Tuesday Nov 18th

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
This is VOCM Open Line.

Speaker 2 (00:03):
Call seven oh nine two seven three fifty two eleven
or one triple eight five ninety eight six two six
of viewsing opinions of this programmer not necessarily those of
this station. The biggest conversation in Newfoundland and Labrador starts now.
Here's VOCM Open Line Host Paddy Daily.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
Well, all right and good morning to you. Thank you
very much for tuning into the program. It's Tuesday, November
the eighteenth. This is Open Line. I'm your host, Patty Daily.
David Williams, he's the producer of the program. You'll speaking
with Dave when you pick up the phone and give
us a call in the queue on the air. If
you're in the Saint John's metro region, the number of
dialis seven zer oh nine two seven three five two
one one. Elsewhere a toll free long distance one eight

(00:46):
eight eight five ninety VOCM, which is eighty six twenty six.
So as everybody knows, we're pretty good at ball hockey.
Team Canada over the past weekend at the World Masters
Ball Hockey Championship held in Bermuda, in five New Filanders
and Laboradorians on the team, including Mitch Braggs, Scott Duty,
Mike Dike, Masonred and Matthew Feher. I believe Duty is

(01:08):
the MVP of the tournament and Young Fewer is a
one of the All Star team members. So congratulations to
the lads and the team Canada for sure, all right,
this is something I'd like to do into the future.
So they're actually accepting applications now for people who want
to be part of the twenty twenty seven Canada Winter
Games as part of the mission staff. So they're looking
for a chef to mission and assistant as well as

(01:28):
mission staff. The Games are in the last few days
of February until mid March of twenty twenty seven. If
you'd like to be part of the games, they're accepting applications.
One of these years, I'm going to apply for sure. Okay,
So we see the numbers at Canada's inflation rate. General
inflation rate has tick down to two point two percent
in large part of the point and the finger at
the decrease in the price of the pumps, well not

(01:51):
so much here. Let's just look at some of the
numbers as it pertains to this province. All right, Pump
prices fell out of rated nine point four percent in
October after falling four point one percent in September. Drivers
have switched the cheaper winter gas blends of crude prices
have come down. I made concerns of oversupply, that's from Statskan.
Well what's going on here? I mean it's generally speaking,

(02:12):
the PUB has not been in lockstep with the rest
of Atlantic Canada, forget the rest of the country. But
when you see these stories and you go fill up
around here, it's an absolute fair question. We do know
that the PUB has changed some of its course and
its formula and approach to the twenty nine different zones here.
When they apply the price for gasoline, diesel, home heating oil,
stove oils, propane, you know the deal. But how come

(02:34):
we're so far out of whack with the rest of
the country. I know the issue regarding no refining capacity
here in the province any longer. Now the come by
chance is now brave renewable fuels. But it's a fair
question when you see the inflation numbers and the very
next descriptor as to why it's sticked down to two
point two percent is over thirteen percent drop the price
at the pump, not if you live in this province,

(02:56):
all right, same thing as it pertains to groceries. I've
got friends who live around the country, and every now
and then when we're having a chat, somebody goes back
to cost of living issues. Obviously number one at the
top of that list for most groceries. So even with
the price of gas across the country following up about
thirteen percent over the last two months, the issue regarding
groceries is still significantly stubborn three point four percent year

(03:20):
over year increase. All right, So I'm always asked, you know,
what can anybody do about it? And in particular, what
can or should the government be doing about it? You know, Well,
here on the national front or the federal front, it's
the call to drop the industrial carbon tax. Okay, fair enough,
let's have that conversation. But remember, and this is not

(03:43):
pro or against anything you do, including the carbon industrial
tax and or the regular carbon tax which has now
gone away via legislation. We were told that that was
the cause of the high prices, and turns out had
zero impact on the price at the grocery store. And
here's the problem. Even if you look at the United States,
where the arsonist is now the firefighter. The tariffs increase

(04:04):
prices because of course they did, because there are attacks,
and so as a consequence to try to help people
manage the cost of living. Now the President has removed
some of those reciprocal tariffs on products that they cannot
produce at scale in the United States. So here's where
we are for things like shrinkflation. And even if the
whole tariff chaos goes away, how are we going to

(04:28):
be able to rely on the big grocery retailers to
actually bring their prices back to worth considering some of
their input costs may indeed be reduced. Probably can trust
them to do that. In addition to that, if you
ask farmers and grocers, one of the most are the
leading issues regarding the prices is supply chain interruptions and

(04:48):
fires and floods and droughts and insects. So, yes, we
can talk about how we can try to have grounment
pull whatever lever possible to try to help us out
at the grocery store, but it is picularly stubborn. Prices
fresh and frozen chicken up six point two percent, seafood
and other marine products up eight percent, meet eight point
four percent fresh and frozen beef has gone up astonishingly

(05:09):
almost seventeen percent. So where's the pathway forward? To leave
it to you to give me your opinion on it,
and then things like keeping her homeswarm, Sheila Larry called yesterday,
of course, the NDP member for Saint John's E's Kiddy Viti.
One of the key issues that they've been talking about
for a long time is the price to heat your home. Notably.
One thing the government can do, of course, is to

(05:30):
remove tax from home heating. Miss O'Leary and the NDP
are talking about being universal so that it'd be removed
for everybody, as opposed to a means test, you know,
based on income as to how much tax you would pay.
I think it's fair to say that not everybody listening
has got a huge concern with the tax on heating
their home, but many people do so when the Premier

(05:53):
talks about costs of living issues and trying to help
New Filanders Laboradorians balance their own budget before the government
worries about balancing their That's one place here we are
in the winter months, pretty cold out there. Look at
the pictures from Labrador. It's full blown winter and it's
pretty chilly here in and around town. So your thoughts
on it, if you'd like to talk about it, we
can do it all right. And we did hear from

(06:15):
the Governor of Vermont, phild Scott, who was a Republican,
talking about the chaos that's been created in the threats
of annexation while it's meant for Canadian tourism into his
state and it's down five percent or more. You can
do whatever you want with your money. Firebeaed for me
to say you should or should not travel to the
United States. I'm choosing not to. But if you choose to,
good enough for you and good enough for me. But

(06:37):
it has been a huge number. Just look at the
numbers crossing the Canaday West border, even when we talk
about road travel and or air travel. But anyway, let's
move on from that. Yesterday in meetings with first ministers,
and there's a couple of big meetings that Premier wake
Can entertained yesterday then so Premier Lego of Quebec was
not in attendance, but his energy minister was all it's

(07:00):
a little bit of a strange to and fro here right.
Her name is Christine Freshett. She goes on to talk
about the Upper Churchill Memorandum of Understanding being interesting balance Okay,
not even really sure what that means, but goes on
to say that if this province wants to enter into
renegotiating terms making changes in an effort to bolster the

(07:22):
returns to this province, then there will be changes forthcoming
from her province. All right. So it's a bit of
a thinly veiled threat that I don't think anybody should
be too worried about or hang our hats on it.
But what does that even mean? We're just talking in
circles here now at the political level about this. I
don't think it's unfair that if Premier Waken wants to

(07:42):
go through with an independent review, Okay, I think most
people will welcome that. We shouldn't be concerned with timelines
and exactly what's being reviewed. Is it a fair question
to even ask of Premier wakem what exactly is the problem?
I've heard from many people who put in pretty deep
thought and put forward some now is about their concerns,
whether it be for the Mike Wilson's on down and

(08:03):
any of those folks who I've been on the show
in the past to talk about their concerns. Most welcome
to come back, but we haven't really heard any specifics
at the political level. Exactly what we're talking about here?
Is it term? Is it risk? Is it hydro, Quebec's
authority at gaul Island? What exactly is it that we're
talking about? So anyway, but that's the Quebec's energy minister. Well,
if you want changes, we're going to want changes. Yeah,

(08:25):
I think that's called negotiations. And whether or not the
MoU is going to be reflected directly or any nuance
will be part of the finitive agreements, which you have
to think it will be. But anyway, thanks for coming
and thanks for comments and on that. I also think
you know, for some people the issue regarding Quebec and
how they talk about the Labrador border. For me, it's

(08:45):
complete and utter childish nonsense. It's been settled. People try
to continually tell me it hasn't been settled, but it has.
So should that be part of the conversation. I don't know.
If it's frivolous For some people, it's extremely meaningful, given
the fact that if they just ignore the border, which
has been settled as far back as nineteen twenty seven,
and again nineteen eighty two and repeatedly since. But does

(09:07):
that open the door for them to be even more
heavy handed, heavy footed and try to gain a stronger
foothold to what is actually the territory of NEWFOUNDLANDA Labrador
people think that we should be talking about them. We
can do it if you're so inclined. All right, A
couple of the things about the judicial recount that has
been accepted and approved by Justice Power. The voting district

(09:30):
that had the largest separation of votes was of course
Tops of Paradise one hundred and two votes, but yet
it was the only one accepted for initial or pardon
me for additional review. It's important to get it right.
I have no personal problem with this traditional recount because
people are losing their faith in the integrity of election results.
So let's have the evaluation and the careful examination. But

(09:52):
here's based on some of the affidavits that would put forward.
Some ballot candidates' names were circled instead of marking with
an X. Some of them were accepted, some were rejected.
For starters, we have to be consistent to what we
include as a vote that will count. In addition, to
that though, just think back to the recounting to tearing
over the peninsulas in the federal election. How many ballots

(10:14):
were spoiled? Look not to be preachy, but the ballot
is pretty self explanatory. You know, there's a candidate's name
and their parody and a circle and you put it
next in there. So I have a devil of a
time understanding as to how so many people are incorrectly
filling out their ballot. They took the time, they obviously
care about their vote. How do I know, because they

(10:35):
went to the polling station, they got their ballot, their
name was crossed off of the list, They went behind
the shield, and they struck the ballot, albeit with circles
as opposed to exes. But we'll see how that's going
to take. The recomp against today should only take a
couple of days, we're told at that point it's difficult.
It's difficult to think that there's going to be that

(10:55):
particular voting district overturn. But who knows. But after that,
let's get the house reopen and get down to the
people's business. Your thoughts, all right, former politicians? So this
story has been floating around for a while, and we
know that when Andrew Parsons decided that his time in
politics was done, it was pretty quickly after that he
signed off as signed on as senior council at the

(11:17):
Sussex Strategy Group. That's a public affairs firm. They are
located in Toronto. And now he signed on with the
Federal Lobby Registry. Okay, so when he was the Minister
of Energy, we'll call it, of course, largely responsible for
signing off on some of the onshore wind proposals. They
went through the process environmental assessments and the like, and

(11:39):
all the land that was made available up to some
three hundred square klometers of public land to be used
by Evreck now his client, the Exploits Valley Renewable Energy
Corporation Everreck, So all right, we can talk about the
wind proposals if you're so inclined. And for former politicians
there is a cooling off period for a year here

(12:02):
you can't be lobbying directly the provincial government. But there
are no rules regarding provincial politicians upon their leaving politics
to be able to lobby the federal government. Let's change that,
you know, why not, No one's been grudging agile Parsons
or anybody else after their political life to move on
to the private sector and at some point into the
future maybe being involved directly with the lobbying and or

(12:24):
working with the government looking for contracts or lobbying on
behalf of one industry or another, one company or another.
But it feels too quick, it really does, because not
onlybody have direct ties with the provincial government who's largely
responsible for these onshore win projects, but he also would
have some hooks in Ottawa. Why because he was a
Minister of the Crown for a long time and for

(12:46):
the last decade plus there's been a federal liberal government.
So the overlap seems extremely real to me. So maybe
those rules have to change to reflect, you know, even
if it's just the optics, because optics are reality in
the world of politics, right right, Okay, When you hear
public conversation about the scourge that is drugs and drug

(13:09):
overdose deaths and the crime associated with drugs, it's extremely real,
problematic and seems to be getting just worse day by day,
month by month. Here in the city of Saint John's
we've had this conversation a little bit, but just to
reflect some of the emails I've received about it. If
there's the possibility or the opportunity for the City of

(13:31):
Saint John's and Council to do more to try to
shut down these trap houses, these drug houses, the hair
that's been split by the city, I think is unfair.
So if they have the opportunity to be more forceful,
to join with partners such as the R and C
and direct control afford to the city by the City
of Saint John's Act, let's do everything humanly possible. Some

(13:55):
neighborhoods have been absolutely pummeled by the presidence of these
trap houses and the criminal element they're in. So we're
not suggesting that the City of Saint John's and on
armed by law officers go to these trap houses to
conduct investigations and arrest, but they have more tools than
they're using. I don't understand why we're not doing everything
humanly possible, as afforded to the city by legislation, to

(14:18):
be more active on this front. If you speak with
people who live in neighborhoods that notoriously have been under
the thumb of crime and drugs and drug dealers and
guns and ongoing violence, they're crying for help, and of
course they are, like everybody who would be living in

(14:38):
that circumstance would be doing exactly the same thing. We
cannot have a passing of the buck type of conversation
between the city, the landlord's law enforcement. More needs to
be done, plain and simple. And it's not just one entity,
it's all three or more who can play a much
bigger role in trying to shut down some of these operations.

