Lawyer Jim Bennett — representing the Town of St. Anthony, the St. Anthony and Area Chamber of Commerce, and the concerned citizens committee — made his arguments for an application for those three individuals to be examined.
Bennett continues to argue moving the service breached a 1981 contract among four parties regarding health services on the Northern Peninsula and Labrador areas. He also says the decision of the Conservative provincial government was bias following the election of Liberal Marshall Dean in a byelection.
The lawyer has also argued Kennedy, the health minister, made his decision based on a flawed report from Drodge and his company.
The applicants are appealing a conclusion of Justice William Goodridge to deny an injunction against government’s decision to move the service from St. Anthony to Happy Valley-Goose Bay.
At the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador in Corner Brook Wednesday, Seaborn determined there would be no leave required for the individuals to be examined in the matter. None of the three lawyers — Philip Osborne, on behalf of Kennedy; Rosalie McGrath, on behalf of Drodge; and Daniel Boone, on behalf of Rowe — who appeared via videoconference objected.
Among his arguments, Bennett said Kennedy made his decision to move the service based on the jurisdiction’s election choice, and the minister is the only person who would have that information. If anybody has that information, he argued, it would have been a conspiracy.
The lawyer said these three individuals have the most, if not all, the information required. He said the matter will be of little inconvenience and at the expense of the applicants.
Meanwhile, following a short debate with Seaborn pertaining to whether there are allegations of bias being made, Osborne requested a notice for Kennedy to testify not be issued. He said the examination would not be useful or appropriate. His argument focused on the fact a minister exercised his discretion and made a policy decision, and a court should not interfere with that ministerial power.
He also said Don Keats, the deputy minister of health, would be the appropriate person to examine, and he would have knowledge of all pertinent information.
McGrath also opposed the application to examine Drodge. She said her arguments were outlined in a brief filed with the court.
Finally, Boone took a creative approach in his opposition to the application with respect to Rowe, chief executive officer of Labrador-Grenfell Health. In filing the application to examine Rowe, he said Bennett was on a “fishing expedition” for evidence to support his case. He took exception with that, saying Bennett was fishing without a licence, out of season, and for the wrong species.
Boone said it is not necessary and/or appropriate for Rowe to be examined.
Bennett responded that Rowe had previously expressed his pleasure with the service in St. Anthony and that he was at the helm of an organization that had not previously identified any issues with that location. He said Rowe has knowledge of the background and developments, that he is an important and necessary witness. Bennett also said there is no reason Rowe should be opposed to being examined.
Seaborn also questioned Bennett on the relevance of having Rowe on the stand.
Seaborn said he will present a written decision on the matter “in the near future.”
