Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly, Thursday 9 January 2025
The House sat for the fourth and final day of an extraordinary debate under Standing Order 8(7) on the Memorandum of Understanding between Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Hydro-Québec. Members from both sides questioned NL Hydro executives (CEO Jennifer Williams, VP Wade Parsons and Chief Legal Officer M. Ladha) on topics including independent review, risk analysis, jobs, Indigenous benefits, water levels, contract term and the completion guarantee, while the Opposition repeatedly pressed for an independent external review as recommended by Justice LeBlanc. The government announced a new independent expert panel led by the Consumer Advocate and confirmed a vote would be held that day; several documents were tabled.
Orders of the Day
Extraordinary Debate on the NL Hydro–Hydro-Québec MOU – call of Motion 1
J. Hogan
The Government House Leader called Motion 1 from the Order Paper to continue the special debate on the MOU.
Opposition call for independent review and questioning on consultants' numbers
T. Wakeham
The Leader of the Official Opposition argued the MOU is being rushed after only four days and pressed for an independent external review as recommended by Judge LeBlanc; he questioned who checked the consultants' numbers and whether an independent set of eyes reviewed the MOU. CEO Williams said consultants (J.P. Morgan, Power Advisory) peer-reviewed internally and NL Hydro challenged inputs, and that a separate review of the MOU's content was conducted for government but not shared with Hydro.
Finance Minister on independent oversight and definitive agreements
S. Coady
The Minister of Finance said there had been extensive independent oversight including an independent panel, expert reviews and a parallel process through Stewart McKelvey, and noted definitive agreements are not due until April 2026 and a new independent process had just been announced.
Risk analysis and request to table scenarios
J. Williams
Responding to Wakeham, the CEO explained risk was factored through multiple future utilization scenarios for both NL Hydro and Hydro-Québec, but declined to table the scenarios and opportunities, saying disclosure would harm NL Hydro's negotiating position.
Government response and announcement of Consumer Advocate–led oversight panel; vote confirmation
A. Parsons
The Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology responded to the Opposition, stated the vote would happen that day and that four days equals roughly two regular House weeks, and announced a new independent expert panel chaired by the Consumer Advocate to review the MOU and progress toward definitive agreements, providing quarterly summaries to the public and House.
Member statement and question on Churchill Falls ownership after 2041
L. Stoyles
The Member for Mount Pearl North spoke in support of the MOU and asked whether NL would own 100 per cent of Churchill Falls after 2041; CEO Williams clarified Hydro-Québec remains a one-third owner of the facility regardless of the contract ending, but the MOU restores improved governance and removes Quebec's veto power 17 years early.
Concerns on best deal, independent review, and water/reservoir risk
P. Forsey
The Member for Exploits relayed constituent doubts about whether this is the best deal, called for an independent review, and asked about risk to water levels amid changing weather. CEO Williams explained multi-year storage and drought cycles, noting Hydro-Québec projects long-term water availability to increase.
Indigenous impacts and lessons learned
S. Reid
The Minister Responsible for Indigenous Affairs spoke to the MOU's commitments to respectful relationships with Indigenous communities and asked how lessons from Upper Churchill and Muskrat Falls would mitigate impacts on Indigenous communities. CEO Williams cited the MOU's Indigenous relationships clause, new revenue streams for Innu Nation, and existing legal hiring protocols for Gull Island.
Best deal argument and job breakdown for CF2 and transmission lines
C. Tibbs
The Member for Grand Falls-Windsor - Buchans used an 'orange-squeezing' analogy to urge extracting maximum value and an independent review, and asked for a jobs breakdown for CF2 and transmission lines. CEO Williams said exact numbers await detailed engineering but jobs would follow the hiring protocol prioritizing Innu, Labradorians, then NL residents.
Support statement and jobs multiplier question
E. Loveless
The Minister of Digital Government and Service NL spoke in support, highlighting economic benefits and Bay d'Espoir Unit 8, and asked for a simple vision of the jobs available. CEO Williams cited the mining job multiplier (2.6 jobs per iron ore job) and listed roles such as equipment operators, carpenters, electricians, engineers and accountants.
Questions on Hydro-Québec stopping the project and completion guarantee
P. Dinn
The Member for Topsail - Paradise questioned the rush and called for independent review of the MOU, then asked what happens if Hydro-Québec stops the Gull Island project midway. CEO Williams explained exclusivity would end and cited clause 2.3(l), noting Hydro-Québec provides a completion guarantee putting its ratepayers on the hook.