(15:00):
And I know it can be, you know, playing whack
them hole. You get them here and they go there,
but still chase somewhere on until we chase them out
as best possible. What do you think. Let's talk about
it all right, a couple of quickies before we get to.
When the federal budget was released, many people notice the
fact that the aviation services that were once under the

(15:20):
auspices of Transport Canada have now quietly and without much
clarity or explanation, now been folded into the Department of Defense.
I don't think it jeopardizes some of the work they
do insofar as monitoring the Canadian coastlines for pollution and
marine life tracking and the like. But now that's gone,
and that's the national National Aerial Surveillance Program. So now

(15:44):
it's all part of the Department of Defense. I think
I don't know whether or not it's a big deal,
but it seems pretty plain and obvious to me that
just moving that cost and some fifty two aircraft that
were once part of the Transport Canada's operations in the
Department of Defense is just to bolster defense spending. So
it's as much a move on paper as it is

(16:06):
for operations. I don't think anything stops. I just think
it's a way when the country is saying, well, we're
going to hit two percent of GDP on the pathway
five percent of GDP on defense spending, it was an
easy way to do it. Same thing with the Canadian
Coast Guard being blended into the Department of Defense. So
it's really just shuffling round dollars as opposed to shirking responsibility, right,
I think. So anyway, your thoughts on that if you

(16:28):
want to talk about it, all right. So there was
a protest yesterday here about the pending job cuts for
the federal public sector. You know, there's a lot of
public sector workers who are within a year or two
or three of retirement age, so through attrition and maybe
some targeted cuts as at least sixteen thousand positions going

(16:51):
to be lost over the course of the next three years.
So the federalation of labor of course concerned on that front.
And I think the labor concerns across the country are growing,
whether it be the teachers now a birder being legislative
back to work, the use of the with standing class,
so there could be no core challenges over the term
of the contract, which is four years. Section one oh
seven legislating back to work workers at the ports and

(17:13):
the rails and Canada posts and their Canada flight attendants.
The sentiment amongst organized labor is growing, and not in
a favorable way. When we talk about relations with provincial
and or federal governments, and this is the last one,
it's the federal budget, man, Okay, So nobody should be
too surprised that the federal budget passed. It came with

(17:36):
the hyperventilating about, oh, you know, chewing on fingernails. It's
so close. It passed one seventy to one sixty eight
with numerically speaking, very close, but the political theater is
just absurd. So two NDP members abstained and they gave
explanations as to why, you know, there were things in
that budget that were good for their constituents. They were

(17:57):
pretty plain. You know, the NDP can say they overall
did not support the budget, but those members who abstained,
they said, well, there's lots of good stuff in there
for me and the people that I represent wanted. Okay,
then it gets even more absurd with the Conservatives. So
Elizabeth may well get Elizabeth me out of the way
here quickly. So the leader of the Green Party has

(18:18):
said because the Prime Minister stood it made a very
brief reference to committing to hitting the climate change targets,
that was good enough for her. But on the Conservative front,
I think it is an absolutely fair assessment to say
they didn't want the government to fall either. They didn't.
I mean, if they did, they could have been a
little bit more forceful then. Standing in the foyer of

(18:39):
the House of Commons, once there's a question called in
a vote begins, the doors are locked. There's a little
foyer in between the Parliament partly of the House of
Commons proper and the doors that get locked. So Shannon Tubbs, look,
she had a major surgery. She could not be there
but Andrew Schare, Government House leader, you know, stood outside

(18:59):
and after he found out exactly what the vote was
going to be, the math was done, he had information
that was not available to people in the chamber proper
comes in and says he had a technical difficulty, and
so consequently now he's here and death to death to death. Look,
I don't I can't speak for the Conservative Party of
Canada and specifically they're members of caucus as to whether

(19:22):
or not they want an election, but it certainly doesn't
look like they did. I don't think any party really does.
I mean, going through the throws of what was it
felt like two or three years worth of campaigning, Eddip
don't want to go back to the ballot box. Doesn't
look like the Conservatives do. Elizabeth May doesn't. I don't
know if the Liberals want to or not. They may
even feel poised to do better than they did in

(19:43):
the last election. But you know, it just does make
a fires of electronic voting. If you cannot be in
the House of Commons probably shouldn't get to vote.

Speaker 2 (19:52):
Now.

Speaker 1 (19:52):
With Shannon Tobbs and others who have serious medical concerns,
she just underwent major surgery, so Obviously she can't be there,
and that's no fault of hers, but the whole theater
of technical difficulties, you are right there. If you wanted
to be in the house to cast your vote in person,
you could have. So anyway the budget is through. People

(20:14):
will be applauding and people will be crying foul. But
that's where we are, so there will be no Christmas
election and your thoughts on it more than welcome. We're
on Twitter or a vos upline. You could follow us there.
Email addresses open on a VOSM dot com. Let's take
a break. When we come back to the floor, is
yours the topic up to you? Don't away clock it
back to the show. Let's go to line number one.

(20:34):
Good morning, ed, you're on the air. Are you doing
the will I'm doing okay, I'm Patty.

Speaker 3 (20:42):
There's one of those days.

Speaker 1 (20:44):
Problem.

Speaker 3 (20:45):
I have a I have a very concern. The main
thing is this. A friend of mine was admitting hospital
and they threw many, many tests. They determined that the
person has a heart valve problem. Right, and the doctor's

(21:06):
determined that, so they were going to do open heart surgery. Obviously,
right did to fix the particular issue, So they get
to transferred. They're in the hospital for like almost two weeks,
so it gets transferred from one hospital to another, and
for some unusual reason, I don't know who is the

(21:30):
infinous wisdom who thought this or whoever did this in
the first place, released them last Friday saying okay, we
can't do nothing until after Christmas. I'm like, okay, So
last night they were found on the floor blue literally blue,

(21:50):
rushed to hospital forty minutes for an ambulance, but they survived.
My concern is this, if you at one hospital they
determined that they are a vowed problem with that particular person,
and when they transfer to a person to a different hospital,
within not even two days, they're released, No, we very

(22:13):
real they have a heart problem, and then all of
a sudden, it's release them from all particular absolute rays
and saying, oh, they can't do anothing until Christmas. So
you waste it, not just two like one ambulance, but
you had to waste another ambulance, emergency response, all this
waiting for like forty minutes for ambulance and bring them

(22:35):
right back to the emergency room in the hospital waiting
for again more tests which you have already done to
determine the problem in the first place, because a person
was transferred from one hospital to another in order to
receive the surgery in the first place, but you had
never received it.

Speaker 1 (22:51):
Okay, just very quickly, What were they told as to
why nothing could be done until Christmas? Like, what does
that mean?

Speaker 3 (22:58):
That's a good question to That's a very good question.
Why did anybody tell them that in the first place? Right,
knowing very well they do have a heart problem and
a vowl problem, and they are of course fighting hard
to breathe, walking, everything else. So obviously, if there's a
major problem there, right to release someone from the hospital

(23:23):
knowing full well they have a heart problem, because if
this person lived alone, that'd be dead day, that would
be physically dead. Right, So obviously, if you're transferring one
patient to another, is the files and the information of
that person, all the tests done actually get into the
other hospital, even though they are the same corporation of healthcare,

(23:45):
there's some major problem going on there. It's well, in
my mind, literally risking people's laws if somehow someone has
an infamous wisdom to basically throw somebody out of the
hospital because they didn't look at the churns.

Speaker 1 (24:01):
I don't imagine that's the case. And let's remember, you know,
we've had concerns about wait times for cardiac procedures, and
at one point there was over two hundred and anow
there's been in an additional surgeon added here at the
Health Science and so I think that list is seeing
fewer people wait as long as they have. So look,
I can't speak for one case or one doctor or another,

(24:22):
but there's been plenty of people, dozens, if not hundreds,
who are at home waiting to be called about when
the procedure is going to take place, one cardiac surgery
or another. So I guess there's a risk assessment conducted
and a timeline considered. And again I don't know all
the ins and outs there, and nor do I know
what the doctor actually told the patient. But there's plenty
of people, including people listening to the program right now,

(24:43):
who are on the list waiting for a cardiac procedure,
no doubt about it.

Speaker 3 (24:47):
I mean, if she was not in that bad a shade,
then you know they would release her at the previous house,
the first hospital in the first place, to go home.
Why transfer to the other hospital in order to receive
the surgery but get told to go home. Well that's
like a I mean, you look at it, completely inefficient

(25:08):
in every sense of the work, right, but you're risking
people's lives, especially if the doctors have determined that that
particular person has a problem they need heart surgery neatly
to transfer them over to a different hospital to receive
the emergency, to receive the procedure in order to help
them out. But yet it's basically told to go home

(25:32):
before the procedure is even given. I mean, I know
there's many people after waiting for different surgeries and stuff
like that, but if it wasn't that much of a
bad case, why send a person to a different hospital.

Speaker 1 (25:44):
I don't know if I really have nowhere three idea,
And I look, we hear stories all the time of
people who are told, okay, on Wednesday, the nineteenth of November,
you are having your procedure one procedure or another, and
then they're told, maybe a day shy, that we're going
to have to postpone it. Some of that boy down
to access to the operating theaters and the staff required.
So I don't know what the circumstances are in this case.

(26:06):
But when you're facing the worries associated with needings for instances,
in this case, a surgery on your heart that when
it doesn't happen in timely fashion, what do you think
people are going to feel? They're going to be nervous,
the family is going to be stressed because of the
obvious reasons. A heart issue could be the demise of
one person or another, including myself to its sweet. So

(26:26):
I don't really understand all the ins and outs of
your friends concerned, but I understand the questions.

Speaker 3 (26:31):
Yeah, I if this is the case and they didn't
determine that particular person as a risk to have major problem,
then okay, send the person home at the hospital they
were in the first place, but they transfer her over
to the other hospital in order to recede the procedure,
right because it determined it was that bad Apparently. Yeah,

(26:55):
it's very very strange. I don't know if if there's
like major miscommunication going on there, but obviously somebody dropped
the ball and almost cost somebody's life last night. Like
that's that's pretly not a good thing. So, I mean,
the great d are transferring patients from one hospital another
is the proper information getting to the other doties, to communication,

(27:16):
getting to the to the to the actual hospital itself.
Of how serious that particular person.

Speaker 1 (27:21):
Is, you would think so, and I would hope so.

Speaker 3 (27:23):
Well, you would hope so. But obviously somebody dropped the
ball and hopefully it's inves gad about hospital. Why that
happened would be nice.

Speaker 1 (27:30):
Well, at least the patient him or herself should know
exactly what's going on, and if it was a staffing issue,
say that, if there was a risk assessment done, say that.
You know, a bit of information goes a long way.
And I don't know what that person knows or doesn't know,
but I appreciate the time. Anything else you want to say.

Speaker 4 (27:47):
Ed what we have you?

Speaker 3 (27:49):
Well, you know, I hope this doesn't really happen to
anybody else. I mean you probably would be to a point.
But hopefully they're communication between hospitals.

Speaker 1 (27:58):
And most of this would be electronic once once diagnosis
and testing has been done, the medical record is digital,
so there's no reason that they wouldn't have access to it.
Like even for me as a general tax paying citizen.
After I go in and get a diagnostic test done
or get some blood worked on, I can go on
to my gov health app and see what the results are,
so you know, for well, the doctors have access to

(28:18):
the information, and I appreciate the time. I hope your
friend's okay.

Speaker 3 (28:22):
Well, as far as I heard last you still wait
in the emergency room a game, still waiting for a
room upstairs, which she already had Friday.

Speaker 5 (28:32):
I don't know, it's.

Speaker 3 (28:33):
Weird, okay, Well, you have a good daily and hopefully
something will get better, hopefully for Christmas, hopefully.

Speaker 1 (28:39):
So I appreciate your time. I wish her well you too, thanks,
bye bye. I mean even things like prior to diagnosis
being completed through a variety of test, you know, including
a die test. On that front, how many beds doesn't
make the broad strokes here. How many hospital beds today
are being occupied by some who doesn't need to be

(29:01):
in the hospital, They need to be in a long
term care facility, or in an a Q care facility,
or they just are awaiting a test for instance, the
cath lab question. I mean, it's not that long ago.
We actually had a conversation with a gentleman on this program,
lie from his hospital bed in Cornerbrook, where he felt
fine and he wanted to go home. They wouldn't discharge

(29:21):
him until he had ADYE test on. And the only
cat lab in the province is at the Health Sciences
in Saint John's. So when the Cornerbrook Hospital is being
built and all the questions about radiology but no real
clamor for an additional cat lab, which is it always
struck me as bizarre. And of course the same thing
answers were offered is that, well, you can build a

(29:43):
lab and buy the equipment, but unless you have the
technologists to run it, that is just sitting there as
equipment without actual practical approach or practical application. So anyways,
but that whole concept of in the hospital when you
belong somewhere else, realistically speaking, medically speaking, it's obviously been
a problem for a long time. Let's get a break

(30:05):
in here. When we come back, the show is up
to you to hop it up to you. Don't go away,
Welcome back to the show. Let's go to lin number two.
Take it more to the Liberal member for Placentia Saint
Mary's at Cherry Gaman Walsh. Morning Sherry around the air, Good.

Speaker 6 (30:19):
Morning, Patty. I'm calling today. I just want to talk
about nurse Practitioners and as the Shadow Minister for Wellness
and the Social Social Social Social Supports and well Being specifically.
But I also want to talk about my district, Placenta,
Saint Mary's. So the Nurse Practitioner Pilot project was something

(30:41):
that we thought forward in August August twenty seventh, actually
I attended the announcement over at the healthfi and Center
and the Liberal government at that time we launched a
year long Nurse Practitioner Funding College to expand access to
primary care. And it was developed in collaboration with the
New Zeland Lavator Nurse Practitioner Association, and there was the

(31:02):
key features to that pilot. The cost at the time
was going to be estimated to be about two million
for one year. We were going to have independent contractors.
It's going to be equivalent to the public sector nurse
practitioners' salaries. There will be additional funding also the offset
the business costs that come with setting up the offices.
And it would yield about a little over sixteen hundred

(31:23):
hours in direct patient care and excepted to see you
seven to eight hundred patients, which was a fear and
good number.

Speaker 5 (31:31):
Was built.

Speaker 6 (31:32):
Was a building, a commitment where there was going to
be an evaluation factor. There's going to be ongoing assessment
to inform the permanent funding models. Now, at that time
CNLMA did a pose the fact that the business costs
were going to be covered for nurse practitioners and they
had argued that physicians had been seeking a similar model
for quite some time. So the PC's committed to providing

(31:53):
for positions as well if they got elected. The Department
of Health has issued the q which is a request
for supplier qualifications to to recruit the nurse practitioners. They
did this on September tenth, during the election and well
just before the election on September tenth, and it will
close on November twenty seventh, which is next Thursday. But

(32:14):
we haven't heard a word about this from the new
minister or any of the changes that PCs were going to,
you know, put in place that they promised to.

Speaker 7 (32:24):
Guess how they.

