VOL. 3 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEr1BLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, May 19, 1981 NO. 42 ....... , .

May 19, 1981 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): PREMIER PECKFORD: Tape No. 1626 SD - 1 Order, please! The hon. the Premier. Mr. Speaker, before we get into the normal Orders of the Day and Question Period, it is with a great deal of sorrow we learn of the recent passing of a prominent gentleman, a long-time distinguished public servant in the person of Mr. Walter Melvill Marshall, father of Mr. William Marshall,~ House Leader and President of the Council. Mr.

Marshall entered the Public Service in 1935 in the days of the Commission of Government and became Secretary of Finance. He served in that capacity until Confederation in 1949 and was appointed shortly thereafter Deputy Minister of Finance and Comptroller of the Treasury. Mr. Marshall distinguished himself in many areas of public life , not the least of which was his position as a Commander of the British Empire, an honour conferred upon him in 1949 by King Geroge VI. I am sure that this hon. House joins with me in extending to the family of the late Mr.

Marshall our sincere condolences in this their hour of sorrow. MR. SPEAKER: MR. STIRLING: Th.e hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Yes, Mr. Speaker, on this side we certainly would like to join with the Premier and his colleagues in extending sympathy to Mr. Marshall and his family. Mr. Walter Marshall was a distinguished public servant. He served his Province well through the very difficult years when we were first going from being a new and struggling Province.

I know his advice to Premier Smallwood was very important and he was one of those Deputy Ministers who established the standard that we now have in the civil service and I think the standard is one of the best in Canada and •11e certainly want to join with the Premier and his colleagues in 4530 G'

May '19, 1981 MR. STIRLING: family. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD:. Tape No. 1626 so - 2 extending sympathy to the Marshall You have heard the motion. Those in favor 'Aye'. 'Aye'. Contrary 'Nay' .. Carried. STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS The hon. the Premier. I .am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I am a bit slow off the mark today. That is all therjigging over the weekend - AN HON. MEMBER: And the woods. PREMIER PECKFORD: - and the woods, yes. Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a statement.

In February 1974 the Government of Canada and the Government of the Province of Newfoundland signed a ten year general development agreement. This agreement was seen as the mechanism through which substantial federal funding would flow to the Province through the Department of Regional Economic Expansion.• Specifically it provided the framework through which individual subsidiary agreements dealing with social and economic developments could be undertaken. The objectives of the general development agreement are: (

A) to increase the number and 4531

__ May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1627 EL - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: quality of viable long-term employment opportunities and im­ prove access to those opportunities by the people of Newfound- land and

B) to increase opportunities for people to live in the area of their choice with improved real standards of living. At the , time of the signing of this agreement, the then federal min- ister referred to the agreement as an. "action pact" '!.nd estimated that some $1 billion would flow to Newfoundland over its ten year lifespan. The main sectors where this action is to take plac 2 as defined in the general development agreement are forestry, fishe:t:.y, agriculture, -tourism, ocean science and tech- nology, construction,highways, water and sewer systems, housing, minerals and manufacturing.

There is also provision for integrated plans for particular locations. It will be apparent to the hon. members of th~ House, Mr. Speaker, that the general develop­ ment agreement was designed to cover vi~tually ever sector of the Newfoundland economy and to remove bottlenecks which stood in the way of the development of our opportunities. This Prov- ince has been and still is a very strong supporter of this agree- ment as a means of overcoming regional disparities and bringing the level of services for our people up to the standards enjoyed by other Canadians.

The problem that we have is not with this agreement nor with the Department of Regional Economic Expansion which has always been receptive to our proposals. Rather the problem is that the Federal Government has failed to provide DREE I with the necessary funds and flexibility to meet the joint ob- jectives of the general development agreement. The result of this can be seen in the substantial drop in DREE expenditures and the· delays being encountered in =signing new agreements. 4532

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1627 EL - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Since the general development agreement was signed in 1974, a total of nineteen specific sub­ sidiary agreements have been signed. These 19 agreements re­ present a joint commitment of over $508 million of which the Federal share amounts to $440 million and the Province's share $68 million. Eight of those agreements have been completed while the others are at various stages of implementation. It is in­ teresting to note that between February 1974 and July 1978, a total of sixteen agreements were signed, working out to an average of four per cent.

In the three years since then, however, only three agreements have been signed, the latest being Forestry in January 1981. In 1980 no such agreements were signed. This failure to conclude agreements occurred despite the fact that the Province has submitted nine very important initiatives to the Federal Government through DREE. Numerous meetings at the Ministerial level and official level have been held to work out the details but we have been unable to conclude the necessary agreements. Mr. Speaker, the proposals which have been submitted to the Federal Government are

(1) Land Surveying and Mapping, submitted in September 1978;

(2) Coastal Labrador, submitted in October 1977 and revised in December, 1979; 4533 /

May 19, 1981 "'ane No. 1628 ow - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD:

(3) Nordco II - September 1979;

(4) Corner Brook - October 1977;

(5) Pulp and Pape-r Mill ~1odernization- December 1979;

(6) Highways -May 1980;

(7) Institute of Fisheries & Marine Techonology - 1977 (Revised June 1980) ;

(8) Industrial Development - June 1980;

(9) Minerals Development Agreement - October 1980. Mr. Speaker, I will be meeting with the hon. nierrq De Bane - I hope I have done justice to his name 0n pronunciation - in the near future and it is my under- standing that the agreements relating to Coastal Labrador and Pulp and Pa"9er "'i.ill Modernization will be ready for signing. Notwithstanding this fact, there will still be a long list of outstanding agreements to be concluded. In addition,several new oroposals will be submitted in the near future.

Each of these proposals clearly meet the objectives and strategies set out in the General Development Agreement and represent priority areas which the Province believes should be jointly undertaken by both levels of government through DREE. In many instances these proposed agreements are simpl y a continuation of previous agreements which have already met the criteria of the General Development Agreement. Therefore, it is very frustrating to try to understand why such agreements cannot be concluded especially since the General Development Agreement still has some three years remaining. Mr.

Speaker, in examining DREE activity it is interesting to note that DREE's budget as a oercentage o~ the national budget has fallen by 33 per cent over the last five years. During the same period the DREE expenditure, as a per­ centage of our provincial budget, has fallen by 38 per cent. In 1979 DREE exoenditures on subsidiary agreements in this Province were 'l.'Jout $70 million. In 19 8 0 these expenditures fell to $41 million and unless a significant number of agreements are signed almost immediately, it will fall to less than $30 4534

~ay 19 , 191H Tape No . 1628 ow - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: m·illion in the current fiscal year . These factors clearly indicate that the federal governm ent no longer supports its stated commitment to overcome regional dispar ities. Again, numerous attempts at the ~sterial and officials levels to obtain answers as to why this is happening have been futile but the facts s9eak for themselves. In

summary, therefore, Mr. Speaker, hon. members should note that:

(1) This P.rovince has been 4535

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1629 NM - l PREMIER PECKFORD: and still is a strong supporter of the general development agreement approach as one mechanism for reducing regional disparities. While we recognize that DREE isnot, nor indeed can it be, the total answer to this very complex issue, we feel that the joint activities undertaken to date have been instrumental in permitting us to move ahead in many crucial areas much faster than would otherwise have been the case.

However, while much has already been accomplished, a great deal more has to be done; Secondly, this government has consistently and repeatedly made this position known to Ottawa and has continuously sought meetings to discuss our concerns over the future of DREE; And three, this government has, on numerous occasions, verbally and formally, at the ministerial level and at the officials level, tried to con­ vince the federal government of the urgency to sign new DREE agreements. I am tabling, for the information of hon. members, my most recent letter to the hon.

Pierre DeBane, Minister of Regional and Economic Expansion 1 regarding the necessity of signing various DREE agreements; and Four, this government will continue to work strenuously towards this objective. The final decision of each of these agreements, of course, rests with the federal government, not with the Province. All we can do is present well-planned and loaical projects and programmes which we feel fall within the mandate of the general development agreement. l'Te can only hope that every member of this House and our representatives in the federal government will assist us in this endeavour.

And I table, Mr. Speaker, as the last piece of correspondence in an ongoing series of 4536 fl

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1629 PREMIER PECKFORD: communications between both levels of government, my letter to the Minister of DREE on the 20th. of March, 1981, in which I addressed the whole question of DREE and here is the letter. NM - 2 "First let me say I appreciate your telephone call." Because he had called me a couple of days earlier. "There has been, over the past year or so, a dramatic decrease in DREE spending and new commit­ ments for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. It seems, from a distance, that some of this slow down is politically motivated.

I do not know if tnis is really so, but there is substantial evidence to support such a view in a whole range of federal-provincial issues that have seen the Province being ignored or being treated unfairly. "The Government of Newfoundland takes the view that DREE has a vital role to play in this country. Turning away from DREE, as is now being suggested by the federal government," because this is what he told me on the phone, "is a serious mistake. To try to bypass the provincial governments will not wo~k for long, if at all.

"I mentioned to you that there were a number of agreements in addition to the Pulp and Paper Modernization and the Coastal Labrador which are absolutely necessary. These include," and I went through some of the same list as I just went through in the statement. I go on in the letter to say, "In addition, I must point out that there are three other proposals which should be able to be approved through the "system" without the same analysis and scrutiny. Of these three, one is already underway and hence why it should be finalized easily.

That is the expansion of the present Wetern Newfoundland Industrial Development Agreement to accommodate the Corner Brook Harbour Development. This component was excluded from the existing 4537

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1629 NM - 3 PREMI'ER PECKFORD: agreement until an environmental assessment had been completed. Now that the assessment has been done and is positive, an amendment to this existing agreement can now be done. "The other two agreements, Land/Surveying and Mapping and a Mineral Development Agreement, represent activities that have been part of OREE Agreements for years and hence present no new analysis or assessment .11 4538

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1630 AH-1 PREMIER PECKFORD: ''To further indicate the necessity of signing these present agreements before you, let me inform you that two new proposals, one on fisheries and a second on St. John's, will be presented to your department within the next wo months or so. 'May I impress upon you again the gravity of the present situation and solicit your support for the resolution of these problems. Kind personal regards.' 1 Mr.

Speaker, I table the .: statement and the accompanying letter to indicate that th.is Province is doing all that it can in a reasonable fashion to bring about further DREE agreements in this Province so that we can create more jobs and get on with the business of raising our standard to that of other Canadians. 11R. NEARY: You know you have not done your home"•ork. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The han. Leader of the Opposit- ion has about five and a half minutes approximately. MR. STIRLING: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

In his normal manner in which he attemps to get full support from this side of the House,the Premier has not had the courtesy again to provide me with a copy of his Ministerial Statement. I wonder if in his most private moments when he looks,as he said,about all the money that has been pumped into Newfoundland by DREE and suddenly there are no agreements signed in the last year or two, I wonder if in his most private moments whether or not he wonders that he and his government might be partially at fault?

Is there just a possibility since the federal government that signed this in 1974 had a brief change in which the PC federal government took over? And the 1977 agreement that he refer'red to, I wonder how come that 4539

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1630 AH-2 MR. STIRLING: did not get signed in nine months? I wonder did it have anything to do with him calling Jim McGrath a traitor and a dead loss for Newfoundland? Did it have anything to do with that?! wonder if it is a possibility? Or the fact that he took his then Prime Minister and tried to embarrass him on the step~ of the Confederation Building?

