as well. The Premier updated us on the status and process for devolution or assumption of authority for land and resource management. This government and our public are on record for decades as serious concerns over the federal legislation now in place. But the Premier said we are considering two approaches of taking down the legislation. We have to weigh the pros and cons. Could the Premier lay out some details on the comparative advantages and disadvantages of the two approaches...