Speaker 6 (32:24):
Were elected, I mean they made some significant healthcare provinces
throughout luseland met Door. Now there was the summer you know,
there's also some arguments in the public that it was
going to cover only twenty of the three hundred and
fifty one license in peace but also at the time
that meant twenty off the about forty independent MPs that

(32:45):
were in the province, so with that half. But the
PCs were criticizing the pilot. They said it had a
limited it was a limited pilot, there was too many
conditions around it. They said that seventeen hundred patient roster
wasn't enough and they just was number of criticisms. During
the campaign, PCs, again I just said, were out and

(33:06):
had significant health promises and so in their campaign, in
their platform they promised to make nurse practitioner visits free.
Throughout news from London Lavador, every nurse practitioner visit free.
They budgeted five millions towards this promise. They said they
would double the size of the nurse practitioner education program,

(33:27):
they would provide overhead support and incentives for nurse practitioners
and family doctors to establish clinics, and they would create
a permanent mobile team of local nurses and nurse practitioners
to serve direct parts of the province. That's right out
of their books. Now the NHA for Percentia Saint Mary's
on October fourth, now Premier wakem and the PC candidate

(33:49):
for presention, marys around the Power. They held a public
meeting in Whitburn and there's a video on the candidates
Facebook page. She's standing in front the doctor William pH
newho clinic with the map premiere and specifically saying that
under a PC government, the new whole clinic will return
to twenty four our emergency care. That clinic transitions to

(34:14):
urgent care in March of twenty twenty three. It's now
eight to four urgent clinics, urgent care clinic and it
has been like I said, for some consince March of
twenty twenty three, and that was due to the inability
to stablish I mean, I was constantly constantly calling the
Ministers of Health Community Services trying to get the appropriate staff,

(34:35):
the appropriate number of staff to keep this emergency unit open,
and it was not possible. It was absolutely not possible.
You're looking at four to five doctors to effectively staff
a twenty four hour emergency. And we know there's a
different categories Category A where there's someone on site all
the time, Category B where there's someone available all the time.
They can be called in so they're you know, they're

(34:56):
on duty, they're waiting rural and remote, and we're here
in Magister now down in Saint Mary's, for example, and
Saint Mary's is serving that clinic, and Saint Mary's is
serving about one thousand residents from Saint Stephens Peters River
right up to river Head and others too, because somehow
people from Saint Joseph's go down there also and they're

(35:18):
serving about a thousand residents. And they're down now to
one doctor one day a week. They had a nurse
practitioner and they had a doctor, but go down to
one doctor one day a week. And of course, you
know there's one doctor, there's a limited number of patients
he can see in his day. And if you don't

(35:38):
get an apartment this week, and you don't get one
next week, for three or four weeks before you can
even get an apartment. And there's a significant number of
seniors down in.

Speaker 7 (35:44):
This part of my district.

Speaker 6 (35:45):
So we have an issue down here, and we've had
it for a while now. In Placentia, where there's a
fabulous hospital and emergency unit, long term care facility and
acute care facility, there is a mixture of doctors. We
have virtual care to physicians time visits on call with
full time with some the emrged like it is a
combination to keep the emergency and the hospital staff. And

(36:09):
even there, I know yesterday one of my constituents waited
over twelve hours in the merge to see a doctor.
And I know twelve hours doesn't seem like a long
time sometimes here in Saint John's when you're waiting twelve
to twenty four, but you know, twelve hours is a
long time for a senior to sit anywhere and wait.
And we've been talking about this for all for a
year now. The Minister was in this yesterday, she was

(36:32):
on REALCM and to quote it that the Health Minister
says timely access to adequate healthcare is top priority for
her department. She's been busy taking three things and getting
up to date in her department. And I understand that
it is a massive department to health community Services. And
she just said she wants, you know, the biggest issues
to tackle recruitment and retention. Well, I haven't heard a

(36:52):
peep on their promises for the changes to what we
put in in August for the nurse practitioners. I do
know what was announced, you know, to request qualites on
the twenty seventh. But if they're going to change it,
would you think that they would have went in and
changed the requests now already and we hear something, and
maybe they did. Minister just hasn't said anything about it,
so we haven't heard anything. And I now my district,

(37:15):
and I'm sure there's other districts in the province, is
truly and honestly hurting for this nurse practitioner program to
go ahead. We need it, you desperately need it.

Speaker 4 (37:25):
Now.

Speaker 6 (37:26):
Am I going to get a nurse practitioner in my district?
Who's going to do this? I don't know, but there's
a chance I'm willing to take to try to make
sure it happens. I mean, I know for surely in
my district now right now, it's sixty dollars a visit
to a nurse practitioner, and we do have one there
and she is utilized and everybody loves her.

Speaker 5 (37:42):
I know.

Speaker 6 (37:42):
I had to take my son who lives in Saint
John's and his non verbal autism to a nurse partitioner
a couple weeks ago, because that's another story, because I
thought he had a doctor. He was on the list,
and when I went to go call the doctor that
he hadn't used in two years since he had the
initial visit, couldn't find a doctor, got no'm are no
longer in service and I have no idea. I still

(38:03):
haven't done the doctor. So I call the nurse practitioner
in Churches School and took them there. That was one
hundred dollars a business, So one hundred dollars is a
lot for some people. Took pay to go see it
was a nurse practitioner for half an hour. I'm just
anxious as the critic, as the Settle Minister for Social
Sports and Wellbeing, and as the NAHA for district of

(38:24):
Percentage sent Mary's to know what is going on with
this nurse practitioner on it that we announced in August.

Speaker 1 (38:31):
All fair questions, I mean the whole issues of promises
regarding healthcare. You're reducing our alliance on travel, nurses re
established in emergency services at Whitburn, all of these types
of things. I don't know where the details are because
staffing and recruiting and retaining has been a huge problem,

(38:53):
and not just here, every province in the country is
having the exact same concerns. I'm not exactly sure why
because we've got more doctor and nurses than ever before,
but yet wait times continue to increase. People waiting on
patient connect the number continues to grow. So I don't
know where the details are regarding the nurse practitioner program
or anything else, but we certainly have plenty of time

(39:13):
for Minister Evans on this program to give us a
few more details. We've actually reached out to the Premier's
office for some time, maybe today, but sometime this week.
So these are all questions that everybody has. And you know,
I'll be told by some supporters of the current conferent
that you know have to give them time. Well, okay,
but time is also up the essence here, and if
the promises were made, they must have had included some

(39:36):
detail in the minds of supporters and individual politicians and
some of their advisors and strategists. So I know transitioning
government is difficult, but people don't have a whole lot
of time to wait, considering the fact that most of
the information and the authority is in the hands of
senior bureaucrats, they're still there. So the briefings, okay, but

(39:56):
let's get some answers to some of these actual detailed
questions include yours, and we'll see what we can do
here on this program, Sharry, that's for sure.

Speaker 6 (40:04):
Yeah, I am honestly and genuinely concerned about this because
this was a good announcement. It was in collaboration with
the Lustilan Lebator Nurses Practitioner Association. Everybody thought it was
a good you know, it was a good concept. It
was one solution. We need multiple solutions, but it's one solution.
And like the foundation was late, the work was done, like,

(40:24):
come on, let's get going, and if you're going to
make changes through it, you know, announce those changes. Please
talk to the people, tell us what's happening.

Speaker 1 (40:32):
Absolutely, I appreciate the time, Sherry, thank you. We'll ask
these questions as soon as we get a chance.

Speaker 7 (40:37):
Thank you very much.

Speaker 1 (40:38):
You're welcome you too, byebye. H And I see things
floating in out of the corner of my eye here,
and it was comments about, you know, the president taking
away some traffs that he initially put in and told
us that it would not increase prices. Prices increased, take
away the traffs. The next big question is, well, the
price has actually come down, you know it certainly remains

(40:59):
to be seen. Groceries is my bugaboo. It's the biggest
one that concerns my day to day operation, my day
to day spent as the grocery shopper. But once they
go up, it's extremely difficult to paint the picture of
how quickly they may or may not come down. Let's
get a break in, Dave, speak with someone on the
phone there. Maybe they're on the queue. If not, plenty
of time for you. Don't go away, welcome back to
the program. I guess because of an at this a while,

(41:21):
I can predict a few things, including some of the
emails and even some of the emailers. So the question
is about members of the past Liberal government, whether it be
cabinet ministers or otherwise. And I can't recall a big
flood of Liberal members calling Sherry Gammon Walsh's call. We
spoke with Pam Parsons a while back. I think that
was about a very specific thing in our district. I

(41:42):
don't think we've spoken to many Liberals beyond that. If so,
you can refresh my memory. And the question is about
isn't it rich to hear the liberals complain about the
mess they created and that's sort of the paraphrase some
of the emails I got, and how long the pieces
have been in power? Okay, So my question would be
to folks who have that obvious take on things, because

(42:04):
it's a fair point. The liberals are power and awful
long time so as opposed to me asking questions, but
past members of the liberal government, okay, how long should
people wait to be able to ask legitimate questions about
what's actually happening? You know, in the nurse practitioner program,
it was crafted, it was very well understood how was

(42:26):
going to work. Some of the consternation by the doctors
in so far as you know, office expenses being covered
in this nurse practitioner program. If the question is has
anything changed, I don't know. I don't think it matters
to me whether that's a past liberal member of government
or just a regular tax paying citizen. But I'll put
it back to you. How long do you think people
should realistically wait before we ask questions of the now

(42:51):
PC government. I don't think too long should pass before
we can absolutely ask detailed questions some of the things,
because remember, as members of the official opposition, it's a
critically important role, so to hold government to account and
like I said when I spoke with Sherry Gavin Walsh,
transitioning in a government and getting up to date with
all the briefings required and not actually understanding the workings

(43:14):
of government. Whether you're newly elected or were past member
of the official opposition, a lot goes on that opposition
members don't get to see. And that includes all the
rest of us, so all US taxpayers and all US voters.
So I get it, the transition takes time and people
have to be quote unquote patient. But my question back
to those who offer that concern via email, how long

(43:35):
do you think people should wait? Not I mean the taxpayers.
You can ask questions of the premier awakement government today.
You can ask them on the fifteenth of October, fair
enough because the campaign there was lots of promises and
pledges made. So that's the question I have for you
is how long should people wait before they think it's
fair to ask questions of the now PC majority government.

(43:55):
Let's got a lineup of four, say get born into
the world for councilor here in town of Tom Davis
councilor here.

Speaker 4 (43:59):
On the air, good morning Patty. A couple of quick things.
The kellys Brook Trail is actually closed for use. We're
building accessible washrooms there, so just to let everybody know
that before they go out for their walks and stuff.
As well. An update on our rainfall. A normal monthly

(44:25):
November month would be between one hundred and sixteen and one
hundred and thirty two millimeters, and to date we're up
two hundred and sixty eight millimeters, so we're on track
to hopefully replenish some of those reservoirs that were down.
Last November was actually the wettest month in the history
of Saint John's. We received three hundred and twenty six
milimeters in the month of November last year.

Speaker 1 (44:48):
It felt like every bit of it too.

Speaker 4 (44:50):
Yeah, we needed it, though. We would imagine if we
didn't get all that rain last November we're kind of
mess we would have been in. So on, just a
couple of quick comments. I'm going to take the council
head off just for a minute, just to get these
things off my chest. It's amazing that the MSc Galtic
isn't allowed to basically sit there as long as it's
been sad and I wonder within the calculation financial calculations

(45:14):
of the insurance companies and the owner of that ship,
whether they're hoping Mother Nature takes it away.

Speaker 1 (45:22):
Yeah, I mean there was also a delay in actually
getting added. I know some work had to be done
on shore to even allow crews to get on site,
but it did feel like there was a pretty sluggish
reaction to a big cargo ship being grounded that close
to shore and now here we are, and you can
only imagine, and I think the people that are actually monitoring,
they're pretty much saying that it's likely going to get worse.

(45:43):
Winter weather is going to be particularly harsh, possibly and
if so, the buffering and the battering that it's gotten
or received already, you can only imagine that the worries
of people in the area, whether it be involved in
fishery or otherwise, they're very well founded.

Speaker 4 (45:58):
You know. If a virtual government is in pretty quiet
relatively speaking on this, and I think they need to
start banging the fist on the table a little bit more,
because again, I mean, it's probably too late. Unfortunately we
lost the summer it was and would have been it
was a beautiful, quiet, relatively speaking, hurricane free period of
time to actually have done something with that, I mean
this North you know it's the North Atlantic. It's not

(46:19):
really North Atlantic there, but you know it's the Atlantic Ocean,
and nature will take that ship away. And I'm again
really really dollar and cents. People sit back and do
math on things and figure what one thing's going to
cost versus other thing's going to cost. And you know, again,
I think, I think the time there's I don't know

(46:41):
how many other jurisdictions would put up with that environmental
challenge not being dealt with as quickly as it possibly
can be that close to shore.

Speaker 1 (46:50):
It reminds me of the passing the buck or passing
the responsibility around between the province and the FEDS. Who's
responsible for cleaning up whales out of Washta Shore. I
know it's a different conversation, but you know, we should
be able to understand in very short order exactly whose
responsibility it is and be able to mobilize whoever's responsible
much quicker than we have in the past, whether it
be for Wales, data on shore or ships out a

(47:11):
runner ground toime, I didn't even realize what time it was.
But if you have more, I'll put you on hold
and get back to you after the news. Okay, sure,
all right, let's do that. All right, it's going to
break for the news. I'll come back. Tom Davis is there,
can want to talk about the budget and then whatever
you want to talk about, don't go ahead, welcome back
to the showt'shorre re joined Tom Davis on three time.
You're back on the air.

Speaker 4 (47:32):
Thank you, Patty problem. Another side conversation, but probably a
pretty important conversation, is the fact that cloud Fair, which
is basically a website provider, has actually been down all
morning and how integrated our lives have become. When I
look at the list of websites that will be infected Amazon, CANBA, Facebook,

(47:54):
Opening Eye, which of course check GPT, Spotify x YouTube,
Stage accounting, which a lot includes my company uses to
be able to do their accounting, and a lot of
this stuff has moved to the cloud. Now you no
longer have stuff resident on your computer. PayPal, so you know,
that's a lot of the world when you really think
about it, Like my business uses PayPal when people do bookings,

(48:15):
and so you know, you just think how integrated we've become.
And for two and a half hours this stuff's not working.

Speaker 1 (48:22):
Yeah, I'm experiencing it in real time, and you know
it's also how reliant and solely reliant we are on it.