Or if his President of the Council who said that r egardless of who is in Ottawa - just las t week the President of the Council speaking as Acting Premier -said regardless o£ who was in government in Ottawa, wh~ther it has been PC or Liberal, it has only been for the benefit of Ontario and Quebec and we have always been treated badly by a federal government: I wonder if it is possible in those most private moments it occurs to the Premier that his attitude might have something to do with it, the same kind of arrogance that tel~ every Cabinet minister over there that you can get involved in all of the offshore development companies that you want, you can get involved in all the land development companies that you want just 4540

May 19, 1981 Tape 1631 EC - 1 MR. STIRLING: as long as the Premier has a look at it to see whether there is a conflict of interest? I wonder if there is a slight possibility that this desperate situation that w~ are in in Newfoundlqnd with the management of our economy, with the lack of jobs, with the lack of development, is there just the slightest possibility that maybe this government might have something, they might be responsible in some •1ay?

The Premier ~n summing up his statement had the gallagain to sa~ to read·a letter given to us for the first time today, to read a letter in which he starts to negotiate with a federal Cabinet minister and said, 'From here it looks as though it is political,' starts off in a way to negotiate in such a way that he does not want an agreement. Is it possible that this Premier is so caught up with the fact that he is on the right side of those people who say, 'Boy, fight for Newfoundland,' that he really does not want an agreement with anybody on anything? MR. NEARY: Right on! MR.

STIRLING: He does not want an agreement with the teachers, does not want an agreement with NAPE, does not want an agreement with Nova Scotia, does not want an agreement with Quebec, does not want an agreement with the federal government, so he has somebody that he can nail and slash. Is it possible at all that there is the slightest bit of responsibility on behalf of the government? Now, Mr. Speaker, I wonder why we are seeing this today? I wonder why it is that we are seeing another public release? Why is the timing done today? Why the tabling, I wonder? .MR.

NEARY: Because I wrote him the other day, that is why the timing is today. I shook him up the other day. MR. STIRLING: I wonder if the Premier would do us the courtesy of tabling all the correspondence dealing with 4541 ~·

May 19, 1981 Tape 1631 EC - 2 MR. STIRLING: these DREE agreements? Would he table us the copies of all of the submissions that have been made? Or is the Premier in the same context in which he says to his ministers, 'You can do whatever you want to do. We are not bringing in any penalties, we are not bringing in any laws, we are just making the Premier the ultimate person to make the ultimate decision on what is a conflict of interest'? Is it possible that only the Premier is going to select the cv~respondence that can be tabled?

Does the Premier say that we can now go to the federal people and get the same kind of publicity, the same kind of release? Because he knows that that cannot be done. He knows that normal protocol is such that correspondence between the Premier and the federal level is not tabled except when the Premier selects a time to do it. Now, Mr. Speaker, in three weeks you can fool all of the people, and he did a very good job of doing that. But in two years or three years, surely it is beginning to dawn on people that this government does have the responsibility in their Five Year Plan, Mr.

Speaker; the harsh reality is that despite large infusions of federal transfers, the economy continues to be characterized by slow growth, high unemployment and a persistent inability to narrow economic disparities between Newfoundland and the rest of Canada. 4542

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1632 SD - l MR. STIRLING: Whose fault, Mr. Speaker, whose fault? The fault of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is where the responsibility lies, that is their job. If they do not want to do that job then give it up and go to the people and let them have a.choice as to who they would like to see govern this Province. They take no initiative, no responsibility and they have given up governing, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Further statements? ORAL QUESTIONS .; MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speake~, my question is for the hon. the Premier. In view of the fact that the Premier is so adamant that we own everything inside the 200 mile limit and it now looks like they have found a way to raise the Titanic and bring her ashore,which may turn out to be one of the world's greatest tourist attractions, would the hon. gentleman indicate - and the Titanic is within the 200 mile limit - whether or not Newfoundland is going to lay claim to this valuable tourist resource if and when it is brought to the surface~ MR. MOORES: MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD: Hear, hear. A good question. The hon. the Premier.

I would think that as a lead-off question after a holiday and so on that the Opposition would be able to come up with a more substantive question than that. Seeing that they cannot, we will try to answer things which are perhaps more far reaching.

And we have done some research on it and we will be letting the hon. member know in due course as to what the position of the Newfoundland government is on the Titanic because it could be a real boon for development in the Province and we want to ensure that every single piece of development that we can get our hands on to create jobs for Newfoundlanders, to provide revenue for our people is looked 4543 . -,.

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1632 so - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: at and we will never overlook the Titanic and we will not overlook the fishery and we will not overlook hydro power, we will not overlook the offshore, we will not overlook forestry, we will not overlook mineral development. Eve~y last microscopic piece of development that we can lay our fingers on we will, Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of Newfoundland and Labrador. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Simms}: for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear. Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary, the hon. member Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that the people who are interested in bringing the Titanic to the surface and trying to get her ashore are now arranging their financing for this year, finalizing their plans, would the hon. gentleman indicate what steps the government have taken to stake a claim on this valuable - it may turn out to be the world's most valuable tourist attraction. Has the government taken any steps to stake a claim on this? Will they have to get permits from the provincial government before they bring the Titanic up? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: As I indicated to the hon. member, as soon as we are prepared to indicate what our position is as a government we will. There has been a fair amount of research doae by a number of our people who are working on the offshore case into this particular, if you will, sidelight to it and as soon as that is completed and we are advised as to what we should do there we will be letting the hon. member know. So all things are possible. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary, the hon. member for Mr.

Speaker, would the hon. gentleman indicate if experts and lawyers and so forth have been hired 4544

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1632 SD - 3 MR. NEARY: to prepare our case in case the matter has to go before the Supreme 4545 '<.·

May 19, 1981 Tape No . 1633 DW - 1 M'<.. S • NEARY: matter has to qo before the Supreme Court of Canada,hot.~ far along the road they are in preparing their case? Because, Mr. Speaker, if we do not assert our rights, our legal rights as far as the Titanic is concerned, which is inside the 200 mile limit,then what chance do we have of proving that we own the offshore oil and gas? If we can prove that the Titanic is ours then we might have a good chance of proving that we own oil and gas. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: I am not sure if anybody who was listening to the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) really heard what he said there then,because they are not necessarily related. Because you can prove or disprove something to do with the Titanic does not necessarily mean that it is linked directl y to seabed mining and the ownership of mineral resources on the Continental shelf.

But that aside,and to take him on in the ~alvolio like way in which the hon. member for LaPoile usually asks guestio~'r will respond by indicating that we are going to do all in our power to ensure that we are covered there as we have already done on just about every other issue facing us. MR. SPEAKER: MR. L. STIRLING: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, I h~d a question for the Minister of Development (Mr. Windsor) 1 who is not here, and it is a much more mundane subject but I will ask it of the Premier. There is announcement from the St.

John's Housing Corporation which is to be brought into the Newfound­ land and Labrador Housing Corporation 1 presumably that is still under the Minister of Development. l<Vould the Premier indicate whether or not the advertisement now being run talking about the sale of building lots and showing a building lot at a minimum of twenty-something thousand dollars and running up to $30,000 1 does that conform with this government's policy as to how these building lots are to be priced?

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1633 DW - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I will have to take that as notice, Mr. Speaker, and find out for the hon. Leader of the Op~osi­ tion (Mr .. Stirling) before the House closes this afternoon. On the surface it would seem that it conforms with trying to keep lots as low as we can in the Province even though that seems to be high on first 6lush, _This development has been ongoing for some time. The St. John's Housing Corporation is being accomodated by the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation,which was another part of the

preamble to the Leader of the Opposition's question,but to be specific I will get the details on them and I will take notice of the question, Mr. Speaker. MR. L. STIRLING: MR. SPEAKER: of the Opposition. ?JI..R. L. STIRLING: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary, the hon. Leader l'ihile the Premier is checking that out,would he indicate whether or not it is the govern­ ment's policy that these building lots should be sold at a profit or is it his policy that these should be sold at cost? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: The only answer I can give to that, Mr.

Speaker, is that the corporations that are handling this matter are corporations which are not permitted to make money;they have to cover their administrative and other costs. But there is to be none except for the contracts that are let. If the Newfoundland and Labrador 4547 '--.<

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1634 EL - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: Housing Corporation or its sub- sidiary, St. John's Housing Corporation tender for some servicing for a piece of land on which are going to be lots, obviously the contractor who,gets the lowest bid perhaps will make a profit on it, has to, I suppose,in order to keep in the business. But for it to go directly into Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation or St.

John's Housing Corporation, of course, they are just trying to cover their administrative and other costs and not to incur any amount of profit so that the lots are sold as cheap as is possible given the system and given that private enterprise must get the contract after the tendering is called. MR. STIRLING: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Leader of the Opposition. MR. STIRLING: A supplementary, the hon. the Mr. Speaker, that is what I am trying to get at.

Is the Premier saying that it is the govern­ ment's policy that the lots being sold by Newfoundland and Lab­ rador Housing Corporation, the actual sale price to the individual, the sale price to the people who buy the lots, of course it has to include costs, but are you saying that those building lots as far as the government is concerned are not to be sold at a profit to the Corporation? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: . Yes, Mr. Speaker.

It is supposed to cover just their own costs and not as has happened in New­ town and other places where Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation have been ~nvolved. So it is not to have a profit incurred there. It is just to cover the costs and to cover <.the cost of the servicing and so on. MR. STIRLING: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. 4548

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1634 EL - 2 MR. STIRLING: Then as far as the Premier is concerned, that the direction to the government is not that they should charge what the market will bear, that it is the intention of the government to put them on the market at cost plus whatever their administration costs are but in no circumstances for them to make a profit? MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: That is the way the Corporation has been working for quite some time, Mr. Speaker, and that is the way it is working now. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the President of the Treasury Board and it concernes the negot­ iations presently going on with Local 7107, of the Air Services Division of the Department of Transportation. I wonder if the President of the Treasury Board could tell us whatthe status of negotiations are at the present time? MR. SPEAKER: DR. COLLINS: The hon. the Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, that bargaining unit has been in a position to strike for some time 1 which they have not done.

And there are negotiations still going on and we think that they are proceeding as satisfactorily as one would wish at this point in time. We hope that they will be concluded in short order but I cannot say when obviously. MR. TULK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: for Fogo. MR. TULK: A supplementary, the hon. member Mr. Speaker, there are statements floating around that the engineers, mechanics and pilots and so on that are covered by that local may very well be waiting until we have a large forest fire in the Province before withdrawing their services.

Could the minister confirm whether indeed those 4549

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1634 EL - 3 MR. TULK: rumours are true or whether they are false or whether there is any substance to them at all? 4550 .:

May 19, 1981 Tape 1635 EC - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I would not want to comment on that. I certainly would not want to comment on that in a positive fashion. I certainly have a greater regard for their professionality, if you want to use that term, that they would not put the forests of this Province at great hazard in that way. I think that the negotiations that are going on are meaningful negotiations; both sides are looking on them in the proper light.

I do not think there is any threat hanging over anyone's head and I think that our people out there take their responsibilities to heart and I do not think they would unnecessarily put any part of the natural resources of this Province in any sort of hazard. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS): A final supplementary, the han. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister would perhaps undertake to check into the state of affair~ with regard to rumours of an impending breakdown perhaps in negotiations and perhaps a withdrawal of services?

