Daryl Dolynny

Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Does committee agree?

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to chime in here with my colleague Mr. Menicoche. What we’re hearing here today is absolutely hogwash. We’ve got a northern contractor here, the only northern contractor left that has yet to be paid for the work and services they did on the bridge, and we’ve got a referee program that we’ve clearly documented and the government has said we agree with the terms, we just don’t have the money left.

What kind of message are we telling our contractors out there? Please do the work for the government and we’ll pay you when we think or when we feel?

The Minister talks...

Thank you, Madam Chair. I’d like to welcome the Minister and the department here today as we review this act. I guess, first and foremost, after being well schooled on the principles of this act and the mechanism behind this act, I had a concern with the title of this act, called the Victims of Crime Act. When you look at where this money is going and how this money is collected, victims of any crime do not receive a penny of this, this actually goes to rehabilitation of inmates and so I really strongly encourage the department to consider renaming this act to clearly reflect where this money...

Thank you, Minister Beaulieu. At this time, committee, we’ll turn our attention to the chairman of the Standing Committee on Economic Development for comments on the bill. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Minister Beaulieu. We’ll turn our attention to the chairman responsible for the standing committee for reviewing the bill. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Minister Lafferty. At this time we’ll turn our attention over to the chairman of the standing committee which reviewed the bill for comments. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. We’ll go to Mr. Neudorf.

Not that I want to get into specifics, but if we deal with it in general comments it will make the clause-by-clause here a lot more efficient. In Section 14 it talks about the coroner examining and cross-examining witnesses, which is basically a fairly high judicial capacity. When that occurs, are witnesses able to have, or are they offered any legal counsel? Do we supply that? Is there any type of memorandum of rights given to witnesses to have a legal counsel without delay in a cross-examination? Thank you.

Does committee agree that Bill 45, An Act to Amend the Workers’ Compensation Act, is ready for third reading?