VOL~ - PRELIHI11ARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSE.~LY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. Tti'ESDAY, NOVE!-1BER 20, 1979 NO. 33

November 20, 1979 PAC Tape No. 1196 NM - 1 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER ISimmsl: Order, please! First of all I would l~e to recogn~ze and welcome to his first sitting 1 the new member for St. Mary's- The Capes (Mr. D. Hancock) who wa~ sworn in earlier today. SOME EON. MEMBERS: MR. NEARY! MR. SPEAKER: Hear, hear! -That is only t.he beginning, Mr. Speaker. Crcler, please! With respect co ~e amendment made yesterday by the han. member for the Strait of aelle Isle (Mr.

Roberts) 1 I ruled yesterday that the amendment is in order and that the question of whe~~er or not it was debatable would be deferred to today's sitting. !. ~now prepared to rule that the amendment is debatable. SOME ~ON. ~3E.~: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Reference is made ~o HansarQ ,June 27, 1918 and Hansard,May 2, 1975 in which precedents h~ve been set. I would like eo carry en and point out to all hen. members that after an amendment has been moved and seconded 1 the question on the amen~~en~ is proposed and any member who speaks after that question has been proposed speaks to it and not to the main question.

Standing Orders 47 to 53 apply, and in particular Standing Order 49 (1) provides a thirty minute time limit for each me~ber. Standing Order 36, for the benefi~ and information of hen. members,secs out how the motion is to be put.

The question is put by the Speaker, "Shall the words proposed to be left out st:and apart of the question?" If this is resolved in the af;irmative then the amendment is disposed of. !fit is resolved in the negative,then the further question is put by the Speaker, "Shall the words proposed to be .:.:1sert:ed by the amendment be• there inserted?" There is no furth~r debate at that paint in time and the decision as to what ha?pens to ~he ~~n~~ent is then ~ade. One final .9oi::t~ should ~ake is that when

November 20, 1979 PAC Tape No. 1196 :Lli.. SPEAKER (Simms): the amendment has been disposed of and the main question has been proposed, we revert back to the main question, any member may speak who has not alreadz spoken. on the main question, whether or not he spoke on the amendment. NM - 2 The mover and seconder of the amendment, if they have spoken to the main- quj:!stion, cannot speak to .l,t again. In other words, a member who has spoken only on an amendment is entitled to speak on the main motion after the amen~nt is disposed of. ORAL QUESTIONS: MR. SPEAKER: The han. member for St. Mary's-The Capes, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 3COO

Nove~ber 20,1979 Tape No. 1197 AH-l Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question I would like to address to the Pre~~er of the Province. I guess it is just as well to start at the top and work your way down* In t.;e recent by-election,the hen. Premier visited cur district,first in a four-wheel drive,and I guess t.;e road conditions were so bad he came be;~ t.;e second time in a helicopter about which there is still a let. of talkdn cur district. Our district, Sir, consists of about 200 miles of roads.

A little better than one third is unpaved and 1 in the last few days of the campaign,the Premier came to my district and promised better road conditions. My questions to him, Sir, is when can we expect bett~r road conditions? Even payment, is that too much to ask for? SOH£ RON. MEMBEPS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER:(Simms) PREMIER PECKFORO: The b~n. t.;e Premier. Mr. speaker, as a matter of fact ! did visit the great district of St. Mary's-The Capes to which t.~e bon. membe~ refers. I jid noe leave the district of St. Mary's-The Capes and come back in a helicopter.

I travelled every ine-1. of roaC in the district of St. MarJ's-The Capes in a four-wheel drive and car. I did not leave after t.1.at point and come back in a helicopter. As a matter of fact,I had the helicopter come to St. Mary's-The Capes after I had driven ever every inch of road in St. Mary's-The Capes. There has been a lot of improvements made on road conditions in the dist.::ict of St. Mary's-The Capes over the last f.ive or six years. SO!AE P.OU, MEMBERS: Hear, hear! As a matter of fact, Hr. Speaker, I think that. if one wrote Ccwn the districts in the ?~ovince,St.

Mary's­ The Capes have gotten ~ore money for road reconstruction_ and paving than any ot."ter district in t.'1e Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. SCM:: EON. MEMBERS: ?P.F!f!ER P:S:c::<FORO: Hea=, !'lear! Pursuant to that, !tr. Speaker, to be specific $17 million has Qeen spent on road reconstruction and paving in St. ~ary's-The Capes. Hea:r, hear! 300:1

Nove~ber 20,1~79 Tape No. 1197 AH-2 PREMIER PECITOP!l: l can go on, Mr. Speaker, to directly answer the hop. member's question and indicate that we will continue to give high priority to the roads in St. Mary's - The Capes, as we will to all districts in the Province because it is this government's intention to in~ure that road reconstruction and pavement continues, in ~,e Strait of Bell ''Isle, in St. Mary's-The Cape~, on the Burin Peninsula, i!). Burgee and Bonavista"south, all over this Pro~vincoe,more so than ever before in the past. SOME HCN, MFMEFPS: SCME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: {Simms) Hear, hear!

Oh, oh! Order, please: A sqpplementary. The hen. member for St. Mary's -The capes. MR. HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There has been a lot of money spent on r6a0s ir. my district and in every o~,er district, I am sure,but I am sure a large majority of ~,at money was federal ~~ney and came ~~rough the past adminis~ration in Ottawa and not who is up ~;ere now. SCM£ HON. !A..E.!.f9ERS : Hear, hear! MR. HANCOCK: Liberal money,Sir. Lib~ral r.1oney. ~~~ Order, please! If the hon. member has a ouestioni SOME HON. ME..'ffiERS: Oh, oh! MR.

P-.l\!tCCCK: There :1as been verf little Cone in the last eight years, Sir. very little in ehat area. !s the .Minister of Transportation and Communications {Mr.Brett) aware of the road conditions in our area and if so what does he plan ::o do atout it in the future? Shall we look forward to Cetter conditions? Answer t.,e question. :.fp_, SPEM:!:R: ~e hon. t.;e Premier. l?REMIER PEC?J'ORO: ~r. Speaker, let me reiterate what ! said earlier. I khow the hon. merrber is a ~ew ~ember, He might not be aware - ! would direct him to t.,e Budget of the Gover~~ent of 3002

Nove~her 20,1979 Tare No. 1197 AH-3 P~~I£P PECKFOPD: Newfoundland for the last five or six or seven years, to ~~~ Public Accounts of ~~e Province,and he ~ill see there tangible proof, concrete, substantial proof that every nickle of money that went into the road reconstruction-and paving in st. Mary's-The capes came from ~~is government in St. John's. SO!-!'E HOU. !'I'.EMBEP.S : Hear, hear: 3003

November 20, 1979 Tape :1o. 1198 SD - 1 Pru:::-t!ER P~CKFORP: Ae .:1re ·;ery proud, ar. Speaker, that:. we have been able to provide 100 per cent of the money in St. :!ary's - The Capes. We are very proud of the fact and we can aSJ:!ure the_ hon. member t!".ac we will continue to i."nprove road conditions in.st. Hary's­ The Cape3 ~ we will all aver ~~e Province over the next ~ee·or four years. The massive amount of poney that: is to be_ spen_:t, :-!.;. Speaker, in ~e next t:.hree or four years on road reconstruccion and paving in ~~is ~rovince will boggle the mind of the han. member.

SOZ!E HON , ~!-1BERS : Hear, hear. :.tR. SPE..\KER: (Mr. Simms) T~e han. member for LaPoile 1 followed by ~~e hon. m~~er for Grand Bar~. >LtJ.. S. JEP..RY: :1r.

Speaker 1 I would like to ::iirec<: a question :o ~1.e hon. the Premier, Sir, in connection with the gaver~ent's policy adopted some tL~e ago of subsidizing fish plants ~o enable t:;e:se plants to enter into -.ln agree:nent 'Hi'.:h the :lcwfounciland Fish."1an Food and Allied Y.ior.~ers ur.ion. 1 understand, Sir, just:. -:.o give t:he House some background, that t.ile las;: agree~ent that was signed was signed as a res~lt of the goverr.mcnt:. giving citber ou-:::ri-;ht grants or 3ubsidics t~ the fish plants 30 that they =ould ~eet ~.c ir:dicace what

part cf :it::wfcundland and :abr<lC:or that ;oli-::y a:;::plies T::.e hon. t.:1c Pre:.:ier. :1r. Speaker, tho :.on. me.:.be.r ::or :.::.:1c che::c is sor:-.e disc::-i:r,ination in :tis ::Liscr:::.c-:. i::. r:!-:e SCut.:-.wes-:: 3G04

Tape !1o. 1198 so - 2 A suppler:;ent::.ary, the hon. raet::ber for LaPoile. :.1R. S.

HEARY: indicate tb.e cost '!:o the taxpayers of t.'1.ese grants that wer.e given '!:o fish planes and ! understand the grants or subsidies, •Hhatever, you want:. to call ~~en, app~ied only to !ish plants ~p as"far as~aurgeo and all ttw plants an t.~e Sou~~wesc corner o! ~~e Province were left out for some reason or other even ~'1.ough t::.hey all have.to negotiate :mien concacu;. ~·lould t.'le han. gentleman indicate what t.~e cost, i! he has any idea, what the cost to t.~e Public Treasury was of subsidizi."lg or giving grants to these fish plants so ;:t'.ey could sign a contract wi't-'1 :..1.~ :mien?

The hon. the Pre.<;~.ier. PREHIER PECKFORZ:l: :1r. Speaker, 'l' do net know off t.i.e t:.ep o£ my head what the cost was but. I will get t:!'le information this af~ernoon and tomorrow ~orning and info~ the hon. member and Chis !>.on. neuse of it tomorrow ar.d give t..~e reasons wny t:he agreement specifically excluded, if L~ fact it did, ~~e area to which 't..~e hen. ~enber refers, :!R. S. :i:E:.ARY: ,\ .final 3Upplement.ar'J 1 >tr. Sp~aker. ;.tp,. SPEAKER: A .final suppleeentary, the hon. ~ember for LaFoile. >!R. 5 • :ffiJ', ... 'tY : Y..r • .Spe.:o.ker, the :ton. gentleman has received a letter, the hen.

Pre.>nier, from Billard's Fisnery Limited of :targaree .,.ho are ir. tJ1e same boat: as the other fish' fllar.t.S th.:u: I am talking 3.bou':: who are now faced with a pa:;· <.:Jut vf $55,000, T;t,; :~on. gentlet.Ian has received cor.,munication::; f:::orr. the owner of that plant, :·1r. 3illard. ·,.;ill t."l.e :mn. gentlen.:m indicate if ".ow, -1.:. 'Ji~"-' of e..:,e fac~ ::..'la.: this plane may have co close Co.,·n am:. -.:;t:her plants i.:J. t.."'l.ac area, zma.:l plar.'ts,may nave to clos.c down i:.eca:Jse ~1ey ·.;ere r:ot t:::~a'CeC. 'Che sa.:::e, they -..:ere J.iscri:ni:-,ated agair..st il.S coc;pareci to 3C05

Nove!'l'ber 2:0, 1979 ~:P.. SPEi\Y..ER (SI.!-1.."'.51 PREMIER PECKFOP.D: Tape No. 1199 DW - l The hen. the Pre~iar. t1r. Speaker, I t:hink it is unfair t:o indicate at this point in time because the hen. member has failed to substantiate saying that we have been discri~~natorJ iri our actions as it relates to supporting large fish plants as. opposed to small £ish plants.

But I can assure the hen. men-hers , and I can aSsure this House and the fish operator in Margaree, as I can all fish operators around ~~e Province 1 ~~at we will be fair and reasonable in how we approach the whole question of subsidization i.f, in !act, that is indeed a part of the collective agreerr.ent. MR. S. NEARY: ?PL'1IER PECKFOP.D: HR. L. THOf.l.S: And I will get the answer tomorrow? And you 'Hill get the ans'\<lier :.omorrow on t..'lat. The hon. metther for Grand Bank. Mr.

Speaker, it is with, a great deal of feu and trepidation, awe and respect that ! stand ::o ask t:.he question here in the seat previously held by the r.err.l:er-elect for Burin - St. Georse 1 s (M:r. F .• simmons. However, I would like tc ask the President of the Council a question. Chief Browne of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has been reported as saying that he t.:U.nks what is comzr.only known the Lock­ up here in St. John's is satisfactory. He is also reported t.o have said scree tilt'.e ago t.~at his advice as to the conditions - if you did not like the conCltions of the Lockup on Water Street in St.

John's,then ~~e best remedy ·.Jas to stay out of jail. ~ow, !1r. Speaker, I am C1Uite faniliar with the Lockup here in St. John 1 s - £0!-'.E HON. Y!E!-l.BEPS: ch, oh: NR. L. T::OHS: - in my capacity a:; a lawyer onl:r. Unless things have changed radically within t.~c la~t few ~ont.~s,that place is really unfit for t.o hold a person :.en:porarily,if at. all, :,!r. Spaiiker, I ·,o~culci like to ask t.."le President. of !:.'1.e Council (Mr.

Marshall) if t.!lere are ar.:_-· plans by t~1e so,,.ernr.ent to relccat:e t.'le Lock.ur and give it new prer.ises'~ because : do not. think t.'te premises can ):;e renovated or anyt.:tins co do an·j ;;ooC .,.here it is risht nov;. It is ri;ht: cut of the :•iCCle fl,;;es! 3006

;;overrher 20, 1979 HR. SPE.i\KER; (.SD-!MS) :·!F,. W. g,.\P.SHALL: Tape :-to. 1199 DW - 2 Tbe hen. President of ~~e council. :1r. Speaker, jails are unpleasant places anyway,but I concur with. what the hen. rr.etr.ber for Grand Bank (!-!r. Thon-

s) has indicated that as far as the jail here in St. Jor~'s is concerned that it is old, it is in need of rer.ovation 1 shall we say, and I can only say that that, with a lot of other buildings that we have in this Province, are .buildings that t.'!e government would liKe to see renovated or altered.

And ~e have a long-term hopes of being able to realize this desire and that as far as his speclfic question with respect to the cells at 'the Loc.!.:-up are concerned it is a ttt.a.tter th.at is of some concern to the government in ccnjunction 1 as many other places are of conce~, and it is <1 ?<l~ of the ongoing programme of the government to refurbish and hopefully as soon as the financial constraints allow it and permit it •He shall be doing ever{~~ing that we possibly can, not only with• the cells but with respect tc o~~e~ buildings that have become obsolete, unfortunately, ever the years. 3C07

Nove~~er 20, 1979 HR. SPEAKER {Simms) : ,M.tt. THOMS : Tape No. 1200 The hen. member for Grand Bank. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We~l 1 in reality, of course, it is the whole courthouse complex down there is a decerent to ~~e proper administration of justice in ~~e Province and I wonder if che President of the Council could tell me whether or nat there are any plans in the near or distant future to have a new caur~~ouse in St. Jo~~'s? NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER: MR. MARSHALL: The hon. President of the Council. Of course, Mr. Speaker, we all have plans !or better facilities in the future.