And I wonder if he could inform the House if indeed there are any contingency plans in case such a withdrawal of services does take place? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, it would help me a great deal if the hon. member wishes me to do something like that, if he would tell me the source of his rumours. MR. WARREN: Oh, sure! DR. COLLINS: I would like him to give me specifics on that. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! DR. COLLINS: I do not wish to become party to causing spurious rumours to get going. 4551

May 19, 19.81 Tape 1635 EC - 2 MR. TULK: It is not spurious. DR. COLLINS: If they are not spurious, the hon. member, in private if he wishes,can give me the names of the people who are supposed to be initiating these rumours. Now, as far as contingency plans go- MR. TULK: Check with the department. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Order, please! DR.

COLLINS: As far as cont"ingency plans go, the Department of Lands and Forests has contingency plans all the time to take care of the hazards that come with : the Summer months in this Province and those contingency plans do include contact with other provinces which have facilities and equipment to take care of forest fire fighting. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. Could the minister tell the hon.

House how many water bombers his department will have standing by this Summer and "'here will the water bombers be located? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker, as everyone in the Province knows, we lost one of our water bombers in an accident last year. We now have six water bombers which will be on stand-by. They will be stationed throughout the Province, I believe at Gander, Stephenville, Goose Bay and ·in St. John's. MR. WARREN: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr.

Speaker, I hear by means of 4552

May 19, 1981 Tape 1635 EC - 3 MR. WARREN: the media during the weekend that due to the crash of one of the water bombers in Quebec last year that this year there will be only one water bomber on stand - by in Labrador . Is this a correct report by the media? MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon . the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands . MR. TULK: Say yes. 45 53 '

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1636 NM - 1 MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker, certainly I am not aware of that. We will displace our water bombers throughout Labrador, and throughout Newfoundland, certainly on a regular basis and as the need develops we will transfer water bombers 'from any part of the Province.

If there are two water bombers in Labrador on any giv~n day and there happens to be a tragic forest fire situation beginning in the Province, a forest fire developing, then we will simply take the water bombers from Labrador, bring them back to the Island, we will station them on the Island, and if there is a bad forest fire situation in Labrador we will sDmply transfer them to Labrador. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): A supplementary, the hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I will try to rephrase my question. Could the minister advise the hon.

House if there will be one or two water bombers stationed in Happy Valley-Goose Bay this year? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker, as I understand it there will be two. I will certainly take the question as notice if the member wants and come back with the exact details either later this afternoon or tomorrow, exactly where in the Province the water bombers will be stationed.

As I understand it, there were two water bombers in Labrador for a period of time last year and when the forest fire hazard index is low in Labrador we bring the water bombers back to the Province, and we transfer it the same way vice versa back from the Island to Labrador if the forest fire hazard is high in Labrador and low on the Island. 4554

May 19, 19.81 Tape No. 1636 NM - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. member for St. Barbe. MR. BENNETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Rural Development. I understand 1 Mr. Speaker 1 in July of 1979 some $67,050 was awarded to the Newfoundland and Labrador Rural Development Council to do a study related to rural development in the l980.s for Newfoundland. would the minister like to tell the House what happened to any prospective reports that might be forthcoming, if indeed there has been any reports or any activities? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Rural, Agricultural and .

Northern Development. MR. GOUDTE: Mr. Speaker, yes, the contract was awarded for that study. I am trying to recall, I do not think the study has reached my desk yet. What I prefer to do is take the question as notice, get the information and then come back. But I have not seen that particular study to this point in time. MR. SPEAKER: St. Barbe on a supplementary. MR. BENNETT: The hon. member for A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Well my information, Mr. Speaker, is that $67,050 was placed in a bank deposit and it is sitting in a bank.

And I take interest in this especially because the people in my district particularly, in a rural district, are being denied dollars to develop industry and create employment, while $67,000Drorn my information, if I am corrrect. So I would certainly like for the minister to table any information that might be available and hopefully this money is being used and if it is not being used then I would like most certainly to see it turned loose so it can be used. 4555 . -,..' !."

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1636 NM - 3 MR. SPEAKER lSimms) l The hon. Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. MR. GOUDIE: MI . Speaker, I am not aware of any $67,000 that has been put in the bank in this city- is that what the hon. member is suggesting? In this city? MR. WARREN: A couple of years ago. MR. GOUDIE: Again I will have to take notice. I do not know of any $67,000 tied up whert it was ear­ marked for a study and not being used at all. I will come back with the information, Mr. Speaker. 45 56

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1637 AH-1 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The han. member for Windsor-Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Forestry (Mr.Power) with regard to the spray programme coming up. The minister has cex~ tainly received some correspondence from concerned town councils or people responsible for providing water to municipalities and I know in one specific correspondenc.e he was requested, he was told that the buffer zone that he was allowing around a certain water supply was not big enough and that he was requested to~use Bt in that-particular area.

By the way, r might say that I am talking about one of the biggest populated areas in the Province, the Grand Falls- Windsor- Bishop Falls watershed. Has the minister made a decision on that issue yet? Will he be using Bt in the area that surrounds the Grand Falls - Windsor - Bishop Falls water supply? MR. SPEAKER: The han. Minister of Forest Resources and Landa. MR. POWER: Mr.

Speaker, as it relates to our spray programme,which will begin sometime I guess as -the first week or the second week of June comes along, we have taken into account the requests of many of the town councils throughout the Province as it relates to what they said to the Royal Commission and what they have said directly to our department. We have followed all the recommendations that the Royal Commission laid down. Last week I did receive some correspondence from, I believe, the Exploits Valley Regional Water Supply Committee asking us to use more Bt and less matacil in their areas.

That is under active consideration by the senior officials in my department. We certainly intend,if at all practical and possible,on one hand to protect the forests and on the 4557 r:

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1637 AH-2 MR. POWER: hand to make sure that' the water supplies of the communities are not endangered in any way. So we have not made a decision on it yet simply because it has not come back to my desk but I imagine it will be there very shortly and we will certainly entertain the requests of the water supply committee as well as is humanly possible so to do. MR. FLIGHT: A supplementary. MR.SPEAKER (Simms): A supplementary. The hon. member for Windsor-Buchans. MR.

FLIGHT: The minister will recall 1 since he recails the correspondence 1 that the question was asked-and the people writing that letter, the authors of that particular letter are very responsible and very knowledgeable people in the Central Newfoundland area - they asked why that particular area was being sprayed? The fact that the area surrounding their water supply was being sprayed did not make sense to them and they pointed out, as the minister will recall, the reasons why they felt there was no need of spraying that particular area anyway.

I Would the minister indicate why in his judgement it is necessary to spray the timber around the Grand Falls- Windsor-Bishop Falls water supply? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker, as you are aware and as all members of the House are aware,we undertook a fairly detailed systematic approach to finding out what forests in the Province should be sprayed with matacil or Bt to protect the forest resource.

That included a detailed, I suppose,anaylsis of the Royal Commission's report and also a detailed analysis of the harvesting priorities for the companies for the next several years as to what would be harvested and what was in bad need of protection. Obviously 4558

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1637 AR-3 MR. POWER: from having gone through that process it was decided by t.he committees involved that the area around the Grand Falls water supply system was an area of in one case high priority forest and in the other case one that was under extreme attack by the budworm . I assume the decision was made to recommend that to our committee, our final committee in our department,for spraying. Certainly if those reasons are not known to the exploits Valley Regional Water Supply Committee that ~ay be one of the reasons they are expressing so much concern.

I am sure that when I undertake to respond to those people tomorrow that ~'e will lay down the reasons why that area was important to be sprayed and also certainly , I suppose, the way thqt we can accomodate their requests for more PT and less matacil in that given area. MR. FLIGHT: A final supplementary. 45 59

May 19, 1981 Tape No . l638 EL - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : A final supplementary, the bon. member for Windsor-Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: As the minister knows, Mr. Speaker, we are now less than two or three weeks away from the start of the spray programme in this Province, that is if we are going to spray in the . prime time, in the time when · we catch the budworm in incubation, that kind of thing. Would the minister undertake to tell the House why it is that less than three weeks away from a spray programme) we have not identified yet the areas that we will spray with Bt or with matacil?

We have not identified the watersheds that~will be protected, the buffer zones or what areas have been designated for Bt.And I recall the minister saying, not long ago, that the reason Bt would be used in certain areas was because there was less danger of damaging or poisoning water supplies or less environmental damage. And it seems funny to me, Mr. Speaker, that a few weeks before we get into a full spray programme we have not yet identified the areas that will be used with Bt that will be sprayed with Bt. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR.

POWER: Mr.3peaker, I have to take exception to that extremely simplistic approach to how we determine what forest resource EO in this Province are to be spraven. We established a Royal Commission which announced its decision - or we as government announced its decision or recommendations to us in January and February. We announced the blocks that we were proposing to spray.

We went and met with many of the councils in the Province who expressed an interest in meeting with us because of the water supply system, The reason that if there is any dispute or any uncertainty as to what areas might be sprayed with Bt or matacil inc the Grand Falls-Exp~oits Valley region is because only last week they have made theirrequests known to us to spray less in that given area. It certainly has nothing to be done with how the department or the government have approached 4560

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1638 EL - 2 MR. POWER: the problem that we h·ave at hand . We went and met with many of the councils in Central and Western parts of Newfoundland. We told them what we were going to do, and in many cases it was accepted by them as a rational, sane and sensible approach. We have even gone furhher in the De­ partment of the Environment to make sure that the water intake of all of those communities will be measured every day as opposed to every second day, as was recommended by the Royal Commission.

So this government has done every­ thing that is humanly possible to do to make sure that the spray programme comes off as effectively and as efficiently as it possibly can and with the agreement of the majority of New­ foundlanders. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. the member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: I have a question for the hon. the Premier and it has to do with the code of ethics that he brought in the other day for ministers. Does that include the use or the misuse or abuse of government helicopters and government aircraft? I am told that on Saturday, the Minister of Fisheries (J.

Morgan), on a routine visit to his district,took the govern­ ment helicopter, went down to Bonavista, took his campaign man up for a joy ride for an hour, or an hour and a half, then came back down and consulted with the mayor and then got back aboard the helicopter and took off. It was a purely political visit. Would the hon. gentleman indicate if this type of activity would be included in his code of ethics that he introduced for ministers in the House the other day? 4561

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1639 SD - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, that is unfair of the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary). The Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) is not in his chair. The hon. member for LaPoile could have waited until the Minister of Fisheries was present to ask the question to the Minister of Fisheries. Do.es the bon. member for LaPoile know how many other meetings_ the Min_ister of Fisheries had that day in his constituency or in other constituencies dealing with his department? You know, these are questions that have to be answ~red.

And to just come out simplistically an~ to blanl_<etly :try to accuse the Minister of Fisheries of doing something supposedly unethical is completely wrong. Does the member for LaPoile know exactly everywhere the Minister of Fisheries went that day? Obviously the ~inister of Fisheries - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER PECKFORD: - as the Minister of Fisheries gets around the Province as much as he can to see as many fishermen as he can and all the rest of it and, you know, to just blatantly accuse a minister of misusing a helicopter without knowing all the information is completely wrong.

And so I think, obviously, the Opposition, as can be seen by anybody in the gallery today, has very few questions to ask, so throw as many red herrings at the government as you can because they cannot ask questions dealing with substantive issues because we have all the answers. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear. Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary, the hon. member Mr.

Speaker, I consider th_at to be a very, very important question because this is quite an expensive contract that Sealand Helicopters have with this government that is being paid for by the taxpayers of this Province. And I am sure the taxpayers would welcome questions 4562 .-..!