Speaker 4 (48:31):
Yeah, you know, it's fascinating because as we supposedly evolve,
it seems like we're probably not necessarily creating a more
sustainable and a more reliable society. So you know, it's
one of those things, you know, even though AI especially
with healthcare, I know you mentioned all the time, and
it's so true, like, you know, the benefits of having

(48:53):
the most up to date science and medicine at the fingertips,
at the speed of life twenty four hours, seven days
a week, nobody retires, and you don't get you know,
the the in theory, the information that is being used
to diagnose and to treat would be the most up
to date, you know, and the fact that you could

(49:13):
have that at your fingertips. But then the flip side
is as you move more and more down that road
and you no longer have the experienced people to actually
make those decisions and be able to service you. And
what happens when and it's not any if, it's when
things fail, you know, does everything just stop? And you know,

(49:34):
I guess you have to have redundancies, but it's difficult
to have you know, parallel medical uh you know people
who can just step in when when the AI is
not there for whatever reason.

Speaker 1 (49:46):
Well, there's no going back at this point.

Speaker 4 (49:49):
No, it's interesting, it's an interesting experiment. We're doing well.
I guess generations to come, we'll look back and figure
out whether we made the right bets or not. Okay,
I'm going to put the hat back on the so
we'll have back on. You know, we have a new
council and one of the first things that council has
to do after an election, well, we have to do
it every every winter, really every not you know, every fall.

(50:10):
We have to do a budget. And as most people
who've gotten their tax bills or have gotten their assessments realize,
people's on average home values have gone up eight percent
in the city. And the impact on that if we
don't do anything with mill rates is that people's taxes

(50:30):
will go up on average eight percent. And you know
that's an average. There's some people that goes up way
more than a percent, you know, like heartbreaking the league
up more than a percent. Although eight percent is pretty
challenging on already really squeezed people's homes. There's people who
are less. But you know, we actually end up with
this great chart that basically shows, based on people's homes,

(50:50):
how much on average every group goes up. And right now,
I just call on people to think about that. And
you know, because within council there's this balancing act of
trying to provide services and improve services, but of course
it has to be paid for. We have the blessing
and I'll say it is the blessing at the city

(51:10):
hall that we have to balance our budget. We can
borrow money for capital works, but we have to balance
our budget and that puts constraints on the City of
Saint John's that it does not exist for the province
or for the federal government. It's too bad that there
aren't more constraints on those two parties. But that's not
what we're talking about. So, you know, for people, a
lot of times people want more and more and more

(51:32):
or the least they want what they have. But with
property values going up, and of course the cost of
doing everything going up, including how much we pay employees
and all that stuff, these are already complex conversations. But
the residents need to weigh in and Unfortunately, a lot
of the people we need to hear from for one
reason another maybe they've given up, maybe there's just feel

(51:55):
like there's no point, and they're the voices I try
and bring into the council chambers. You know, we hear
a lot from people who want more snow clearing and
more cydewalks done, and you know, want, want, want, And
we also hear from people when we talk about maybe
not doing something or adding more. But who we don't
hear from Unfortunately, when you're going around knocking on doors

(52:18):
and you're sitting at people's kitchen tables and they feel
connected enough to you and they trust you enough that they,
you know, start pouring their hearts out to you, and
you'll have senior citizens crying at a kitchen table. It's
pretty heartbreaking. But we don't hear from those people unless
we go and knock on the doors. And it's not
necessary epathy. Maybe it's pride, maybe the combination of a

(52:41):
whole bunch of things. But you know, I know that
there's thirty percent of resident the City of Saint John's
are experiencing housing in affordability, and I know that an
eight percent increase in property taxes is very significant for
well pretty well anybody, but but for a lot of people.
And I just want to call on people to do

(53:01):
two things. First of all, consider what you think the
city can afford and needs to be able for. But also,
you know, think about the impact of eight percent. Really
sit and let that sit with you, because it's forever,
you know, as long as you're alive, and that's going
to continue to go off obviously.

Speaker 1 (53:21):
And that's actually the last twelve percent. As a taxpayer
in the City Saint John's, I have no problem saying
to a counselor on the show it's unacceptable. It just
absolutely truly is. And I mean in the sunshine list
at the City Saint John's is astounding. It really truly is.
So we can talk about people want more and they
want better services and improve services and that services and
all the rest, because that's what people are like. People

(53:43):
want what they want when they want it. But the
way that the city has handled the budget and the
increase of proper taxes over the last number of years
is out of control. It just is. And before you
run council, I think you would have said the same thing.

Speaker 4 (53:56):
I still do. I say the council, and the challenge
is that there's not enough people screaming and yelling and
putting that pressure on us to do the difficult things.
We don't do it what the province don't do with
the feds. But the city is a place where you're
the closest to the residents, where it affects you the most.
People have to and they have to get real with

(54:18):
it too. They have to realize everything costs money, whether
it's new mews centers, or roads or sidewalks or all
that stuff costs money. We accept that. But someone has
a dry line in the sand and say, you know
what I believe is the standard of living and New
Found Laborator has been inflated. We had this big boom
and now we're starting to settle down and people have

(54:39):
to realize that we can only afford what we can afford.
But you have to send that message to the politicians.
It has the part of our culture. And I tell
you it's tough down there when people are like, well
we're not hearing from people, Well guess what they need
to hear from people. Okay, not just every once in
a while.

Speaker 1 (54:57):
But their job is to manage the book, not culture.
Culture is in the hands, in the hearts of the regular,
everyday citizen. That's where culture belongs. A couple of quick ones.
On housing, it very much feels like the old Vallely
Haley site is moving ahead. I mean, we can talk
about consultations getting it right in mixed juice and egress
and all the rest, but it very much feels like
that's going ahead. How About on Mon twenty the Martian Road,

(55:20):
the old Harrington School. The proposal there from Michael Cayle
or Matthew Callahan O'Callahan was enormous, four hundred units. I
think these square footage somewhere around maybe seven hundred sixteen stories.
All the rest of where's.

Speaker 4 (55:31):
That well was, where all that stuff is. It's in
the very early stages. And obviously, as a city we
don't directly control everything. We're supportive of density, we obviously
want to manage it for the best long term interests.
But again, you know, ask ask his development group, Matthew
Callahan and the development group. You know, it's an I
think it's an exciting project, but you know it's a

(55:53):
lot of money. I mean, I imagine he's going to hope,
he's going to make it happen. But these are massive
projects on imagine more really you know when you think
about what a change it would be for that part
of the city. But that that is the type of
development that we need to encourage. Is density is infill
because we don't have to go put more roads out
in the middle of nowhere. We have to drive water
mains and sewer mains out in the middle of nowher.

(56:15):
So you know it's for us. You know, we're excited
about it. But that being said, you know it's got
to follow the rules. And if these things take time.

Speaker 1 (56:24):
I appreciate the times for me. Thank you take care
of them too. Bye bye, all right, it's gonna break
in right on time. Can you stay there and talk
about the budget and then plenty shoulift for you. Don't
go away, clok back, Let's go to Lene number two,
Ken around the air.

Speaker 5 (56:36):
Good morning, Patty to you. I listened to your I
think you call it preamble or introls this morning, and
correct me if I'm wrong, But I believe you forgot
to mention that outgoing conservative in team general roup it
goes not to vote on the budgets. Don't one you

(57:01):
mentioned Andrew Scher stood up in the House and said
that he voted Noel because that wouldn't work. The question
I have there is and he wasn't only there was
two MP's. There was another guy by the name of Reed.
Why was he voting remotely when he was in the house.
And and with regards to Shannon's nuts, I don't know

(57:27):
if I can pronounced that correctly, but she's a Conservative
MP for Lakeland, Billie Bloydminster. She was apparently in surgery,
So there are some people asking questions, couldn't she have
voted remotely on this? She was literally in surgery at
the exact time of the vote. Now, my other question

(57:49):
is it seems to me, well, I was like, okay.
My other comment is it seems to me that the
Conservatives really didn't want at this time. So my question
is why all the theatrics or the theater why didn't
they just come out and say they're going to vote

(58:09):
for the budget because they don't want kind of election
at this time And it's.

Speaker 1 (58:14):
Clear that they don't, well, because their supporters want the
government to fall. I mean, I think that's just the
natural course of politics. But you know, some of the
additional theatrics, to use your word, are just sort of
tiring to me. Anyway. Look, it's none of it's surprising,
and I don't even know the rationale or the strategy
behind it because it doesn't fool anybody. I mean, I

(58:35):
think we've all figured out that the theatrics are just
for their own opportunity to get in the news or
have a sound bite as part of a news clip
or whatever. But it just comes across as really quite
juvenile to me, and to me, it doesn't matter the
party that pulls it off. Every time any member of
Parliament or any MHA does something like that the theater
of the absurd, then we should all call it out
because it's a freaking waste of time.

Speaker 5 (58:58):
Oh Patty, I don't know about you, Like Okay, I
am a conservative, but I'm going to tell you the truth,
especially coming from Newfoundland, how many elections that we had
we had in the last few months. We had federal election,
we had provintial election, and we had a municipal election.
You know, at this time, especially when it's so close

(59:21):
to Christmas, pretty much the only time of the year
when people can escape the reality of the world, you
have the time to relax and enjoy our families, friends
and stuff like that. So why now, like, why wouldn't
the Conservatives just come out and say, to avoid all
the theatrics, if you will, just come out and say,

(59:44):
you know what, we are voting for the budget at
this time and because and whatever reasons they're going to
give vote maybe a Supreme election, maybe a fall election.
I just don't understand it. And to be honest with you,
as a conservative, I'm tired of it all, I really am.

Speaker 1 (01:00:06):
It's been a long year. By law, had the government
fallen yesterday, we would have maybe had an election on
Boxing Day or as they it is the ninth of January.
Not because I say so, because the law says so.
Was the country in the mood? I don't. I can't
speak for every voter in the country, but it seems
pretty plain to me that the federal priorities none of
them wanted one. I mean, it's another six hundred plus

(01:00:26):
million dollars. It's would be the possibly the fourth election
of this calendar year. Seems like a lot.

Speaker 4 (01:00:32):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:00:32):
Plenty of Conservatives would have been happy enough to see
the Currenty government fall yesterday. How many don't know, But
as a self professed Conservative. You know, I'm just curious
about your thoughts of mister polie if there's a leadership
review coming. I don't know what the future holds for
mister Polliet, but your position on him as leader, well,

(01:00:52):
you know, like, as.

Speaker 5 (01:00:53):
Far as I'm concerned right now, and yes I'm a
concern rhythm and stuff like that. However, I don't think
peer Polyeb has no card to play right now.

Speaker 3 (01:01:08):
Okay.

Speaker 5 (01:01:11):
I don't know if you remember back in nineteen seventy
nine when the Conservatives fell because of John Cosby's.

Speaker 3 (01:01:20):
Budget.

Speaker 5 (01:01:21):
At the time, it was a long time ago, but
I believe it could be possible that that's what Pierre
polieb was hoping for this time around. I don't know,
I'm just some old guy sitting in the gould with
an opinion, and unlike you, I'm not that great articulating myself.
I just I'm mostly a watcher. But I can tell

(01:01:44):
you this right now, Patty, I honestly believe that nobody
wanted an election in the Christmas season.

Speaker 1 (01:01:55):
Probably not. I mean, I know, just from my own position,
it felt like an awf long year of campaigning. I mean,
in these days, if we're being realistic. Campaigning never really
actually stops, you know, we get some fits and starts,
But it felt like a very long year of politics
on top of the issues themselves and the struggles that
are real. So yeah, it's been a very long year.
It's interesting that you brought off the nineteen seventy nine

(01:02:18):
budget though.

Speaker 4 (01:02:21):
Yeah.

Speaker 5 (01:02:21):
Well, I don't know if you're old enough to remember, Patty,
but I am. And yeah, I don't know. I was
probably in my late teens at the time. Out of
nineteen seventy n it's a long time ago. But yeah,
and she fell and Joe Clark, the Joe Clark problem,

(01:02:41):
that fell right quick. I believe, I honestly believe that
this is what the Conservative Party was hoping for.

Speaker 1 (01:02:51):
Yeah, I mean felt very quick. I think maybe just
Shy have seven months after they got elected and they
only came up Shy have a majority by five or
six seats, I can't remember the exact number. And you're right,
less than seven months later the government fell.

Speaker 5 (01:03:04):
Yeah, it's sad. And then Trudeau came in with a
majority government.

Speaker 1 (01:03:08):
Is this is this?

Speaker 5 (01:03:09):
But I don't know, is this what Pierre Pouliet was
hoping for? I mean, Patty like, we're not stupid. You're
an educated person. I'm not, but I'm not a stupid person.
And I'll tell you what it's time for. Maybe I
don't know, maybe the Conservatives should try and work something
out with with the you know, the sitting government and

(01:03:32):
get on to what's best for the country instead of
playing all this god hope, sorry almost for Instead of
playing all this politics, get on with what matters to Canadians,
like you know, the cost of living, food prices, and
and and all these very important issues. And to reiterate
or story, to reiterate, reiterate my thoughts. But we don't

(01:03:57):
need all the all this, all these theatrics and seed
theater right now. We need we need politicians that are
that are are going to sort out the problems or
try and sort of problems that we're dealing with. Like
when I go to the grocery store and I pick
up what I think is thirty forty dollars worth of

(01:04:19):
food and it turns out to be eighty five dollars,
that's what These are the types of things that we
need to be dealing with. And the medical issues and
you know, lack of medicare and stuff like that right now.
I don't know, Patty. I appreciate what you do, man,
and I really don't know. And the reason why I'm

(01:04:41):
saying I really don't know is because, like you, like
many were frustrated, and I've got to the point where,
you know, with this all, with this all like thought
about rigged or whatever, like, are the Conservatives amy get

(01:05:01):
hurt them liberal?

Speaker 3 (01:05:02):
I don't know.