I can say that the government has moved,particularly in the Department of Justice 1 in recent years. As we all know, a new bu~1ding £or the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary has been constructed here in St. John's. There are extentions to the Penitentiary. ~he courthouse has certain inadequacies, as many as other buildingz 1 and 1 can anl:r reiterate my last answer to the hen. member, that we hope to be able - I would not say replace it 1 because that is one of the finer buildings in the Province architecturally and it certainly has an historic signi.:icance 1 but, as ! say we are considering it.

We have already made I think giant inroads in recent years into the refurbishing of buildings of ~~e Department of Justice and we ce~ainly will keep ~~at in mind when we establish priorities from ~ime to time. HR. NEA.RY: :1R. 5P~R: unless you wish to yield. MR. WARREN: M..P.. SPEAKER: supplementary. A supplementarJ, Mr. Speaker. The han. member :or Torngat Mountains, I yield far the supplementa=y.

The han. member tor LaPcile·an a Along the same line of questior.ing ~hat my hen. friend di=ected towards the President o£ ~~e Council, 2ir, and ! '"ill :nake it brie£', ! will ask a double- barreled ques~icn, and ! tr~nk :ny hon. friern for lec~ing me ask the supplementary because ic is very important. 3G08

November 20, 1973 Tape No. 1200 NM - 2 MR~ NEARY: Would the President of the council indicate if there is overcrowding at the Penitentiary and if now the stories we hear about are correct, that people who are sentenced are -serving­ their sentences on weekends and on holidays and in the evening and so forth and sometimes one day a week: YoU almost have to book a reservation 1:0 ge.t into Her Majesty's Penitentiary • And correct that when you go down there, some of these people, the preferred customers,if you want to put it that way, inmates, they can go down and they have a trailer down there, they can sleeo in the t=ailer, have coloured television and bring along a flask?

Is that the kind of way now that the people who are sentenced by the courts in this Province are being treated by the Justice Department? MR. sPEAKER (Sinttl'.SI: The hen. Preside_n1; or the Council. !.1?.. ~1ARSliJ'l..l.J.: 1 hardly, I do not think, I hardly need answer the latter question. I do not think it is voiced ser~ously. With respect to tne Penitentiary 1 as tne population ~ncreases so­ I hope not in direc~ proportion, but so do the ~nmates of the penitentiary over the years been increasing from t~e to time.

And,as I say,chere are extentions to tne Penitentiary, and renovations ~~at are in the course ot be~ng effected at tne present time. Now witn respect to the obser~at~on that the hen. member made concerning persons book~ng ~n t~me on tne weekend 1 that has no relationship to the accommodations. In th~s day of social justice, and t~e parole workers, and social concerns and remedial cypes or ;?Un_ishmene. for people 1 it is provided under the Cr~inal ~ode of ~anada 3G09

November 20, 1979 Tape 1201 ?K - 1 M.r. I1arsha11: that in certain offences ~hat sentences may b~ served on weekends at various times to enable the person to become rehabilitated much more appropriately. And that is the reason why people come in and out of the ?enitentiary 1not because of lack of space. A."'ld the ,few occasions where there might be some lack of space 1 th±s is being done with a degree·- HR. NEARY: (Inaudible) . .MR.

MARSHALL: of planning • aut that happens very, very rare:y 1 arA in most cases where these sentences are served intermitter.ly it is because of the Criminal Code with the view to rehabilitatL,g a person b=ought in a situation. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER CSIM.'1S) : !1R. !iEAP.Y: MR. SPEAKER; Tornga t Y.cun cains. MR. WARREN: That is sheer nonsense! The hen. memb~r fer Tcrngat ~ountains. (Inaudible) • Order, please! The han. member for !1r. Speaker, my question is for ~"le Hinist.er of TransFQrtation and Communications {Hr.

Brett} 1 As the minister is aware that the Department of Public works, federally, have closed ~ff their heat fer the sand pit in HaFPY valley-Geese Bay, aP~ this is ~he sand that is used for major roads in that area. !n light of this fact, and the Town Council do not want to have salt shipped into the area, has the minister been in contact with the Federal authorities tc see i£ the heat can be turned en to this sand ?it, ih view of the fact that Winter has already set in in that area o£ Newfoundland and Labrador? MR. SPEAKER: :.tR • SR.E'!'T : The han. member for Transport.ation and Ccrnmunicaticns. Yes, Hr.

S,;,:eaker, we !:-lave been in t.cuch '4ith t.he Federal Government, and I understand the Federal me~~er is also trying to do what he can there. Salt would be of :'lo use any-nay be.;::ause of ::he temperature. But i£ ·.;e cannot heat the sand 1 we will just D.ave to 3010

~-Iovember 20, 1979 Tape 1201 PK - 2 !{r. Brett: do the best we can with, x~u &~ow, what is there. Elut we have been in touch with the Federal Government, we are still negotiating with them. MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS}: MR. F. RO~'E: The han. member for Trinity-Bay de Verde. Mr. Speaker, in ~~e absence of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Goudie}, r would like to address the question to the Premier 1 and ~he questiOn is based On the assumption that t.'le Premier is aware of the fact that there has been a freeze placed on the Small cra£ts Harbours Division of the Department of Fisheries'and oceans, and also I understand they have been ordered not to support canada works projects for the purpose of building harbour £acilities_ and fishing facilities in the various communities throughout the Province.

So t.here has been a complete freeze on the Small Craft Harbours Division with respect to ~onies available, ar4 appr~al of, and support of canada Works project. Assuming tr~t the ?remier is aware of this, Sir, I 'NOnder if the ?remier could indicate to the House what actions his government has t.aken with respect 'CO freeing up some funds by contacting cur fish and chip friends in Ottawa, namely, the Minister of Fisheries, Mr. HcGrath, and :inance, Mr. Crosbie7 MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. ?R£11IER PECKFORD: I thank the hen. member for his quest.ion. It is a very timely question indeed.

When I spoke to the Prime !·1inister a week and a half ago 1 I did raise that issue ·ni::h him, that we thought that: it would be very wise money spent if some of· the Small C::-af-:s Harbours u~ney could be freed up to supper~ and complement applications r.cw in fer very worthwhile public works an.d fisheries t:rojects. And so I did make representation to the 3Gti

:1over.ber :o, 1979 Tape t-<o. 12\l 2 so - 1 l'F.£:!!!0'!;1,. PSCKFORD: Prir.e :1inist.er directly. Considering that I should do somet."ling in writing ~"lis reorning after talking on ~~e phone over the last. number of days wi~~ a number of ministers in Ot~awa, I have wired, the ~nister, :·1r. Atkey, I have wir~ :-!r, C::-o::obie,the ;Unister of Finance 1ar.d! have wired the Hinister of Fisheries and Oceans, !1r, McGrat:1, on the matter supporting ~'1e concept of aUditional ~~r.ey to small craft ~rbeurs to specifically support projects now in the illill from Canada f.lorks. E ~HON. ~1E}ffiER: Hear, hear.

A supplementar.J, :,!1:'. Sfeaker. :m. SPKEAKE~: (Simms) A supplenentary 1 the hen. ::te.'t'.ber for Trinity - say de Verde. Thar.k ;.·ou, :-1r. Speaker. ! t.'1a::.k the Premier for his answer. I have been meeting wit.~ officials of ~he Small C::':lft:.

Harbour;;> Division wi~tin cite peZ'iod ::hat. the ?re::der was t:.-1.lking aJ.:out 1 and ~p to 't:hat particular ?Oint:. in eit:e =.here have Ceen no memos or directives issued from Cttawa to obviously infuse :::ore capital into ~~at particular division of ~~e Depar~ent of Fisheries a:",d -_:.ceans, Could the Premier indicate :apJ:-roxi:.:a~ly -..-hat t.be he is expecting eo receive an answer wit.:. respec<c to get::..lng aCdi<:.ional funds -for the Small C:aft. Hartours Division?

Also, could i1e indicate arecunt of :::cney chat is J:eing reques-ted !:::ecause I -:.'}ink :.:1ey ita•;e only ::he pas-:: :tur..Cer of years •,.rhicn has been ::-.aint.'l.incd at e::.:l.t le?el :or :.:--.ose nu.'!',ber of yaa=s? A.'1d my ::onversati':jns wit.i :.he officials indicate :..'1"-t:. ;:he need i:; in the order o! SlO ::iillicn,.;as rr.illi.on -:_o 510 m:.llion. i-ihen and ;10-..· :nuch? ::clill.:..cn to 515 :-::ilh.on to $20 :::illion; J"Ol! f:.:-.cw, ~·au ~ou.Cl;:: your 3C12

~ovenber 20, 1979 Tape t;o. 1202 SD - 2 PREl-liE?. ?ECKFORD: answer in ~~ac regard because he makes sure he has got himself covered in ~~e sence chat he goes from SlO oi11ion to $20 million in one fell swoop and in one_breath. When, :.tr. Speaker MR.F. ROWE: A point of order, :1r. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Si:ru:ns) A "point of order, ebe hon. me~er for Trinity -Say de Verde. ~1.?... F.

RO>·IE I am not ~ying to misrepresene the inforn-'.ation that. has been gi•Jen to me by officials of the Sn-.a11 Craft Harbours Division. ! simply seated tr~t over the past number of years S5 million has been made available to Small Craft Harbours Division and the es'ti:nate is that the need is in the order a; $10 million to .515 r::illion. I did not say that. was what was fort.hcoming. A?.. SPEAi::Z.R: Order, please~ I ~uu1U rule that. this is not a point of order but perhaps more in the line of a ciiiference of opL'1.ion between tw hen. members. The aon. the Pr~~ier may continue. Tha:--J:. you, :-'.r. Speaker.

I do not mean to make light of ~~e sit.uaeion with ehe hon. ~ember. The need, I suppose, when onE: gets Co•,..n t.o ne~d and ilOW 'fOU define need, it: could all t..'1.e 'Nay to $100 million when one looks ac the number of applications people would like t.o put. in for much needed projec~s around che ?rovincc for wharfs and for fi~hing facilities. So, you ~now, it is hard to put any reasonable parameters on it. ans·,.;er within seven t.o t.en c.a::·s, t.cr.

Jays on ::.:1.e outs iCe, :o the ·..:hole -~uest.i.on of funding to assist. i:-. tt:.ese C.J.nada ;Jerks r:roj ~cts, ':.':te !:'-ange of funding, ! do not. know. That is a :natt.er t.hSt Fisheries and 0CC3.ns will iav-s: to decide '..Jith t.i'leir !:inance 3C13

Noverr.ber 20, 1979 Tape !lo. 1203 DW - 1 PRE!t!ER ?ECKFORD: people in Ottawa. ! do not know what the ~,ing is.I would hope that it is at least at the level ~~at it has been in other years and hopeflllly there is some improvement in that level, and that is about all I can say. I know that initiatives a~e underway in Ottawa now, this week 1 to trJ to free up additional_ funds for this verJ worthwhile purp~~e. I recognize, acknowledge, appreciate, under- stand and am sensitive to,the fact that there might be $15 million; $20 tnillion or SJO million worth of need.

If we can 1 as I say, get somewhere above what has been the level in other years I t..~ink we would be doing fairly well and our support is llO per cent behind them. AN HCN. !"'..EHBER: Wha~ is the figure? PF£MIER PECY~ORD: I do not know what the figure is. ! am looking ac somewhere above what it :1as been in other years, Th~ hen. merr~er for LaPoile 1 followed by ~~e hen. member for St. Barbe. M.P.. S • t~"EARY : Mr.

Speaker, rry ques<:ion is for the :,1inister of finance, Sir, Would the han. gentleman tell the Hause what is be!1inc! t.'1is crackcicwn en the cabarets and <:he bistroes and the night clubs and the taverns and t.he restaurants in the Province:- hhat is behind :all of this? The hen. Hinister of finance. JR. J. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, I presurr.e the hon. r:er,ber is referring to a notification that ""ent 01.1t from t.1.e L.!.quor Licensing Beard to ~he various lounges and bars and so en, establishments licensed to purvey alcoholic liquids 1 that ~~e provisions in the Li~uor Licensing Act in te~s of extensions to t.~e hours during which =usiness ~aJ be carried on will new be brought into force as stated in the Act. !he Act: does state that the boards ':lay 1 -:n special occas!.ons such as banquets and so on anC. so forth 11!xt.end these hours 1 and :...1.e not:ifical:.ion :r::erely stated t~a~ t~e provisions in ~,e Act now will be carried out·stric:ly according ~o the Act. ,,lR. 5. :rr.:.t'.RY: l.

St.:fple~entary, M:. Speaker. A final suppler"entarJ, the hen. rr.errber fer .:aFoile 1 [clloweC l:y the hon. rre:rb~r fc::: St.. 2ar.be. 3014

Ncvetrher 20, 1979 Tape !1o. 1203 OW - 2 HR. S. NEAR'{: Mr. Speaker, ~he hon. gentleman Cid not answer my question. I asked the hon. gentleman what was behind i~. Was t."lere an abuse of the privilege of getting extensions? Is it a ciorality move on the part of the government, this crackdown? Or was the law being broken?

Because the hon. gentleman is fully awa_re th.at the Ne>oifotJ,ndland Liquor Corporation have cracked down on extensions, even for special occasions 1that they said t.~ere would be no more extensions once the exter.sions that are out:. now nm out. t:hat will :Oe t."le i:rplications of this? >'iill it create any unemployment as here on the air? h'hat will be t."le ir.plications and why was this drastic crackdown all of a sudden so necessary? What was behir.d it? :!R. SPEA.KER: (SI!-fl-!

S) DR. J. COLLINS: 'l'he hon. !-iinister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, firstly, t.he hon. ree:rber asked would it ha.._"'e any ef!e~t on Wlernploy:::ent. I groat:.ly docbt that:. ".l:he number of extensions 3C15

November 20, 1979 Tape NO. 1204 AH-1 DR. COLLinS: given to lounges and bars was quite a small number. Quite a small percentage of the total nuw~ers did ask for and die:'! receive extensions. ! t."link it uas less than five per cent. There are something over 600 lounges and Cars in the Province and some~,ing less than five per cent 1 believe, did on any regular ba~"is ask for o:ttensions. Sa I do not thinK it will have any significant impact ip terms of employment.