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1639 SD - 2 MR. NEARY: involving the use of the government helicopters and the government aircraft. Mr. Speaker, it is not my fault the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) is not in the House today. He told us the other day he was in Ottawa when the meeting took place in Bonavista,when in actual fact he returned to the Province that afternoon, came .back and was in Newfoundland when that meeting was taking place in Bonavista. But is it right?

I am asking the Premier to give the House information, I am making no charges or accusations, I am asking the hon. gentleman to give the House the information to provide us with the logs _in connection wi.th the Minister of Fisheries' use of the government helicopter on Saturday afternoon. I know h~ spent the whole afternoon in Bonavista, purely a political job, a routine visit to his district. Is this the policy of th.e government to allow members the use of the government aircraft and helicopters to visit their district on a routine visit? MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: The hon. member for LaPoile knows the answer to that question.Because he was not making hay with his first question, he had to insert then something new that had not been known in his original question. If he. was that concerned about it why did not the hon. member for LaPoile stick to it? He had to then insert that the Minister of Fisheries was back in the Province the same time that the meeting was on in Bonavista. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh!

PREMIER PECKFORD: Obviously, the hon. member for LaPoile is trying to dance all over the place to try to find some way in which he can accuse or find something at fault with the Minister of Fisheries. The Minister of Fisheries can answer for himself and when he returns to this House he will take care of the member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. 4563

May 19, 1981 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Tape No. 1639 so - 3 Supplementary, the hon. member Well, Mr. Speaker, I am not asking the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) any questions in connection with it, I am asking for Mr. Clean to find out aoout the use of his helicopter. What is the point of my asking the Minister of Fisheries? ~,e Minister of Fisheries is not going to tell us why he took the helicopter . I want the Premier to investigate this. Will the P.remier undertake to find out what the Minister of Fisheries was doing with the helicopter on Saturday afternoon and why he took ~is campaign chairman 456 4

May 19, 1981 Tape 1640 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: Bonavista for a jaunt out of the community for an hour or an hour and a half and then brought him back in again? Does that have to do with the Department of Fisheries in this Province? I am asking the hon. gentleman seriously to take a hard look at it, to look into -i~, to find out if it was justified,and if it was not justified to send the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) a bill for the use of that helicopter. He could have got down in his car for $25 and it probably cost the taxpayers $2,500 to send him down to Bonavista that day. ~ SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR.

SPEAKER (Simms) : PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh, oh! Order, please! The hon. the Premier. Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) for his ongoing adjectives about me. I appreciate it very much. And as we have known one another for the last five or six years, I am sure he will continue to apply such adjectives to me as we go on together in this hon. House as parliamentarians to do what we can for the people of this Province.

It might interest the hon. the m~mber for LaPoile to know that he is making a number of assumptions in his questions which might not necessarily be valid and I would ask him to reconsider what he has just asked, as perhaps the kinds of hints that he has been throwing across the floor about the Minister of Fisheries might not be valid at all. MR. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. STIRLING: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. 4565

May 19, 1981 Tape 1640 EC - 2 SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Order, please! MR. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, I thought that this was a relatively innocent question. Is this an indication of the kind of standard that the Premier is going to use? Because he was the one who brought into this House this new conflict of interest which was going to cure all the problems. Two questions: one, does it make any difference to the Premier whether or not, in fact, the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) could say publicly that ~ he was out of the Province at the time that that meeting was held?

Does it make any difference whether he was lying or not lying? And secondly, have you set down a standard for ministers to use that will distinguish between political use of a helicopter and departmental use of a helicopter? Have those standards been clearly set down? MR. SPEAKER: The hen. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker, they have been clearly set down and the Minister of Fisheries did not hire a helicopter on Saturday. MR. NEARY: But he was in Bonavista. · PREMIER PECKFORD: He was in Bonavista but he was not onboard a helicopter. MR.

NEARY: I beg your pardon, he was there with a Sealand Helicopter. PREMIER PECKFORD: That is right, and the Minister responsible for Historic Resources was there on departmental business, who happened to hire the helicopter. MR. NEARY: Oh, I see. PREMIER PECKFORD : And that was on departmental business, not on political business, to answer the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bellevue. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, now we are getting somewhere. The hen. gentleman - 4566

May 19, 1981 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. CALLAN : MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: Tape 1640 EC - 3 Order, please ! The hon. the member for Bellevue. I will yield . The hon. the member for LaPoile. The hon. gentleman is giving us now little bits and pieces of information. We will eventually get at the truth here . The campaign chairman of the Minister of Fisheries, the member for Bonavista South (Mr. Morgan) has nothing to do with the uepartment of Fisheries- 11othing t o do with historic sites or objects, well, not at. the moment anyw~y .

Now, why was it that the Minister of Fisheries decided to take his campaign chairman on a little jaunt? What did that have ~o do with it? Could the hon . gentleman relate that to some kind of government business? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECl<FORD: ~ow, of course, we are getting there, ~tr. Speaker, are we not? That is why I mentioned to the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) about his questions because perhaps his questions were all 4567

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1641 NM - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: he should be careful about his questions because perhaps his questions were all for naught, that he was chasing little rainbows that did not exist and now we find that after he has wasted all this time in Question Period, that the whole question of whether the Minister of Fisheries [Mr. MorganJ hired the helicopter in the beginning is for · naught, it is just gone up in hot air, gone up in smoke. MR. NEARY: PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh,no, it is not. Because the Minister of Fisheries [Mr.

Morgan) did not hire the helicopter in the beginning, and there is a policy that the helicopters and air services are used for departmental and government business. MR. NEARY: It is collusion between two ministers. But what about the campaign manaqer? !<Thy did he go? MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : We have time for a final supplementary. Opposition. MR. STIRLING: The han. Leader of the Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I still would like the Premier to answer the question whether or not it really makes any difference to him, whether the fact that the minister went out of this House, who is not in the House, said outside the House that we had misled the people because he was out of the Province at the time, does it make any difference to the Premier whether or not a minister is telling the truth or not? And secondly, how do you distinguish between the political use of an aircraft? For example, the information which you just got you did not have in the beginning, is that how quickly the standards can change? MR.

NEARY: When it suits him. 4568

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1641 NM - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: The first part of the question was insulting. I do not intend to answer it. The hon. Leader of the Opposition knows as well as all hon. members that we value the truth here to the utmost and as much as any hon. member does (inauClible)to see that things are done properly. I will stand on my record on that and I hope the Leader of the Opposition stands on his. And I hope the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) stands on his. I hope the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) stands on his.

And as far as the use of government aircraft goes, it is·done according to government business 1 obviously~ it has to relate to the department, it has to relate to government business so that the taxpayers are being well served. That is the practice. That is the policy. And we are proud of it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : has expired. Hear, hear! The time for Oral Questions PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES: MR. SPEAKER: and Energy. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. BARRY: The hon. Minister of Mines Order, please! Mr.

Speaker, I have here a report which is required to be filed under the Mineral Act for the period April 1st., 1980 to March 31st., 1981. There are copies available for hon. members and for the press. MR. SPEAKER: Further reports? ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD: The hon. the Premier. linaudiblel besides how fair we are and how we try to spend the taxpayers money reasonably and honestly at all times that we can, there was a question asked in Question Period a few minutes ago about 4569

May 19, 1981 Tape No . 1641 NM - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, but just to show how efficient we are now, besides bow honest we are, the lots.and the way Newfoundland and Labrador Housing operates, they usually build in a nine to ten per cent primarly in those areas of development where the servicing has not been comoleted and they have to do a guesstimate on bow much the paving would cost afterwards. So 45 70

May 19, 1981, Tape 1642, Page 1 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: is a max i mum of 10 per cent built in to handle those - !1R. STIRLING: PREMIER PECKFORD: I have that checked out Profit. No, no, not profit they are not allowed. But when there is additional work to be done with that development which is part of the sales effort, for example, paving and so on, a 10 per cent figure is taken. Sometimes they lose even then because of the way inflation and escalation goes for paving and asphalt and all the rest of it.

And that is what is happening in the Cowan Heights development, that there is some paving to be done in the next couple of years on some of the lots and some of the streets when they are fully sold and that will be incurred by the Corporation at that point in time in the future so that in order to cover that they build in a 10 per cent. Outside of that,none; everything is done at cost. That is the answer to the question the Leader of the Opposition(Mr. Stirling) asked. MR. SPEAKER(Simms)": Further answers to questions? MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon.the Minister of Justice. MR.

OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the answer to a question on the Order Paper of May 4. MR. SPEAKER: Further Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given? DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the answer to question number 63 of May 12. 4571

May 1.9; 1981, Tape 1642, Page 2 -- apb MR . SPEAKER (Simms): MR. BARRY: MR . SPEAI<ER: Mines and Energy. MR. BARRY: Presenting Petitions. Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Minister of Mr. Speaker, I wonder if by leave we could revert back to Notices of Motion - MR. SPEAKER: Is there agreement to revert to Notices? MR. BARRY: MR. SPEAKER: SO~ HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: Mines and Energy. MR. BARRY: - for·three bills? Agreed? Agreed. Agreed. The hon. the Minister of Mr .

Speaker, I give notice .I will on tomorrow ask. leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Ratify, Confirm And Adopt An Amending Agreement Entered Into Between Government And Lower Churc hill Development Corporation Limited" . Mr . Speaker, I also give notice I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, :'An Act To Amend The Newfound~and And Labrador Hydro Act, 1975". And, M.r. speaker , I also give notice I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Ac t To Amend The Labrador Lands Reservation Act" . ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. OTTENHEIMER: Order 2, c;onunittee of Supp ly.

On motion, that the Hous e resolve itself into Committee of Supply, Mr . Speaker left the Chair. 4572

)1ay 19, 1981, Tape 16<t2, Page 3 -- apb COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY MR. CHAIRMAN(Butt}: Order, please! \~en the Committee last met we were discussing Head 1, Consolidated Fund Services , and most of the subheads there are statutory. The amount of time remaining in Committee is five hours and thirty­ one minutes . MR . NEARY: time we dealt 4573 Mr . Chairman , the last ·~·

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1643 ow - 1 MR. S. NEARY: with this heading, Consolidated Fund Services - MR. CHAI~AN (Butt) : The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: - we talked quite a bit about the provincial debt which, this year, will reach $3.2 billion, $3,200,000,000. Now, Mr.

Chairman, if you take a population in Newfoundland of 575,000 1 which I believe is a bit high at the moment- I enquired about it this morning; I am told the population of Newfoundland is 575,000 at the present time - if you divide that into our provincial debt you will disr"'rJVer much to your amazement that every man, woman and child in Newfoundland has a $5,600 debt hanging around his neck, $3.2 billion divided by 575,000 - the population " f Newfoundland - "'rill show that every man, woman and child in this Province O"t-Tes $5,600, which makes our per capita debt the highest in North America.

If they had a debt like that in the United States - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. S. NEARY: Yes, the per capita debt. The per capita now I am talking about. We have the second highest public debt in the whole of Canada, we are next in line to the Canadian Government. But our per capita debt is $5,600. That is about, I would say, double, more than double than what it is in the United States. If the United States had a per capita debt of S5,h00 for every man, woman and child they would be gone under long ago. Every child born in Newfoundland today is born with a debt of $5,600. And, Mr.

Chairman, I do not know what else we can say to rivet the point home that one of the reasons that this Province is in the recession, is passing through a major depression 1 is because of our pro­ vincial debt. You cannot attribute what is happening in Newfoundland today totally to inflation,although the govern­ ment will try to use the excuse that inflation is causing all 4574

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1643 DW - 2 MR. S. NEARY: kinds of worldwide problems. Well, that is true. But in Newfoundland our ~roblems are compounded because of the mismanagement of the affairs of this Province . The government - in ten years the provincial debt of in this Province, ten years of Tory administration the provincial debt has gone up by $2.4 million, $2,400,000,000! Now, Mr. Chairman, we also hear the government complain and we heard it again today when the Premier stood in his place in this House and took another swipe at the Government of Canada.

And in case he does not think that I know why he did not take that swipe qt the Government of Canada about DREE,it is because of a little memorandum that I sent him the other day and a letter that I sent in connection with his letter that he had written to the town council in Port aux Basques about a proposed industrial park for Port aux Basques. The hon. Premier told the town council in Port aux Basques that their industrial park was on a list, high on the list of priorities and that the government were going to see to it that an industrial park for Port aux Basques was included in the next agreement with DREE.

Well, let us see what DREE says about this. I have the memo in front of me that I sent to the hon. gentleman that shook 4575

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1644 AH-1 MR. NEARY: no doubt right down to the tips of his toes. Dated March 17,1981, a memorandum to Mr. Mancini, subject information, and it has to do with negotiations with DREE contracts for Newfoundland. And when you get down to the part that has to deal with industrial parks 1 let me read for the benefit of the honourable members of the House the part that has to deal with DREE financed industrial parks. 'So far the Government of Canada, the ~apartment of Regional Economic Expansion have proposals before them for seven industrial parks.

And I can read out the ones that there is a DREE contribution commitment to to date: The Donovans Industrial Park in St. John's, the Maple Valley Industrial Park, Grand Falls Industrial Park, Carbonear Industrial Park,Car Crescent Industrial Park, Gander, Wabush Industrial Park, Labrador, Country Road Industrial Park, Corner Brook. Now listen to this , Mr.Chairman, the (

b) part of this answer. Recentprovincial government proposals for industrial parks: Proposals now. 'under the current industrial development proposals there are three industrial parks identified, Gander, Octagon Pond, St. John's, renovations to facilities at Argentia. In addition there were discussions'- listen to this, Mr. Chairman.

Even thought the Premier told Port aux Basques they were going to rate top priority , that he was going to see to it that their industrial park would be included in the next DREE agreement to be signed, listen to what DREE says, the Executive Assistant to the Minister of DREE. 'In addition~he says,~here were discussions but no proposals regarding three other possible sites, Port aux Basques, Botwood, Corner Brook, provision of industrial land by filling in the shoals area of the waterfront.

In other to complete this list a very time consuming scrutiny of our files from 1969 would be required.' Now the reason I raise this, Mr. Chairman, is because this is just an example 1 4576 ..

~1ay 19,1981 Tape No. 1644 AH- 2 MR . NEARY: this is typical of the king of information that we are getting from this government , especially from the Premier, in connection with DREE. The actual fact of the matter is that all the things that the Premier has been talking about in this House in rec ent weeks are merely proposals. There has been no discussion , there has been no hard bargaining, there have been no around the table discussions in connection with these DREE projects,and as a result, Mr.

Chairman, as a resul t Newfound l and this year finds itself without a road agreement, finds itself without any DREE agreements of any magnitude. And as a result we have a depression, a major recessi on in t he construction industry in this Provin ce . I was told over the weekend by a small contractor tha t every time no\-1 they go to a site to start a little job they are beseiged with people who are unemployed looking for a job. They are like flies around a molasses puncheon looking for a job on the se small projects .

He told me ·tbat it reminds him of the pictures that he has seen on television of the dirty thirties, Chicago type things. We have not reached the 4577

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1645 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: soup line stage yet but we are getting pretty close. There is a major depression in this Province at the present time,especially in the construction industry, and the unemployed construction workers are dismayed. And, Mr. Chairman, if this continues-the interest rates keep going up, the unemployment is reaching record .proportions in this Province now, the cost of living is out of control, we have the highest taxes in Canada -if it keeps up we are likely by the end of the year to see riots in the streets, that is how serious it is. MR. J. CARTER: Bloodshed.

You would like that, would you not? MR. NEARY: I would not like it. I am not one who advocates civil disobedience although I heard it one time suggested from the opposite side of the House. Mr. Crosbie, when he was here, suggested one time civil disobedience. I do not subscribe to that. But the government buries its head in the sand and they talk about all kinds of things that do not affect the lives of the ordinary people of this Province. Mr.

Chairman, all they are interested in doing is using the government helicopters, misusing and abusing the government aircraft, sending the Norma and Gladys on another little jaunt around Newfoundland - and I know Your Honour is signalling to me that my time is up . viell, I hope that somebody else will intervene and I will come back and have another go at this subject, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN (Butt): Order, please!

Before recognizing the next speaker I would like to welcome to the House on behalf of all han. members four very distinguished Jentlemen from the Canadian Council of Land Surveyors; President David Crandall from Manitoba; Vice President, Eric Jerrett from Newfoundland; Past Presient, John '~ a tthews from British Columbia; Secretary Treasurer, Ken Allred , Alberta. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. 4578

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1645 SD - 2 MR. CHAIRMAN (Butt): The hon. Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, just a few remarks. The hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) is back onto the public debt. This matter was brought up before and it was answered fairly extensively but I would be glad to say another few words on it. Everyone would like the public debt to be smaller than it is but, of cours .e, we incur a public debt to develop services for the Province.

And if we do not wish to build hospitals or schools or build roads or whatever, we could have a very small public debt 1 but I do not know if the people of this Province wish us to work that way.

Now the hon. member says that we have the highest per capita public debt in the country,and I am not going to dispute that,but the point I am, going to make is this, that the total direct provincial debt, that is,the debt that the Province itself incurs, not the debt that agencies of the Province incur which are guaranteed by the Province, but the debt that the Province itself incurs, in 1977 it was $1.5 billions, that is just in round numbers; over the next year that went up by 7 per cent.

Now I do not know what the inflation :r:ate was that year but I am willing to bet my bottom dollar it was less than 7 per cent. It went up by 7 per cent the next year up to $1.66 billion. The next year it went up by 10 per cent. Now that may ha.ve been close to the inflation figure, but I suggest that probably even that was below the inflation figure. It went up from there to $1.8 billion. Th.e next year it went up by 3 per cent and that was considerably below the inflation rate. It went up to $1.89 billion and then in 1981 it is. projected to go up to just over $2 billion. That is in increase of 9 per cent.

The point I make, Mr. Chairman, and I made this point previously in terms of the total public sector debt, that our total public sector debts have been increasing 4579 ;.- .

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1646 EL - 1 DR. COLLINS: at a rate of between six and seven per cent per year

whereas inflation is going up at what- ever it is, ten and twelve percent for the year. In other words, our debt is going up at a lesser rate than the inflation rate is going up and now I point out that that applies also to the Prov­ incial direct debt. If the hon. members is' implying - I did not say he is saying this now - but if he is implying that our Provincial debt is out of control- it is high; it is not out of control. We are getting a cap on it. We are increasing our debt at a lesser rate than it should increase if just inflation alone applies. We are putting a cap on it. MR.

NEARY: (Inaudible) to do that. 1 DR. COLLINS: No, in very few provinces, very very few. I do not know but we might be unique in that regard. I suspect we are. So that is the only. point I would like to make in answer to those remarks. MR. NEARY: MR. CHAIRMAN (Butt) : MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman. The hon. the member for LaPoile. What a load of hogwash, utter tripe, garbage that the han. gentleman just spewed out on the floor of this House. Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is that the Provincial debt has tripled in this Province in less than ten years. And the reason for it is mismanagement.

Seventy-five per cent of the reason for our Provincial debt going up $2.4 billion, $2,400 million in less than ten years is because of mismanagement on the part of this administration. And we have the highest per capita debt in the whole province. And maybe nobody cares, I do not know. Maybe the Government are just taking the attitude 'let her rip, let her go.' But it is something,Mr. Chairman, that we have to contend with in this Province. The day of reckoning is not too far away. And I would not mind it so bad but every time the minister gets up he says, ' Well, how else 4580

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1646 EL - 2 MR. NEARY: could we get hospitals and schools and water and sewerage?' Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is that the Provincial debt has trebled in this Province in less than ten years and we have nothing to show for it. In twenty­ three years of Liberalism in this Province, twenty-three years while we were trying to catch up with the rest of Canada, twenty­ three years, Mr. Smallwood 1 who was always accused by the other side of the House- by the Opposition of the day, by the Tories­ accused of bankrupting the Province, so we were told: 'Mr.

Small­ wood was going to plow her under. She was going bankrupt.' Do you know what t~ Provincial debt was at that time? $700 million. January 18, 1972, the Provincial debt, $700 million. Now, it is $3.2 billion in less than ten years and not a thing to show for it. There was a time, Mr.

Chairman, when w7 were building schools in this Province, when we were building hospitals, when we were building water and sewerage, when we were developing our natural resources, when we were building vocational schools, when we built 6,000 miles of roads, when we paved just about all the roads in Newfoundland,brought in rural electrification and what else did we do? There are 333 items listed that the Liberals did in twenty-three years, a public debt of a little over $700 million. But, Mr. Chairman, on January 18, all our forward march stopped dead in its tracks.

And all they did was drive up the Provincial debt and we do not have a thing to show for it. $550 million squandered on the Labrador Liner­ board mill that should have been left in the hands of private enterprise. They drove it up. Not onlY. did they nationalize it but spent $550 million that is included in that $3.2 billion debt. And the minister should not separate the debt. The direct and in­ direct debt is $3.2 billion. There is no way you could separate it. 4581

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1646 EL - ! MR. NEARY: These two little explosions they set off on either side of the Strait of Belle Isle, $220 million. And then cancelled the project after the '75 election was over. And nationalizing Churhcill Falls Corporation . $350 million. Well, right there you have over a billion dollars . What is there to show for it? Not a thing, Mr. Chairman . Mr. Chairman, there is not a thing to show for it so I hope we will never again hear the Minister of Binance (Dr.Collins) get up and tell us, · ~~ll,if you are going to build water and sewerage and schools and hospitals, you have to borrow.· ~ 4582 c:

May 19, 1981 Tape 1647 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: Only one hospital has been announced in ten years and that is in Port aux Basques. And this year, what did they allocate in the budget for the construction of that hospital? $1.5 million. In ten years , they have not built a hospital in ten years. And the way they are going at Port aux Basques, it will take ten years to build that one, another ten. They have not built a hospital in ten years, Mr. Chairman. Show me one. I would like for the Minister of Fi-nance (Dr.

Collins) to get up and point his finger to a new hospital that they have built in this Province in the last ten years of Tory administration. Where are DR. COLLINS: MR. NEARY: started by the Liberals. HR. STIRLING: government. MR. NEARY: they? The Health Scier"ces Complex. Out where? The Health Sciences Complex~ The Health Sciences Complex was Paid for by the federal Paid for by Ottawa. Ottawa put $45 million into that project. Do not be so naive. How stupid! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! l-1R. CHAIRMAN (Butt) : Order, please! MR. NEARY: How stupid! How stupid can you get?

The Health Sciences Comples, the medical school, was a great Liberal concept. DR. COLLINS: This government is paying for it. MR. NEARY: Right, this government is paying for it. Ottawa put up $40 million for that project. DR. COLLINS: How much did it cost? MR. NEARY: It cost around $65 million. Ottawa put up $40 million or $45 million. 4583

May 19, 1981 Tape 1647 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, the fact of the matter is - I will repeat what I said before - MR. HOUSE: (Inaudible) Carbonear. MR. NEARY: Carbonear was built by the Liberals. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR . NEARY: Mr. Chairman, they have not built one hospital, not a hospital. And I doubt if they built any ~chools, maybe a handful. You can count the number of schools on one hand that they built. MR. TULK: Count them on your fingers. MR. NEARY: Count them on the fingers of one hand, Mr. Chairman.