Support statement and questions on readiness and risk
S. Gambin-Walsh
The Member for Placentia - St. Mary's stated support for adopting the MOU and asked whether NL Hydro and government are well positioned to finalize and oversee the project and the level of risk. CEO Williams affirmed readiness and stressed work must start, describing it as a lessons-learned, de-risked MOU.
Recess motion
J. Hogan
The Government House Leader moved that the House recess until 1 p.m.; the House stood in recess and resumed at 1 p.m.
Support statement and questions on employment for women and Indigenous people
P. Parsons
The Minister Responsible for Women and Gender Equality spoke in support, commended CEO Jennifer Williams as the first woman to head NL Hydro, argued delay costs about $2,000 a minute, and asked about employment opportunities for women, gender-diverse and Indigenous people. Williams and VP W. Parsons cited the Women's Employment Plan requirements, hiring protocols and the Labrador Aboriginal Training Partnership.
Reservations and question on contract term
J. McKenna
The Member for Fogo Island - Cape Freels expressed reservations about the rush and the exclusivity clause, called for a second set of eyes, and asked why the contract is 51 years rather than 25 with an extension. VP W. Parsons explained a longer term maximizes value while Schedule F's escalator keeps pricing tied to the market.
Labrador West economic impact
J. Brown
The Member for Labrador West gave a passionate speech on how the 525 MW cap stifled growth in Labrador West and how the MOU's increase to nearly 1,990 MW would enable new mining, housing and community development, urging colleagues to visit Labrador's energy assets.
Labrador benefits, coastal power and Indigenous engagement
L. Dempster
The Minister of Environment, Climate Change and Labrador Affairs spoke about Labrador's historical grievances, the increase from 525 to 1,990 MW, and pressed for solutions to high diesel power costs on the coast, asking NL Hydro for data on subsidizing coastal rates. She emphasized meaningful Indigenous engagement as a key lesson from Muskrat Falls.
Retroactivity clarification and environmental assessment question
J. Wall
The Member for Cape St. Francis corrected the '$2,000 a minute' claim, confirming with CEO Williams that CF(L)Co generation payments are retroactive to January 1, 2025 only once definitive agreements are signed. He reiterated the call for independent external review and asked what environmental assessment studies for Gull Island need updating; Chief Legal Officer Ladha said the 2012 EA is still valid, some permits need updating, and costs will be borne by the Gull Island joint venture.
Tabling of documents
J. Hogan
The Government House Leader tabled the executed French version of the MOU and a backgrounder titled 'Expert input into Churchill Falls negotiations' dated January 6, 2025, requested by the Member for Terra Nova.
Summary of key learnings, experts and de-risking clauses
P. Trimper
The Member for Lake Melville summarized the debate, praised the expert witnesses' independence, discussed the rationale for a 50-year term given long asset lifespans, and had CEO Williams walk through specific MOU clauses (Schedule F, 2.3(e) non-dilution, 2.2 escalation and cost flow-through, operating rights) that de-risk the agreement. He emphasized Labrador readiness, Indigenous partnership and 5 Wing Goose Bay.
Independence of the deputy minister on the negotiating team
H. Conway Ottenheimer
The Member for Harbour Main raised concerns about independence, questioning the role of deputy minister of Justice Denis Mahoney on the negotiating team. Minister of Justice B. Davis confirmed Mahoney served as both deputy minister and a negotiating team member and denied being briefed on negotiations; CEO Williams confirmed negotiations on definitive agreements had not started. Conway Ottenheimer argued the government is not sufficiently independent and reiterated the LeBlanc recommendations.
Point of order on unparliamentary language
L. Parrott
The Member for Terra Nova raised a point of order alleging the Minister of Housing used an offensive word; the Speaker said he did not hear it, but after J. Dinn corroborated, the Minister of Housing (J. Abbott) retracted the statement.
Government defence of negotiating team composition
A. Parsons
The Minister of Industry, Energy and Technology defended the negotiating team, noting via a February 2023 press release that the whole team was government-appointed for expertise, that Justice LeBlanc did not require an independent negotiating team, and that external experts (Stikeman, Power Advisory, J.P. Morgan) supported it.
Historical review of past premiers' Churchill Falls efforts
F. Hutton
The Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure spoke in support, reviewing the efforts of premiers from Moores through Williams to change the 1969 deal, emphasizing this is only step one toward definitive agreements in April 2026, that the process is not being rushed, and that he plans to support the MOU.
This is Tabled's summary of the sitting, written from the official record; Hansard is only ever quoted at the link above. Search Newfoundland and Labrador Hansard for the words themselves, or read this sitting in the archive.