Despite that 1 there had in actual fact in recent times 1!or whatever reason 1 there has been an increase, The percentage of 1ounges.and bars requesting extensions was considerably smaller than t.~at up until recent1y 1 it was something in the order of one per cent.

Relatively recent there had been a bit of an increase up to some~,ing of the order of five per cent, and t.~e Board just felt it had to look at the situation and in doing so it felt th.a~ the rate of requests was getting rather excessive so it had to bring to t.~e attention of the owners and operators of these lounges that it would carry out '.:he provisions of t.~e act aceorc!ing to how they were written. MR.SPEAKER:(Simms) MP .• BFNNETl't The hen. member for St.Earbe. Mr. Speaker, my ouestion is directed to ~~e hen. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

In view of all the excitement that was created before June 18~~ with =egards :o tr.e Provincial Home Ownership Assistance ?rogramme 1! would like to ask ~~e hen. minister how many applications has been received by his department, how many dollars has actually been approved to go o?t,or hew many dollars have actually gone out on this programme? !'JR. SPEAr.:E:R: Affairs and Housing. MR.WINDSOR: The hen. Minister of Municipal Mr. Speaker, I can advise ths hen. ~ouse that we have had in excess of 1,200 requests for ~nformaticn on ~~is programme and as a result have mailed aut to persons in the ?ro7ince 3016

November 20,1979 Tape r,;o. 1204 AH-2 ~R.WINDSCR: applications, application forros to these 1,200 people and the information relating ~o the programme. As a result of that 1 well in excess of 300, I think somewhere in the order of 350 or .375 applications have actually bee.:n receiyed. we anticipate that soroe seventy per cent of these will actually translate themselves into approved applications. In other worcls1 perhaps some thirty per cent of t?ose received wili ~ot f~r one reason or ano~~er be eligible !or this funding.

I can also advise that just ~~is week we issued the first cheque 1 which,means ~~at ~~e first person who began to build his home after the August 1st._ deadline has actually completed his home to at least sixty-five per cent 1 has taken occupancy and has received his funding. I would also like to point out to the hon. House that the programme has been ext:emely well received and on the basis of our analysis appears ~o be ext:e~ely ef!ective particularly in ~~e ~Jral areas and we are 3G17

November 20, J.97:t Tape No. 1...:05 NM. - J. M...tt. WINDSOR: lookl.ng at revising or upgr-J.ding tht:.: programme as we anticipated 1in fac~ 1 when ~e puc the programme ~n place that we would neea to look at l.t again for next year as it relates to urban areas. sa~ HON. ~~~ERS: HR. SPEAKER (Sit:m'.s l ~ MR~ BENNETT: Hear, near! The non. member for St. Barbe. The hen. minister just about answered - apparently,! unaerst:and 1 Mr. Minister, t.'l.ere nas only been- one approval - t1R. WINDSOR: MR. BENNETT: !1.R. WINDSOR: :·!R. BENNE'l'T: M."O... WINDSOR: M.G .. BE-.'WETT: (.Inaudi.oleJ. D~d you say one?

One cheque ~ssued. One cheque issued. (Inaudible). Yes, ::: see. HR. ~tEARY: Does the hon. gentleman have any money to pay out? YLH.. SPEAKER: from t.~e hon. memoer? MR. SE:NNETT: SOME HON. MEMBERS: HR. SPEAKER: Order, please: Is that tne question I do understand the - Oh, oh! Order, please: The hen. mem.oer nas the tloar. ! understana there are co be amendments ~~de, Mr. Minister, for tnis. Are there not to be amendments made so chat ::..t can be more readl.l'J com:.ributed to the people who want to get into :1ew homes? I understand there are to be amendments :nade co this programme? HR.

SPEAKER: MR. 'tH~SCR: The n~n. Minister of Munic~pal flf~airs and nousing. If I could, ~r. Speaker, :irsc of all clarity tne fJ.rst poJ.nt ~~e nan. gentleman :nade 1 ~~ere nas only been one cneque issued. There have been almos~ JOO applicatl.ons which are either approved or 3G18

Novemoer 20, ~97Y Tape No. 1205 NM - 2 MR. WINDSOR: are in the process of be~ng approved and which we anticipate will actually receive approval. Haw many actually have been approved and natirications sent out 1 I am afraid.! do not have the exact figure. But t~ere is only one person who has. actually completed nis nome to a level that he can move- in and receive hiS funding. MR. NEARY: A great programme, one cheque issued. MR.

WINDSOR: The question also that the han. gentleman asked in his original one that I d~d not address, how much funning has actually been cottmitted, I do not nave an exact figure but we have every indication tnat we will in fact use up all of ~~e funding that was al~ocated for th~s year. A~l tne funds that were allocated in t.he .oudget for t.'1iS year for thJ.s prog::~e Wl.ll ee taken up, ~ome~~ing in the order or ssuo,uoo.

Ana as ~t relates to the amendments for next. year, ! :iict not say there wou..td be amendments • I sal.d tnat in conjunction ~ith our fl.ve year review, a review for the five year plan of ~~e Depar~nt of Housing, which are plans which all departments are do~ng, we are ana~yz~ng ~he programme to see where it has been effect:l'Je, wtere t:here may be weaknesses and where improvements may in fact be needea for next year and,~f necessarJ 1 We will mak~ proposals to Cabinet for amendment to the progr~~e for next year. ~R. $PE1L~R (Simms): A final question, tne ~on. member for Eonavista North. M-'1:\.

ST!RLntG: Thank you, Hr. SFeaKer. A question for t::he ?renuer l.O !us capacitY I guess as pi:1ch h~ttJ.ng l:'isneries ain.lster. About two weeks ago I brought to the actention oi ~he Premier some points that were raised by a member of the Fisheries Loan acara, Specifically they nad ~o do wich (1) ?Olit:ical interference 1 (2) t~e n~ber of appl~ca~ions in front of ~~e boara, and tne lack of meetings cf the ccard. Woula the Premier care to comment en ~ose ~ee pointst 3C19

Novemoer ~o. L979 Tape No. L!OS NM - 3 MR. SPEAKER: ~he non. the Premier. PREMIER ?ECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, as I have 2ndicaeed on a numoer of occasions, the whole F~sheries Loan Board- operation is under review oy government at ~he present moment. As to the queseion or political interference, 3(:20

Nov~~er 20, 1979 Tape 1206 PK - 1 Premier ?eckford: there might be members on the Soard, staff of ~~e Board who allege such activity, you ~,ow, and they are at liberty so to allege. I am interested in seeing that the Board operate efficiently and effectively, and having it reviewed totally to ensure that it does. There l:'.ave been a number of Board meetings in the last week and a half or so,' and, T think, at least two Soard mee~ings, and the staff of ~he Loan Board are working very hard, some of the people who are in the =ield to do inspections on small bounties, small boats.

I think there are BOO applications in and they are trying to finish off all L~spections by November 30. There has been about $13 million expended to date. And all applications that have been approved for whatever part of fishing gear or boat have been honoured so tP~t that work can go on. All the shipyards in the Province have been assured ehat the work ehat they have at the present moment will be completed, that all of t~at money will be forthcoming. And the review, the total review 1 ~i11 be finished by Nova~er 30 1 and a policy statement by government will be made early after that date, So the Board has met.

The question of political interference, if some member of the Board would care to make that clear to me or to some member of goverr~ent so w~t we can investigate it, I would be only teo happy. I have indicated that in the past ! would welcome somebody to come forward with that information.

So t..'le whole t~ing is under review and we are ensuring that all approvals that have been made are being honoured - $5 million last. year, $13 million this year­ and now we are revie•..ting to see 'Nbat kind of support' is necessary between the 1st. of December ar~ March the 31 ~o ensure that the fishermen who have ongoing commi~ments can get on with the business of getting their beats built or additional gear pu~ in place.

There is some problem dealing with ·fishermen, for example, or in ~he most cri~ical area where they have approval from ~~e Federal Gover~~ent for some Federal subsidy on a new beat and are awaiting approval of loans from ~~ Fisheries Loan Beard. They are So we have t:o prior ize the. problems that •,.re have 3C2:1

November 20, l9i9 Tape 1206 PK - 2 Premier Peckford: there when you are talking about hundreds and hundreds of applications for =oats, well over one thousand applications on that score, and hundreds and hundreds of applications for other things like mot:ors and other gear. So,you Y~ow 1 we are well aware of that situat.ion. It has been fu!ly reviewed.

And I can assure the hon. member that we are trying to priorize the problems in order of their need, and hopefully be in a poSition early in December Co m~ke a substant.ial announcement on how we see the Fisheries Loan Board proceeding between the 1st. of December and March 31, 1980. .MR4 SPEAKER (SIMMS} : Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has expired. I would like to,on ber~lf of all hen. members,welcome to the gallery today the President of the Newfoundland Pharmaceutical Association, Mr. Brian Healey: 5011£ HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! ANSiliE .. ttS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHIOI NOTICE HAS SEEN GIVEN MR.

SPEAICER: The hon. Minister of Lands and Forest. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, a couple of days ago in reply to a question placed orally in the House by the me~~er for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) in connection with the spray programme and matacil left on hand, the information I could not give him then, was wha~ amount of matacil and the value of it? Mr. Speaker, I can now inform the House that there are 706 barrels of matacil presently an hand in the Province. The approximate value is a half a million dollars, SSOO,OOO. We have been in contact with the Provin=es of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia and Quebec.

So our potential buyers, we have written them, and we have also been in contact by telephone, and in meetings,to outline that this matacil is for sale, and to date there has been no ~uyer, at least no buyer indicating at t~s tL~e they want to cuy now. But t:,.;ere is a potential buyer for the matacil between now and the next spray programme of 1980. 3C22

November 20, 1979 Tape 1206 PK - 3 ORDERS OF THE DAY HR. 1-'.ARSH.ALL: order 2 - Committee of the Whole. MR. SPEAKER {SI?-'.MS) : Order 2 - Committee of' the Whole on a bill, "An Act To Reform The Law Respecting "rhe Property Of Married Persons, (Sill No. 1}. on motion that the Hause resolve itself into a Committee of the Whale House, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. 3C23

Nove..ber 20, 1979 Tape Ho. 1207 SD - l COHMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SAID BILLS :.tR. CHA!ill-1AN: (XX • Baird) Order, ,please! A bill, "An Act To Ref0rtt The Law Respecting The Property Of !<tarried Persons". (:-io. 1) On motion, clause (

l) through clause (15) carried. :1R. CH.1\IR!-!~I: Shall clause (16) carry? MR. T. R.!.:DE.OUT: Mr. Chairman, an claUse (16)· M..~. OiAI.R!W!: The hen. member for Baie Ver~e - waite Bay. MR. T. ?.It/EOU'I': ~he Minister of Justice (~x. Otter~eimer) is nc~ here, Mr. C~airman, but I do believe, if! rememCer ~~e debace properly 1 ~nat ~~ere was some discussion L~·~;a detate on the principle of ~~is bill with regard to a tL~e el~ment.

Okay 1 ':hB President of ~'1e Council sa~rs he can ar~wer it so I will sit down and allow hie to answer. ~~;. liS.:_ jl_. :J..ARSEALL: ~te President of ~~e Council. .:e Sj.>Oke on it ·;ery !orcibly .:~.t the t.i:ne.

The hon. :,!lni!:lt:er of Justi.ct. present sit:'J.ation the licitation period t:.t.a.t: would apply 'Nould te d l.i:nit:at:ion period t:l"'.a::. is al:o::ady providet.l un&~r tte general st:a~:.It:es li~itat:.ion peri.cd of time ·eioulC be a ::.;.;enty year period; if it relat;;d. to ?ersonal property then the li.:::itat:ion of actions pereonal would applJ. ~lew, at ~·m prcsenc tit:1e, :::e policy 3G24

?/~ver:-.be= 20, 1979 Tape ~io. 1207 SD - 2 July 1st, yes, it does not come into effect until July l~t. The observations that were taken 1 as happens from t.i."lle to tioe 1 or observations are required <;o ~ weighed -and the government is weighing tltem 1 and I can inform the Committee and t.he hon. ::\ember as I have a-lready informed, by th.e way 1 the hon. ~ber for t..'le Strait of Belle Isle in private, t..'lat govern:nent will consider these matter~ and ~,e Department of Justice will be formulatL,g opinions on it which can t.J.!-;:.a a little while.

And if it is necessary t:o make an amendment we will be bringing in an amend.mcmt. in tb.e second session of t..~is Assembly which will come into effect, if it is necessarj 1 before July lst. but it will only be with respect t·o the limitation if we find it necessary.

The point that ·,.;as raiseC. by the hon. member f9r the Strait of Belle Isle requires a certain amount of research ~~d ~~is relates, ~he m~~rs of ~~e Co~~ittee may r~t recall, to ~,e limitation period in which t~~e for actions can te taken. and we want to afford enough time to do research so L,at we just. do not make .:1n amendment in Committee and jump in~o somet.\Ung that we will regret afterJards. ;-!P.,. R!OtOUT: :1R. CHAIR.'1A:!: (!1r. Baird) AR. RIDEOUT: !-1r. Chair!:lan. T!le hon. member for Baic Verte - w'hite Bay. :1.r. C.n.airman, I thank the hen.

President of the Cour.cil fer his sr.swer and in that part of the question ! assume we w-ere talking about outer limitations like the t:..;enty year business :lnd t."le ot..'l.er one. :·ihat I also have a conce!:'n ,;;.bout is Uownward limitations.

I have had questions posed co me, fer exsw.ple 1 by consti:.uents ;.long the Li..n"' -you kr.ow 1 I am not t:aincd in legalese so forgive :::'e if I am 3. bit ..,·,:kwaxd explaining it but along t!1.e liz:e of ::ow close- !dr exa!np!.e, a muc~ older man mar:ie~ a 1~unger woma~ and ~~ey arc car:ieci four ~r £i·.J'e :Jfl.ars and he dies or ·what:ever, is there gain; to be "" li:nit:.ation oc t.:le downward end as we:.l as on tite oti:er end~ There are a lac of ?eor:le asking c;:uest:.ions about t...~at, you know, wtu::t."ter all ::he property u:rl asse::s and so on t.:~a;: ;1e has built. ';.1!:- .lS .:1 single person, is t:ler0. gains 3\.25

Novembe: 20 1 1979 Tape Ho. 1207 so - 3 :m.. T. RI:.JEOUT: cent of the share? It is a difficult quescion. I had difficulty addressing it when conseituents asked aboue it but it is :.1 legimate concern of a certain segment of _cur soc_iety a!fd ! suppose ic is fair to say ehat they deserve 3(;26

November 20,1979 Tape No. 1208 AH-1 MR. RIDEOUT: scree kind of answer in ter.ws of what the government's intentions are. MR. CHAIRMAN: (Baird} HR.!-".ARSHAI.L: The bon. President of the counciL Mr.

