Newfoundland and Labrador House of Assembly, Thursday 17 September 2026
This special multi-day sitting, conducted under Standing Order 8(7), was devoted entirely to debate on the resolution approving the Definitive Cooperation and Implementation Agreement between Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, Hydro-Québec and Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation Limited, covering the Churchill River and Gull Island energy projects. Government members and ministers championed the agreement as a generational opportunity delivering more power, value, transmission, jobs and debt reduction, while Opposition and independent members raised concerns about the loss of market-based pricing, the missing Gull Island escalator clause, a revenue cap, the broken referendum promise, transparency, Innu consultation, benefits for Labrador, and a rushed process. The sitting included several procedural matters, including a ruling on a point of privilege regarding the Deputy Speaker's conduct and additional points of privilege over remarks made during debate, with closing remarks delivered by the three party leaders and the Premier. The motion carried on a recorded division of 21 to 18, after which the House was adjourned until the call of the Chair.
Orders of the Day
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Labrador West economic opportunity
J. Power
The Member for Labrador West highlighted the region's mining potential (Kami mines, Julienne Lake, an estimated $450 billion untapped), noted roughly 33 per cent of provincial GDP is tied to the region, and argued for infrastructure investment (transmission line, housing, health care) and for the region to share in benefits, supporting the government's direction.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Member for Waterford Valley votes no
J. Korab
J. Korab cited a broken referendum promise, the lack of market-based pricing (using a house/CPI-versus-market-price analogy), the absence of a Gull Island escalator clause and difficulty obtaining pricing information from the government's advisors, concluding the deal too closely resembles 1969 and announcing he would vote no.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Member for Fogo Island-Cape Freels supports
J. McKenna
J. McKenna said a referendum would not improve the decision, emphasized the value and power pillars for rural districts and population retention, praised the lead negotiator from his district, and announced he would support the resolution.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Member for Placentia-St. Mary's votes no
S. Gambin-Walsh
Recalling her father's work at Churchill Falls, she argued the 2026 agreement replaces the 2024 MOU's market-based pricing with market access lacking enforceable protections, criticized the abandoned referendum promise, and concluded the deal is not right, announcing she would vote no.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Minister of Jobs, Growth and Rural Development supports
L. Paddock
The minister framed the decision economically, citing approximately $18.4 billion in nominal benefit over the first 14 years, the value of unlocking mines, defence investment in Happy Valley-Goose Bay and data centres, and argued the greater risk is stalling, concluding he would support the resolution.
Recess
Speaker
The House recessed until 1 p.m. and resumed with debate continuing.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Member for Burgeo-La Poile votes no
M. King
M. King centred his remarks on trust, criticizing the government's fixation on comparing to the 2024 MOU, the broken referendum promise, references to Muskrat Falls, and the 'do-nothings' remark, and raised concern about the looming 'Muskrat Falls cliff' on electricity rates, indicating he would vote no.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Minister of Forestry, Agriculture and Lands supports
P. Forsey
P. Forsey said the independent review exposed MOU deficiencies and the new deal delivers more value, power and transmission, answered constituents' concerns about waiting until 2041 and the 2 per cent escalator, highlighted jobs, food security (Country Ribbon, dairy, SucSeed) and Labrador benefits, and announced his support.
Debate on Churchill Falls agreement — Member for St. John's East-Quidi Vidi
S. O'Leary
S. O'Leary criticized the process as fast-tracked for political purposes with insufficient time (one hour for the NDP caucus) and lack of independent oversight, referenced broken referendum promises, colonial history, Indigenous recognition and Muskrat Falls cost overruns, and questioned the negotiations with Hydro-Québec.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — opposition (S. O'Leary)
S. O'Leary
Cited past resource mismanagement, insufficient environmental oversight, lack of independent review and Innu consultation, and a broken referendum promise, concluding she cannot make an informed decision and will vote no.
Recognition of former MHA Perry Canning
Speaker
The Speaker welcomed former MHA Perry Canning to the public gallery.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — support (R. Balsom)
R. Balsom
The Member for Carbonear - Trinity - Bay de Verde spoke in favour, emphasizing federal partnership, the 85 per cent/20 million person-hours job commitments, benefits to his generation, and rejecting waiting until 2041.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — opposition (J. Parsons)
J. Parsons
The Member for Corner Brook criticized the rollout, the broken referendum promise, and the deal's financials, arguing Gull Island and Churchill Falls upgrades are utilities built for Quebec and that fixed pricing at 2.5 per cent escalation is a poor deal; he urged government to set the deal aside and get it right.
Point of order regarding decorum during debate
L. Dempster
L. Dempster rose on a point of order asking for better cooperation so members can speak uninterrupted; the Government House Leader argued it was not a valid point of order, and the Speaker urged all members to show respect during the debate.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — support (J. Dwyer)
J. Dwyer
The Member for Placentia West - Bellevue supported the resolution, highlighting benefits for trades workers, apprentices, and industrial communities, the risk of leaving billions on the table by waiting until 2041, and confirmed he will vote yes.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — opposition (K. Russell)
K. Russell
The independent Member for Lake Melville said he will vote against the DCIA, citing disrespect to the Innu Nation, absence of guarantees for Labrador infrastructure, health, housing and public safety amid crisis, lack of independent scrutiny, and objecting to a decision on a political timetable driven by federal interests.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — support (P. Dinn)
P. Dinn
The Minister of Education spoke in support, emphasizing education and skilled-trades investments and opportunities for youth, and shared a personal story of a nine-year-old constituent who died of leukemia, concluding he will support the agreement.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — opposition (E. Loveless)
E. Loveless
The Member for Fortune Bay - Cape La Hune conveyed constituent concerns over rates, Quebec receiving more power at lower cost, the broken referendum promise, the short negotiation timeframe, and lack of independent review, arguing a fair deal is still available and that he does not consider this a fair deal.
Debate on Churchill River DCIA resolution — support (M. Goosney)
M. Goosney
The Minister of Tourism, Culture, Arts and Recreation, who grew up in Churchill Falls, framed the decision as non-partisan and historic, arguing the agreement puts the province in a stronger position to capture economic value, revenue and choices, and expressed confidence it is a better deal.
Closing remarks against the Churchill Falls agreement
L. Dempster
The Opposition House Leader opposed the deal, arguing it offers no lasting benefits for Labrador, no off-ramps, no fairness clause and no market-based pricing, and urged the Premier to seek 12 more months and independent scrutiny or a referendum.
Closing remarks supporting the agreement
A. Barbour
The Minister of Environment, Conservation and Climate Change supported the deal, arguing development and environmental responsibility can coexist and that the agreement provides more value, power and transmission, creating options and economic growth for rural regions and future generations.
Closing remarks against the agreement
F. Hutton
The Member for Conception Bay East - Bell Island opposed the resolution, citing removal of market-based pricing and the Gull Island escalator clause, conflicting expert testimony from J.P. Morgan and Hydro, broken referendum promises, secrecy over the Gull Island graph, and lack of trust in the Premier.
Point of privilege and point of order
L. Parrott
The Government House Leader raised a point of privilege and order, claiming F. Hutton falsely insinuated he called him a 'do nothing,' referenced death threats against himself and family, and demanded a correction and removal of related content; L. Dempster responded that Hansard speaks for itself, and the Speaker took the matter under advisement.
Closing remarks supporting the agreement
J. Wall
The Minister of Health and Community Services supported the resolution, emphasizing it would create jobs so residents no longer need to leave the province, generate revenues to strengthen health care, and provide hope and confidence for future generations.
Closing remarks on the agreement and oversight
E. Joyce
The Member for Humber - Bay of Islands defended the credibility of Oversight Committee members, noted a written Premier commitment to involve the PUB to strengthen oversight, stated the MOU still requires a definitive agreement, and argued the negotiations were not rushed and produced a better deal than 2024.
Closing remarks focused on Labrador benefits
L. Evans
The Minister of Indigenous Affairs and Reconciliation and Labrador Affairs supported the deal, insisting Labrador must share in prosperity with lasting benefits, infrastructure and services, and committed the government to proactive planning for housing, roads, health care and long-term jobs.
Closing remarks and overview of the special sitting process
B. Petten
The Deputy Premier reviewed the special sitting process, thanked participants and experts, argued the new deal is better than the 2024 MOU with more value, power and transmission, tied revenues to community infrastructure needs, and committed to supporting the deal for future generations.
Recess and resumption
Speaker
The Speaker recessed the House until 6 p.m., after which it resumed with the Government House Leader and Minister of Energy and Mines recognized.
Minister's speech in support of the Churchill Falls resolution
L. Parrott
The Minister of Energy and Mines thanked the experts who attended, defended the negotiating team's work, and detailed benefits of the new deal including more power, transmission, optionality, the premium tranche, federal support for wind and transmission, a loan guarantee for Gull Island, and projected revenues of $18 billion by 2041 and $273 billion by contract end, urging all members to support the resolution.
Debate exchanges on the Churchill Falls agreement
Multiple
Members engaged in extended exchanges on the deal, with the Opposition challenging the Premier over the cancelled referendum, whipped versus free vote, market-based pricing, the revenue cap, PUB exemption, Indigenous consent, oversight, and whether final agreements would return to the House; government members defended the deal as delivering more power, value, transmission and jobs and committed to bringing definitive agreements back and reconstituting an Oversight Committee with PUB involvement.
Closing remarks by the Leader of the Third Party
J. Dinn
The NDP leader reflected on the province's history of major projects and rhetoric, questioned the independence of the experts and various conflicting expert opinions, and reiterated the party's three conditions (independent review with PUB involvement, a House vote, and Innu approval); while encouraged by the Premier's commitments, he stated the NDP would vote no because the Innu had not yet given approval.
Closing remarks by the Leader of the Official Opposition
J. Hogan
The Liberal leader said he was prepared to support a deal but would vote no, citing the loss of market-based pricing, a revenue cap, no upside sharing on Quebec's windfalls, lack of transparency and independent review, the broken referendum promise, refusal to bring final agreements back before signing, and lack of Indigenous consent, calling the loss of protections against Quebec his overriding non-starter.
Closing remarks by the Premier
Premier Wakeham
The Premier thanked the experts and colleagues, framed the decision around correcting the injustice of the 1969 agreement and the flawed inherited MOU, cited federal support from Prime Minister Carney and the urgency of acting, and urged members to seize the opportunity to turn resources into wealth, jobs and long-term benefits for future generations.
Churchill Falls agreement motion - closing remarks
Premier Wakeham
Premier Wakeham concluded debate arguing the new deal gives the province more power, value ($49 billion in today's dollars or $273 billion in cash), more jobs, more transmission access to markets, and a Churchill River electricity rebate saving families 15 per cent, and committed to partnering with the Innu Nation on development of Churchill Falls and Gull Island.
Vote on the motion (recorded division)
The Speaker
A division was called on the motion; the recorded vote resulted in 21 ayes and 18 nays, and the Speaker declared the motion carried.
Other business
Birthday recognition
Speaker (Lane)
The Speaker wished the Member for St. John's East - Quidi Vidi and the Member for Labrador West a happy birthday, noting one was turning 60.
Ruling on point of privilege raised by the Leader of the Official Opposition
Speaker
The Speaker ruled on a point of privilege concerning comments by the Member for Placentia West - Bellevue (Deputy Speaker), finding no prima facie breach of privilege since the Deputy Speaker was not presiding at the time, but reminded members who are presiding officers to hold themselves to a higher standard. He also set out the format for the day's continued extraordinary debate.
Extraordinary debate on the Churchill Falls agreement - Member for Gander
B. Ford
B. Ford recounted his late father's work at Churchill Falls and drew parallels between the 1969 rhetoric and today's, criticizing the process as an 'information session' rather than a debate, the broken referendum promise and the secrecy around the Independent Review Committee's experts, stating he cannot support the agreement.
Extraordinary debate - Minister of Finance
C. Pardy
The Minister of Finance spoke in support of the resolution, citing the Independent Review Committee's findings, and argued the agreement is worth $49 billion versus $36 billion under the 2024 MOU, delivers $10 billion before 2041, tripled power to Labrador, a 15 per cent electricity rebate, and reduces the province's need to borrow.
Extraordinary debate - Member for Mount Pearl North
L. Stoyles
L. Stoyles relayed constituent and senior concerns favouring a re-opening clause and off-ramps, questioned why the deal is being rushed and why Quebec receives more power and federal support, cited a constituent's frustration over the broken referendum promise, and said she would not walk out but would be present for the vote.
Extraordinary debate - Member for St. George's - Humber
H. Cormier
H. Cormier spoke in favour, framing the deal as an opportunity to move past the 1969 shadow and create jobs amid U.S. economic uncertainty, highlighting more power, guaranteed inflation adjustments, Gull Island construction jobs, and the 15 per cent rebate, and stated he would vote yes.
Extraordinary debate - Member for St. John's West
K. White
K. White raised concerns about Gull Island's absence of an escalator mechanism, the surrender of market-based pricing, affordability and the inadequacy of the 15 per cent rebate, and after listening to constituents concluded he cannot support the agreement and will vote no.
Extraordinary debate - Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture
L. O'Driscoll
The Minister spoke in favour, arguing the deal is better than the 2024 MOU with $49 billion in net present value versus $36 billion, delivers real value now, more power and flexibility, $3.5 billion in federal support, and thousands of jobs, and stated he would proudly vote yes.
Extraordinary debate - Member for Burin - Grand Bank
P. Pike
P. Pike expressed disappointment that the $2-billion upfront payment from the 2024 agreement was given up, criticized the fixed price contract and loss of the escalator, the broken referendum promise, and argued Quebec got the better deal, urging the government to take time and get the deal right.
Extraordinary debate - Member for Labrador West
J. Power
J. Power described Labrador West's mining economy and the Labrador Trough's potential, explaining that development has been hampered by power and transmission limits, and highlighted the federal $1.3 billion contribution for the proposed 735 kV Labrador West transmission line as key to unlocking future industrial growth.
Support for Churchill Falls DCIA
M. Goosney
The Member for Humber-Gros Morne spoke in support of the agreement, framing it as a historic opportunity to give young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians reasons to stay and build futures at home, and said he wanted to be able to tell future generations they seized the moment.
Fairness and market-based pricing concerns with DCIA
S. Stoodley
The Member for Mount Scio referenced the Grade 8 Newfoundland studies curriculum on Churchill Falls and argued the deal is unfair because the PC negotiating team gave away market-based pricing (Schedule F) recommended by Power Advisory, capping the upside so that if Quebec benefits, Newfoundland and Labrador does not. She said she will not support the DCIA nor walk out, and urged government to send the negotiating team back to secure market-based pricing.
Support for Churchill Falls DCIA
H. Conway Ottenheimer
The Minister of Justice and Public Safety spoke in support, framing the agreement as a renaissance bringing jobs for tradespeople in Harbour Main, reasons for families to return home, stronger revenues for seniors' services and health care, federal investment as a vote of confidence, and denying that Quebec gains more than Newfoundland and Labrador.
Trust, transparency and process concerns with DCIA
P. Parsons
The Member for Harbour Grace-Port de Grave raised concerns about trust, citing broken promises on a referendum, no deadline and independent scrutiny, invoked Muskrat Falls cost overruns and Jerome Kennedy's involvement, questioned the confidentiality of the oversight committee, noted the loss of market-based pricing and the Gull Island escalator, and called the process the most antidemocratic she has witnessed.
Welcome of former Cabinet ministers
The Speaker
The Speaker welcomed former Cabinet ministers Paul Shelley and Kathy Goudie to the House.
Motion to recess
L. Parrott
The Deputy Government House Leader moved that the House recess for 10 minutes, which was granted.
Support for Churchill Falls DCIA
M. Butt
The Member for Lewisporte-Twillingate spoke in support, focusing on jobs and training for rotational workers, the power pillar enabling new projects, greater value to address affordability and public services, and connecting his district's fishery, tourism and wharf redevelopment to opportunities from the agreement.
Market-based pricing and flexibility concerns with DCIA
B. Davis
The Member for Virginia Waters-Pleasantville opposed the agreement, citing his town hall concerns about the 50-year term, the loss of market-based pricing in favour of a CPI-adjusted fixed price cap, the removal of the 2051/2061 off-ramps and the Gull Island 2% escalator, and uncertainty over power tied to a project that has not passed feasibility. He said he will vote against the deal and not walk away.
Support for Churchill Falls DCIA
C. Tibbs
The Minister of Social Supports and Well-Being spoke in support, emphasizing the value of work and keeping skilled tradespeople home, more power enabling mining, oil and gas and development, revenue to strengthen health care and services, and shared a personal story about a worker forced abroad. He argued a vote against the deal endorses the 1969 deal.
Labrador concerns with DCIA
L. Dempster
The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair criticized the agreement for failing Labrador, noting 18 coastal communities still run on diesel while Muskrat Falls power bypassed them, criticizing the 'Team Labrador' of three PC MHAs and the Premier's absence, and demanding that 2% of the new power be used to connect coastal communities to hydro rather than treating Labrador as an afterthought or offering only jobs.
Adjournment and closing remarks
The Speaker
Before adjourning, the Speaker thanked all members for the four days of debate and thanked the Table Officers, Commissionaires, Sergeant-at-Arms, Broadcast and Hansard staff, then adjourned the House until the call of the Chair.
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.