Speaker 1 (01:05:03):
In some form there are, I would think so provincially,
not really federally more so. But I'm still now hung
up on nineteen seventy nine. Now that you planted the seed,
might let's draw some parallels between the seventy nine budget
and what's happening in the country today. So this is
fascinating stuff. Inflation at the time was extremely high, maybe
somewhere around ten percent, and then remember when Pierre Elliot

(01:05:26):
Trudeau became the prime minister, people actually had mortgage traits
that were in and around twenty percent. At that time.
John Crosby introduced that budget which included something very similar
to the recent past. There was the Energy Tax Credit
today's modern carbon credit. Because at the time Crosby and
the government were proposing almost a twenty cent increase on

(01:05:47):
a leader gasoline, so at the same time, to try
to offset it, introduce the energy tax credit. So isn't
that just crazy stuff? I mean, at one point, carbon
tax's price on pollution was absolutely a conservative idea. Look
no further than the John Crosby budget of nineteen seventy nine.
So now that you brought it up, it's kind of
in my head, Ken, I really appreciate making time for

(01:06:07):
the show.

Speaker 5 (01:06:08):
Thanks a lot, Thanks Patty, you have a great day,
man you too, Bye.

Speaker 8 (01:06:11):
Bye, love your love.

Speaker 5 (01:06:13):
I love your shows all and I'm.

Speaker 1 (01:06:14):
Glad you call. Thanks luck. Ken, All right, bye bye?
I mean, is not something else? So yeah, they introduced
that additional cost on gasoline, and the last time, when
the consumer carbon tax was in place, it added what
around seventeen cents to a leader of gas. As a
Conservatives of nineteen seventy nine proposed an eighteen cent increase

(01:06:35):
on gasoline per leader, and at the same time offered
the energy tax credit, very much like the carbon tax
rebate of this day and age. Wild stuff. Someone wanted
me to throw this birthday grating out, They're happy to
do it before we get to the break. Good morning
and happy seventy fifth birthday to Geraldine Perry. Granny G.

(01:06:57):
Hope you have a great day, Granny G. Let's get
a break in when we come back. Lots of time
for you. Don't go away, Welcome back to the program.
Let's go to Lene number one, Anthony around the air?

Speaker 9 (01:07:11):
Good?

Speaker 1 (01:07:12):
Okay, how about you, oh number one?

Speaker 8 (01:07:16):
By hold some for the habs last nice.

Speaker 1 (01:07:18):
Yeah, I'm still kind of sulking over the new hook injury.
But anyway, there you go. Yeah, it would have been overtime,
no kidding.

Speaker 8 (01:07:27):
Yeah, yeah, Paddy body the daylight saving time. But I
want to you, what's your feedback on then let's just
like you to me, it feels like it does way
more harm than good.

Speaker 1 (01:07:39):
I don't think it's necessarily any longer. When it was
first implemented, there was half our reasons for it. But
I mean part of the country doesn't even do it,
right Saskatchewan, up in the Yukon practs Quebec, they don't
even abide by daylight saving any longer. And I think
it's high time we actually, you know, walk away from it.
It even has health risks, so that should be enough

(01:07:59):
for me anyway.

Speaker 8 (01:08:02):
Yeah, exactly, Like I'm like, I've seen like it's spikes
in like vehicle ped history and accidents, like I mean
it is dark at almost four third enough. And I
mean when it comes to children, you can't just drive
youngsters out to the door when it picks black, you
know what I mean and manage to keep an eye
on them or follow them around and in the day
like but the and they say it's it's I'll reflected

(01:08:24):
in their kid's behavior too, Like I mean the just
showing mental health effects. It's just like anxiety, depression and
all that. We know that the whole demographic for those
are have been enhanced in the last few years. And
it's like they come to say that they used to
do to reduce energy. It's not reduced any energy now, No,

(01:08:46):
it's not bringing his led and like you know what
I mean, like uh, and I read something somewhere else
like it was due to farming, Like I don't know
that you've had but to pose the cabbage. I wouldn't
care what time it was.

Speaker 1 (01:08:59):
No, I mean some of the arguments then were maybe
passable today not so much. I mean just think about
in the spring when the clock spring forward. I mean
that sleep deprivation when when we have a loss of sleep.
Of course, it impacts your mood, and of consequently your
mood impacts your physical realities. I mean, you don't have

(01:09:21):
to take it from your anthony. There is lots of
well documented research into the impacts here. Like in the
days following the spring forward, there's a spike in heart
attacks and strokes. I mean, there's a there's some rationales there.
There's more accidents. Why because people are not as alert,
they're tired. When you're tired, you lose some of your focus,
you lose some of your coordination, and so consequently that

(01:09:42):
is an increased risk accident, so or collisions, I should say. So,
I think it's time for a realistic conversation about doing
away with it. I think it's nonsense. Personally, that's good.

Speaker 8 (01:09:52):
I'm glad you agree. I'm on like and like you
take productivity in the workplace. I mean, like you said,
going back to us, say to read it right, people
are not focused.

Speaker 3 (01:10:03):
People are going to be making accidents.

Speaker 8 (01:10:04):
That leads to you know, you're nerdy, You're doing more
harm than you are going That's just my own opinion,
and I'm glad that.

Speaker 3 (01:10:09):
You agree with us.

Speaker 1 (01:10:11):
Yeah, and people might disagree with us and so be it.
We can have a chat about it. I mean, just
think about the impact it has on say for insans teenagers.
Teenagers for the most part, you know, just think about
how we adjust to go back to school. And then
you have to throw two more wrenches into it with
the spring forward fallback. So the impact on adolescents and
teens I think is pretty well understood. Just imagine if

(01:10:33):
you don't have a normal eight to four, nine to
five job and you got it like for instance, if
you do some sort of irregular shift or you have
no split shifts like we used to win the hotel business,
go to work at seven o'clock in the morning, take
the bags for the checkouts, go back in five o'clock
to unload the busses. That our shag up is a huge.

Speaker 3 (01:10:51):
Issue, Yeah, as massive.

Speaker 8 (01:10:54):
And if we're bringing teens and adolescents into the picture.

Speaker 3 (01:10:57):
I don't know about you, Veddy.

Speaker 8 (01:10:58):
When I was sixteen or saved I was, I wasn't
very happy if didn't get Derek coltenned Lack in the
night in.

Speaker 1 (01:11:03):
The summer, yeah, I remember the double daylight saving summer.
We'll be out playing soccer ten thirty at night still
light out. That was weird.

Speaker 8 (01:11:13):
Anyways, I'm gonna saytybody, thanks for listening.

Speaker 1 (01:11:16):
I appreciate your time, thanks for calling everybody all right,
bye bye. Yeah, it doesn'tet a whole lot of conversation.
But when you think about I think there's actually bills
in front of certain UH legislators in the country here
now talking about walking away from it. It's been a
long time since they actually recognized it in Saskatchewan and Yukon,
parts of BC, parts of Quebec. So what do you

(01:11:38):
think should we walk away from it here? I think so,
but I'll leave it up to you. Let's go to
line number four, Lindsay around the air.

Speaker 10 (01:11:45):
Yeah, good morning, Patty. I like to talk about the
two things I want to talk about. The first one
I want to talk about is the RecA for the
three guys that lost lost their seats. But beginning they
gave one guy a recount and the other guy two guys,
they didn't give them a recount. Now, the guy did

(01:12:06):
give him a recount to loss the seat by a
margin of a one hundred and one vote something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:12:11):
Yeah, hundred and two, you're right, Ane hundred and two.

Speaker 10 (01:12:14):
Well, I guess they must have pretty well known that
they probably wouldn't win in a recount. Now, the other
two guys, Derrick Bennett, which just in my destrict, he
lost his seat by eighteen votes, and the other lost
the seat I think by sixty seven votes something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:12:31):
Yeah, Brian Keating lost the Jeff Tire out in Placentia
West Bellevue. I believe it was sixty four votes, and
you're right with your district. And for the the one
that's getting the recount Tops of Paradise, the vote difference
is one hundred and two and that's Dan Barbot, who
came up short against Paul din Yeah.

Speaker 10 (01:12:48):
Yeah, well, but you see the point than the other
two guys, Derick Bennett and the other guy, excuse me,
you should have got a recount as well, because they
could have probably put it over the top and give
the Liberals in our seat or something.

Speaker 7 (01:13:06):
You know.

Speaker 1 (01:13:07):
Well, the difference there is not about necessarily the number
of votes, because if it's ten or less triggers an
automatic recount. So nothing was an automatic here. And the
one that was accepted there was affidavits put forward about
some irregularities. So there were people who had circled the
candidate versus putting an X in the box or an
X in the circle. So some of those ballots were accepted,

(01:13:27):
some were rejected. So that's what they're evaluating this recount
is what ballots got accepted, what got rejected, to make
sure it's consistent across the board. They couldn't prove those
irregularities in the other two districts, well, at least they
couldn't prove it to Justice Fowers. So we only have
one and it should only take a couple of days.

Speaker 10 (01:13:43):
Yeah. Well, I mean it's not gonna make a lot
of difference now. But the way I see is like
almond like cheese and one and chalk it the other two.
You know, we give this guy the two guys this
guy over here the good sandwich, and we'll get them
the dead sandwich.

Speaker 1 (01:13:59):
Well, I guess they couldn't prove to the judges liking
whether or not there was a need for a recount,
But in this one district, apparently they looked at the
need based on some ballots that were I feel it
the exact same way. Some were accepted somewhere discarded. So
I guess that's the only reason we're having this one.

Speaker 10 (01:14:15):
Okay then and now the other thing I like to
talk about is the m ou I think that's what
they're calling it. The thing with Churchill Falls yep, and
the meeting that at the yesterday. Well, the only thing
I can see, like I don't think there's gonna be
too much in this uh new deal with Churchill Fellows
Falls for the people Newphila Labrador tell the truth because

(01:14:39):
like it's not going to decrease our idro rates, is anything.
Hydro rates will probably go up more. So you know
there's no there's no money going back into the pocket
of the people neuhu Leo Labrador. So you know something
there for Quebec, but nothing there for Nuphilean Labrador.

Speaker 1 (01:14:58):
Well there is is what or not it's enough for
people to approve of it, I guess is the issue.

Speaker 10 (01:15:05):
But I don't think it's going to make any difference
to our hydro bell If it's anything to go up,
they're not going to make it any lore. That's one
thing for sure. They're not going to put money back
into our punckets. So if we can use it de
boi growthries or clothing or whatever we want to get, No.

Speaker 1 (01:15:22):
We're not going to get any direct cash I don't imagine.
But the question about our hydro rates compared to Quebec's
hydro rates, I hear that all the time. We have
as residential customers around what is a fourteen point two
three seven cents plus the additional fee, So let's round
up fourteen and a half. In Quebec on average around
eight cents. So the only way our hydro rates is
going to be impacted, period is if if this happens,

(01:15:45):
if the government applies the money coming in, and what
they're talking about between now and twenty forty one is
an average of a billion dollars a year, if they
apply that to control our rates and control debt and deficit,
that's any way we're going to see any direct benefit
on our bills. Hydrokebec's not going to make any direct
subsidy to how much mean you pay for hydro.

Speaker 10 (01:16:05):
No, but we should get something with the money coming
in a billion dollars a year for the next seventeen years,
you know that should be going towards our hydro to
Macha hydro bring down our hydro bills because it's coming
from from from Churchill Balls which supplies go back with
hydro and and they're getting there hydro for about what

(01:16:27):
you're saying about eight percent, hire is only five percent,
but you saying eight I can live with that. So
if they can get dinner that eight percent, why can't
we put that towards our hydro bell so we get
ours to reduce to eight percent.

Speaker 1 (01:16:43):
Well, that'd be a political decision. And look, there's already
moneys from hydro apply to control our rates now and
that runs out in twenty thirty, and we still don't
really know exactly how that works. The Auditor General would
like some more information, and so would I to be honest.
So after twenty thirty, if there's no further control money
on our rights, because even between now twenty thirty, we're
still looking at it over two percent increase predictably on

(01:17:05):
top of any rate applications from hydro renew flam power.
So we're nowhere close about the woods, no, I know,
like you know where.

Speaker 10 (01:17:13):
So for the people with Nuppel and the common people
like myself and you and everybody else, it's the same
old Sam. Oh you know that we're still dragging a law,
you know, So there's nothing there For like myself, I'm
a senior citizen. Now we got the single mama's single mothers.

(01:17:35):
I mean, we have two children, probably raised. It's nothing
there the lighting, the load on earth or anything like that.
So therefore, you know, like we're still in the same
old boat that we're in when joeyce Molle made the
day in nineteen sixty nine.

Speaker 1 (01:17:51):
I think it's a different set of circumstances. But I
understand people's continuing concerns and questions on the MoU and
it's some of it's relatively for but there's plenty of
complexities in it, that's for sure. Lots of technical issues
that escape me and so probably escape most anything else
you want to say, lindsay no except for this, Like now.

Speaker 10 (01:18:11):
When they get into this in April, what I think
it is. But then the Premier Quebec got to be
here and when they're making deals and stuff like that, well,
I'm going to get back on the line and talk
about it again. What I'm talking about now because I
want the Premier Quebec to hear what people think or
what I think anyway, is going on in the province,

(01:18:31):
because you know, like they're getting the planning into the
stick and we're getting the dirty and the stick. You know,
that's that's what it mounts down to right now.

Speaker 1 (01:18:40):
I appreciate call lindsay thanks a lot, Okay, then thank you,
You're welcome, Bye bye. Timing is part of the conversation.
The party quebec Qua, their leader if successful, says they're
walking away from the deal in full right Legou knows
that his days are numbered. They're that party. The coalition
to avon air is palling miserably. They could gitmately get

(01:19:00):
shut out in the next selection. So and that's just
the fact. That's not encouraging, you know, pressing a timeline
or being aggressive for anything. That's just the fact of
the matter. The predicate back while says they're not interested
and so that could be where we end up. And
for some people good enough. But if you're someone in
support of to include that reality in the timeline here

(01:19:20):
is I think a part of the conversation, isn't it.
Let's go to line number three. Tina, you're on the air. Hi, Tina,
line number three. You're on the air.

Speaker 11 (01:19:33):
Regina.

Speaker 1 (01:19:34):
Oh, Regina, you're on the air.

Speaker 5 (01:19:35):
Go ahead, okay, hello, honey, Hello there, Patrick.

Speaker 1 (01:19:41):
I'm doing fine. Thank you for asking how about you.

Speaker 11 (01:19:44):
I was listening to out of the conversation, sir. Uh huh,
mon is not as heady.

Speaker 7 (01:19:52):
I'm just swepting from my cat.

Speaker 1 (01:19:55):
Where do you live? I mean it's a mere meeting road,
Mary meeting road. Cat got away when.