Chairman, we have considered that and we do not really ~.hink that the observation of there being a downward limit is really a valid observation for this·-reasent If, in the example that the hon. member gave, there is a marriage between an elderly person and a younger person it is always possible, and I think that this has not been really addressed by people who tend to from time to time criticize ~~is act, it has not reallY been, I think,as widely known as it certainly should, that it is competen~ for people to enter into a contract contracting out comple~ly from the provisions of this act if they so desire, if this is ~"leir choice in all of its aspects and that is the position 1 reall~ that ~~e government is taking. number of years a person is married, whether theY had to be married one year or two years or three years to take the benefit of ~~s act 1 I am not quite sure myself- as a matter of fact 1 I do not really think ~~at ~~e observation is valid but just let us say ~~at there is some validity to it, the next question one has to ask is where does one Craw the line?

Whether it is going to ~e six months one y~ar, two years, ~~ree years or four years? It is a most difficult premise. It would work,we feelJrank injustices in many cases where, for instance 1 somebo~J 1 sa~ is m~rried for ~~ree months and ~"len ~~e un!ortunate situation where one of the spouses gets accidently killedJ :;ou get ~"lat particular situat.ion,' t»hy should they not have the benefit and obligations under ~"le act itself?

So ~~is is the problem whi~~ we meet ev~n if one assumes there is validity to the objection but as far as the government is concerned it is a matter of policy. it is going to keep the act as it is because c~~erwise it would destroy, reallyrehe basic principle of ~;e act: itself. 3(27

November 20,1979 MR. STIP..LING: MR.CF.AIR.IQ..N: (Baird) MR.ST!RLING: Tape No. 1208 AH-2 Mr. Chairman. The hon. member for Bonavista North. Related to that ~ame question, Mr.

Chairman, and if my colleague and I seem to be unprepared it: is because we understood that we were going to be back - it was a problem in communications, information did not get through that, we were going to be into this. ! have had a number of people ask that same question and the answer that the ?resident of the council gave tends to bring up a more fundamental problem. ! have no doubt 1 no doubt whatsoever that every member of this House with his spouse or her spouse will arrange a marriage contract that does wh-at that couple wants to do.

There is no question in my mind about ~~at, that ~~ey will arrange a marriage contract that will do what ~~ey want to do. The people that I think we are trying to protect with ~~e act are people who do not even know, unless we send out from ~~is Rouse of Assembly a registered letter to every married couple in the Province,saying enclosed is the copy of your marriage agreement and you better put this in a safe place because it is now in effect and it is ~inding unless you want to dr~ up your own ag=eement. If you '4ant to draw up your own agreement you can get o1~t cf this.

And t.,e peorle that we have a great CPncern for is the a\•erage Newfoundlander who does not really pay very much attention to what happens in thi~ weird and wonderful city of St. John's, feeling that he can go about minding his own business and looking after his own fa~ily and really does not understand that this House of >Assembly can impose on him and his wife an agreement whether t.~ey ~ant it or not. The point th.at has been brought up is that people just cannot. underst:and th.at t.~ere>is no p~riod, no cooling off period.

The Xir~ster of consumer Affairs and Environ~ent,(Mrs Newhook) ! am sur~,is verJ proud of legislation whic~ we new have in Newfoundland going back a few years where somebody makes a purc~ase and ~~ere is a cooling off period, a period of ten days where ycu can make up your m~nd whether you want 3C28.

November 20,1979 Tape No. 1208 l\H-3 MR. STIRLI'tTG: it or not and you can cancel an order. Many people are concerned that in this particular situation you can have those unfortunate examples. 3(.29

November 20, 1919 Tape No. J.20'::t !lM - 1 MR. STIRLING: Bearing in mind that we only have, according to the member for Stephenv~lle (Mr.

Stagg), a very small percentage o"f divorces/' we are only taJJ::ing about: one or two per cent_.., -:¥e are only talking about the exceptions really that get hu:t, bearing in mind that situation, are we not really setting tnis upPAnd I know it is a question of policy, out I wonder spould not the pollcr be reco~sidered for the very pOints my colleague has brougnt up, tnat there snould oe some period, that somebody snould not be obliged to enter into a contract automatically as ~~is does; you automatically enter into a contract w~th a marriage and you can nave either a weal~~y widow w1th a young man tak~ng advantage of it, or the reverse ot that, a young lady taking advantage of a wealthy widower.

Maybe r~ght out of a death, in a moment of - in nis weaKest moment cney end up married. Under this ac~, as I understand lt, as long as tney live a eay ~n that matrimonial home ~~ey can decide to spl~t up the next day or tne day after, or tne week after, or tne montn after and automatically the newcomer to tnat arrangement has an interest of fifty per cent ~n tne matr~monial home. 11ayoe r am not understanding ~t correctly? Maybe the Presiaent of ~he council would like to correct that impress~on, if that is no~ ~he correc~ impression. :-!.R~ CHAIFJ.!.AN (.t!airdl : Tne ?resident of the Counc~l. MR.

MARSHALL: ! do not derrogate from the substance of ·.mat ~he non. member says but I think tnat a lot of people when they talk about marr~age itself say that tnere should be this certain period of time before people enter into tne matr~rnonial s-t<lte. Now, ~he ma~rirnon~al state ~~at we talk about, some people m~ght emphasize the las~ wora on it,unfortunately 1 on some occasions but tne matr:.monial state is really, you know;apart ±:rom Ch.l.s act, resUlts in certain contractual- it already has a contract:.ual aspect and a contractual relationsh~p.

Under tne present iaw the man is respcns.l.ble for che sup~or~ or his wife and,you know, there are various 3030

November 20, 1919 HR. MARSHALL: is aware of. Tape No. l20Y NM - 2 incidents that I am sure the han. member Now, the hon. member when he first spoke he sa~d he thougnt tnat most people ~ould arrange a contract. With respect I say tnis woul~ only really be necessary in tne event that a man wished to leave his property to pome person other than h~s wife. !! a man, and in this day and age we have to say a spouse, is going to !eave everJth~ng to h~s or her counterpart this act, as a matter of tact 1would ass~st that person in nis intention.

Because the act1 in effect 1 would make half of tne matrimonial assets 1 as ctefinect in the act, the property ot the wife or the husband and to that extent these assets would not ne includea in probate when ~~e estate is submitted to probate. so in <:.~at particular instan~e.there ~s a benefit because there is a saving on probate costs to che extent of tne value. to max.e a contract i.f outright to the wife.

They can ~ke a cont~act and they need tneir property is going to be left other than Now1 I understand and! appreciate wnat the hen. member says and we all know wnat is going to t:.appen1 that no matter what law you :nake, it is going to be very dif:ficult for e1Ierybcdy to oe apprized of :he law, to know wnat ~he law ~s~ Government is aware of ~~is. Before the Matrimon~al ?rcperty Act was brought .::::efore this House for We first time, abnut eight_een ·months pn.or to this, there was a great aeal of ~nformation aisseminated oy the government and various organ~zations.

The intention was publicized, various organizations were asked for tneir comments and we received, as usual, from some ~ut not from otners. Since tnat pe~~od of t~me, bet'N"een i<:.s original introduction in this House last !-iarch and the present tim~s~x montns have passed. It has been a matter of a great aeal of public debate and one would ~~inx,as a result of that,~~at tne publ~c would be,pernaps,more awar~ of this legislat~on than perhaps o~~er types of legislation. Having said all tha~,I agree with wnat the non. member says.

There are going to oe a large number or 9eople who do not k~ow their rights, 9articularly 3D31.

:~ovetr.ber 20, 1979 Tape No. 1210 .NR. W. r.A.RSHALL: perhaps be to a greater degree in tb.e smaller communities. Government now intends to errbark 1 with.in the next six mon~~s,on an information progr~~ witn respect to the Act and it~ conse­ quences. And I should also think that. it. wculd be valuable .. I think t.he government. will address itself to ~~e situation that the incidences of thi~ Act can be avoided if two ?eople wish to by a simplistic document.

Some people have unki~dly referred to this Act as a bonanza for the "la...,.t~rs and they envisage very complicated complex. contracts that have to be drafted in order to avoid ~~e incidents of this Act, not so! Really," t mean 1 it car. just be a plain piece of paper signed by two people, once the husband aid wife both sign the paper, just simple words th.at they co not wa~t· the 1'.ct to apply.

So all of this will be effected over the period of time, we hope to make a - "W"e will make a more direct effort than other.oise 1 than in other instances, to assure that the provisions of thiS Act are brought to public: ii::mtion. But without being too much off the cuff witil the thing, the hon. member will also appreciate the old adage that you can bring a hor::;a to the wu.ter but. you cannot: make hi:n drink. r..ll that we can do is, really 1 all the go\."etnment can do is to see that the public is informed as fully as it: can within its own abilities to so inform it1 and this is what we will do. MR.

CHAIPP.AH: {BAIRD) HR. L. THO!AS: The hon. mernber for Grand aank. Is not the problew that we are discussing now, the problem of the person getting married and then one of ~,e spouses leaving within a short period of time 1 is that not already taken into consid­ eration in the Act and certainly if not entirely so; partially so in ~1at under

section 20, I Celieve it is, - i\.N HO:L MI:::1EE?.: ;,iR. L, THOMS : Sec,tion 19. - !Jection 19 of th.e Act states t1tat, "On the divorce, separation, death etcetera then one of the spouses can ma~e an application to th.e court for a division of the tt:atrimonial assets". Than t:.nder

section 20, the Act gives t..:,e judge the guic!elines, really, for deciding en ~~e division of the matri~Onial assets. Cne of ~he guiCelines in the Act is, in fact 1 ~~e dutation of ~~e marriage so that presureably, a judge in a particular case •.;here scmebody is marrieC - lii<e I knew a person one ti,,.e ·..Jho was married for seventeen Cays and he separated and got a divorce seventeen years lat:.er. But in a situation such as that 3032

Novettber 20, 19 79 Tape No. 1210 MR. L. THOMS~ where it is ~uite obvious to a judge that somebody is out to maybe make a dollar on a marriage, somebody ~ho might be a gold digger 1 under that particular

section then the court can actually - I guess they could make a division of one hUndred to nothing or ninety-nine to one because the Act does not auto~~tically give a fifty/fiftz split. ··It gives discretion tc the court, to the judge to award ~ unequal "split. I tllink the only thing' t.~at~ we Were objecting to in ~hat parti~~ar

section I have been referring to is the use of the wordi 'grossly unjust or unconscionable', we wan·ted to have it 1reasonable 1'-lltic:h I would still like to see happen because 1:he words 'grossly unjust'are certainly open to - what one judge may consider grossly unjust,another judge Ir.ight accept as perfectly fair. But I think t.'lat t.'le problem that we are discussing right now is taken care of under

section 20 of tite Act. MR. C:iAIR.'-iJ.~ {BAIRD) : The hen. President of the Council. MR. w. HARSHftLL: Mr. CJlainnan, I th.ank the •'han. tr.ember for Grand Bank (Hr. ':'hor._s) for his assistance it is ; __ ndeed - there is a discretion under -c.~e Act for the judge to meet these particular situations. but as I was indicating to the other hen. mew.bers - •.o~hat I was saying is i~ would be most unwise to pu~ in any limitation !::ecause that makes cert.ain basic assumptions and pretr.ises that 'Aill not apply in specific cases. So this is one way in which the concerns of hon. r..er;.bers can be met.

If the duration of the marriage.3 is vert short and that there are grounds for it1 ~~ere is a discretion ~~ere to operate, As in all cases where you make ~~anges, particularly when you make far­ reaching a."'l.d beneficial changes such as this J it is a r..atter of weighing the changes as to what is good for the general and •,.;hat is good for the specific.~"'l.d l will sa~wi~~ respect to ~~is Bill 1 ~~at ~~. as! say, we value tite comments that '"'ere made in_ second reading anC: are now :.caC.e in <"Ctrr.ittee, but we have weighed all t .. hese :::att:e::s anC. 3(33

November 20 1 1979 Tape 1211 PK - 1 !-tr. Z-!arshall: we really feel , you know, that it would. be unwise to put in and neither is it necessary,in our view, to put:. in that somebody, in order to get the bene£it and/or to incur the. obligat;.icns under this Act they must be married forx number period of ~ime. MR. CHA!RMA.'i (BARID): The hen. member for Bonavista North. MR. STIRLING: Hr. chairman, dealing with Clause 1~6, I. have had a few queStions f:om people looking for some clarification on just what is intended to be covered in matrimonial assets? It may be a very simple question with a very simple answer.

A person's bank account,is that included in a matrimonial asset if he opened the bank account after he was married? - during the marriage? The hon. President of the council. MR. !A.ARSHALL: You know, the matrimonial assets are described as all real and personal property acquired by either cr both-spouses during the marriage with the exception of, and it:. gives gifts, and inheritance, personal injury awards, personal effec~s, business assets.

Now1if the bank account was used,of course, for the purpose and it formed part of the business assets, then, as I am sure the bon. member would realize then in that event it would not. Property exempted under a marriage contract or separation; !amily heirloom, real and personal property acquired a£ter separation. So if there is a bank account there, and the bank account is Lo the name of one spouse, and it has been used for the purpose of the marriage, it constitues a matrimonial asset. But now the right to it, as the hon. member will ' appreciate, is different than the right to the matrifuonial heme.

The rnatr~~nial home is treated like a joint bank account, which I know the hen. member is familiar with. So in other words, there is a division of it, you know, each party has a right to it ilmtediatelf on, you know, before any separation. With respect to ~he bank accOunt and the matrimonial assets 1 this occurs after- whatever the sec::ion is there- separation, death, and divorce, and what have you. In ocher words, it is deferred. The han. member :at: 9onavis~a :lcrth. 3C34

November 20, 1979 Tape 1211 PK - 2 MR. STIRLING: Mr_. Chairman, presumably it becomes effective on the separation or the death, what have you? 1-m. MARSHALL: Right. MR. STIRLING: Mr. Chairman, take in the case of 'the fishermen, for example, le< us say_, first: of all, a full-time fishermen who has a boat 1 is that considered a business asset or a matrimonial·:asslit? ill\. CHAIRMAN (BAIRD) : The han. President of the Council. HR. MARSHALL: It would depend, Mr. Chairmant on what he used the boat for. If the boat were used for the purpose of fishing, I would say, it would be a part of his business assets.