And the water and sewerage that they put in is trivial, insignificant, compared to what was done in twenty-three years. So, Mr.

Chairman, I go back to my original statement, that this Tory administration - and this is a continuation of the Tory administration that took over on January 18, 1972 - they have tripled the provincial debt during that time, in less than ten years - $2.4 billion and nothing to show for it; record unemployment, the highest cost of living in Canada, the second highest provincial debt, the highest per capita debt in the nation, the highest taxes in Canada, that is what they have to show for it, Mr.Chairrnan, a major recession, a major depression in this Province at the present time, and all they can think about is oil.

All they can talk about is oil. Now, I guarantee you, if the oil is not corning ashore by the time the next election is called, they will get oil, all right, they will get all the oil they are bargaining for. Because they are making a mess of the oil. And only last week, Dr. Stuart Peters, who is a senior officer with Crosbie (Offshore) , speaking at a seminar over in London, Ontario, told the seminar that because of the attitude of this government and because of 4584

May 19, 1981 Tape 1647 EC - 3 MR. NEARY: the political climate in Newfoundland at the present time, oil companies have been scared away, have oeen frightened away from Newfoundland . What a statement, Mr. Chairman! What a 4585 c:

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1648 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: statement from a man who is in th.e industry, in the oil industry servicing the offshore rigs. What a statement for Dr. Peters to make, And Dr. Peters is no friend of the Liberals in this Province. I would say that he is well in with the administration of the day.

But he was forced, I do not know whether he knew he was going to be quoted over in London, Ontario or not, sometimes business people and politicians when they go outside the Province have a tendency to be a little more vocal and they talk a little more than they do on the home front, not thinking that anybody is going to pay any attention t6 them, not thinking that they are going to be quoted in the newspapers. Well,Dr. Peters was quoted in the newspapers as saying that this governing is fri~htening away business and industry wholesale.

And he said if we are going to benefit by the offshore oil then it is about time that the provincial government started talking to Ottawa. I sent for the clipping, I should have it tomorrow and I will be glad to ask some questions about it in the House. But it is a startling revelation, Mr. Chairman, and I have a few more things that I want to say about that particular matter. I hope somebody will intervene so I can have another go. MR. CHAIRMAN (Butt) : The han. Leader of the Opposition. MR. STIRLING: Wh=n we last rret, Mr. Chainnan, I asked the Minister of Finance lOr.

Collins} a number of questions involving the financing of the pension plan and I think he undertook to get the information. I just checked quickly through Hansard, I do not see it there, but it may be later on and maybe he would either point it out or repeat the information. MR. NEARY: MR. CHAIRMAN: MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman. The han. member for LaPoile. Mr. Chairman, I am glad that my hon. colleague intervened there so I can carry on for a few more moments because I want to get back, and I am sure that the 4586

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1648 NH - 2 MR . NEARY: surveyors who are holding a convention in this Province at the present time \"'ill be in­ terested in some of the matters that are under discussion in this House at the present time because their bread and butter depends on whether or not these projects succeed or not. we have heard a lot of talk here ~bout the DREE agreements not being signed and whose fault it is , and we heard a Ministerial Statement read today in the House by the Premier condemning Ottawa again, taking another flick at the Government of Canada, this time 4587 ... ·..,.._

May 19, 1981 TaJ?e No. 1649 ow - 1 MR. S . NEARY : singling out the Minister responsible for DREE (Mr. De Bane) and saying it was all Ottawa's fault. And I have been contending now for weeks in this House that all DREE has before them are proposals, no agreements! The Premier keeps saying, 'Why do you not ask your buddies up in Ottawa to sign the agreements?' What agreements? There are no agreements:· And how do I know there are no agreements? Because t am on the phone every other day; every time the Premier makes a statement I call Ottawa, I call DREE. And, Mr.

Chairman, it is absolutely unbelieveable the things that the Premier can get away with in this Province and in this House: Nobody ever questions it; he makes the statement, nobody ever bothers to ask about it,as if God had spoken! Well, I quoted a few moments from a memo that was written by the executive assistant to the Minister of DREE in Ottawa. Let us see what - and this was only March 17th. 1981 - let us see what they say about DREE agreements that the Premier keeps telling us are ready for signing. The question that was put to the DREE people by Mr. Cardinal, executive assistant.

He said, 'List of subsidiary agreements awaiting approval for Newfoundland'. And what is the response? Well, just listen to this: (

a) Canada/Newfoundland Pulp and Paper Modernization subsidiary agreement has received Privy Council approval and is awaiting ratification; (

b) A Canada/Newfound- land Coastal Labrador Development subsidiary agreement received approval in principle by Economic Development ministers in July 1980, submission of these specific agreement conditions and components to the Economic Development Committees the Treasury Board and the Privy Council will be required when ministerial discussions on these are concluded'.

As a matter of fact the ministerial discussions are not concluded, so how can there be an agreement ready for the ink? 'Thereafter a subsidiary agreement might be said to be awaiting approval, although further negotiations with the provincial government and sub- sequent modifications may still be required prior to ratifi- cation.' 4588

May 19, 1981, Tape 1650, Page 1 -- apb MR. NEARY: Now, Mr. Chairman, I want you to listen to this, the next paragraph. Listen to this now, this is from the executive assistant of the Federal Minister of DREE(Mr. DeBane) - from his executive assistant after asking DREE to bring him up to date, and the Premier tells us that it is Ottawa's fault the agreements are uot signed. Well, let us see what the next paragraph says: 'There are no other federal/provincial subsidiary agreements awaiting - - . approval.' Shall I read it again, Mr.

Chairman? 'There are no other federal/provincial subsidiary agreements awaiting approval, there are a number of prospective joint initiatives under analysis by the DREE office in Newfoundland at this time in various stages of maturation. The particular items are listed and described in the monthly report, Subsidiary Agreements in Preparation. As these items evolve and prove viable, they are incorporated into our main estimates display.

A more realistic aspect describing possible programme activities, including potential subsidiary agreements, is presented in the programme forecast multi-year operational plan. 'If you are following the current' - listen to this - 'If you are following the current terminology of the provincial government there are nine or ten subsidiary agreements awaiting approval. There are probably a little more if one is consistent and includes every unsuccessful proposal submitted by the Province since the signing of the Canada/Newfoundland general DREE agreement in 1974.' Mr.

Chairman, _you cannot be any more plain than that. You cannot be any more blunt than that. The fact of the matter is that this government 4589

May 19, 1981, Tape 1650, Page 2 -- apb MR. NEARY: - and here is the memo. I think what prompted the Ministerial Statement from the Premier today was that I wrote him the other day in connection with the incorrect statement that he had made to the Port aux Basques town council about their industrial park, and I sent him a copy of this to prove that I was right. And that is what motivated his attack on DREE and the Government of Canada today. His is very concerned now that we are ·getting at the trutl,, we are getting near the truth, he is going to ·get caught bluffing, he is goin9 to get caught ~n his bluff.

The fact of the matter is that he has been running a gigantic bluff for the last several weeks. There have been no negotiations in connection with DREE agreements, merely proposals put before DREE and no hard negotiations, no agreements. And that is the truth of the matter, Mr. Chairman, and it is about time, in my opinion, that the Premier stopped this bluff. All he is doing is harm for Newfoundland. He is harming Newfoundland. His buffoonery is harming Newfoundland. Mr.

Chairman, I always heard that the Texas Legislature was the most famous in the world for buffoonery, but when I hear statements from the Premier and from ministers in this government, I am wondering if we do not head the list of legislatures, for buffoonery, in the free world. We heard another example of it today. It is about time that the Premier stopped this buffoonery. Because all it is doing, Mr. Chairman, is doing Newfoundland an awful lot of harm, an awful lot of damage. And as a result today, what do we have in Newfoundland? We have a major recession.

We have people's hopes built up on oil, the oil boom syndrome and no oil and no prosperity. Everybody is led to believe the oil is going to solve all our problems. Oil is going to take care of all our welfare problems, is 4590

May 19, 1981, Tape 1650, Page 3 -- apb MR. NEARY: going to solve out unemployment problems, is going to solve our tax problems, our gasoline prices, our electricity prices. 4591 .· ..

May 19, 19.81 Tape No. 1651 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: That, Mr. Chairman, is a part of the con game, that is a part of the gigantic bluff that is being carried on by this administration. The actual fact of the matter is, that the cost of living will sky rocket if and when oil is produced offshore, and ninety-nine per cent of Newfoundlanders will never know there is a gallon of oil around. When they are producing oil offshore with one well, Hibernia, it will employ about 500 or 600 Newfoundlanders, so we are told. The Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr.~Barry) ga:ve us these figures.

Why there are more people employed in senior citizens homes around this Province than will be employed in the offshore. Mr. Chairman, I suppose tomorrow morning now I will turn on my radio and I will hear somebody editorializing and saying, "The member for LaPoile was shouting, the member for LaPoile was ranting and raving." I cannot help it if that is the way I speak, if that is way I was born. I do not have a very mild voice. I like to make my point and if anybody does not like it, I would suggest they go buy ear plugs or they go and play tiddlywinks, if the y are bored with their jobs. MR.

CARTER: We can always fire you out. MR. NEARY: No. No, the hon. gentleman cannot fire me out. The hon. gentleman has tried that . and the Tories have been trying that for twenty years. Maybe the people will put me out, or they will put me in. But the hon. gentleman will not decide that, that will be decided by my constituents. And, Mr. Chairman, I would say 1 the way things are going in this Province 1 that maybe, maybe the thing to do is to put the matter to the test, put it to the test. 4592 ' ·- .(,"

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1651 NM- 2 MR. NEARY: People are so discontent and so disgruntled and so discouraged witll thls crowd, outside of Tory st. John's, Mr. Chairman,they will not get a seat in the next election, not a seat. And they will lose a few in St. John's too. at another time, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN (Buttl: DR. COLLINS: Anway ·r will deal with that ~he hon. Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member is dealing with the wrong head or something. Legislature has~ not come up yet·. I do not know how seats carne into thls. MR. NEARY: We are on the public debt. Public debt we are. on. DR.

COLLINS: I wanted to answer a few questions that the han. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stirling). had in rnind 1 but just before getting on to that I think the hon. member for LaPoile (.Mr. Nearyl forgets one thing when h.e talks about the past capital works and that is that a lot of these were rental purchase agreements and we are still paying for things,like,say,the Children's aospital,out of our capital fund this year. We are paying for the Memorial University. We are paying for the Gander liospital. These are all capital expenditures,to some extent,in this year. Now, Mr.

Chairman, the Leader of the Opposition asked a number of questions in regard to pensions. I do not recall precisely what the questions were, but I do have some information I got related to them. I hope I will cover the questions he did ask a number of days ago. Our pension fund at the present time covers various groups; the Public Service employees, and that includes most of the government agenies, such as liydro and health . care institutions and non-professional school board 4593

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1651 NM - 3 DR. COLLINS: employees and so on. The fund also covers teachers, as most people know. It covers the House of Assembly, members of the House of Assembly. It covers the Constabulary, and the Constabulary includes not only the Police, it also includes the firemen and the warders. The fund at the present time, as of the end of March, had a rna·rket value of just over $42 million, and about half that is invested in bonds and mortgages and the rest in stocks and in short-term instruments. The fund is managed on an interim basis by the Royal Trust, which we sort of inherited re~lly.

I believe when the Teachers' Pension Fund carne . to be managed in the overall fund, I think we inherited the Royal Trust. They had been doing this work for the teachers, the pension fund, for quite a number of years, so they carried on witli the otfier aspects of it because it is just an interim arrangement.

There was a study done a couple of years ago and that study was not very conclusive at that point in time, at the end of it, despite a number of things, but in regard to the management of the fund it said it could be done intra­ departmen.tally by the Department of Finance using some consultants, or one could set up a commission, a pension cornrni.s s·ion, 4594

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1652 AH-1 DR. COLLINS: and that matter has still to be decided ultimately and finall~But on an interim basis the Royal Trust manages the investments of the money in the fund. We get a return on those investments of approximately fourteen per cent,in round figures,and that return,of course, goes back into the pension fund 1 it does not go into the consolidated revenue fund. I th~nk one of the questions asked was whether contr~~~tions cover the present outlays from the pension fund,and they do.

The contributions by employees and matched by government at the present time gives the cash flow more than sufficient to cover outlays at the present time to pensioners and it will for some time in the future. But the time will come when there will be more outlays than there is income and then there will have to be some change in present contributions to the fund. At the present time government is guaranteeing any outlays. There are certain aspects to the fund which are not covered actually. In general they are,but if you just take out certain parts of them, one or two parts are not covered at the present time.

The government guarantees that they will be covered. There is an expectation that there will be a full-scale actuarial study done on the pension fund within the next couple of years. I think as far as I recall,that covers most of the questions that were asked, Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN (Butt) : MR. STIRLING: MR. CHAIRMAN: Opposition. MR. STIRLING: Shall 105-02-02 carry? Mr.Chairman. The hon. Leader of the Well, Mr. Chairman, I must say, specifically enough the government made a great 4595

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1652 AH-2 MR. STIRLING: to-do this year about funding the pension plan. I now understand from the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) that they do not have an up-to- date actuarial study done. Can he provide a copy of the last actuarial study and give us an indication of what the true liability of this Province is? I understand that earlier this year there was some indication, I think in either the Budget Speech of the Throne Speech,of starting to fund that unfunded liability. That is what I was looking for, the specifics on that. What is our unfunded liability and what is the plan?

How much per year in order to look after that unfunded liability?' I know that the people paying into the plan 1 because of their young ages have been paying in more than the government actually needs.But the whole purpose of this funding->nd the government indicated that they have moved away from the present system into a funding system and the detail is not adequate. It is mentioned here under one of the subheadings, Pensions and Gratuities.

This is the place where the minister should provide the information in detail as to what the unfunded liability is, and how much is going in this year, and what period of time it will take for that to be concluded properly? Otherwise,we are not getting the detailed information that should be answered in committee. MR. CHAIRMAN (Butt) : The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, I could wait until that subhead comes up but perhaps I may as well just answer the question now and I think this has to be viewed in the proper light.

Up until last year's budget the pensions due· to pensioners in the public service of this Province were totally unfunded, there was no fund for them whatever, that is in the general public service. There was a fund for the teachers as have mentioned, but for the general public service I 4596

May 19,1981 Tape No. 1652 Ah-3 DR. COLLINS: there was no fund whatever and the pensions, the payments to the pensioners came out of our revenues, our current revenues. Many provinces are still in that situation and some provinces say they are going to stay in that situation. For instance,in Ontar io they do not intend to fund their pensions'; they say thc>t is the \vay, in their view, they wish to manage their commitments, their obligations , is to just continue,as pensions become due at any time in the future they will be paid out of 4597

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1653 EL - 1 DR. COLLINS: current revenues. Now, we elected to try to get a bit more security in that regard and as a first step, and it is only a first step, it is a first small step, I suppose, but nevertheless it is a first step, the first step we made was to match the contributions by em­ ployees on an annual basis and this year the contributions by the employees will be roughly $16 million. That is their current contributions that they are required to pay out of their salaries. The usual rate is 6 per cent of salary goes for the provision of pensions.

And government has undertaken to match that amount and,therefore,we will be putting in this year approximately $16 million. Now, as I stated a few minutes ago, those contributions by employees and by government is more than enough but not very much more than enough, but it is more than enough to cover the outflow in this year, in '80-'HJ~in terms of pensions.

So there is a small build-up.But I am not implying that that small build-up is sufficient to fund our past obligations, our past obligations which reach right back to 1949, really, our past obligations which were totally un­ funded over all those numbers of years, many hundreds of millions of dollars before the people now on pensions die and pensions are no longer due. So, that remains unfunded but it does not mean,of course, that they will not get their pensions, they will get it out of current revenue as the years go by.

I doubt whether this Province, unless a tremendous bonanza occurs, I doubt if this Province will ever have a totally funded pension scheme. We might have a partly funded scheme 1 but I think it would be a long day in the future and we would have to have tremendous revenues, for us to have a totally funded pension scheme which would mean that each year there would be no money going out of the current revenue to take care of pensions, other than matching the current contributions of that year. 4598 ..

May 19, 1981 Tape NO. 1653 EL - 2 DR. COLLINS: I think that is a dream that we will likely never reach,but we may partially fund it.And that actuarial 'study was done about a couple of years ago. I was not involved at the time,but I understand it was done a couple of years ago and we are going to do another one now in a couple of years hence. And at that time, I think we will be getting into what extent we will partially fund the pension scheme. MR. STIRLING: MR. CHAIRMAN(Butt): Opposition. MR. STIRLING: Mr.Chairman. The hon. the Leader of the MJ;" ..

Chairman, that information- it appears that we have decided to start paying into a fund but this House of Assembly should know what the estimated unfunded liability is. I do not think it is fair when the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) says that public service pensions plans have been unfunded. The public servants have been funding their share of it. They have been paying their _share and have always paid their share. The question is at what time does the government pay in its share. Now it seems as if we are into an in-between situation.

It was not that long ago that an award was given to an actuarial firm outside the Province to do a study on pen­ sions, and it was only in the last year.And what we need to know­ otherwise it is•just a hit-and-miss kind of proposition- what we need to know is what is the unfunded liability?And now that the government has decided to pool all those pension funds, what impact will the employees be able to have on those various pen­ S~9n funds?Because people are not all the same ages and all the same groups and all have the same pattern, it would seem to be important for the people who have given up their pension fund, the teachers for example, to know what is happening.

And there must be an actuarial study done/ otherwise, you would not know what is needed in the way of funding to put in the government's portion. 4599 , .

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1653 EL - 3 MR. STIRLING: Now, it is true that in a Prov- ince as strong as Ontario, maybe the employees would be quite happy to see it come out of the general revenue. 4600 ·.

May 19, 1981 Tape 1654 EC - 1 MR. STIRLING: The fact that the employees have managed to get the government, and the government themselves,to agree to start funding,may be more of an indication of the lack of stability of the government or concern that at some point the government will not be able to pay pensions, as happened in New York City a few years ago. So I think it is very important for the Province to hnow - New York City went bankrupt basically on the basis of unfunded pension liability. It is not an insignificant figure.

And the government should tell us the full story as to just how big that unfunded liability is and what kind of a plan the government has to get it under control. It is not simply enough to say, 'Well, we are not going to let it get any worse.' I think that the government does know what the information - it is available in the minister's department. As he said, it may have been done before he took over the department, but I am sure that if he searches, he will be able to find the information and I do ,think that we should have that information before voting on this subhead. MR.

CHAIRMAN (Butt): The hon. the Minister of Finance. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, before the hon. gentleman answers my colleague, the Leader of the Opposition, Sir. I have been hammering away here now for the last hour hoping to get some kind of a statement of policy from this government as to what is going to take place in this Province in the next few months, in the next year or so in connection with resource development and jobs. MR. CARTER: li'7e have got a policy, to get rid of you. MR. NEARY: Well, I realize that.

That has been the policy of this - 4601 ' -::

Mav ·19, 1981 Taoe No. 1654 EC - 2 M~. CA9.TER: (Inaudible) -oolicy. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman, I have been trying to get some kind of a statement of policy. I have been trying to find out the philosophy of this administration. And what I said in the beginning was that they are obviously a governmentcof all chaw, al~ talk, and do nothing.

Because that is all we have heard for ten years in this Province, talk, chaw, bellyaching, battling with this one, fighting with that one, quarrelling with Ottawa, badgering Nova Scotia, kicking the oil companies around, kicking the people who want to come in and develop this Province, frightening them away. And, Mr. Chairman, it is very significant to me that a man like Dr.

Stu Peters up in London, Ontario, a man who is a part of the establishment, is forced to come out and make a statement that was quoted in the newspaper in London, Ontario, that this government is frightening industry away from Newfoundland because of its attitude. Because of the political climate in this Province nobody will come in here. Mr. Chairman, do hon. members realize how damaging that is for Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders?

Do hon. gentlemen realize that is the reason we have record unemployment in this Province, that carpenters cannot find jobs, plumbers and pipefitters and electricians and welders and labourers and truck drivers and heavy equipment operators, \vhy they cannot find jobs?­ why steelworkers up in the head of the bay cannot find work, and are worried that they may not even get enough work this year to get enough stamps to get their unemployment? That is the reason for it, Mr. Chairman. 4602

May 19, 1981 Tape 1654 EC - 3 MR. NEARY: It has nothing to do with worldwide inflation, it has to do with this government. I passed a remark there a few moments ago that this government had done nothing, In tripling the provincial debt in this Province, they did not do anything for it. I was wrong . When I sat down, I thought of something that they had done . According to the Newfoundland and Labrador Lounge Association, they have saturated the Province with booze .

Only a week or ten days ago , when the Ne\o~foundland Lounge Association met here in St.John's, they told th~ whole o~ Newfo~ndland that in the last ten years Newfoundland had been saturated with booze. That is one thing they did. Now, what was the other thing they did? Well, I tell you what is pn their list of priorities, building jails . That is the reputation they got, that is the record they will have, saturating Newfoundland with booze and building jails. They do not build any schools or any hospitals or any vocational schools or any arts and culture centres, they build jails. The Minister of Justice (.Mr.

Ottenheimer) in the last few months, announced 4603

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1655 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: three or four jails in Newfoundland. Well,you are going to need more than three or four, you will probably need a jail in every corner with the attitude of this government and with what they have done to this Province. They have crucified Newfoundland. And they cannot even build jails right.

Because according to CBC Here and Now last night, all somebody has to do down in the new wing of Her Majesty's Penitentiary when a fire starts,or even if a fire does not start, all he needs is to be able to pick a lock and if he can pick the lock he can set off the alarm system that opens every door and ev~ry window in He~ Majesty's Penitentiary. So they cannot even build jails right. And the Minister of Justice (Mr.

Ottenheimer) tried to get out of it by saying. 'well,the new wing of the penitentiary is not fully occupied yet but when it is occupied we will have all the bugs ironed out, we will have these things overcome.' By that time it will have cost the taxpayers of this Province another few hundred thousand dollars,to remedy a mistake in the design. If the smoke detectors go off, all some prisoner has to do is be able to have enough ingenuity to make a key to fit into that lock and bang.' every window and every door in Her Majesty's Penitentiary opens up and they can all pour out into the streets. So, Mr.

Chairman, the reputation and the record of this administration is not one of building, building roads, building water and sewerage, building hospitals and building schools and building vocational schools, it is a record of saturating the Province with booze, And these are not my words, these are the words of the Newfoundland Lounge Association, a group of very prominent businessmen in this Province who accuse the government of saturating her vlith booze and building jails. The only announcements that they can find to make are 4604

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1656 ow - l MR. S. NEARY: to build new jails or extensions to old jails. We are going to need a lot of them in this Province, Mr. Chairman, if the trend continues, and it looks like the trend is going to continue. This government refuses to negotiate with the Government of Canada on the offshore, they refuse to negotiate with Quebec on getting a transmission line across - getting our power transmitted across the Province of Quebec, they refuse to deal with the Government of Canada on the development of the Lower Churchill.

In 1974 they set off these two explosions to start the development, and then after- ·the election they cancelled it, cancelled it! And as result, Mr. Chairman, we find ourselves in Newfound- land today in a dilernrna,as far as as our energy policy is concerned. The government has no energy policy. They are now down trying to develop Cat Arm 1 a stopgap measure. They have no intentions of going ahead with the Lower Churchill, they have no customers for the power! I had to laugh - I heard a statement made in this House a short while ago 1 I am not sure who made it, the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr.

Barry) or the Premier said, 'Well, we can develop the ~1uskrat Falls and that will give us enough power for the Island of Newfoundland in 1985'. Did anybody take the trouble to sit down to see how much that power is going to cost? To develop the Muskrat Falls is going to cost about $?..5 billion. Where is the money going to come from? AN HON. MEMBER: Guaranteed by Ottawa. MR. S. NEARY: No, it is not guaranteed by Ottawa. Ottawa is not that stupid yet that they would - MR. L. STIRLING: Oh, no, thev have. Muskrat Falls has a guarantee. MR. NEARY: They have guaranteed what? MR.

STIRLING: - if the Lower Churchill is developed. They have guaranteed all the development. That is why they should have gone ahead with it. guarantee it - Ottawa is going to put up the ~oney and 4605

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1656 DW - 2 MR. S . NEARY: Well, if Ottawa will guarantee the money then I would say that they all should be decorated up there in the Government of Canada. There should be a monument ere<;:ted in this Province to the Liberal Government in Otta1o~a if they are prepared to put up the money, $2.4 billion or $2.5 bil~ion . Why did the government not go ahead then , i£ Ottawa is prepa red to put up the money? Why are they monkeying around and 4606 ..

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1657 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: ·- - ---- -- pooh-piddling around with Cat Arm when we can develop Muskrat Falls and the Government of Canada will put up the money, or develop the Lower Churchill, better again? Why, Mr. Chairmanf I mean, these are the questions that I would like to have answered~ The government have driven the Province to the brink of bankruptcy. They will not give us a statement of policy, they will not tell us what their philosophy is for this Province.

All they want to do is quarrel and fight and argue and bawl and scratch and fight with Ottawa or with some other Province or with~ some other comp,any or some other individual. Mr. Chairman, I am beginning to realize that the statement I made the other day is truer than I thought it was. The Premier of this Province does not want the problems solved. Why what would he argue and fight about? He is going to go down in history as the greatest loser in Newfoundland's 500 year history.

He is going to lose the codfish war, he is going to lose the - well, the constitution, he does not even bother to talk about that these days, does not talk about it at all. He is hoping people will forget about that. He is going to lose the offshore battl~ the way he is going at it, he is going to lose the fight with Quebec to transmit power across Quebec Province 1 he is going to lose all four major issues,and he has hooked his wagon to all these shooting stars. He is going to go down in history as the big loser in this Province. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. NEARY: No, the Premier I am talking about.

But in the meantime Newfoundlanders are suffering, they cannot cope with the high cost of living, the high cost of gas, the high cost of electricity. There was a time in this Province, as well as in other provinces,when a mar.. making $18,000 or $20,000 a year had a few dollars to spare but not anymore, Mr. Chairman,he does not have a cent to 4607

May 19, 1981 Tape 1658 PK - 1 MR. NEARY: spare, cannot cope, cannot maintain his home, cannot feed his children properly and clothe them, cannot maintain the standard of living he is used to. MR. CHAIRMAN (MR. BAIRD) : to wind up his speech? MR. NEARY: Is the hon. member about And, _Mr. Chairman, the lion's share on the blame should be attributed to this adminisration and not to inflation. Inflation has taken it-s toll but you cannot attribute all of the. problems we have in this Province to in£lation 1 it is incompete~ce and mismanagement, Mr.

Chairman, and I hope I will get a chance to have another few words a little later on on this matter. MR. CHAIRMAN : MR. STIRLING: Shall 1505-02 carry? Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: Before I recognize the hon. Leader of the• Opposition I am sure all members would like to take the opportunity to welcome Councillor Doyle Mills from the city of Corner Brook. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. CHAIRMAN: historic district of Humber West. MP. • ~lEAR" : member. MR. CHAIRMAN: MR. STIRLING: Hear, hear! I might add he resides in the He is in watching his The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I would say that the Councillor could possibly be contesting the next provincial election. He has shown a great interest in Corner Brook 1 he has shown a great deal of concern and I am sure that he can see that the only way he can get any of the development done , is going to be to get involved in provincial politics himself and it might give the hon. member a bit of a scare. Now, Mr. Chairman, I would - 4608

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1659 EL - 1 MR. STIRLING: hope now that the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) has had time to look up the figures or to get the information and if he is ready to give me the in­ formation on the unfunded liability, I will yield to him so that he can give us that information. MR. CHAIRMAN(Baird): The hon. the.Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, I did not have the figure available here. I have asked in the department. if some one can get it together. It is not readily available there at this point in time but they are trying to get a good indication of it. I miight~have it shortly.

I expect to. MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: MR. NEARY: The bon. the member for LaPoile. Mr.Chairman, the bon., gentleman still refuses, or any of the ministers -the Premier or the Min­ ister of Finance still refuse§ to deal with these matters I have raised, these matters for which they are directly responsible, namely,record unemployment in this Province, the high cost of living, the highest taxes in Canada, the gasoline tax the highest in the nation, increasing electricity rates, all the responsibility of this government. They cannot blame Ottawa. They cannot pawn it off on Ottawa.

They have to deal with these matters themselves. And I am glad to see my old friend, Mr. Mills,in the allery today to see the things that are discussed and debated in this House and to keep an eye on his member because I know, Mr. Chairman, of the good work that Mr. Mills is doing in the City of Corner Brook. A very outspoken man like myself, a man who likes to get at the truth and who champions the cause of ordinary people. And certainly, as my hon. friend said, the Leader of the Opposition, we could use members in this House of the calibre of Mr. Doyle Mills. Any why do I say that? Why do I say it, Mr.

Chairman? I say it because most members of this House are out of touch with the ordinary people. They are out of touch with reality. They think that licensing beer taverns 4609

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1659 EL - 2 MR. NEARY: and opening up bars and saloons and cabarets and building jails - theythink that is the priority. They think that is the priority in this Province. They think that is the number one priority, opening up taverns, dives, cabarets, yes. That is - AN RON. MEMBER: We nn not onen t~eM. MR. NEARY: Oh, I see, you do not open them, you just give the licences for them. AN HON. MEMBER: Sure, it is a free society. MR. NEARY: Oh, it is a free society. Sat- u:tat~ it with b9oze and b.uild j.ails. That is the only thinq that this crowd have produced in ten years. And, you know, Mr.

Chairman, I do not know if anybody is aware of the serious impact that the negligence; the neglect of this administration has had on the people of this Province. People are struggling, they are desperate, they cannot cope. I never saw so much discontent in Newfoundland as there is at the present time. From one end of her to the other, people are depressed and discontented. They do not know how they are going to manage, how they are going to be able to look after theix families. The increase in crime is one of the offshoots of that. The Minister of Justice (.Mr.

Ottenheimer) buries his head in the sand and says, 'Oh, no, vandalism and crime in this Province are under control'. It is out of control and that is one of the reasons they had to build more jails. If they would only come to grips with the economic problems of this Province, the social problems in this Province, they would not have to waste their money on jails. Mr. Chairman, people are not able to maintain the standard of living they are used to in this Province anymore. And I know the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) will get up in a few minutes and tell us, 'Well, the same thing applies to North America and 4610 , ..

May 19, 1981 Tape No. 1659 GS - 3 MR. NEARY: the whole world". To a certain degree, that is correct, but 75 per cent of the problem in this Province can be attributed to the negligence, the ineptness of the provincial government, mismanagement by the provincial government. 4 611 .: . ~ · {a"

May 19, 1981 Tape 1660 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: The other 25 per cent I will concede is brought about by inflation. People are driven to desperation. And the funny part about it, Mr. Chairman, it is a job to get the real debates in this House recorded. The news people are always looking for something spectacular, something outstanding.

I think they hav~ standing instructions I at the CBC to Find out where the latest demonstration · is taking place so we can send somebody out to cover it, find out where the trouble spots are so we can cover them. ' But when it comes to covering and reporting the biggest problems in this Prov~nce, the debates that take place in this House, they grudgingly give twenty-five or thirty seconds in the evening on their major newscast.

I have stood here today for the last hour and a half and I have lambasted the government and I have accused them of negligence and incompetence and mismanagement, and I laid out the public debt, $5,600 for every man, woman and child in this Province, an albatross around their necks. A child born today in this Province would be born with a debt of $5,600, the highest in Canada, the second higest public debt in the nation. And, you know, l1r. Chairman, what will be said about it? 'Oh., that is all boring.' That is all monotonous to th.ese fellows -merely repeat it, repetition, that is all it is.

What do you have to do to get the message across to the people of this Province? MR. TULK: (Inaudible)heat them over the skulls. MR. NEARY: The people know. The people say, 'What are you doing up in the House?' I have gone back and forth across this Province probably more often since the first of January than any other member of this House,except the ones who go home on the government aircraft on weekends probably 1 and I guarantee you that anybody but anybody in this House who is silly enough and foolish enough to bury his head in the sand and not think that there is discontent 4 61 2

May 19, 1981 Tape 1660 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: and trouble brewing in this Province as a result of record unemployment, the highest cost of living in Canada, the highest taxes in Canada, the highest gasoline tax in Canada and a government of inaction, a government that does nothing except bellyache - you know, Mr. Chairman, they think that all their attacks on Ottawa about gas and oil and about ownership have sex appeal. They think that has glamour for the Newfoundland electorate. :::ut I can tell . this House now that the Newfoundland electorate,like Dr.

Stu Peters, who made that statement up in London, Ontario last week, the .: Newfoundland electorate are fed up with that foolish nonsense. And if they are fed up with me, it is a funny thing that everywhere I go - I was down at the supermarket today - AN HON. MEMBER: And you were mobbed. MR.

NEARY: Well, not mobbed, but practically everybody I met were taking stuff off the shelves saying, 'Look, I wish we had more men up in the House of Assembly like you to talk about the cost of living, to talk about record unemployment, to tell me where my son or daughter is going to get a job.' They will be pouring out of the colleges and the university and the vocational schools in another three or four weeks, vthere are they going to find jobs? Mr.

Chairman, this is a very grave and serious matter indeed and one that this House should address itself to and not get sidetracked off on silly, foolish things that we debate in this House, wasting our time and wasting the time of the people of this Province and wasting taxpayer money, talking about silly nonsense. We were told before the House opened that this was going to be a session of the House that would go down in history. We were told that it would be the most 4 61 3

l1a~r 19, 1981 Tape 1660 EC - 3 MR. NEARY: outstanding session of the provincial Legislature,of the Hou