Speaker 11 (01:20:03):
I was saying November thirteenth.

Speaker 1 (01:20:05):
Oh that's a long while. Describe the cat. So if
anyone sees that, we can try to help you out.

Speaker 11 (01:20:09):
I know I'll send a picture.

Speaker 12 (01:20:11):
Okay, yeah, all right, Yeah, she's a tabby.

Speaker 11 (01:20:16):
She's only two years old. She got out. I didn't
know she was out because she was a house cat, right, yeap.
I haven't seen her sincere anyhow, I'll give him are
contact number or whoever?

Speaker 1 (01:20:31):
Right, yeah, Dave has it. Okay, So if anyone sees
the tabby, give us a call. We'll connect you with
Tina and hopefully get the house cat back sooner than later.

Speaker 11 (01:20:41):
Okay, honey, no, no, but I'd like to comments on
all the other people who are online.

Speaker 4 (01:20:47):
Ever before me?

Speaker 1 (01:20:48):
Okay, what would you like to say?

Speaker 4 (01:20:50):
No?

Speaker 11 (01:20:50):
They had good things like Moscot dolls, Dave Savings.

Speaker 1 (01:20:56):
Sorry, yeah, there's a lot on them, go, isn't it.

Speaker 11 (01:20:59):
No, I'd like to make a comment about peer Parianfra.

Speaker 1 (01:21:03):
Sure, go ahead, yeah, would you like to do it now?

Speaker 11 (01:21:08):
The man, excuse me, he's a man, is nothing, he
doesn't he criticizes that he doesn't give solutions. That's all
I going to say.

Speaker 1 (01:21:19):
And I appreciate your time, good luck. Let's see if
we can help you find that cat. Thank you, you're welcome, Regina,
bye bye very quickly. I'm bath and Fergus o'burne. So
this is about Young Folk at the Hall. Right off
the bat. They're recruiting youth in the Marystown area who
may be interested in New Fland of folk music to
attend the upcoming Young Folk at the Hall which is
December five, six and seven of this year. More information,

(01:21:43):
it's an easy one. It's nlfolk dot com slash young Folk.
So Young Folk at the Hall coming up again this
year December fifth, the sixth, and the seventh, and specifically,
if you're in the Marrystown area interested in Newland folk music,
they'd love for you to attend. Let's take a break,
don't go away, welcome back to the show. Let's go
to Le number one. Take it to the housing supports
that end homeless of Saint John's. That's Nicole. Hi, Nicole,

(01:22:03):
you're on the air. Hello Nicole, should you hear me?
Go ahead?

Speaker 13 (01:22:14):
Sorry? How are you doing?

Speaker 1 (01:22:14):
Okay? How about you?

Speaker 13 (01:22:16):
I'm doing all right. I wanted to give a quick
call in. I know this morning you chit chatted about
trap houses in your preamble yep, So I wanted to
just have a little chat. I actually just got back
from Montreal where I spoke on this topic, because it's
becoming a giant concern across the country. News lands. Not necessarily,
I mean, we're always unique, but we're not necessarily unique

(01:22:38):
in this situation, not at all. No, And so I
mean it's a really complex situation. And what we know
is that education and public awareness can only help shed
light on these topics. So I thought i'd give a
call in today and have a conversations about it.

Speaker 1 (01:22:55):
Where would you like to start, Well, I think, first of.

Speaker 13 (01:22:58):
All, I do want to recognize the unbelievable impacts on
just the community itself when these things happen. You know,
there's a huge impact on violent behavior, criminal activity, there's
bigger neighborhood concerns, mental health problems increase, and people are
absolutely right to be afraid. I mean, it's a scary situation.

(01:23:21):
And on the other side, we've got huge impacts on
the system. Where you spoke about the increase in bilow pressures,
You've talked about, the increases in law enforcement concerns. You've
talked about, you know, the decrease in property value. You've
talked about, the increase in crime. So all those things
I think no one would argue about, and really they're

(01:23:42):
very blatant. But one of the things I think that
gets missed in the conversation sometimes is the folks who
actually get trapped in these trap houses and the actual
impact on those folks themselves.

Speaker 1 (01:23:54):
Okay, what does that mean? I mean, in the go ahead,
do you mean people the houses are those live in
the houses surrounding these trap houses. I just think I
missed what you said.

Speaker 13 (01:24:05):
The folks who are actually in the trap houses, who
live in these trap houses. So in our industry, we
call them rocks are uts, which stands for residential unit takeovers,
and what they basically are is a takeover of your home.
And as we see vacancy rates decrease and poverty levels increased,

(01:24:28):
we see an increase of these residential unit takeovers. Which
is a perfect storm for what we have going on
in City of Saint John's right now. And we know
that folks who experience housing and security generally also experience
a lot of poverty. There's a big overlap in a
demographic and so the relationship starts pretty easy. I think

(01:24:49):
you know, someone has a house and there's somebody else
who you know, you have a roommate who wants to
come in, or you need some extra money, or potentially
it's the children in your home who they can't find
their own accommodation, and so you see some of these
terminal activity starts to take place.

Speaker 1 (01:25:07):
I mean, like many societal ills. You know, we can
talk about hiring more cops and hire more Crown prosecutors
and building new prisons, but a lot of the roots
of some of these issues is poverty. And I don't
know why we can't wrap our minds around that. We'd
rather spend on bricks and mortar than spend on individuals
and try to you know, whether it be an education
and trying to help them get out of impoverished living

(01:25:30):
situations and what have you. I'm not sure if that's
where you were going with that, but that's always what
pops into my head. Sorry, Nicole, we can't hear you
any longer, not really. Yeah, that's better, go ahead.

Speaker 13 (01:25:47):
And the breeds so farce up here.

Speaker 1 (01:25:52):
Yeah, it's really breaking up qutty badly? Go continue? Go ahead?

Speaker 13 (01:26:00):
Is that any better?

Speaker 1 (01:26:01):
That's not so bad? Go ahead.

Speaker 5 (01:26:03):
Yeah.

Speaker 13 (01:26:04):
What we see I guess around these other things to
takeovers is there are generally four types. One is from
folks who experienced homelesses in the past and they end
up with a house and then other people they try
to give out folks accommodations and it becomes a little overcrowded,
and then with death becomes some of the criminal activity,
and it's really hard. I could understand having a difficult

(01:26:26):
time watching your friends had to camp out so hot
or intent. That's a difficult situation for anyone to be in.
The other type we see happened quite often is with
elders and with seniors, and how their family members take
advantage of those folks and come out of institutions and
they take over the situation. And I can understand that situation.

(01:26:46):
I mean, I don't think I would throw my family
members out in the street. The other situation we see
happening all the time. It's criminal activity. So you have
someone who potentially is vulnerable, they're alone, they have no
support system, and you have you know, organized crime members
who need someone to sell their drugs. They come in
and then they threaten me with violence. The situation often

(01:27:06):
starts with some sort of way in the door. You know,
whether it's social status, whether it's financial means, whether it's
support maybe throw a lonely maybe it's someone to helps
shovel your driveway. And they get in and you think
that they're really helpful, and then they get in the takeover,
they get comfortable and it's really hard to get them out.

(01:27:27):
What the big issue I think that people are frustrated
with is a jurisdictional game of tag that we end
up playing when we're in these situations. Because you're right,
we need more law enforcement.

Speaker 7 (01:27:39):
Well, i'm prevent we.

Speaker 13 (01:27:41):
Need more a And where does this fall these unwanted
folks who are doing criminal activity? Where where do those
folks fallow in the system? And who owns that? And
that becomes I guess the hot potato that everyone is
kind of passing around. The onus becomes on the individual
who is renting to say I want this person here anymore.

(01:28:02):
But tell you that's a lot to put on somebody.
In my opinion, you have to see that person at
the local food bank. You have to see that person
when you leave your home, if you see that person
when you're going to the soup kitchen. And it's a
scary it's a scary game out there these days.

Speaker 1 (01:28:19):
I can understand that point. But what's the alternative.

Speaker 13 (01:28:24):
Well, I think what we what we need and I
don't think this is a shock You've been saying it
all along. Is we need to come together for some
sort of system change. The RTA has to come together,
law enforcement has to come together, by a law has
to come together. But also we need more mental health support.
We need more social workers, we need more housing workers.
We've really seen a decline in people's social supports. If

(01:28:46):
you're alone, you're a sitting ducks. If you've got a
support network around you, you know that you're stronger. There's
more strength and numbers, you know. And I think that's
the key to me to talk about here. We need
more housing stock, we need more enforcement, but we need
more support for folks who are vulnerable, who are out
there and are desperate to be canted to their community

(01:29:06):
and to be part of things and not so isolated
and alone.

Speaker 1 (01:29:10):
Nor cans about.

Speaker 13 (01:29:11):
Criminal activity, but we know about criminal activity, Patty, is
it hates more eyes, does more attention. The more folks
that we can support with outreach programs, the more eyes
we have on properties to people who are vulnerable, and
therefore it will go down. That's how we knew this
game of whack a mole is just not sustainable in
and out of institutions and out of programs and not

(01:29:32):
a HNP. I mean, those systems are overburdened. What we
need to do is support the folks, have their needs
met so that we can get ahead of the situation
and address the issues.

Speaker 1 (01:29:43):
Well, it's the very same thing that I think and
I say about things like Ten City. You know, people
wanted out of their eyesighted. In this case, wo it
started our Confederation building. So we move the tents from
there down to the colonial building. We move the tents
from there to Bowering Park, whatever the case would be.
It settles and solves absolutely nothing. Just shuffling people around,
you know, tens or otherwise doesn't solve anything. It might

(01:30:05):
appease those in the general neighborhood. And then of course
it's just someone else's issue to deal with down the road.
So you know, actual policy that addresses things directly as
opposed to plan to use your phrase, whack them all
is sometimes lost. Year. You know, some neighborhoods might not
be as vocal, some tense cities might not be as
visible as they are on the parkway. Some people who

(01:30:27):
are homeless might not be as visible in my neighborhood.
Doesn't mean they don't exist. So we just shuffle things
around and hope for the best.

Speaker 13 (01:30:34):
Absolutely, Patty, And where's the solution of that shuffle shuffle shuffle?
I mean, it's just perpetuating the problem more and more.
If I know, if I need somewhere to go to
do my criminal activity or to get in out of
the rain, and I know I can use your house,
and I can use your house as long as you
don't call the police, then buddy, you're not going to

(01:30:57):
call the police. I will do everything my means to
make sure you are either satisfied or too scared the call.
The other thing is the police and hands are often tied.
You can't necessarily charge someone for just trespassing a private dwelling.
In fact, you actually can't charge on treustpacking a private
dwelling unless it's part of a bigger complex, like you know,

(01:31:20):
an apartment building. So therefore the police come. You had
this first of all, say I don't want this person here,
and then they take the person, so put them in
their cop card'll drive down the road, let them out.
We'll guess what person's coming back to.

Speaker 1 (01:31:35):
He's coming back to your door, Yeah, Nicole, And you're right.
We've just eclipsed to eleven o'clock. So I'm late for
the news, but I appreciate making time for the program.

Speaker 13 (01:31:44):
All right, thanks so much, Petty good one.

Speaker 1 (01:31:45):
The very same to you. Bye bye. All right, there
we go. She's the Saint John's manager or the manager
of housing sports at and the homeless of Saint John's.
And let's get a break for the news. Don't go away.
You were listening to a rebroadcast VOCM in Line.

Speaker 2 (01:32:00):
Have your say by calling seven oh nine two seven,
three fifty two eleven or one triple eight five ninety
eight six two six and listen live weekday mornings at
nine am.

Speaker 1 (01:32:14):
Welcome back to the program. Susan Walsh has the problems
of senior's Advocate. Very recently she received the R. Tarot's
Award for Eminent Contribution to Seniors in Canada, and Susan
Walsh joins us online number six. Good morning, Susan, you're
on the air.

Speaker 9 (01:32:26):
Good morning, Patty. So nice of you to invite me
to talk about this.

Speaker 1 (01:32:29):
Happy to do it. I congratulations, Thank you. So what
they're talking about is, I don't know exactly what it's
in recognition of, but things like the structure of your
office and investigating systemic issues. What is it that ar
Tarot saw in the work that you do here that
are deemed you the part of me the recipient of
this award.

Speaker 9 (01:32:49):
Yeah, So last year in twenty twenty four, they invited
me up to Ontario to be part of their Future
of Aging Summit, and that's something that was an international
collection of you know, hundreds and hundreds of people from
all over the world talking about how we know what

(01:33:09):
we can anticipate in terms of aging in the world
and how we meet the needs of seniors. And so
I was brought up as a speaker to talk about
that and had a fair bit of discussion about our office,
the Office of the Senior's advocate and the work we're
doing to try to improve programs and services and the
needs of seniors in Newfoundland and Labrador. And they were

(01:33:30):
very taken with all of that, and number of questions
from the audience was off the charts around, oh my gosh,
how do we get one? How do we you know,
see the value in Ontario for example, and all over
many other problems that were represented spoke up. So that
was all I thought, you know, I came back from that.
I mean, you know, myself and my colleagues and the
other seniors advocates in Canada, we do a fair bit

(01:33:52):
of trying to push the agenda on having advocates across
the country because currently there's now four the wor three.
Now we have four, but you know, other statutory offices
like mine have one in each province. Right there's a
ciszens rep and every promiser's Privacy commissioner, every promise is
telling you that, and every province except Ontario. So you know,

(01:34:14):
we try to make this, put this on the agenda. Okay.
So all of a sudden the blue, a few months ago,
I get contacted by our te arrow who are assumed
to be called entant and they're renaming, rebranding, and they said, Susan,
we'd like to present you with the Imminent Contribution Award.

(01:34:35):
I was, I was floored. I mean I nearly fell down.
I was, so what and why? And I mean, you know,
you spend your career at Patty. I mean I'm at
this thirty six years, thirty five years now, it's almost
just about thirty five years. You spend your career just
doing your work like you do every day, like everybody, right,
and you don't expect any recognition for it. So, you know,

(01:34:58):
I think I was, I was fabricast and speechless, but
I really think it's a testament to the many teams
I've worked with over many, many years, and specifically the
team here at the Office of the Senior's Advocate. I
mean we are four just became five staff, and what
we've been able to accomplish, you know, speaks for itself.