I would say that in most cases, you know, obviously, if a fisherman has a boat 1his gear and equipment and that it would be part of his business assets. MR. CHA!RMA..lll: The hon. member for Eonavista North. MR. STIRLING: l1.r. Chairman, I w-onder, because as the President of the Council, the last ~~swer he gave me was very definite, and in this answer he says, "I would say" 1 I wonder if we should not spell that out a little more because most fishermen who are fishing do not consider themselves businessmen, and they do not consider their business assets. MR. CHAIR!J'..AN: The hon. President of the Council. HR.

MARSHALL: You know, if the hon. memberwould permit me. l mean,my private life;! ply a certain trade but one does not wish to be put on the skillet 1 as it were 1 So 'y~~ get used to. saying, 'it would appear) and I would say) and what have you: li-..tt: if the hen. member wishes it more definitely¥ I will say, if he will accept this as the Holy Writ, yes, Sir, that is the actual situation. MR. CF.A!R.4MI: -The hen. member for aonavista North. NR. STIRLING: Mr.

Chairman, dealing •..Jit:h that same fisherman lee us suppose he gets a part-time job in the Premier's office, and he is still a part-tL~e fisherman, and h€ just goes out to catch an occasional cod, sort of a recr~ational purs~it~ith ~r~t fishins boat, is that now a business asset or is it a mar.rimonial <!.sse-t.?

November 20, 1979 Tape 1211 PK - 3 HR. MARSHALL: It depends on what he uses it for, Hr. Chairman. I meantii he uses it for fishing and he derives an income from it - now business assets are described here- see, it is rather difficult giving these off-the-cuff opinions* As a matter of fact, it is really difficult giving them 1 too, without fee,- MR. STIRLING: That is the part that hurts the most. MR. HARSHALL: · That is the part that really hurts the most, yes.

But ~~ere is a definition here, Mr. cr~irman, of business assets ar~ these are assets used in the course -'Business asset means property primarily used or held for in connection with a commercial business inves~ent or other income for profit producing purposes~ It is 16 (1). So, you know, if the boat is primarily used for the purpose of fishing it ~~uld form to be a business asset. HR. CHAIRMAN: The hon.rnember for Bonavista North., MR. ST:RLING: Mr. Chal--man, ~~ese questions, of course, are real questions. I mean I am not making these up. MR. MARSHALL! HR. STIRLING: is trying I 4,ow. I realize that.

These are questions that the average Newfoundlander 3C36

November 2u, 1~79 'l'ape No. 12.!.2 NM - 1 MR. STIRLING: to sort out in saying whether _or not he agrees wit..'l the agreement that tne government l.S going to bring ~n force for him. Let us take tnat same incident; this ~sa fl.s~erman. wno used to be a'fisherman, st:.i4l cons~ders himself-a fishe;rr~ who now has a retail store and he only uses his .boat occasionally 1 when· the fish are runn~ng, t? go out and jig a fisn. He dOes n~t sel+ it, he brings ·it in for h~s own use 1 in tnat instance 1 J..S a fisning ooat tnen a matrimonJ..al asset? MR. CHAIF.MAN: MR. MARSHALL: '.rhe President of tne Council.

Well 1 agal.n, Mr. Chairman, I do not want to appear to be oegging the questJ..on. I real~ze that the hon. member's quest.J..ons are certa~nlY very serious and very we.!.l intended and they are certainly we.!.comed. The fact of the matter is 1 it Will nave to oe determined. ~ou will have some borderline situations, and it will nave to ce determined as to whether or not it ~s pr~ily used !or commerc~al purposes. l mean, if he goes out j~ggJ..ng cod once a montn ana he takes his -w~fe for a ride in the ooat tnree :.imes a month, I woula say pr~marily it ~s used tor the matrimonial purposes.

But there will be certa1n- the difficulty in w~king laws, the non. member will understand, is that it iS diffJ..curt to make hard and fast, iron­ clad rules wnicn apply in everj situation.

There has to be somewhat ot a borderline area and in order to make the law apply adequately and properly ana appropriate.!.Y in all cases there has to be a discretion, and ~n tne instance that tne han. gentleman ~s bringing up ~t depends upon;t:o an extent ::1 discretion,but a Judgeme.Ot.aepend~ng on applying tne general law to tne part~cu.!.ar fact so that ir there iS a aispute ~~ere iS a guicte here to be followed and it Will be in tb.e cplnion, of course_, of the person, i.e., t.he judge tn t.'le case; i£ it:. is a back to the w.:Hl situaticn 1 ::o cetermine 1.1:, MR.

STIRLING: ~r. chaJ..~~n. someboay wno has a tent- trailer type thing, or a trailer wh:l.ch ne uses nat for ousiness purposes, is t.hat:: trailer or Summer ncme1 ::'or example/supposing he puts it up on stilts, a suw~r heme is par1: ot the matrimon~al assets? :.tR. HARSHALL: Part ot the macrimon1al assets. aR. STIRLING: Thank you. 3C37

November ~9, ~97~ carried.. MR. CHAIRMAN: (Baird) MR. THOMS: Tape No. 12.l.2 GH-2 on motion, clauses (1/) tnrough to {2U), 'J.'he non. member from Grana Bank. Mr. Chairman, this is the

section ~,at I referred to earlier and my friend from the Straits of Belle Isle (Mr. Roberts) also'·referred t:o when he spoke on .this bill, where Clause {20) s~ates that the court may make a division of matrimonial assets that is not equal, where the court is satisfied that a division of these assets in equal share could be grossly unjust or unconscionable.

Now, sometime in the very near future- certainly after July 1st- this is going to have to be interpreted by a court, and what inter-pretation they are going to put on grossly unjust, I do not know and I doubt if there is a lawyer in this House at the moment who can guess what the court would call grossly unjust or unconsciOnable.

My frien~ from the Straits of Belle Isle suggested that this particular sect~on should be amende=. to read "would be unreasonable taking into account any of the following factors", but the use of the words 'grossl1' unjust' - in reading the Municipal Act I read where they are referring to gross misconduct.

These words certainly will come back to haunt us, and ! really do not see any reason now why the government would not agree to changing that to have it read 'unreasonable' rather than 'grossly unjust'. 'Grossly unjust', you know, makes me think of something entirely different from ~~at which would be unreasonable, and I can only see this part:.icular clause being improved by amending' it to read 'unreasonable' rather than 'grossly unjust' or 'unconscionable'. MR. MAP.SF.ALL: Well, Mr. Chairman, you know, that is the hon. member's opinion- MR. CHAIR!.!AN: The President of the coqpcil. MR.

MARSHALL: - and certainly I respect h~s opinion, but it is not one wi~~ which we share. This was brought up in debate 3C38

~ovcwber 20, 1979 Tape Ho. 12lJ SD - 1 ~1R. W. HA?..SHALL: in second readL"lg and what 1 in effect, this would do in our opinion, and this is a matter of policy of ~~e government. I am just telli.."lg the committee this so that. the House and tha committee can be quite assured that ~~e government has weighed ~~ese mat~~rs and weighed them all very carefully before bringing them before ~~e House.

Hha.t this, in effect, ;..ould do is by deleting ~~e words 'grossly unjust' or 'grossly',~~ ~rd 'grossly' so that it reads just •unjust' or 'unconscionable' would be to extend moreso than we 1Jt0uld like, than we think it should be, the discretion of the courts in this matter.

"'"' 1"'nk upon this 1 really 1 as being prir.arily relating to the economic aspects of marriage itself and not so ouch as to ~,e ot-~er asoec=.s of marri~g~. i-.J.'ld •·1e very s<crongly feal 1 :.:.nless there is really, really good reason, unles:s it", in other worUs, should be grossly unjust or unconscionable ~~a'C Ulere should be an eqJal division of tae assets, o~~r things being equal.

Now, :r know the hen. gent:.lerea."l, and as I say, ! value what he says and respect his observations ~~at he ~akes but at the same time I know that he will realize what I am saying is that government has considered it anC: ncvern.-nent has, as a matt·:;: of policy for reasons I have given, decided not to lead in any arr.en~ent at this time on clause {20). :·1R. i... STIRLING: Hr.

Ch.1irman, I do r.ot knew if it. applies to - The hon. rr.ember f~r Sonavista :lorth. clause (20) or to (10), {19}, {20). :taytc the President of the Cou.ncil,with u. little inUu.lg.=r..cc 1 \o/OUld J.gree. ! :ua not sure if it appli~s specifically "to ( 20} but it' is in the area of (13), \19) and (:~!J). I ,rr,ade .:.;. ?Oint J.nd it ',..ras su::;pcrted by ot..1er of our speakers, dealing with this clause it sort of says. "As soon as a petition for divorce is :iled 1 a mar~iage is annulled or c~e spouses !lave sepa.r:atcd". !:1 ot.'1er ;.:ords, on a:;;y of t7lose act:s it. irc-.z:;:e..ii<ltely 3C39

Novmeber 20 1 1979 Tape :1o. 1213 SD - 2 :.m. 1. STIRLING: would like to ask the President of the Council new if he has had a chance to give any consideration to it since ~~en,of establish~ng some mechanism to r~ndle thi~ other _than t~e courts which I under~tand right now are vears behind. I said months bu~ ~~en! was corrected by my colleague from Grand Bar~ (Hr. r.. Thoms) to say years.

And if ,this is not ~lready going to overload an 9verloaded court and it has not only the effec-t. on~ineident:s arising out of this act because every t~~e ~~ere is any of those ~~ngs ~,~t happen that ' will cause a division of the spoils, "'immediately it has to go to co~rt.

Now, it seems to me that t."oat has t~ effects if we use the normal court system, Unless we establish an additional court or additional mechanisms or additional commi3sions or some other means of handling it not only does it have an effect of further torturing people who are ~ying to settle their lives again after a brea~ up of a w~rriage but it has the effect of already adding a burden and ~~erefore t.'1rowi:1g out. the other court ?rocesses into f~ther t'.lrmoil.

So, that instead of being just being a year behind 1 we may end up two ard three years behind and the whole process, no matter how good the intention of the legislation, the whole process may founder. I wonder if the Pr~sident of the Council, in cor~idering this question of policy, r~s given any thought to providing a speedy mechanism to handle ~~is problem? >1P,. CHA!R:-tA.:.J: (>tr. Baird) The hon.

President of the council. l'hese,Mr.Chairman,are veey real concerns the hon. member voiced, I do not suppose there is a great'deal we can do in ~'1e bill, you know, with respect to this mat-:.er. ! r.::ean, eo1.e problems with the courts and -:.he dockets of ~~e courts being filled not only in this area of law but in other areas of law/'is a matter of great, great concern ~o not only ":.his ;overn:nent: 1 I t.:.1iflk governments everywhere, because the courts all" over North America have had t..\;,is prcblen. ~'..lt. ! can say t.'1at governr.H:!t'.t has :ll.:-cae.y moved in t:.he -arca,::-2ally,of fa";~ily law in whic!1 J. lot of :hesc quest:::.ons ;.;ill 3C4o·

:rove..""ll.:er 20 1 1979 Taf!e Ho. 1213 SD - 3 appointed to it, there is a recognition that matters that come from t..'1em are not just judi::ial matters but they are 3C41

November 20, 1979 Tape No. 1214 DW - 1 MR. W. HARSHALL: social matters and sociologists and psychologists and guidance counsellors and what have you are assigned to that court,! WP are monitoring that court,particularly,very caro:full-y to dete~~ne its success and we have high hopes that it_ will prove to be a very succ:essfu1 venture that can be expanded in the rest of the Province.

In short, then X can say that this government_ has already recently roved i~ that direction in the establishcent of the Unified Farnil.v couM"• But I would agree with the hon. member that it is a matter of some concern t.lt~t unfortunately where disputes occur, you know, divorces or what have you -:- it is unfortunate, indeed, that they arise in t."le first place. But the only appropriate place we have foun.d in order to effectively deal wit.~ them is through the courts. All we can do is hope to set up-, _ _,a mechanism to make the courts more expeditious and this we are in the process of doing. ;.t~.

CilA!?JoW.J (BAIRD) : NR. L. STIRLING: 'l'he bon. metr.ber for Bonavista North. I take it that there may be scree further progress en that before the Bill actually takes effect in July 1980? HR. CHAIR.'Wl: The hon. President of ~~e Council. Mr. Ch.airtnan, I think it would be wrong for rre to give that parcicular impression. The if!lpression ! want, to give is that generally speaking we are concerned with being ~~arged with the a~~nistration of Justice in the ~rovince.~ith the slowness of the court 1 it is not necessarily ~~e fault of the courts -either 1thPTP are all sorts of circumstances involved in it.

But I would not be able to say that by tile tirr.e it cotres in on July lst, I do not know whether this Bill the hen. merrber indicates ehat ~~is Bill would have an ~ffect of further clogging up ~~e courts 1or the enact~nt of this Bill would cause furt~er delays .. ! do not really think so, I t.1.ink. it is outside the ar.Li t a f "t~1is Eill itself, b-ecause all ~'1is Bill Coes 1 it ]t::st sets Co"'"n certain criteria which a jt=dge ,-...ill hilve to irr.§leF.ent and changes the previous cri~eria in ~etertrining the discribution of the frOFerty assets between the parties.

If ~here is a dispute ri<;ht now the court still has to Cet.err._ine 1 in default of an agreer.ent 1 ioc...,· the assets are to Ce WstributeC. 3C42'

:Iovem.ber 20, l9i9 Tape ::~o. 1214 DW - 2 HR. H. H:ARSHALL: P...nd I do not think, as I say, that this will affect that to any great degree it just sets down a different criteria. However, .,.,.e are concerned, as I say, with the ad.lr.inistratio~ of Justice because Justice delayed is Justice denied, and we are working a~ all times to t.'le end of improving the system. On motion, Clause 20· canied. HR. L. STIRLING: How do we indicate a vote against Clause 20 particularlv on the point of the question of policy? Mr. chairman, I am just lOoking for direction. HR. CHAIR."'AN: {BAIPD) l<JR. L.

STIFLING: The hon. n:ert'her for Bonavista North. !t seems that we do have a Ual difference of policy in this particular one that my colleague, the men-her for Grand aank {P.r. Thoms) brings up about the definition of 'grossly unjust' versus 'reasonable! So I, for one, feel like I have to vot:e against that" clause. XR. 'tl. MARSHALL: MR. CUAIRHAU: Hr. Olai.rll".an, if I may just indicate. The han. PresiCent of the Council.

The rules of the House have been changed as the hon. member, I know,knows and there can be a divisicn on it if you wish. bur r S\tgges-e t.l-).at the hon. member• s objection to it and the fact that ;;e is voting agains't. it has been recorCed by virtue or the fact t.J;at. his comments a moment aqo and the fact thPV wi11 ~~er in ua~~ar~ ~-lR. CSAIP!.m.'l: I wish to advise hon. metr.ber' the division will be noted in the }1inutes. MR. Cr..hiP~"W--l: MR. L. S!IRLING: On motion, Clauses 21 to 23 carried. The han. tnetl"ber fOr' aonavi:Sta i'iort.'l. :,tr.

Chairman, on Clause 24 I think this is wr.e:re the l-tinister of ECucation (Ms. Ve:rge) in the discussion on :second :reading indicated that the judge could make provision thae'one spouse p_ay to the o~~er spouse such amount as set out in the orCer to provide for c;,.e division of t..'le property. Not befng a lawyer, Hr. Chairman, I do not make the distinction between passing legislation and providing the :mans to solve tite problem. And it would seer:t t.a me th.at we should not pass the legislation 1.!.T1til we have t:..~e rear.s to solve t.'1e problem.

But :1ow just getting as to sort: of what happens t.~e next step. 3C43

November 20, 1979 Tape 1215 MB - 1 HR. STIRLING: suppose it goes ~o court and we have a situation where one of the partners is going to be responsible for the children and stays in the home. Do I take it from this

part in the answer that th_e Minister of Education (Ms.Verge) gave me, that the c_ourt will decid.e whether or not the house is to be sold after hea_ring all the. evidence?

If·it is not going to be sold it may make provision for somebody, say for example in this case, the wife with the children that stay in' the home; make provision that she would have somehow to pay her husband, who is now left and out of the house, to pay him in the normal course of events,~less she convinces the judge otherwise, in the normal course of events. there would have to be some provision for her to 1 in effect 1 buy out his inter~st or pay off his share. of this section? Is that the effect MR.-... :-!~Ilt.'!AN: (Baird) MR. MARSHALL: The hon. President of the Council. Mr.

Chairman,that is a poss~ble effect but i~ is not a necessary effect~ The way the

section reads is that the court may, and I would say it would be very, very rarely indeed. ~he purpose of the

section itself is to give the rights of ownership reall~ in the event-! would say in most cases-to the mother and children, particularly when there are young children. So it says it may or it may not if circumstances do not indicate. It may order that there be compensation paid. I can only conceive of this being done if the perso~ having custody of the children is in a better economic position, shall we say, than the other tenant of the property. The point of the matter is, it may, it is permissive, but it is nOt mandatory. !1R. CHATP-~.:\N: MR. STIRLING: Han. member for BonaVista North. M~.

Chairman, under this 3~c= of the act I ar:t trying t;:' apply the concept on the government policy. ~s I understand the government policy is to say-let us take most di7orce proceedings in Newfoundland, the ones that I 3C44

November 20, 1979 Tape 1215 MB - 2 MR. STIRLING: am aware of, the wife usually ends up with the children and they stay in the home. Is it the intent of the government, and the government 'policY, in that situation, if they do not take any other proceedings, that the vife and chi±dren in the home have a half interest in the home, or the w'ife has a llalf interest in 'the home, and the husband that leaves retains his half interest, and they have to settle that somehow? They can either se.ttle it through court, or they are going to have to settle it somehOw.

But the husband retains a half interest in the home. ~ARSHALL: MR. CHAIRMAN: MR. MARSHALL: That is right, yes. Hon. President of the council. That is- riqht,Mr. Chairman. There are other provisions in the act itself,· subject to­ was it

section {20)?- Subject to the discretion of the court itself in respect of aggravated circumstances to change that distribution. This is the intention of the government. It recognizes the fact that it is a fifty-fifty. division, and even though one is out of the house that person will have a half in~erest in the house, subject to the act and the ability to apply for a change in that division. MR. CHAIRMAN: MR. STIRLING: Hon. member for Bonavista North. Mr.

Chairman, -do I take it then in the normal course, on separation, if ther~·is any kind of diSpute that it ends up going back to courti That is the logical sequence, that it ends up going back to court, and the court then has to hear all the evidence and decide whe5her or not this should follow. That wife cannot sell that home the~ with the children. This fellow, although she thought s~e was rid of him, he still has a fifty percent interest in her property and that could be twenty years down the road, he would still have that fifty percent interest. 3G45

November 20 1 1979 Tape 1215 MB - 3 MR. CHAIRMAN: Hen. President of the Council. MR. MARS~ There is a prevision farther en. The house can be sold or-paragraph (

C) of thAt same

section gives the court the power to order a sale, Or the partition of the property, which I wou1d assume that the court could do at the same time it waS considering the' other Matte~s. on motion Clause 25 through to Clause 26 carried. MR. CHAIRMAN: shall Clause 27 carry? MR. STIRLING: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The hen. member for Bona vista North. MR. STIRLING: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 3046 ~

November 19, 1979 Tape No. 1216 GH-1 MR. STIRLING: This, I take it, is where we are getting into the area now that you were talking about earlier - a fisherman's boat, if he is using it for fishing, is a business asset and, presumably - now, does that mean ~~at he ~u!d have to go to the court to - let us suppose a fisherman and his wife split up. Maybe be has only been marri~d six months, they split. up at the end of six months..

Then what happens - he says, "Okay, that is it, you are out", and she said, "Well, I own half of this" - she then has to take him to court, presumably, and, then a court must decide whi~~ are business assets and which are personal assets. Is that right? MR. CHA!RI1AN: {Baird) MR. MARSHALL: The han. the ?resident of tha Council. Mr. Chairman, you know, if the parties cannot come to an agreement, one or the other would be entitled to bring the matter to court for.adjudication. MR. CH.\IR."Wl: MR. WARREN: The bon. member for Torngat Mountains. Mr.

Chairman, further on that question, taking the question in the context that my colleague asked; if a fisherman has a boat - MR. MARSHALL! MR. WARREN: I am sorrJ, the hon. member. I am sorry, you are talking to the Minister of Finance so I '.<~ill start again. !f a fisherman has a boat and he is only married for six months or a year and that boat is outstanding from th.e Fisherif!S Loan Board or from a bank or such thing, does that mean that this liability is also shared by the lady~ "by both parties? MR. ~HALL: HR. CHAIR. "iAN: MR.

M.ll,.RSHALL: Yes, yes, because it would be shared - The hon. the Pr~sident of the Council. - to the extent, Mr. Ch~~rman, that any interest in the boat would be subject to this paramount lie~ to the Fisheri&s Loan Board or ~~e bank or what have you. As a ~atter of fact, I would assume that certainly in the future all financial institutions will have bo~~ the husband and ~~e wife sign any papers where loans are involved. 3047

November 19, 1979 Ma. WARRt:N: then. carried. MR. CHAIRMAN: (Baird) MR. RIDEOUT: Tape No. 1216 GH-2 The Lc~n Board is going to be broke On motion, Clauses {27) through to (31), Shall Clause (32) carry? Hon. member for Baie Yerte-White Bay. Mr. Chairman, I have to say at the beginning that with all the provisions in this bill, I guess that it is Clause (32) that causes me the ~st problems from a very personal point of view, and I am talking about the cohabitation clause that Clause (32) deals with. If I understand the act correctly - and the President of the Council, {Mr.

Marshall} feel free to correct me if I am wrong- when the act comes into force, those of us who are married and those who will get married any time th'eieafter, after Ju~y lst, will come under the provisions of this act. There is, however, a provision for any of us, provided there is mutual agreement between both spouses, to contract out of the provisions of this Matrimonial Property Act. However, we do, unless we choose to contract out, become subject to all the provisions of this particular bill.

Now, clause (32), dealing with cohabitation agreements- and I realize it is a ver] difficult area to do anything about - l am not small-minded in the situation at all and I realize the dilemma that the government has to face - we have to face reality and what is reality we have to tr] to do something about it- but Clause \32),in direct contrast to the situation th.at I just stated as it: applies to al,i of us_ through who are married and to those 'Nho 'N"ill get married after the bill comes into force, Clause {32) provides for a contracting in for those people who are cohabitating, those people who are living toge~~r. in other words, in a common-law arrangement.

The bill provides for ~ose people to contract in, to come into, to become part of the act. We wo~ld have to cont=act out, we are into it anyway. We have no choice, according to ~he law of this land ~~at we become subject to the provisions of ~~is act, and if we •.;ant to change that: then the only choice is t:o contract 3C48

November 19, 1979 Tape No. 1216 GH-3 MR~ RIDEOUT: out. Those people who are cohabitating, living common-law, have a far greater choice, I would submit to the minister, than 3C49

November 20,1979 Tape No. 1217 Rl\ - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: the person who is married, they can contract in or if not they can continue to cohabitate, to live toge~~er, even ~~ough they may acquire assets during their cohabitation 1 they.~ill not be subject to the provisions of this law unless they agree to contract. into it and be- come subject to the agreements thereto. I find ~~at offensive in principle, although I say that realizing the very serious practical considerations that the government must face in bringing in

an act­ of this kind. But I do, I have to sa-r· in conscience 1 I find lt very offensive in principle, that people who are cohabitating will have that kind of choice. New, I do not know if there is anY practical way around it or not. I am open to suggestions and I am just shar­ ing the concern that I have to the minister and I would like to hear his views on it. I do not know if there is any other pract­ ical way around the matter or not. I do not if it is practical to say that it applies to all couples whether ~;ey are married or whether they are cohabitating.

It seems to me that this cohabitation clause, No. (n),gives a very unfair advantage to those people who see fit not to marry for whatever reason, whether it is a legal :eason or some other reason 1 it gives those people a very unfair advantage compared to the rest of us in our society, And it se-ems to me1 also, that an argument can be made that clauser2) actually encourage~ people to cohabitate 1 to live common-law rather than get marr~ed~ I ~~ink a very hard argument could be made that that is exactly what it does.

And if people are afraid to come under, for whatever reason, to come under 1 to get married and,~~erefore 1 become part of what this bill pro­ vides, then ther~ is a very easy solution, if you are not bo~~ered in conscience or in any other way, and that is to agree to live common-law and then you do not have to go in unless you agree to go in, if both of you agree to do it •. So as I say to th.e !-liniste.r, I realize Ute practical dila.-nma that the government faces in this kind of situatior. but I find it ve~f offensive in principle and certainly !,for one, 3G50

November 20, 1979 Tape No. 1217 RA2 Wt. P-IDEOfJT ~ in speaking for myself 1 in my own conscience could not support clause (3~). MR. SPEJ\Il:ER: Hon. member for LaEoile. MR. NEARY: I am -not going to argue, Sir, the I'DOrals of this p~rticu1ar c1a.use I will leave that tq the minister and to the government • But my hon. colleague who just s:poke1 Sir, has a very valid point. As I indicated dt,tring second reading of this bill the government, in order to correct an in­ justice in our society, brought in a law that intrudes in the lives of every married and unmarried couple in this province.

What the government should have done,as my hen. friend just indicated,was brought in a law enabling people who wanted to enter into con­ tracts to enter into contracts. ~Vhat they should have dorie, really, for the married couples in this province is what they are doing for t."le unmarried couples., That is what the government should have done, wherepeople,if ~~ey wanted to, could enter into agreements instead of forcing the law on every married couple in this province which, in my opinion 1is t."l.e greatest int..~sicn into people's personal tives 1I supposerthat we hav;'~ver seen on the North ~~rican con- tinent.

I would not be a bit surprised but the whole bill is un- constitutional and if it was ever tested in the courts, certainly might even be contrary to the British North .liJr.erica Act. In the :meantime Mr. Speaker, I believe the, and ! know r am not allowed to argue the principle of the bill now 1 but ! belieVe Phe!t the government should have done and what t~ey should do now, is to re- consider t!':is matter and give everybody the sam!? privilege as they are giving the people who are shacked up. SOME EON. M£!1BER: !naudible. MR.

SEARY; I have nothing against shack- ups, I will leave t.l-tat to. the government~ But there is 1 <!-S rn:,:- hen. colleague indicates, there is a tendency here for people to feel that they ~auld be tetter of by shacking up because then you can 3C51

Noverrher 20 • 1979 Tape no.1217 RAJ MR. N'FARY: either enter into an agreement or not enter into an agreement. But if you are legitimately married 1 then you have no choice 1 you have to accept this law whether you like it or not 3C52.

!-tovember 20, • 979 Tape No. 1218 SD - l and that is where t.'lis _law is caus!.nr; an awful let of cone err. across this Province today. ! have talJ:ed to an awful let of people ar.d ::.hey are very concerned about the f3:ct th.at t.Jte goverrum;:n!:. is dict.1.ting to thm:1. and telling the=t what to do and in~~ding in ~~eir per=cnal and private lives~ It is a matter. that should be left up to the L~dividuals themselves.

It is an admi~sion of failure;really 1 in our society and the government is tr]ing to correct an injustice to deal with the horror stories -:.~at -..-ere pointed aut by the :1inister of" Education {Hs. Ve1;ge) 1 the real godmother of t.~is bill. Then t.'le government,in trying to de ehat, brought in a l.::tw for everyLociy, There is toe ::~uch regi:nentation today, ther'=- is too cuch intruding in people's personal lives and it is about t~e it stopped~ And 6is is t..'le worst example of all. :·!y han. friend is 100 per cent correct, :1r.

C~1airman, tha::: what the ryovcrn::1ent should have done was given everybody the same privilege, treat everybody aliJ:e. Xi !ION. ~1EMBE?.: t1P... S. :IEARY: -~i HCN. ~1E2>1BER: ~-m. S , NEAR'I : (Inaudi;.;;-ltd the law is {inaudible) . Pardon. (!naudi~l~) the law is {inaudible) • \-Jell, there sno1.1ld Ce less laws, there should be less stepping in the people's lives, there should be less regimentation. The next ~~ing t..~e government will be regulatL~g ~~c n'...lttbcr of ti.-:~es you are all owes!. to so to the ba tl-'.rco?m a day.