(01:35:18):
So I don't accept this board for me. I accept
it on behalf of all these wonderful teams and people
who are committed to trying to make a difference. And
the idea is tens to your question, A long way around, sorry,
is that this eminent Contribution award really recognizes outstanding service
to seniors in Canada, and they through I guess me

(01:35:41):
presenting last year and then then checking through our office
and the work we do and started following some of
our work contacted me to say we'd really like to
recognize the work you're doing.

Speaker 1 (01:35:50):
On behalf of seniors and congratulations. Once again, it's remarkable
to me there's not a senior's advocate in every single province.
And I would add to it some of the work
done structurally speaking, and the advocacy done by Susanne Brake
as well, which is you know your predecessor and I'm
sure you just picked up where she left off. So
bravo to you both. Specifically, I'm receiving this award. I

(01:36:11):
was a little liked to the news. So i'd like
to give to the break on time. Do you have
time to be put on hal because I have a
few things i'd like to discuss with you.

Speaker 9 (01:36:17):
Yeah, I'd like to mention one more thing about this too.

Speaker 1 (01:36:20):
Sure, let's put it. Do you want to wait for Yeah,
we'll wait to come back and try to hit the
break on time, which I don't normally do, so we'll
put Susan on Hall and we'll take that break. Don't
go away, welcome back, Let's rejoin the Province of Senior's
Advocate online number six. Susan walsher back on the air.

Speaker 9 (01:36:35):
I get Patty, I just I would just to finish
the piece off. I would like to say that when
ourto ero brought me up for to receive the award,
I mean, you know, certainly they covered costs. I took
time off work. I mean we're a small little budget here.
I wouldn't waste it on that. Not that it was
a waste for me, but from the perspective and some

(01:36:56):
you know office money. But I will say this, I
had a great opportunity to meet with leaders in Ontario
who are certainly working hard on behalf of Seniors, the
National Institute on Aging, Elder Abuse Prevention Ontario. These different
groups all came together so that I could share with
them our experience as an office and how they might

(01:37:18):
position themselves with RT Arrow and other you know, smaller
advocates to try to move forward to have a national
advocate and provincial advocates throughout the country as well. This
award came with five thousand dollars that could be donated
to a charity of my choice, and that's the piece

(01:37:39):
I'd just like to say, you know, I'd like to
thank RT Arrow. They did make a donation to the
Newfoundland Labrador Canadian Red Cross Wildfires, so the Canadian Red
Cross Wildfires specific to Newfoundland and Labrador. So it was
a five thousand dollars donation, you know, in my name,

(01:38:00):
and because they could move so quickly, and I appreciated
how quickly they moved to get that done. Last my gosh,
I guess just before the summer or during early summer.
It was during the time that the federal and provincial
governments were matching it, so it became fifteen thousand dollars.
So I just want to send a thank you to
them because I think that that was I hope that

(01:38:23):
helps a little bit for the many people out there
who are suffering right now.

Speaker 1 (01:38:29):
Good choice. A quick question on the office of a
Senior's Advocate. Number one, Every province really does need one.
How about at the federal level.

Speaker 9 (01:38:38):
Yeah, so there isn't a federal Senior's advocate either. I
think there's a role there. I think that, you know,
if every province had a senior's advocate. I think that's
critical because it focuses in on the needs and you
know your individual needs within your province because as I
say all the time, I mean the needs on the
West Coast are very different than needs on the East Coast.
So I mean, I think an individual advocate needs province

(01:39:00):
is critical at the federal level because we don't have
senior's advocates provincially do not have the authority to make
recommendations at the federal level. We can influence and we do,
you know, we provide our input at that level, but
we can't actually make recommendations to the federal government. So
the idea of having a federal advocate I think would
be really beneficial as well, given there's so many programs

(01:39:21):
that are federally based for seniors, and given.

Speaker 1 (01:39:24):
The fact that in the world of healthcare transfer dollars,
sometimes the federal government make sure it's airmarked for specific
things and in the recent past, long term care, so's
there's absolutely a federal role to play here insofar as
a standalone advocates office, just some very specific ones. And
for some this might not come across as the biggest
issue facing seniors, but it is an issue and that's

(01:39:46):
lack of regulations to ensure there's air conditioning and seniors
living facilities. So again, people will talk about access to
primary care and a variety of other things obviously important,
but unless you're living through an on air conditioned place
during the hot months of summer, which we just had
an extraordinarily hot summer, what's happening there? Is there any
move on that front, because that seems I'll use inhumane,

(01:40:06):
even though that might be slightly hyperbolic.

Speaker 9 (01:40:09):
Yeah, So, I mean, we receive a lot of contact
at this office, you know, in the summer specifically, but
throughout the year, but primarily summer from seniors and or
their family members who are living in primarily personal care
homes where there's no air conditioning. And this past year

(01:40:29):
we saw a new kind of approach on that which
was related to the wildfires, and so even the windows
couldn't be opened air conditioning, you know, units that sometimes
get brought in were not really able to be used
to any degree because they were bringing in the smoke.
So it was I think probably one of the worst
summers we've ever seen as it relates to what seniors

(01:40:49):
had to endure. And unfortunately, if you look across this country,
very few provinces regulate or require conditioning in these facilities,
and so it makes it harder to you know, force
the agenda on it, however, And I guess the other
thing is we have a lot of old homes in

(01:41:11):
this province who were built long ago before you know,
our summer's got as hot as they currently are, and
so you know, it's we have a stock of facilities
that would need significant upgrades, but we obviously need every
one of them because there's there's, you know, such a
demand that we can't you know, we don't really we're

(01:41:31):
not meeting the needs from a long term care perspective now.
So it's an area that really we're focused on as
an office in terms of, you know, what are the
options and opportunities. We've had contact with the departmental Health
on this. They tell us that, you know, they you know,
expect that facilities will try to provide some relief, whether

(01:41:53):
it be through you know, portable air conditioning, whether it
be through uh, you know, having like additional water compresses,
those kind of you know, the cold cloths. I mean,
they're trying to work with what they have. The answer
is an expensive one. I don't think that it should

(01:42:14):
be off the table, though, given that the rates on
personal care continue to go up on a regular basis,
which is an area that our office is currently looking into,
because you know, if we're going to pay more for
service than we expect to get more out of the service.

Speaker 1 (01:42:26):
Don't we no question. Have you had an opportunity to
meet with Premier Awaken yet?

Speaker 4 (01:42:30):
No, I haven't.

Speaker 9 (01:42:32):
I actually have all of the letters to all of
the ministers in my inbox right here waiting for my
signature to go out. I wanted to give them, you know,
a few weeks to get themselves climatized to get briefed
on their portfolios. And so they are all right here
just waiting for my signature. Literally they will be going

(01:42:53):
out tomorrow. Is to say I want to meet.

Speaker 4 (01:42:57):
I want to meet.

Speaker 9 (01:42:57):
I want to meet so that I can give everybody
in every single portfolio, all ministers, here's what priorities are
on yours from my perspective, And you know, I'm happy
to work as collaboratively as we can to make positive
change for seniors in this problem.

Speaker 1 (01:43:15):
Yeah, but you know some things, the transitioned into government
is time consuming and briefings can take time, but even
things like the Auditor General's reports on long term care
and personal care homes, they don't need much briefing there.
We all read the reports. They questioned the government of it.
So that's you know, some areas where we do have
time to put some pressure on because they were quick
to say all those recommendations need to be followed. Now

(01:43:36):
they have the authority to do so. So those types
of things I think we can get at other transitions
and other briefings.

Speaker 9 (01:43:43):
Maybe it does take time, No, no, I mean absolutely
there there's no reason no one should be surprised by
any of these. We've been very clear and vocal in
the media, so has the Auditor General. I mean, there's
none of this is a surprise to anyone. But they're
all pretty new in their portfolio, so I mean, I
know they're all getting brief That's how it works. I

(01:44:03):
spent a long time in government. The issue is, I
don't just want it to be a conversation one sided.
I'd like to hear their perspective, and that means it be.

Speaker 7 (01:44:12):
A little time to get briefed, but.

Speaker 9 (01:44:13):
Either or we will be you know. My hope is
that I will be meeting with these ministers very soon.

Speaker 1 (01:44:21):
The letters will go tomorrow, I hope, so as well.
Anything else you'd like to talk about while we have
you this morning, Susan, Nope, you're going.

Speaker 9 (01:44:27):
To hear later this week. We're getting ready to release
our twenty twenty four Seniors Report, which is our second
annual report on how seniors and Newfoundland Lebrador are doing.
And so you will hear about that later.

Speaker 1 (01:44:38):
This week and we will welcome you on at your
earliest convenience to talk about it. And I appreciate your
time this morning, and once again, congratulations, Thank you, Patty,
You're welcome, Susan. Bye bye, Dave. Were you going to
say something, Okay? Yeah. I don't think they do specific
work on individual cases, because that's what we talk about
in the world of advocacy is they talk about systemic

(01:45:00):
issues as opposed to be in the champion for one
individual or another. So if someone at the advocate's office
is listening to my understanding, that's not a service they provide.
But there are people out through that help and I
hate to put more workload on Tom badcock shoulders, but
he has been helpful at the help with people trying
to navigate the world of disability tax credit, but I'll

(01:45:20):
get confirmation from the Senior's Advocate's Office as to whether
or not that's something they do. I would also suggest
for people who need a little help on that front,
the wealth of information regarding supports for seniors can also
be found at Seniors and L they'll know if someone's
coming forward to their organization and say, hey, when people
are trying, it's not only for seniors, let's put that
out there as well. Disability tax credit isn't aged specific whatsoever.

(01:45:42):
We're not going to take another call before the news
because it's eleven twenty nine and three seconds. But Barry
wants to talk about the food fishery. Walter also wants
to talk about the disability to tax credit from what
angle we'll find out. And now he has some comments
about the House of Assembly not being reopened, and we're
to hope by the premiere until their judicial recount is concluded,
which begins today, should only take a couple of days,

(01:46:03):
and at that point I would assume that the House
will open right away, because that's what we're told would
be the process. So let's hold government's fee to that
particular fire, and I will add the obvious caveat A
lot of work can get done without the House Assembly
being open. But even Premier Waken himself, as leader of
the Official Opposition, was highly critical of just how few

(01:46:24):
days are spent in the House of Assembly. And there's
been work that could have been achieved, and laws that
could have been passed, amendments to legislation that could have
taken place that didn't. Why because that does require the
House to be open. Let's take a break. All of
those of you in the qu stay right there, donunk
away the.

Speaker 2 (01:46:40):
Tim Power Show during the conversation weekday afternoons at four
pm on your VOCM.

Speaker 1 (01:46:46):
Welcome back to the show. I told this emailer I
would correct myself because I was wrong. He was writing
as a good pickup by Richard talk about the nineteen
seventy nine federal budget brought forward by Finance Minister John Crosby,
and I mentioned the eighteen cents tacked on to ga Selene,
I said, Leader, but it was Gallon. You're absolutely right, Richard.
We were still using the imperial system at the time,

(01:47:06):
so that equates to about four cents per leader. So
thanks to Richard, I was wrong. He was right. Let's
go to line number four Ivy here on the air.

Speaker 7 (01:47:18):
Hello Patty, Hi there. I thought that I had got
to sleep better anyway.

Speaker 4 (01:47:25):
How are you?

Speaker 1 (01:47:26):
That's bad? How about you?

Speaker 7 (01:47:29):
Well, not bad. I was just listening to your program.
Actually was really interesting today. For sure, I heard sharing
Game of mont it first, and certainly she's one of
the best people. I believed that could be a Hill's critic,
because I mean, she certainly did two endure loads of

(01:47:51):
the problems in the inner district. Of course, not only
your district. Every district is the same problems, of course,
and I believe that she's certainly going to do a
good job with that particular role. As for the house reopening,

(01:48:12):
it should have been reopened, you know to the people
that are there, the ministers or people who are going
to be minute while they are ministers, I suppose, and
I've been there there, they're seasoned, seized, they may James,
so they know exactly what it is that they're doing.
They probably needed maybe a week or two the most

(01:48:34):
like for transition period. But I believed I think that
you know, this is kind of been a least of
time because you know, they're not doing any of the
simple housework. I'd call it house keeping, not housework, but
I was keeping and you know, this is what we
need with the government that was consistently constantly saying that, well,

(01:49:01):
you know, we need to be in the house. The
house niece we open, We'll stay here all night, we'll
stay here every day. And now, of course I'm starting
to sound like Tony. Now, of course, you know they're
in power and the house is not open's I don't
even know anything it's really going on.

Speaker 1 (01:49:21):
Yeah, I mean they have to open it. They have
to prepare an order paper or a white paper as
to what they're going to try to deal with or
address in the House of Assembly. But you know, when
Tony Wakem was leader of the Official Opposition, he was
really always quite vocal about how few days are spent
in So it mains to be seeing what the calendar
will look like, if I'm not mistaken. In the last
fiscal year was what maybe forty nine days they were

(01:49:43):
in the house.

Speaker 7 (01:49:44):
And maybe I don't even think that many, because I
believe they closed early. But at any rate, they weren't
in the house enough. I believe that when they are
in the house, there's lots of theatrics and everything like
that there, and I believe it's basic to turn the
people off from it, you know, so that you know

(01:50:05):
they're not going to be needing to have the house open.
But if they don't have the house open, are they
going to have regular work days the same as every
other worker or what are they going to do? I
think they're going to spend their time in the districts.

Speaker 1 (01:50:19):
I don't really know where every of the forty MHAs are,
to be honest with you, but I do know there's
certainly plenty of them that are at Confederation Billding today.

Speaker 7 (01:50:28):
Well that's a good thing. Yeah, well it's great. I mean,
you know, I tell you that there are some there
are some MHAs who are really and truly like I mean,
they pull their weight. Then some you take you know, well,
I like Lloyd Parrott and Christine still Sellos, and of
course you have pampires, as you have cheer Game of Watch,

(01:50:50):
you have Lisa Dempster and Leila Evans. I mean, you know,
together hard time from the beginning, but I think that
she's quite capable of of the handling the jobs that
she has. And of course on Conway atonheimerus another person.
I'm sure that's quite capable as well. Like there, you know,

(01:51:11):
and they are seasoned mhs, you know when they definitely can.
They could have had the household before now. I don't
think that there's any reason for it to be the
way that it is. And you know, there are some
ministers in I mean, you know, you hear that they've
been to I don't know, auto on somewhere for meetings

(01:51:35):
or something, and you hear it after the fact, which
is what was the big problem with the Liberal government
was that you didn't hear anything until after the fact.
And right now what I see is the Conservative government
not being any different just as people anticipated.