That will Le the ne:!t t:l<inq we will get. ;!,:', Chair:::an, I 'Hill ha.·..-e to vote against t.'l.is clause nee l:::ecause I am against people living Cotl"z.on-law but I til.ink it:. is outr.:!..gh't. ciiscr:!.:~,ina.cion' t.'l.ey should have the: same privilege, cte'/ should be J.blc to opt i:1 3053

November 20, 1979 i'!R. CHAIP.Hl.:-1: {Hr • Baird) }1R. L. TliO!-!S : Tape ::o. 1218 .SD - 2 The hon. member for Grand Bank. I would like to just have a few words in connection wi~~ ~~is pareicular

section basically, I ~uess, ~o back up what the members for Saie Verte and LaPoile, have said. I do nee believe that any c1a~se 1 and I do believe ~~at this, particular ~lause in ~~is particular_ act, no ~lause should penalize t~ people fer being married and ~~at is what this cl;1u.se is basically doing, it is penalizing two people. !or being married.simply because. the act applies to t~ people who have married but it cioes not apply to two people who are not married.

Now, ~ell ~e what is the difference between an injustice ~~at is perpetrated on one spouse or the other who are married and an injustice that is perpetrated on a man and a woman Nho are not ~arried? Ahac ~~e act does and what this particular act does is p~nalize two people for being married because ~~ey are forced to come uncier the act. If they do not come '.lnder t.be act then-i£ they do not ·,.Jant to come under the act t.I1ey have ~~e privilege of opti.r.g out - a contracting out. Sut how many people in Lawn, St.

Lawrence, Grand !lank, Fortune, Grand Beach, how ~any married people are even going to ~~ink about coneracting out of ~~is 2articular legislation? And in spite of an education progr~~,whatever might be carried out, how ~any people in ~~is Province are going eo contract out of chis or even know that legislation is in existance for that ~~tter? I would like to repeat that this particular

section should, in some way or ether, ::e' rephr3.seti, redrafter, scnet~ing done with it so ~~at the married couples are not penalizeC~And this is '4!-lat :.nis particular

section does, it. p.:;n-alizes t\VO people for :Ceing ::tarried by forcing them to come under this part.iC'ttlar act •,.;here ;;·au can -:ohatit and not have one good - for t·,.;a peo[Jle col"'lilbi.tit:g ar.y-..rhere in t:1i;:; Province -::his act; has no force affecc 1 none "''i:iltsoever. 'L1C'' can complet:ely ignor~ it, they are not subject to it, aut it does 3C54

:rover:'.bex 20, 1979 Tape :lo. 1215 50 - 3 :·lr. Chairman, I have ::.o agree with :r.y ~~ree colleagues ~r~ just spoke. Section (32) 1 T believe, is way out of wack for this Province. You know. I can just imagine 3055

November 20, 1979 HR • HAR.11.EN : tomorrow morning Tape No. 1219 IB-1 the headlines of all the daily papers, on all the radio stations throughout this fair Province of ours, straigh~ through Labrador down as far as Nain right on to St. Mary's-The Capes, saying the government is encouraging shacking up, the government is encouraging cohabitat:.lon and this is ~actly what it is doing. our government, the government of this Province is basically encouraging people not to get married, basically encouraging ~~em to live together regardless. I balie'lte,< 11!:. Chairman, this

section of this act definitely should be deleted-. And how many people, young people, whether they are !ifteen, eighteen, thir~J-five or forty, how many people in this ?rovince if they really hear what is being said, Will they reallv know wh~t t~is government is up toP You know, it is absolutely ridiculous for the government to <::lven think about it. You are~encouraging cohabitation i.'l Canada's tenth province. Mr. Chairman, the Minister of the Privy council said that there would be literature going out to all areas of ~~e Province.

I am just wondering if ~~is bill as it is new will be going out to the people or will this bill be refined to show all ~~e goods parts in it. Now1 there are parts of this bill tr~t are good and I agree with parts of this bill. But when this newslette~or wr~tever you are going to send out to the individual people around this Province goes out, are your JOing to have on ~~e first page of that newsletter, shacki~g up is allowed? Mr.

Chairman, it is a verJ dangerous precedent that this government is setting and it is set:ting it,~cwWhat is happening is we will find the balconies being filled to find out what is goi~g on. I call upon th~ media of this Province to let che people know exactly what is entailed in this bill because as far as .f am concerned section)2}deiinitely should be deleted and deleted immedia~ely. }llL THC."1S: MR. CHAIRMAN: !·!R. THOHS: Mr. Chairman. The hon. member =or Grand Bank. ~~. Chai~. I want to make it quite clear co the goverr~ent that I a~ not advocating ~hat this particular clause be deleted.

What I would like ~o see is have the act a~ply to married 3C56

November 20, 1979 Tape NO. 1219 IB-2 MR. THOMS: couples and to couples who are cohabiting, make it fair to both. And t."len, if two people who are living together what to contrac.t out of the act they can contract out of the act just the same as married people can contract out of the act. Make the act applicable to people who are living common-law as well as peopl~ who are married, 'then the act ~pplies eciually to both/ both of them can contract out if ~hey want to. I am not saying not to have this particular

section in there. I think we a~l have to.f~ce up to the fact that not every two people living together are married. In this day and age not every ~No people living together are i man and woman let along being ~ried So again, if I may repeat, what I would like to see, is have the act apply the same to people who cohabiting as to married people. !1R. CHAI:FI!A.AN: The hen. Presiderit~of the Council~ MR. HARSP...ALI.: Mr. Chair~an, I do have a little bit of difficulty on the observations made by all hen. gentlemen in Committee because they voted for the bill in principle as they were going to be for it.

The hon. member for Baie Verte-White Bay (Hr. Rideout} talks about it giving an unfair advantage to people who are living common-law. The bon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) talks about it being an intrusion on the rights of people. Even the hen. member for Grand Bank (Mr~ Thoms), I was surprised, said that this clause penalizes. 3057

November 19, 1979 Tape No, 1220 GH-1 HR. :1ARSHAU.: people who are married. So, if this clause penalizes people who were married, it means that the people who are not married are in a better position after the passage of' this act than the people who are, in fact, married, so it means that the hen. gentlemen opposite really do not think that this bill is of the. substance of which it actuallY is, that it is really One that is worthy for support.

On the one hand, when it comes up before the House, they say they support it wholeheartedly, but from the hen. gentlemen's comments here at this particular time, their comments are entirely inconsistent. They lead one to believe that they are not for it and let the word get out then that the Liberal Opposition,' obviously, since four out of four who spoke were against it, are officially against this bill. Now, Mr. Chairman - SOME HCN. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. CHAIRMAN: (Baird) Order, please! MR. MARSP.ALL: - to make - to say, Mr. Chairman, AN HON. ME."!BER: (Inaudible}, MR.

MARSHALL: Okay 1 the hen. gentler.tan wants it to apply equally. Now, at the one stage of the game/ before when this bill came up before this House - this is before the big election, ~.

Chairman - there were words in here, ".a man and a woman who are cohabiting and not married to oce another may enter into agreement to be known as a cohabitation agreement, as if they were married", and there was a great hue and c~ then at the time that, you knew, how scandalous it was to bring in a bill that recognizes cohabitation ag'riiements as if the people were married, and we agreed at the time it was really just a slip of the draftsman's pen so we deleted those words. Now, the hen. gentleman wants the act~ apply to everjone.

Well, th±S goverr~ent is not prepared to do so, because to do so would be to truly recognizing common-law marriages, and ~~is gove~nment, as a ~acter of policy, is not prepared, you ~~ow - we recognize common-law marriages exist - ~~ac is a matter for the people concerned - but we are not prepared t.o acccrd t-o common-law :narriases th~ same pri•.rileges and rights and 3058

November 19, 1979 Tape No. 1220 GH-2 MR. MARSHALL: and duties, for that matter, because they do not undertake duties as are accorded under the law. So, Mr. Chairman, that is the position now in this particular instance - the unfair advantage ~e say - we do not think it so. The fact of the matter is that people do, as a matter of their own choice, live common~law. If ~~ey live common-law, they can enter into this agreement to get the . . economic benefits of this act, and this is all this act is concerned about in the institution of marriage is to confer economic benefits, absolutely nothing else.

Now, one of the han. members mentioned the fact that ~~is was, as I say, an intrusion on persons 1 lives. Why can we not leave it U? to the people? Why can the married people not make agreements? Why can ~~ey not be accorded the same privilege as people who cohabit together wi~~out the benefit of marriage? Why does this act not apply only iri those instances of marriage where they both agree( And the reason for it is quit:.e simple, Hr. Chairman.

One of the principle reasons why this par't:.iClJlar act lends itself 't:.O one's approval is the fact that if you leave it up to a large number of people, what will happen is that - and in most cases it is the husband desertz, leaves his wife and children wi~~out any visible means of support whatsoever, takes the house and sells it out from under them, puts the wife and children on Social Assistance. The wife and children have to depend on government taxes. We have to pay for them. What ~~is bill, in effect, does is say to that - that is why we do not leave it up t:.o the people- we leave'it up to most people.

Sure, most people are responsible and look after their families, look after their wives after they become widows, but there are a certairi number of people, unfortunately, in this world~ho do not, and there are lots of people or a certain number of people; shall we say, sa that I do not get quoted out of context, but there are ~oo many people in this Province today who have left their families on Social Assistance where the state has to pay for ~he family and go off 3CS9

NOV~~er 20 1 1979 Tape No. 1221 IB-1 MR. MARSHALL: on their merry way, taking all of the assets of the marriage, earning large amounts of money and not contributing. I am not saying-that this bill remedies all that, because I firmly believe that there have to be tightened up the proceciures in this Frovince fer the enforcement of maintenance rights, but when we talk about l~aving-it up to the people 1 certainly we leave it up. We have left it up, M:. Chairman, to about 95 per cent of the people who are responsible and look after their families.

But in· t:he case of_ the 5 per cent that do not:, and in the L,terest of ~~e families themselves 1we say there will be a division of the matrimonial assets and we make no apologies for this. we think that this is a good piece of law. we indicated in the election campaignand when it was brought before the House. The only thing that I am quite astounded with, ~I.

Chairman, is that it came before ~1is House and the official Opposition said that they supported it, Now, lo and behold, if one wi:.>hes 1:0 dissect what they say and listen to what they say ,you can see on the lips of every one of them that in effect they really do net: support it as indicated by their observations with respect to this clause no. 32~ SOME HON. ME.'1BERS: MR. HARSHALL: MR. CHAIR."1AN: MR. RIDEOUT: Hear, hear! A shame on them and a pox en their house. The hen. ma~er for Baie Verte-White Bay. Mr.

Chairman, it has often been said, I suppose, that: in order to defend the best way to de it is t:o 'attack. And certainly the hon. President of the Council tried to. live that principle that time. Because there is nothing =urther from ~~e truth, and I will not, as a member who stood in ~~is House and supported the principle of this bill, ! will nat stand by and have one a~~er member of this Hause twist and turn words to the effect that ! am now against the bill. I am not agains~ the bill. ! am for the principle of this bill 100 per cent. 1 voted for the principle of this bill 100 per cent.

But just because 1 have an objection to a clause - and it matters net to the hon. gentl~~an whether the objec~ion is based on conscience or not-he 3C60

November 20, 1979 Tape No. 1221 !B-2 HP... RIDEOUT: has got to stand up in his place and take my objection to that clause and turn it into a political football,whether it is based on conscience or not, and say that the Opposition is against the hill. Mr. Chairman, what a display by the government House Leader; That is the ki~d of co-operation that will get speedy passage of legislation in this Legislature. · That is the kind of display of co-operation from the goverrment House Leader that will get things done in an amicable fashion.

That is the kind of display by the-government House Leader that he says drops the decorum of this House, that gets people's backs up. I happen to object to that on two grounds. I explained one ground is ·that I think it gives unfair advantage to those who are cohabitating. And seccndly 1 I have a conscientious objection to it.

And as one member of this House,! think I have a right to make that objection and I have a right to make that without the hon. gentleman, the ?resident of the Council, taking those w~rds and attemptL~g to turn it into a political football by saying that the Opposit:!.on is against the principle a£ this bill. What a diversionary tactic by the hon. membe~! MR. MARSHALL: l1R. RIDEOUT: Now I want to say also - Say that to the people in (inaudible).

I want to say also - I will go back through it again since it is apparent that - I do net knew if it is the same problem every day or net-but it is apyarent that the hen. gentlemen do not want to let it sink in. And I will go back through it once more. Those of us who are married have nc choice but come under the principle under this bill. I voted for it. ! have no objection to that, ~one whatsoever, ~. STAGG: Quiet down. .MR. R!DEOf.JT: I have no ObJection to it. ,. wish. the hon • gentleman for Stephenville could be quiet because he says nothing when he stands up.

So when he is sitting down he may as well be quiet. Now, ;tr. Chair:nan, ! !-.ad no choice but come under ::he ;:revisions of this bill. ! had no quarrel with ::hat '"'hat:soever. !£ :want to get our. frcm under the provisions of ::he bill, the husband 3D61.

November 20, 1979 Tape 1221 IB-3 MR. RIDEOUT: and ehe wife have eo agree to ope cue. If one objects 1 you cannot get out. You are in there, that is it. I have no quarrel with that. But when i~ comes to this cohabitation clause, if both people agree they can go in, they can make an agreement to opt into it, to be covered by the provisions of the bill. However, one person can keep them·outside by not agreeing to make_ that agreem~nt to opt in 1

whereas on the other bar~ the only way I can get out from under it is both of us agree. Now if that is not an unfair advantage, if that is not contributing to those people who know ~,ey are not going to get an agreement anyway, if that is not contributing to encouraging cohabitation in this Province, then I ask the hon. gentleman what is it? And I object on that ground and that gives me a conscientious ground to object also. .MR. ~1ARSHALL: ~. RIDEOUT: MR. MA..~HALL: Would the hon. me_m!:er permit a question? Yes,r will permit a question.

If the hon. gentl~~ is using words like it 'does not permit me to ge~ cut from under it; what is the hon. gentleman saying but tt-.at he does not want:. the bill to apply to h.tm and he does not like the bill? MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Chairman, again he goes back to the stupid nonsense - MIL CHAIPJ1A.:; (Baird) : The hen. member for Baie Verte-White Bay. MR. RIDEOUT: - by using me as an example. I could use the hen. gentleman. I could use John Doe. I could use any member in the House as an e::<arnple. The member knows I am using me as an .example.

Can the member get it through ~is head that I voted for this bill in second =eading? Can you get that through your head? t-!R. MARSHALL: ;-!R. R!DEOU'!': So now you are speaking against it. I am speaking against Clause 32-'for ':we reasons. &~d !or the hon. gentleman to get up and try to twist that:. around in the way that only he can aFt:.empt to do and to make a political football out of it:. then I ~uld say it is very unforunate especially when i~ cernes from the Gcve~~~en~ House Leader. 3G62

November 20, 1979 Tape No. 1221 IB-4 MR. NEARY: Mr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRr."!AN (Hr. Baird): The bon. member for La.Poile. HR. NEARY: Only ehe Governmen~ House Leader, Sir, could twist words 3C63

>iove.'l'.b>;2r 20, 1979 Tape :;o. 1222 SD - 1 AR. S. :.lEARY: t:."lat. were uttered on this side of the House like the hon. gentleman did in his devious 1 usual fashion in this House. V,'hat we are saying, .i-!r. Chairman, is t..~is, is t..hat this .~ill is loaded against married people in~ this Province and _gives t.i.e people who are cohabitatL'1g preferential, ~eatment. That. is what this clause says ar~ that. is what we are point.ing out to the House and to t:.i.e people of t:.~is PrOVL'1ce 1if it ever get.s reported. I know, :1r.

Chairman, ~'lere are hon .. gentlemen M sittL'1g on t:.~e government benches who would like to say something about this clause and about this bill, and why t.l;.ey have not stcoU in t.'lcir places and said the t:.'lings that. they say to us privat.ely and in t.'le corridors of Cor~ederation Sui:di~g.and the corridors c£ t:.~is House is beyond me. The wa~ber - Y.R. S. NEA..llY': r~t be fair 1 but. I notice by t~e AN HO~l. ~tE!-1BER: HR. S. :1EARY: Name him.

No, I will not name him,that. would The member for Harbour 1-!ain. papers t.1.at the hon. member for !:iarbour >tain - Sell Island (!1r. :Joyle) has concerned himself abcu'; ab:lrtion, has clim!:eci a.t:oard tl1e bandwagon of at:ortion and is circula~ing a petit.ion on t.1.a'; particular natter. Sut where does ':..1e hor .• gentlemar. stand on this bill that. enco~r.lges shack•".J?S? ;::;n, the hon. gentlerr.an can grL'1 all he wants an~ the han. Minister of Ed:.lcation can shake ;,_er head all she wants; t:.."lo: han.

M.inis:.er of Et:ucation :t:~anaged to p>±rsuade t.'le govern:nen:. and t.J.l'. :.ne govl:!rr.mer:t i;:J.~o ~ri:1ging in a law in this Province ct.f!ecting t.!:e lives o= every :::arried couple in this Province, and ::hen Jii'Je peo?le '"no are li•Ji:lg th.c r::a..rried couples have no choice~ t=:e:t ca.nnoc -.:pt in, they c~n ost o~t but ~ot. opt in. And ,what. is so funny about chat:? If ~~a~ is ~ot 01n in-:.rusion of peo[)lt:s civil liberties ar.C their righc:;, r Jc not 3C64

~love.-nber 20, 1979 Tape No. 1222 so - 2 govern.1nent stepping into the bedrooms of ~,is Province. Even Pierre Elliott Trudeau told ~,e nation that :;overnment should not enter into the bedrooms of this country. A~i HON. HE!1EE.R: (Inaudible) XR. S. :iEARY! !t is very funny, Sir, it is very fur~y indeed.. The raw.ifications and the .implications of this bill, s~r, as I inC.icate.d during second reading,are enormous, !-1r. C!1airman, and !J.ere •....e are trying to poil'lt out to the government one of t.'1.e big weaknesses in the billS..

And wnen we said in tne beginning we supported the principle of this bill, everJ member that stood, r believe, in his place on this side of t.he House .said, "We agree with the principle of ::or:recti::g this injustice". And all these horro: stories that the :-tiniscer of Education U1s. Verge) was using in order to justify :r.aking a law for every married couple in this ?rovince 1 ~";) said, "Yes, we subscribe to that principle".

But - We vo~ed for i~. ar~ we voted for it to ~ ~an. 3u~ we also said, at least I s.J.id d.nd I t:.."link ! ;1eard L'f ::on. friend th.e me::tbe:r who speaks for jus~ice on t.,_i:3 side of the :::ouse say that we ;:oint.ed out to the governnent t:...'1ere were ~>'eaf' .. :J.esse::; in the bill ar.d fran c~-.is side of th'2 Souse. 3ut our plea fell on 1caf ears and t.:;d:: is ir. or:ler to ::-.o'Je :1n .zu::cr.C:::ent.1 ,. •,dll think a!:out i:: ··:hen one o~ 3G65

Tap.: :-;o. 1222 SD - 3 but will a;.Jpl~· to people ·,.oho are nar:ieC all o~~er provisions of the bill will be waived, if ~~ey want to opt: in they can. Then I would say ~o~e would be get.ting _some· ... he:=-e <in -::.."lis House. The hon. gentleman sits over t.:::.ere with a litele silly grin on his face, i1~ thinks it is awfUlly, a~ful+Y fur.ny. The han. gentleman ::.."links t.'1.at one of :..i.s buddies "'ho goes down and ser;es a sen~ence for a white-collar crime and brings down his fl~sk everJ weekend 1 t..!tat: is funny too., ~N a a:;. !U::IDE?.: NR. 5. Nt:A.O..Y: A!LHOU. ME:!BER: ~1R.

S • !JEA..::tY : Yes, I could name r~ces. Yes, go ahead and ;1ame r~n-.es. Yes, Charbonneau Associa~es, tha~ should :ing .3, Oell wit..1. -:.his han. :::=ouse. \•ie would like to Z::e able to fi.:.d out ·what happened t:o t:.'le tr·.rst f~nd t.:,at is down in t:.lte ?Djtal T:=ust Building in one of tbe LlW'Jers' Offices ::!own t:1ere. 3C66

Novetr.ber 20, 1.979 Tape No. 1223 DW - 1 1-:R. S. NEARY: Mr. C.'l.ai.ma."l, in the process of tr1ing to get an amendment and point out the weakness in ~'l.is particular Clause, the Government House Leader ,(P.r. Marshall) has s~en fit to twist- our words. Nothing sets the devil in us more on this side of the House, Sir, ~han to see the devious mind of the minister as he tries to twist and turn and squir:n. We are on solid ground here and I ·would like to hear what the Minister of Consumer Affairs, how the hen. lady feels about t.~is particular Bill.

And I would like to hear from met'bers on backbenches on the Goverru::ent side of ·the House- to find out how they feel about it. !t is, Sir, a very subStantial piece of legislation and a drastic intrusion into people 1 s lives. Governments have gone teo far in my opinion in regu­ lating people 1 s lives, in telling people what they should Co and what they should not de, gone too far altoge~~er.

And 1 as I said, in trJing to correct ar. injustice involving some peo!?le 'Whose r..arriage goes en the .rocks and ::."ley :become socially and economically marocned 1 in order to try - and that I would say is only about one per cent of the population - in order to correct that injustice we find ourselves faced with a law, a piece of legislation, a law forcing everjbody to do some~,ing and allowing those who are not married ~o enter into an agreement if they want to. Let rr.e make it clear, Sir, what I ar.: for~ I arr. for correcting ~~is injusticeJI am all far it.

I am all for bringing in a pie~e of enabling legislation,! am all for making it ~~e l~d of the land t.'lat people can enter into an agree:nent if they 3ee fit. St.:.t I arr.. against shoving something down people's throats that they Co ~ot want and ~~is is a classic exarr.ple of the kind of legislation the people of this Province Co not.t.rant. NP-. CHA!HtAN (B;,IP.D}; The hen. rnetr.ber fer Grand Sank. t!R. L.

TiiOH.S : Hr. chairn:an, certa~n~Y cannot lee this rr:crnenc pass without taking exception to the hen. the ?re;;JiGent. of the Council. (Hr. :·Jarshall) •,.;he ccreptecely twisted and ':;:Urned around what I ;;.ad to say in :::cnnecticn with this particular Clause. It ·.,-a.:; an atter-pt tc divert t..'Us Eou~e frorr: what ·,;e .,.,ere accually saying nbol.!t the :;:articular Clause. 3C67

:iover>bar 20 1 1979 Tape No. 1223 D\1 - 2 !1R. 1, Tl!Ot-'..S : Nr. Ch~i:t'ltan, the Presiclcnt of the Council (Hr. Marshall) 1 after carrJing on this diversion,completely failed to answer the question that I had posed when I spoke in connec- tion with this particular Clause. Jl..nd I would like to hear wh.J.t the !tinister of Education (Ms. Verge) has to say about t,...'lis particular Clause. .She is the one who probably had more input and knows more about" this particular Dill than anybody else in ~'le House.

I would like to hear what she has to say aLout it and I $ee no reason ;,:hy she cannot get on her· feet and let us hear views on this particular Clause. My cornment,and the minister was not in the house at the tin-e, was that this particular

section - I resent the President of the Council standing up and saying 1 'Oh,- you voted for the Bill'. I voted for the Sill in principle,Now if he wants~ to put a different definition, differ- ent

interpretation on what approval in principle rreans or passing of a Bill in principle, that is fine~. I ~m still for the Bill, there is no question about t.~at. But if the President of the Council,e-..-erttirre screbody gets up on this siCe of the House is going to stand up anC any tiree anybody gets up and questions a pareicUlar Clause, well, this is what we are doing,Clause by Clause- A."' HON. MEMBER: ThirC reading. :-!.."".. !. • TEOMS: Third reading. So that if we question a particular Clause 1 that does not mean we are against the Bill,' we are trying to irrprove ~1e Bill, that is all.

That is all we have ever said from the start and ~~at is all we want to do now, i~prcve the Sill. Now, wh.:.t I said was this: I said that :;;articular

section in r::y way of thir.king...and I coulC tc wrc.11g ,I arn not on:nipotent, ! could be wrong but this particular

section of the Bill-penalizes married couples by giving unmar~ied couple~,an unfair advantage. When this Act comes into force,~~en all ~arried ccuples in ~~e Province will ~e covered 1 3C68-

November 19, 1979 Tape No. 1224 GH-1 a.tt. THOMS : bue if the act will only cover those who are cohabiting together, if they so desire to come within the ambit of the act, ~~ey have to consciously make a deliberate effort, go out, enter into a cohabitation agreement, and then a cohabitation agreement may adopt the provisions of ~~is act and such.adcption of ~~is act applies to the man and the woman. They have to opt ibto the act.

A married couPle is under ~~e obligation to opt out of ~~e act, and all I am saying is why not just change this particular clause so that it covers ~~e two people who are-living together common-law as well as the married couple?'Then ~~ey are all in the same boat because, as I said in ~y earlier remarks, there can be just as much an injustice for the common-law spouse to kick the other common-law spouse out of the house as it is for a married person to kick the other married person out of the house. It is just as much of an injustice. AN HON. 1~R: What al:;out (inal.ldible). MIL THOMS: Well, you made t.he - MR.

NEARY: The hen. member knows all about that. AN HON. MEMBER: You are equating marriage with cohabitation. MR. THOMS: I am sorry, what is ~~at? AN HON. ME..~BER: You are aquat.ing marriage witt cohabitation, is that it? MR. THCHS: No, I am not. I am not equating it at all. I am just saying do not put a married couple in an unfair position compared to unmarried couples, that is all I am saying. I am recognizing that common-law situations exist, we all know that. we are not denying that - they do. What I am saying is that let them come within ~~e ambit of ~~is act. Now, the hon. the President of the Council \Mr.

Harshall) did not answer that particular quest::ion at all. He went of£ on a tangent all his own to try to make the Opposition appear ~o be against t~e whole bill. Now there are o~~er sections of this act : am going to question ~fore chis day is over. There are o~~er sec~ions of ~he act I ~~ going to question. Does that mean that I am against ~~e ace? And that is what the ?resident of the Council tried ~o convey. 3C69

November 19, 1979 Tape No. 1224 GH-2 MR. THOMS: It was a complete diversion because he refused to answer some of the questions that we are putting to him in connection with this matter. MR. NEARY: He is very politic and he is trying to be part of it. MR. CHAIR."Wl: {Baird) SOME HON. MEMBERS: MS.. VERGE: Hen. Minister of Education. Hear, hear! Mr. Chairman, I would like to take strong exception to the remarks of· the hen. member for Lapoile (Mr. Neary). In my view 1 he is intentionally distort~ng the contents of this bill, in particular the provisions of Section (32) for cheap, poli"tical advantage.

This is a trick which he pulled last Spring during the debate of ~~e predecessor bill, and out of one side of his ~au~~ during this debate - MR. NEARY: Point of order. MR. CHAIR.I.J.A..~: Point of order. M.,q, NEARY: Mr. Chairman, point of order? HR. CHAIRMA.l'l: Point of order, tile member for Lapoile. MR. NEARY: The hen. minister 1 being a new member of the Rouse, Sir, would not be expected to understand or 'tO know the .rules of this hon.

House, but one of t.~e principles of :.his House is that you cannot question the motives of another hon. gentleman, and the hon. ~L~ister just said that I in my remarks, Sir, used my remarks for cheap, political gain. Mr. Chairman, that is attributing motives co an hon. member of this House, and I would ask Your P.onour - 1 do not want to have ~~e hon. gentleman- <;;,he hen. minister, punished, but 1 believe that Your Honour should point out to ~~e hen. minister that this is unparliamentary and will only do nothing but lower ~e decor~~ of this Bouse. SCME HON. 11E.."1BERS: Hear, he a::! ~1R.

CF.A!RHAN: The hon. :.he ?resident of the Council. 3(/'70.

November 19, 1979 Tape No. 1224 GH-3 On that point of order, Mr. Chairman, I do not think there is any need to dwell to any great length on it, but it is obvious that the hen. member is making a point_ of orde_r just for the sake of it. The han. minister was not questioning the motives, the hon. minister was just indicating what her impression and what her perception and what she feels is the perception of a lot of people as to the hen. gentleman 1 s- SOME HQN. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MP... !1ARSHltLL: himself to this act. SOME HON. ME.HEE..'ltS: - as to the hon. gentleman's address~ng Hear, hear! MP...

CHAIR.M.AN: {Eaird) Beauchesne, page lOS, December 2, 1960, 'cheap, political way' is not parliamentarJ.procedures. I would suggest that maybe the han. member rephrase that section. MR. NEARY: No, Mr. Chairman. ~oint of order, Mr. Chairman,. T.:te hen. r:dnister 3C7:1

Nov~~er 20, 1979 Tape 1225 IB-1 MR. NEARY: has to retrac~ it. If it is unparliamen~ary, Your Honour has ruled it is unparliamentary, the hen. gentleman has to retract. I do not need an apology, all I need is a retraction. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Chairman. !·!R. CHAIR.4AN {BAIRD) : Point of crder, the hen. Presiden~ of the Council. :-