Speaker 5 (01:51:51):
Actually, well, I'll.

Speaker 1 (01:51:53):
At least give the government a chance to actually open
up the house, give us some inkling as to what
they're going to act on, and at that point we'll
know a lot more because campaign pleasures and promises are
that and no more than that. So I'd like to
see exactly what's on their agenda. I mean, think back
in twenty fifteen when the Liberals swept into power, what
was the first bill they passed? It was the old

(01:52:15):
Appointments Bill. I can't remember exactly what it was called,
but it basically established a three person panel to look
at appointments into agencies and commissions and what have you.
But ultimately cabinets still had the right to pick wherever
they wanted. But that was their first order business, which
I always thought was a strange place to start. So
we'll see where the PCs are going to begin their
term of governance and then we'll go from there. I suppose, Well, yeah, I.

Speaker 7 (01:52:37):
Guess, but you know, you had a call around there previously.
I think it might have been the call she starting
about the people with thosing and stuff like that. And
you know these sued drug well I don't know one
thing they do another anyway, drug abuse and crime and
all these these things. And then when they get into

(01:52:57):
a house, you can't get them out, you know. And
if you get them out and the police take them
up and bring them somewhere, they're going to come back
to that house again. I'll knocking on your door like
it is dangerous. So education, and you know, this is
something that they could be working with just education. You know,
there's so many things that they can be doing that, Like,

(01:53:19):
you don't need ministers for everything you have, you know,
MJA is they're like that should be doing something.

Speaker 1 (01:53:26):
Yeah, for sure, I appreciate the time. Thanks for calling Ivy.

Speaker 7 (01:53:31):
Okay, thank you. It's a great day.

Speaker 1 (01:53:32):
Very same to you. Bye bye, thank you. And you know,
when I brought up the numbers of people who will
be in Tony Wakem's cabinet, Premier Wakem's cabinet down to
fourteen from seventeen. Historically speaking, cabinets start small, then they
grow in numbers. Will that be the case here? I
have no idea, but that's been what's happened over the years.
And when I made the comment about you know, some

(01:53:53):
of the workloads are pretty hefty, they just are. And
I know that taxpayers really like to a trimmed cabinet,
and in this case, it saves about one hundred thousand
dollars a year. The only question I wasn't in or
out of the camp of yes it's great or no
it's not. But the question will be for the savings
of one hundred thousand dollars and an eleven billion dollar budget,

(01:54:15):
is this anything more than optics? Probably not. Let's keep
going here. Let's go to line number two. Walter, You're
on the air.

Speaker 12 (01:54:23):
Good morning, mister Daily good morning to you question, where
does someone go to get help with filling out this
x THAK for disabilities.

Speaker 1 (01:54:36):
So well for a couple of things. So you need
what kind of help? First? You have to see a
doctor or a nurse practitioner or other healthcare professional. Is
that where you're asking?

Speaker 12 (01:54:47):
I phoned every nurse practitioner in the phone book yesterday.
None of them are doing this service right now.

Speaker 1 (01:54:54):
They're not taking the service on dope, and so I'm
guessing you do not have a family doctor.

Speaker 4 (01:55:00):
Correct.

Speaker 12 (01:55:01):
I just had a couple of strokes, I had a
pacemaker put in of plus a couple of other medical
conditions I have going on, and I think I'm going
to be entitled to it. I don't know, maybe maybe
they'll say no.

Speaker 1 (01:55:14):
So, if you've recently had these particular issues regarding pacemaker
and strokes, do you have a specialist that you're attached
to for ongoing ongoing assessments?

Speaker 12 (01:55:26):
Yes, but a different one for both services for both,
Like I have a specialist who's looking after my heart,
which is the cardiologist. Ye, I have a I have
a neurologist for my brain for the strokes, and I
have a doctor looking after a noticing, but they cannot

(01:55:48):
speak on the other things that are happening. They can
only go by what they do, right.

Speaker 1 (01:55:52):
Yeah, so you'd basically have to make two stops to
get the one application filled out three or three because
you only had Well, the reason I said two is
because if you have significant limitations in two or more categories,
then you can do that. But it's also important Walter
to understand that if you have a severe or prolonged

(01:56:14):
impairment in just one category, that's enough. So if it's
your heart, that might be enough to qualify for If
it is the strokes and the aftermath of strokes, that
might be enough to qualify for the Disability tax credit.

Speaker 12 (01:56:28):
Okay, so I basically I have to bother a specialist
who should be doing other things with other paties to
fill this out.

Speaker 1 (01:56:35):
I hate to say that, but that might be your
last recourse. And I don't know why nurse practitioners aren't
taking this on. It is certainly one of the roles
that they can perform. There's only two entities that can
do it all actual medical doctor or a nurse practitioner
and the other ones. There's options out there for hearing
and go to a naudiologist for you may be able
to go to a physiotherapist or not compacial therapist for

(01:56:57):
things like walking and what have you. But that sounds
like where you are. And if there's anyone else out
there who knows or has a suggestion for you, Walter,
we'll be happy to talk about it on the show.
See if we can't get you pointed in the right direction.

Speaker 12 (01:57:10):
I ended up with a service in Port Moone, British Columbia.
That's that's who they gave that's who. That's who one
of the nurse practitioners offices. They gave me a phone
number I called It's important movie. It's a service that
does this for you. They fill out the paperwork, They

(01:57:30):
work with your doctor, your family doctor, they said, which
is I don't have one, and they put it to
the government. They go back years if they need to whatever,
blah blah blah, and they charge you with certain percentage
of it.

Speaker 1 (01:57:43):
Is that is that True North?

Speaker 12 (01:57:46):
Yes?

Speaker 4 (01:57:46):
It is?

Speaker 1 (01:57:47):
Okay, Yeah. I sometimes they putting people down to them
because they do take a fee a portion of your money.
But if it can be helpful, fair ball, some people
are more than willing to go to True North.

Speaker 12 (01:57:59):
Yeah, so I don't. I don't know what the hell
I'm going to do. Maybe I'm just going to say
I almost did it. Maybe I'm just going to say
because I had to go back to work Monday after
getting a peace maker put in last week.

Speaker 1 (01:58:09):
Please, if I can come up with a suggestion for you, Walter,
or if there's a healthcare professional auter as such as
a nurse practitioner and or a family doctor who can
help Walter out on this front, please do decontact us.
We'll connect you both. How's that perfect?

Speaker 12 (01:58:24):
I appreciate all your help, Patrick.

Speaker 1 (01:58:26):
Whatever I can do, happy to.

Speaker 12 (01:58:27):
Do it, no worries. Do you have yourself a great day?

Speaker 3 (01:58:31):
You too?

Speaker 1 (01:58:32):
Stay well? Bye bye. Yeah. So, if anyone can help
or help sort Walter out on that front, that would
be helpful. All right, let's see here, let's get a
break in when we Quebec. Still another segment left for you.
Don't go away, welcome back to the show. And just
in reference to an email or ask me why I
didn't mention the comments made by Quebec's energy ministry yesterday. Well,
the fact on the matter as they did. So Basically
what was said is we know that the proposal is

(01:58:55):
in some form of limbo where exactly it is don't know.
We don't even know if negotiations continue. We think they do,
but I really don't know. But when we're talking about
going back to the table trying to renegotiate a better
deal for the province and fair enough, if that's Tony way,
if what Premium wakem thinks is the right path forward,
including his independent review, The comment from Quebec's Energy minister

(01:59:16):
was if our province requires more changes, so will Quebec.
And my thoughts on that were so what I mean,
it's not really about what might change on their side.
If you're living and working in this province, your primary focus,
I would suggests on is exactly what's in it for
us compared to what's in it for them. The emailer

(01:59:37):
also went to ask me why we've never quoted Michael Savia,
Will we have? And the number one quote from Savia
that gets a lot of attention here is that he
had said to Quebec media is that replacement costs other
than moving forward with expansion at the Upper Churchill Land
developing goul Island, replacement cost the for Hydro Quebec would

(02:00:00):
have been somewhere in the neighborhood of twelve to fourteen cents.
So we have quoted that many, many times. The question
then becomes exactly what does he mean, because no one's
been able to figure it out, well, at least no
one's been able to tell me exactly what that replacement
cost of twelve to fourteen cents means. Is to mean
a new standalone development that has nothing to do with
this province, So the infrastructure at a damn site and

(02:00:25):
then the associated transmission, like I don't know, he said it,
and it's been something that people have latched onto here
and I understand why because there's a long way between
five point nine cents and twelve to fourteen cents. So
I'm not entirely sure what he actually meant by that,
but it would be helpful. And of course there was
a call yesterday that post a very interesting question about
Michael Saviian. He's got a very impressive track record in

(02:00:48):
the private and the public sector and now has after
he had left hydro kuebec as the CEO. Of course,
as everybody knows, he's the Clerk of the Privy Council,
the highest order of words inside the public sector. So
the question posed by it was Daryl is whether or
not this is a good thing or a bad thing,
which is a very good question. I don't know how

(02:01:10):
to answer that. So one hand, it feels like if
he's so supportive of this moving forward, then maybe, just
maybe there's a role for the federal government to play
in it, because if we consider it, or if the
government considered muskrat Falls a nation building project, which they did,
because that's exactly what they said when they were talking
about why the federal loan guarantees were being brought forward.

(02:01:30):
So I guess the same American can be made regarding
the upper and the potential for goal. So with Sabia,
who obviously is in support of this deal. So does
that mean it might find its place on a major
project's list. Maybe it hasn't in the first two but
maybe so is it a bad thing? I don't know
what would be bad about it Necessarily, if you think

(02:01:51):
the deal is bad period for this province, then maybe
it's exactly that, a bad deal, And then made comment
off the top about the issue regard the recognition of
the border. It might not be a huge issue on
its face because by and large, it comes across as
it comes across as really quite juvenile and petty and
silly in Quebec, where they refuse to acknowledge the border

(02:02:14):
that we all understand and the documented verification of where
the border lies. It's not what where Quebec thinks it is,
is where we think it is, and so whether or
not some recognition of that should be part of this
moving forward. For some that say who cares? But for
others they point to the fact that if Quebec firmly
believes in their political minds and in the minds and

(02:02:34):
the psyche of their residents, because that's how they even
teach it is whether that means they think they have
more authority and might try to overstep the boundary and
to try to take more of our resources based on
their understanding where the border lies. Possibly, it's certainly probably
in the minds of some people who are in elected

(02:02:55):
office in Quebec and some senior bureaucrats and other tax
paying residents Quebec. So maybe, just maybe. And then you know,
last one about the timing of calls or questions or
criticisms or critiques coming from then liberal members of the
government who are now members of the official opposition and
the time it takes to actually transition into governing. I

(02:03:18):
don't know when the right time is. I've been told
this is too quick. But for regular voters, you can
criticize and ask questions of the current government all you like,
as is your god given right as a voter, whether
or not there's a bit more self reflection required for
former members of the government who are currently sitting as

(02:03:39):
liberal members in the opposition benches. I understand the point.
I understand when you say, hey, it's a mess created
by X, and so give the Tories time to clean
it up or to change the course of the province,
whatever the right phrase is. I get that. But the
basic question I would have is when would you think,
if you think it's inappropriate today, when into the future
would you think it would be more appropriate for past

(02:04:01):
members of the government on the liberal side to be
able to ask questions their whold government accountable or whatever
the phrases people like to add. So, yeah, last one
on the MoU. Apparently it's completely impatently unfair for me
to ask very specific questions of And it's not about governing.
This is about the understanding of the MoU, which has
been out for eleven months now is exactly what we're reviewing.

(02:04:25):
Because you can keep telling me it's whether or not
we have gotten the best deal. But how is anybody
supposed to evaluate that? I mean, realistically, what does that
even mean?

Speaker 13 (02:04:35):
For us?

Speaker 1 (02:04:35):
To wonder whether or not we could have got more?
That's one question, But to hire again, I use the
same companies all the time, Goldman Sachs or JP, Morgan
Chase or whoever, Morgan Stanley. How are they supposed to
answer that question? It kind of feels like an exercise
of futility. If you hire three of those aforementioned big
banks lenders, you might get three different opinions, So you know,

(02:04:59):
very specif if it questions about how much money where
we're borrowing, associated risk authority granted to hydro go back
on Call Island, some of those very specific questions, they're
probably absolutely worthy of independent review. If the terms of
reference simply say did we get the best deal, then
that might be just an exercise in politics as opposed
to an exercise in economics. Right right, let's check it

(02:05:22):
out on the Twitter box where VOSM open line. You
know what to do. You can follow us there email
addresses open out at FOSEM dot com. Quite active in
the email portion of the show today, and plenty of
reaction to call the call we have with Susan wallsh
the provims of Senior's Advocate. Once again, we recognize and
congratulated on our most recent award imminent contribution to seniors
in Canada. But I was caught off guard, and it's

(02:05:45):
not today. It happened I don't know X number of
months ago when we finally heard there's not even such
a thing as a Senior's Advocate in many provinces across
the country. There's only four and the fourth was just
recently added. So remarkable to me. And then someone asked
why I didn't ask her about there's no standalone ministerial
portfolio for seniors. I probably should have to be honest

(02:06:05):
with you and whether or not there should be a
federal Senior's Advocate. I think that would be extremely helpful.
All right, you ready to roll there, Sarah? All right,
good show today, Big thanks to all hands who support
the program, all the callers, listeners, emailers, tweeters. You are
all right. We will indeed pick up this conversation again
tomorrow morning. Right here on Vocim and Big Land of
FAM's open Line. I'm happy to the producer David Williams.

(02:06:27):
I'm your host, Patty Daily. Have yourself a safe, fun,
happy day. We'll talk in the morning. Bye bye

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Tuesday Nov 18th

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

The Joe Rogan Experience

Stuff You Should Know

All Episodes

Tuesday Nov 18th

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang