... '' VOL. 3 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEHBLY FOR THE PFRIOD 10:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. FRIDAY, JUNE 19, 1981 NO. 64

June 19, 198 1 Tap e 26 43 The House met at 10:00 A.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Order, ple ase! MR . MORGAN : On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. EC - 1 MR. SPEAKER: On a point of privilege, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, the morning's news is carrying a story that has to be c.orrected.

I am not sure whether it is a misprint by the press or a quote that is directly quoted from the federal minister ,but they are talking about the selling of squid to Japan and the statement is being made in the paper that I have been critical as a provincial minister of the decision of the federal government to sell 17,000 metric tons of squid to Japan. Mr. Speaker, this was never mentioned in the House or outside the House.

It is not 1 sell' ; I used ·!the term 'giveaway 1 because we are not selling the squid, there is no mention of selling squid to Japan, it is where the Japanese fishermen are allowed to come to take and catch 17,000 metric tons of squid from our waters. So the story is incorrect and inaccurate and I want to correct that because I was never critical of the selling of squid- in fact, the more we can sell the bette~ - but I am critical now and was then of allowing the Japanese fishermen to come and take 17,000 metric tons of squid from our waters · I want that to be on the record as corrected. MR.

SPEAKER: Well, with respect to the point of privilege, there really is not a point of privilege. The hon. the minister has taken the opportunity, as we have seen many times in the past, to clarify remarks 7086

June 19, 1981 Tape 2643 EC - 2 MR. SPEAKER: that have been attributed to him in the press and that does not constitute a prima facie case for a point of privilege. Development. MR. WINDSOR: The hon. the Minister of Mr. Speaker, I am today tabling a report entitled Labrador Resource Development and Transportation Plan. This report is the result of considerable detailed study undertaken on behalf of government by internal experts and private sector consultants.

The report outlines government policy on Labrador and planning efforts to date, summarizes current resource potential and identifies the major constraints and issues affecting development in Labrador. It provides a development strategy for Labrador whic~ represents an ambitious mix of projects and programmes designed to maximize the benefits of our resource endowments. Development in Labrador is a complex and sensitive issue. The reasons for this are a mixture of social, cultural, environmental, economic and political factors.

It is interwoven with resource development generally and economic development for the Province as a whole. Government is acutely aware of these interrelationships and this has in part accounted for the lengthy planning process. Over the last ten years considerable effort has been expended by commissions, task forces, committees and consultants to establish a comprehensive data base on which to formulate specific development plans for Labrador. What these efforts have shown is that Labrador consists of three distinct social and economic regions, that developments in Labrador 7087

June 19, 1981 Tape 2643 EC - 3 MR. WINDSOR: will have different impacts depending on the nature of the develop ments, t~at the costs of resource development and transportation invest­ ments will be enormous and that the federal government will be required to provide substantial 7088

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2644 SD - 1 MR. WINDSOR: assistance in Labrador's developments to realize the potential identified. In April 1979, a Steering Committee of senior government officials was established to oversee the preparation of a Labrador resource development and transportation plan. That committee was composed of representatives at the deputy minister's level from the Executive Council, Departments of Public Works, Transportation, Mines and Energy, Development, Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

In addition to this Steering Committee, a Technical Co-ordinating Committee was established to co­ ordinate the large number of field investigations initiated and was composed of representatives from all involved departments supervising specific activities in Labrador - Municipal Affairs, Forestry, Environment, Mines and Energy, Public Works, Transportation, Development, Executive Council and a representative as well from DREE. Considerable time and energy has been devoted to ensuring that the projects which are included in this strategy are technically, financially and environmentally feasible.

The development strategy proposed in this report is based on the conclusion of previous efforts and the eleven specific studies which were initiated by the committee to provide essential information in determining the mix of projects to be included in the plan.

The studies th.at were done included: Harbour works and subsidiary facilities; Trans-Labrador highway; Trans-Labrador railway; Energy intensive industries review; Further processing of iron ore; Environmental assessment; Biophysical ecological land survey; Regional mapping for Happy Valley/Goos·e Bay; Municipal plan update for Happy Valley/Goose Bay; Hydroelectric development; and winter mavigation. The total cost associa.ted with the 7089

·""' June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2644 SD - 2 MR. WINDSOR: implementation of these studies is in excess of $2 million,excluding the time of government officials. Most of these studies were cost shared with DREE. The strategy outlined in the report is based upon development of the Gull Island hydroelectric project in combination with an energy intensive industrial customer and export sales of surplus power across Que~~c to markets in other provinces or the United States.

The strategy recognizes that access to Upper Churchill power is the highest energy priority of the Province hut because of the tim;i.ng of the resolution of the court case for recall power and the application of the Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act are both uncertain, the report concentrates on Lower Churchill hydro development as an alternative option for meeting our energy requirements and at the same time stimulating industrial development in Labrador.

This, however, in no way reflects any intent on the part of government to diminish the priority attached to the Upper Churchill in the ?rovince's hydroelectric development strategy. The development of Gull Is .land hydroelectric project is estimated to cost in excess of $4.3 billion and takE six and a hal~ years to complete. It will provide over 8,000 man-years of construction employment and is seen as an essential precondition for the establishing of an aluminum smelter, The Labrador Development strategy has proposed the location of an aluminum smelter at North West Point in Lake Melville. 7090

June 19, 1981 Tape No.2645 EL - 1 MR. WINDSOR: This is one of several energy intens.ive options available. Negotiations and invest­ igations for energy intensive users have been ongoing for some time but no decision has been finalized on location of this type of industry either on the Island or in Labrador as yet. Addtional work is required before such a decision can be made.

At this point it is anticipated that the smelter would be built in two phases over a five year period, cost in excess of $950 million, provide 7,000 man-years employment during construction, have a capacity of 300, 000 ·tons annually and provide on complet­ ion 1,200 permanent jobs. Essential conditions for the realization of this project, exclusive of the energy pric­ ing issue, invovle:

a) financial participation with in­ dustry and the Federal Government in the provision of a docksite estimated to cost in the order of $70 million;

b) a water supply system estimated at $30 million;

c) a new townsite which would cost up to $145 million over a ten year period; and finally, negotiation with the Federal Government to assume its responsibility with respect to Winter navigation into Lake Melville. Careful planning and scheduling of these events is critical in view of the dram­ atic impact they would have on Happy Valley - Goose Bay. The development strategy involves a major· role for Federal participation through cost-sharing agreements for the constuction of the Trans-Labrador high­ way from Goose Bay to Labrador West.

This highway would cost approximately $320 million and again create short term economic benefits both for eastern and western Labrador and would strengthen Happy Valley - Goose Bay economy in the long run as a service centre and entry point for goods destined for Labrador West. Such a major transportation artery is vital to further development in Labrador and a start on the highway is critical. 7091

..,. ·June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2645 EL - 2 MR. WINDSOR: The Community Development Sub- sidiary Agreement for Coastal Labrador,which was signed on May 29th of this year 1provides some $39 million for transportation, community services, improvement in local administrative capabilities and feasibility studies over the next five years and will provide substantial benefits to coastal residents. The signing of the Native Peoples Agreement, hopefully in l981 1will provide additional benefits to native communities along the coast.

The remaining components of the strategy essentially re-emphasize the need to continue existing northern development programmes. Approximately $10 million will be spent in 1981 - 82. These programmes are aimed at improving government services to coastal Lab­ radorians. If all of the components of this strategy are successfully implemented,the total capital in­ vestment will be in excess of $7.5 billion in 1980 dollars and will create more than 17,000 construction jobs within the next six to eight years. Various items which form part of this strategy have already passed the conceptual stage.

Portions of the Trans-Labrador Highway have been designed and the attraction of the aluminum smelter to the Province, which will trigger development of the Gull Island hydro­ electric project,is being actively pursued. Over the last two years government officials· have carried out a number of studies on energy intensive users·, both inhouse and through outside consultants. Extensive discussions have. been undertaken with a number of companies respecting the establishment of operations 7082

June 19th. , 1981 Tape No. 2646 DW - 1 MR. N. WINDSOR: in the Province and detailed analysis is presently ongoing. Scientific, engineering and technical investigations into the feasibility of Winter navigation in Lake Melville have been ongoing since 1972 but have intensified in the last two years. The two voyages of the Coast Guard Icebreaker Franklin in January and March of 1980 and the M.V. Arctic probe in February and March of this year have demonstrated the technical feasibility of year round navigation.

The economics associated with any Winter operation have yet to be assessed but further studies are slated for 1981/82 to refine the technical and economic aspects of year round navigation. Government's strategy in pursuing this plan is based on the premise that the establishment of a major industry and the provisi~n of required infra­ structure and transport improvements will trigger other resource and developments. Considerable potential exists for expansion of our fisheries resource, mineral produc­ tion, tourism, forest based industries and offshore oil and gas.

The potential for increased cod landings, commercial exploitation of other species such as turbot and shrimp as well as maintaining a substantial yield of salmon and char will mean a significant impact on the employment activity in this sector. Commercial wood harvesting activity,particularly in the Lake Melvill/ Goose Bay region,is very promising and several forest related opportunities are presently being investigated. In the mineral sector, further exploitation of the large iron ore deposits of the Labrador trough in Western Labrador and the uranium deposits locat.ed at Kitts Michelin 7093

June 19th., 1981 Tape No. 2646 DW - 2 MR. N. WINDSOR: show strong potential development. Tourism development presents a real challenge and oppor­ tunity. The potential of Labrador's unexplored Northern wilderness offers a variety of assets suitable for outdoor recreation which can be capitalized. In addition, the oil and gas sector holds tremendous promise for Labrador. There is substantial eviden·re that favourable conditions existed to facilitate the formation of major oil and gas fields.

There is a 50 per cent probability that reserves of some 45 trillion cubic feet of natural gas and/or some 1.6 billion barrels of oil are present under the waters off the Labrador coast. The realization of these resou~ce potentials depend in large part on the implementation of the various components of the development strategy. During the preparation of this report, Mr. Speaker, the Steering Committee has maintained regular contact with Labrador Resources Advisory Council which has been extremely beneficial.

However, because of the importance of this strategy 1 a much wider representation of public opinion is desirable therefore other organizations and. individuals are invited to express their opinion on this report and its recommendations. Indeed, meetings will be held in Labrador shortly to discuss concerns of these various groups. In

summary, I would like to reiterate that while the resource potential in Labrador is very high, so too are the costs associated with its development. No matter what avenue of development government chooses there will be extensive constraints,both resources specific and those associated with its development in general. These range from financial restraint to environmental sensitivities, from the need for technical innovations to the resolution of jurisdictional disputes. Government is committed to ensuring the development of Labrador. However, this will require 7084

June 19th., 1981 Tape No. 2646 ow - 3 MR. N. WINDSOR: a concerted effort on the part of various government departments, meaningful dialogue with the federal government and the people of Labrador so that project details and scheduling of activities are organized 7095

~·· , ... June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2647 NM - 1 MR. WINDSOR: in such a way as to ensure the best returns to the people of our Province. SOME HON • MEMBERS : Hear, hear~ MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) has about five and a half minutes. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, they are all tapping their desks over there on a statement really that says nothing. It took the minister fifteen minutes to make a non-statement. The minister announced nothing, Mr. Speaker, that we do not already know. He ended up by saying that there should be concerted efforts and meaninful dialogue.

Meaningful dialogue! We thought the minister when he passed over this eight or ten page statement was going to make an announcement of a big industry for Labrador-, some big development in Labrador, when in actual fact, Mr. Speaker, all it is is pure rhetoric. It is academic. The whole statement is completely academic. And the only reason I can see for making the statement was that it is meant to try to offset an announcement that the Federal Minister of Fisheries made yesterday in connection with Labrador. That is the only reason I can see for making this statement at all. MR. LUSH: Political stratagems. MR.

NEARY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is political - what is it stratagems? MR. LUSH: Stratagems. MR. NEARY: Stratagems is political trickery, is it? MR. TULK: Political trickery. MR. NEARY: It is a new word now we are developing, Mr. Speaker. We are branding that as political stratagem, which means it is political trickery. And, Mr. Speaker, it does nothing. We thought the hon. gentleman was going to get up and announce a project like the Upper Churchill or the iron ore 7096

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2647 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: deposit in Labrador and in Wabush that was started by the Liberals. But no, none of that, Mr. Speaker, just a fifteen minute statement just wasting the time of the House. It is something that should be turned over to the intellectuals and the academics and let them go off with it. The minister could have tabled it and saved the time of the House. And I think it is shameful. If that is all they have to offer Labrador, Mr. Speaker, I say God help the development of that part of our Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Further statements?

The han. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I have two statements to make this morning. I will make the negative one first, Mr. Speaker. I am extremely disappointed to - MR. NEARY: You should table it, boy. MR. MORGAN: now have confirmed to my office from the federal minister that the federal subsidy on new commercial fishing vessels will now be reduced from 35 per cent down to 25 per cent, and this indeed a real "slap in the face" to our inshore fishermen - MR. BARRY: You can say that again. MR.

MORGAN: - and indeed a "slap in the face" to the Newfoundland Government, as well as the Fishermen's Union of our Province. The Provincial Government is now paying, and always did pay, 15 per cent bounty or grant on top of the existing, up until now, 35 per cent federal subsidy, so that both subsidies to the fishermen amounted to 50 per cent of the total cost of a new vessel. This action by the federal government means that the overall cost of a new boat to an inshore fisherman will now be increased by an additional 10 per cent. What that means, Mr. Speaker, is a fisherman building a $300,000 boat, it means 7097

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2647 NM - 3 MR. MORGAN: it will cost that fisherman now $30,000 more to :build that :boat. Also of course financing charges will also :be increased proportionately. This means the interest subsidy on loans, made by this government through the Fisheries Loan Board and the chartered :banks, that that cost will also rise :by 10 per cent, thus reducing the total funds otherwise available from the loan board for new construction 7098

June 19, 198 1 Tape No. 2648 ah-1 MR.MORGAN: by a similar amount. I also understand, Mr. Speaker, now that the minister has confirmed it,that concurrent with the federal subsidies being reduced the maximum amount of subsidy will be set at $100,000 for a new wooden vessel and $125,000 for a new steel vessel,which is even worse for the fishermen of our Province. While I knew for some time the federal minister was contemplating a reduction in subsidies.

I am most upset that the federal government would act at this time when inshore fishermen are facing ever increasing costs in their operating costs,at a time when the prospect of keeping pace with such increases through higher prices are not that bright right now with the price being paid to fishermen for their catch. And in recent weeks the Fishermen's Union has indicated to me that as a result of the existing economic conditions indeed many fishermen are facing imminent bankruptcy.

So at the very least the federal minister should have deferred the implementation of his proposed new subsidy policies until the Royal Commission into the inshore fishery has reported on the economic needs of the inshore fishermen. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MORGAN: In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I say this is yet again another example of the total disregard by the federal government of the views· of this Province and the fishermen concerned. SOHE HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. member for Burin-Placentia West has about one and a half minutes. MR. HOLLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, in relation to this 7099

June 19,1981 Tape No . 264 8 ah-2 MR . 1IOLLET T: stat~ent,we are also aware of the r reduction of 35 to 25 per cent and needless to say we do not agree with it in principle. There is probably. a good rationale behind it but I do not know all the background in it. But I would like to point out also, Mr. Speaker, that it seems both the federal and the provincial government are acting tandem in making it more difficult for fishermen to acquire boats. S'OME HON . ME.."lB .ERS : Th at i s rig ht.

MR • ""0LLETT: I mean,if you look at the basic requirement of what a fishermen who qualifies for a loan is now -75 per cent income,a full-time fishermen fur two years,the increase of interest rates from three 'and a half ,to eight per cent, they are cutting out completely the bounties for small boats except in Labrador and I can go on and on. MR. TULK: ~hey did that two years ago. MR.

HOLLETT: And from our side, Mr.Speaker, I would like to say quite emphatically, I mean,it is high time that the provincial Department of Fisheries and the federal Department of Fisheries sit down and negotiate sensible on behalf of al .l our fishermen becauee it seems that one hand does not know what the other hand is doing and the only people th .at are hurting are the inshore fishermen in this Province. MR. SPRAKER(Simrns) Minister of FlshE>ries. MR. MORGAN: Further statements? The hon. With th indulgence of my colleagues, I have some statements here. 7 ·1 on

June 19, 1-981 Tape 2649 EC - l MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave for a second statement, at this time a more positive staternent,Mr. Speaker, and some action taken by this government to help the fishermen of our Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to announce today a number of chaJ:lges that have been made to the operation of the Fisheries Loan Board, which is strictly and totally our provincial jurisdiction. These changes have been brought about in response to requests made to me and to the officials of the board by fishermen, and in particular by the Fishermen's Union.

Officials of the Department of Fisheries and the board have assessed and reviewed the various suggestions made by the fishermen and the Fishermen's Union and the following changes have now been approved by provincial Cabinet: We have made some amendments to the Fisheries Loan Regulations effective May 1, 1981. Some of these amendments are to clearly define certain present sections of the regulations which are primarily housekeeping changes. However, two major amendments to the regulations are how being brGught forward: One, the maximum loan term for wooden boats has always been ten years.

We are now going to increase tnat period from ten to twelve years for boats which are over ten tons underdeck- that is usually thirty-five feet in length. This has been done since we feel that the life of these wooden vessels have been increased given today's construction standards and maintenance facilities. And that, of course, will mean lesser yearly payments to be made by the fishermen by means of a longer term to pay off their loans. 71 0 1

June 19, 1981 Tape 2649 EC - 2 MR. MORGAN: Number two, Mr. Speaker, we have amended certain sections of the regulations so that the board will have greater decision-making discretion in certain extenuating circumstances since some parts of the present regulations are extremely rigid. And because we find they were somewhat :too rigid, we are now changing these regulations and giving the board more power, discretion with regard to what we call extenuating circumstances.

In this regard, the amendmeu'CS enable the board to use discretion in these extenuating circumstances with regard to the eligibility requirements - which was a point just mentioned a few minutes ago- the application of net gain from the sale of an old boat to obtain a new loan, and with regard to the transfer or assignment of an interest in an existing loan between borrowers. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased also to announce that we have completely rewriten the Fishing Ships (Bounties) Regulations.

These new revised regulations - and I say again they are only revised as a result of the input from the fish~en around the Province to the Fishermen's Union revised regulations now come into force effective May 1st. This is resulting from action that was taken last year when amendments to the Fishing Sh;i.ps (Bounties) Act allowed for a transitional period of twelve months to enable new standards and specifications and guidelines to be developed. The major changes we have now made in these regulations are mostly technical ones with regard to the construction of boats.

We are now going to be developing standard specifications­ which are 7 1 0 2

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2650' SD - 1 MR. MORGAN: long overdue in my view in the Province- standard specifications for longliners and guidelines for these standard specs will now be developed. Therefore the effect of these amendments is to remove all the technical provisions from the Fishing Ships (Bounties) Regulations and to provide in its place the creation of a committee of not more than five departmental officials to establish guidelines, specifications and directives respecting the construction and equipping of ships.

Most of this technical work has now been completec and discussions have been held with fishermen, the Fishermen's Union and the Ship Builders Association of the Province concerning the implementation of these new regulations. Now, Mr. Speaker, the most important announcement today to be made with regard to the provincial fisheries and from our government which will be of benefit to the fishermen of our Province , concerns changes to the Province's small fishing boat bounty programme.

When the re-organization of the Loan Board occurred and new regulations were put in place little over a year ago, it was felt that the bounties for both small and large boats could be administered using the Fishing Ships (.Bounties) Act and regulations.

Having now functioned using this system for the past year, and in response to numerous representations some from ~1HAs , members of the House of Assembly here but more particularly from Fishermen's Committees themselves and the Fishermen's Union- it was felt that a more efficient and effective administering of the small fishin9 boat bounty programme could be made by having this as a separate programme. So today, Mr.

Speaker, I am announcing a new small fishing boat bounty programme and it contains the following requirements in detail: Bounties will now be paid on all open fishing boats seventeen feet and over for all residents of Labrador. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. 71 u 3

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2650 SD - 2 MR. MORGAN: Anq, Mr. Speaker, for all other fishermen around the Province,it will be boats twenty-five feet and over. Bounty will be paid on partially and fully d_ecked fishing boats which are less than ten tons underdeck, which means usually thirty-five feet. The outlined regulations here, I will table these following regulations,_But there is one important one which I want to go on record on and that is the bounty will be paid based upon a rate per foot.

In this regard we have made modifications to this rate - and by the way, it is a slight increase to the fishermen, not a decrease as the federal minister has done with his subsidies and bounties - based upon the type of boat that can be built under the small fishing boat bounty p~ogramrne. And these are open fishing boats, in other words, not decked, they will receive $45 a foot, Mr. Speaker.- that is a grant from our Newfoundland government - and partly deck .ed fishing boats at $80 per foot and fully decked fishing boats at $100 per foot.

That is action from our government when we have jurisdiction over the Fisheries Loan Board assistance to fishermen. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. 71 04

§"une 19, 1981 Tape No. 2651 .EL - 1 MR.MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I will close this statement by saying that these changes are made after lengthy consultations with all parties concerned. We do have a mechanism in place for consultations, that a consultation practice will be carried on in the future and if any further changes are made to any regulation of the loan board, it will oe only after, only after exten­ sive consultation. But I am convinced, a.fter this consul­ tation and now these changeg 1it means a benefit to all the fishermen of our Province. Thank you very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, in linking with the Fisheries Loan Board and thes ·e regulations, of course, the most important thing - and r gave a copy of this to my colleague, the spokesman on fisheries in the Opposition, copies of all these statements - is the makeup of the board, the Fisheries Loan Board. This is the final announcement regarding the Fisheries Department today. The makeup of the Fisheries Loan Board; some time ago when we announced the new Fisheries Loan Boa ·rd we . said then we would rotate the fishermen serving on that board. MR. NEARY: What about Mr.Peddle? Where have you put him? MR.

MORGAN: And, Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentle- man from LaPoile (_S.Neary), who is not concerned with the drift-net salmon fishermen problem and the other problems, would keep quiet right now - MR. NEARY: Where did you put him? MR. SPEAKER (:Simms) : Order please!" 7105

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2651 EL - 2 MR.MORGAN: - I could make this statement which is important to all :fishermen around the Province, including LaPoile fishermen. MR. NEARY: Where did you shove Peddle? MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce today that the makeup of this new board for the coming year which will be effective July 1st and will serve until next year, due the same time, July 1st. And of course, the same chairman, Mr. Fred Pike; Mr. Ray And­ rews1who is an assistant deputy minister of the Department of Fisheries 1 will serve as deputy chainnan. Mr.

Eric Wells 1 who is the director of internal audit in the Department of Fin­ ance,will serve on that loan board. Mr. Charlie Parrott, who is a federal employee, the regional manager of the Fishermen's Assistance Plans, Department of Fisheries and Oceans.,we will be working in close co-ordination with him. He is an excellent civil servant and we find him very val­ liable on the loan board. Mr.

Kevin Carroll, he is an official of the Newfoundland Fishermen's Food and Allied Workers Un­ ion, he is there on the: board as an official representative of the Fishermen's Union because he is really an employee of the union. And, importantly, Mr. Speaker, the last two, but not the least important,are two very valuable fishermen. In this case we are appointing Mr. Peter Hennebury, an in­ shore fisherman of Lord •·s Cove. He haii been fishing for the last eleven or twelve years., full-time.

He is the chairman of the Fishermen•s committee in his area and ·he has good close working relationship with all the fishermen in his general area. He has now heen appointed, as of July 1st, to the Fisheries Loan Board;. and of course, he is from the South coast of the Province. 71u6

~·- June 19," 1981 Tape No. 2651 EL - 3 MR. MORGAN: Also, Mr. Speaker, Mr .Arth1Jr Wicks. I think Arthur Wicks is well known to all fish- ermen around the Province, in fact, to members of this House of Assembly. He is known to be a straightforward, sensible, solid individual and also a good fisherman and we are pleased to have h:i.ro. appointed now to the loan board to represent the Northwestern part of the Province-or the Northeast coast, rather,of the Province. And he is indeed a man who is always :cr::.nging forward problems of the fish- ermen.

The fishermen seem to nave good faith in hiE because I know he is calling me every second week or so with problems, and not on his :Dahalf, not on W:s own problems, but 71 07

June 19th. , 1981 Tape No. 2652 DW - 1 MR. J. MORGAN: on behalf of other fishermen, he is working on behalf of other fishermen. And we are glad to have him world.ng now with us on the Fisheries Loan Board to the benefit of all fishermen in our Province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Simms}: The han. member for Burin - Placentia West has about five minutes. MR. D. HOLLETT: Thank you, very much, Mr. Speaker. I must say it is music to my ears to hear the hon. Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan} come up with some improvements and modifications and that and like the han. minister I would like to congratulate the Fishermen's Union for their major input into those changes. They have been working for quite some time. And also I would like to compliment Mr. Pike and the previous members of the Loan Board because they were also greatly involved. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order! MR. D. HOLLETT: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to make a few comments in relation to some of the pro­ posed changes.

I think, as I have already said, the majority are a great improvement, and I trust that the fishermen in the Province will be notified in the very near future of the changes made. Standard specifi­ cations and guidelines~! think it is long overdue but I would also like to suggest to the minister here and his colleagues when he makes up his committee that when we are talking about standard specifications and guide­ lines ·that it will go a bit finther. I certainly think that it is high time in this Province that if we are going to finance machinery and equipment for fishing 7108

June 19th., 1981 Tape No. 2652 DW - 2 MR. D. HOLLETT: boats then it shc;>Uld only be purchased from suppliers who will make a commitment that they will keep spares on hand. I know the minist~r rand I think all of us who represent fishing districts 1 it happens only too often in the peak of a fishing season that a simple mechanical part would give out and the boat is tied up because there is not a spare probably in Canada. I think that is terribly important. In relation to the little small fishing boat bounty regulation,personally I am still at a loss why the subsidy only applies to Labrador fisher­ men.

I do not think the cost of fishermen - MR. J. MORGAN: (inaudible) put boats in Labrador. MR. nJLK : Well, why not the rest of the people in the Province settling for twenty-five? MR. J. MORGAN: The people of Labrador use seventeen foot boats. Mi{".' TuLK: MR. SPEAKER: MR. HOLLETT: They use them here too. Order, please! Mr. Speaker, I do not mean to be argmnentativ~ but I think it is fair to say, as I think the minister said the other day in relation to fishing areas in the bottoms of bays and there are thousands of boats from seventeen to twenty-five feet used by full-time fishermen in this Province.

And I do not think it costs the fishermen in Labrador any more to build his own eighteen foot boat than it does in Gander Bay or in Bay d' Espoir. But if there is a rationale, I am sure in due course the minister will let us know. 7109

June 19th ., 1981 Tape No. 2652 ow - 3 MR. TULK: As a matter of fact,Gander Bay sells them to Labrador. MR. D. HOLLETT: The other thing which is not here, if the minister would care to inform the House ,! would like to know, referring to

section six in the new regulations, he says these are open fishing 711 0 ,.

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2653 NM - 1 MR. HOLLETT: boats of $45 a foot, _nartly aecke~ fishing hearts at$80 a foot in the rates, you know we can have trap skiffs which are open fishing boats up to forty, forty-odd feet. And just for the sake of clarification, if the minister would care to make it,I am sure ~t would be appreciated by us all. In relation to the new appointments to the loan board, Mr. Speaker, I think ~hat is an excellent selection. Personally I know Mr. Andrews, Mr. Parrott, Mr. Carroll and Mr, Hennebury, and slightly know Mr.

Wicks, and I am sure that with those people on the board, and with the new guidelines which the minister has agreed to, I am looking forward to more improvements in the loan board over the next year or two. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: Thank you, very much. Further statements? ORAL QUESTIONS : The hon. member for LaPoile. Mr. Speaker, my question was going to be for the Premier but I will have to direct it to the Minister of Health, seeing that the hon. gentleman is not in his seat.

I was shocked and amazed to hear the Minister of Health admit this morning on CBC radio that he is aware that senior citizens are being charged $4, a dispensing fee, for drugs and they are only receiving one month's supply from certain drug stores in the Province,which creates a real hardship and creates an awful lot of inconvenience. And the han. gentleman,,! was surprised to hear him say that there was nothing he could do about it, t·hat this was a matter for the NewfoundJand Pharmaceutical Association. Mr.

Speaker, my understanding is that this is the highest court in the land, this House here, and I am sure that the House could deal with that matter. Would the 7111

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2653 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: hon. gentleman care to tell the Legislature, tell the members of the House of Assembly what he intends to do about this rip-off? MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) made a press release yesterday regarding the senior citizens programme and of course - a drug programme - which is one of the better senior citizens drug programmes we have in Canada. What that drug programme does, of course it helps those people on high cost drugs.

And that was the objective of it, to help the people who needed it m~st. The fact is that there has been - the policy with the Department of Health is still that we permit a 100 day supply of drugs. And sometimes we have known in a couple of cases, a few cases, and I have been notified of this, there have been pharmacists who feel that they have the right to determine that they will only fill a prescription for 30 days. And we are working on that now and of course we are meeting constantly with the Pharmaceutical Association on it. As a matter of fact, there has been a tremendous amount of improvement. 711 2

June 19,1981 Tap e No. 2654 ah -1 ld..R . HOT J~F : -- - - - there were a fair number orily giving thirty days but we know now that the policy is still up to one hundred days for certain drugs. There are certain drugs that you cannot give a three month periOd for because of the chemical and that sort of thing.

But the doctor is the prescriber and it is the doctor who determines the length or the volurnn of the prescription and the pharmacists are bound,as far as we are concerned 1 to fill these perscriptions. ~here are some cases where we are not quite happy about it but we are working on it and I am sure that we are going to evolve one of the better drug programmes in Canada. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ MR. NEARY: A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : A supplementary. The hon. member for LaPoile. MR.

NEARY: Is it any wonder, Mr.Speaker, that the Senior Citizens Drug Programme is in such an incredible mess when you get ~eak statements like that by the minister who says the doctor can recommend three month supply, six month supply, a year's supply but the druggist does not have to fill it. MR. HOUSE: I did not say that. MR. NEARY: Well that is what is happening. The doctor is recommending and the druggists are saying, 11 no". But I will deal with that shortly, Mr.Speaker.

I want to ask the hon. gentleman if he is aware that every prescription that is taken to the drug store, that the senior citizen has to pay $4.00? If he takes two, three, prescriptions at any given time he has to pay $4.00 for each prescription. If there are three or four items or half a dozen items on one prescription he is charged $4.00 for each item on one prescription. Is the hon. gentleman aware of that and if he is . what does he intend to do about it? 711 3

June 19,1981 Tape No. 2654 ah-2 .. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, that is a traditional practice that is traditional with the pharmacist, That is the way pharmacists dispense: Every drug is separate prescription. That has always been the case. The only reason it is identified now is because we are isolating the dispensing fee from the cost of the drug. We are paying the cost of the drug for senior citizens and they have to pay the prescriPtion fee.

That is not new, that was always the fact even . \•7h~n the hon. member was the Minister of Social Services,so any difference now is that it is isolated and set apart. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, the Pharmaceutical Association of Canada deems that it costs about $3.50 to fill a pres_cription and, you know, that is standard practice everywhere in Canada. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, this is absolutely shameful. The hon. gentleman just attempted to deceive the House by saying that this is tradition. This is not tradition.

One prescription - the charge before was on one prescription but since the introduction of this programme the druggists are now charging $4.00 for each item on a prescription. If there are four items on that is $16 for a prescription,and that is not traditional and never happened before. I would like to ask the hon. gentleman again what he is going to do about it? Is it necessary to have a dispensing charge at all? Why a dispensing charge? If you go to buy food or a piano or a television or any other type of goods you do not have to pay a dispensing charge. Why do you have to pay it to 7 1 1 4

June 19,1981 Tape No. 2654 ah-3 MR. NEARY: a drug store? Why can it not be made illegal by this House? MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The bon. Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, pharmacists are like other professional people and 711 5

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2655 EL - 1 MR. HOUSE: that is the way they make their money, through dispensing fees. They do not charge - there is no markup on the drugs. The drugs are dispensed at cost and there is a prescription fee. Heretofore, as I have mentioned,it was always put together and some of them did have a markup on the high cost drugs. But what it is now we have no markup on drugs and a dispensing fee is charged and, Mr. Speaker, it has always been - if there is four or five items on one prescription, it means four or five different prescriptions.

A phc3.rmacist has to label and document every one of these in the dossier that they keep on e~ch pa~ticu.lar client. I am not overly happy. I am not able to determine a pharmacist's fees any more than I am able to determine a lawyerrs fees or anybody else. We are able to determine somewhat a medical fee because of the fact that we pay it and we are able to negotiate that. There are negotiations we have with phamlacists . on fees for indigent drugs because we pay it.

Mr.Speaker, it is not new and the great advantage to having a dispensing fee rather t~~n having the markup on drugs is that a twenty-five dollar drug marked up would be very costly to the consumer. Now, a person can get a twenty-five dollars drug for four dollars­ and he may have had to pay four dollars for a two dollar drug. But the fact is that it is a tremendously good programme. As a matter of fact, it is amazing to receive letters from senior citizens giving us credit and praise for the programme because we have people today - 711 6

June 19, 1981 Ta~e No. 2655 EL - 2 MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, we had people last year who were spending $100 a month on drugs who are getting them now for no more than $16 and that is the great ad­ vantage to the programme. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NEARY: A final .supplementary, Mr.Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Simms ): A final supplementary, the hon. member for Lapoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, it is amazing if the hon. gentleman ever received one letter from senior citizens as a result of the incredible mess that the hon. gentleman has made of this programme.

The letters are coming in,alrig~t, but coming to the Opposition office critical of the programme and of the minis ·ter for not taking steps after representation was made to remedy these situations that I am raising.

Number one, is the hon. gentleman aware that as a result of druggists only allowing one month's supply of drugs - for ins ·tance, if they have to break a bottle of pills 1 that there is a higher charge to the tax- payer as a result of that, that the . cost, instead of being ten cents a pill could be twe.nty cents a pill and that the government is forced to pay ~ore for that drug than the y would if they allowed the prescription to be filled as re­ commended by the doctor?

And i.s he also aware that in the rural parts of this Provi.nce,as a result of people being forced to hire taxis and to drive longer distances to s:ee doctors and go to drugstores,that it is costing them more? And the hon. gentleman also made a staten- .ent that that is. how the pharmacists make their money by charging the four dollars. 711 7

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2656 SD - 1 MR. NEAR~: Is he aware that they are making - it is one of the most lucrative businesses in the world wher~ they can make more than 50 per cent profit on their drugs. Now is the hon. gentleman defending that policy? MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, the profit that the drugists make on drugs are made from their di~pensing fee. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh. MR. HOUSE: MR. NEARY: MR. HOUSE: The fact that it is costing - Do not be so naive , boy. Mr.

Speaker, if the hon. gentleman knows all the answers , I am wondering why he is asking the question~ MR. BARRY: MR.. HOUSE: He thinks he knows all the answers. He thinks he knows , yes. He gets a feM little clips from somebody and, of course, he makes a fool of himself by standing up and saying, 'That is going to cost more by breaking a particular bottle of drugs'. The fact is the drug is the same whether they dispense the cost to us MR. NEARY: They went to the Premier and he would not do anything about it. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.

HOUSE: The cost to us is the same whether they ciispense it in thirty day amounts or sixty day amounts or 100 day amounts, it is the same thing. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of doctors who will not prescribe over thirty days, there are other doctors who will prescribe up to 100 - it is standard. We have standards across Canada, a 100 day prescription is not abnormal for certain drugs ; for others the drug just cannot stand up that long. And we leave that entirely up to the doctor. There have been a few cases, and :r: stated that at the beginning, where - 7118

June 19, 1981 Tape No . 2656 SD - 2 MR. NEARY: Why do not do something about it~ MR. HOUSE: - pharmacists have refused,and I have asked . people to contact me about that, and it is very few cases and that is being remedied, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. NEARY: House (inaudible). MR. HOUSE: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. TULK: Hear, hear. No wonder they call you Well, boy, that is a bad cut. The hon. member for Fogo. Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands (Mr. Power), SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.

TULK: It concerns th .e spray for the spruce budworm. I understand that the minister said yesterday that given the weather conditions and so on that it may be difficult to get the programme completed and perhaps we would end up with, I think it is one-sixth dane now and it may indeed be difficult to get it completed as it was originally planned. So the question for the minister is what areas have we sprayed, what areas are we puting priority on, where are they, are they mostly on Crown lands or are they on company lands? MR. SPEAKER: and Lands. MR. POWER: The hon. Mini,ster of Forest Resources Mr.

Speaker, with regard to the spray programme,obviously as everyone knows from the news media and hire in the House that we have had some very serious problems with weather conditions. It seems that when the weather is fine the winds are too high tb allow the spray programme to be conducted 1 and as we have made a commitment to the people of this Province not to spray in winds in excess of ten miles, we have not been spraying in any conditions like that. We have had a lot of foggy, rainy kind of whether that the spray 711 9

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 26 56 SD - 3 MR. POWER: programme was not able to be conducted in. So far, I think, up to yesterday morning we had 270,000 acres that received the first application of matacil and we had 30,000 or 40,000 acres that received the first application of Bt. All this spraying is ta~ing place in the Central Newfoundland portion of the Province. It is primarily in the areas where the highest budworm counts are. I am not sure exactly the breakdown between company and Crown limits, but we are monitoring the programme every day, we monitor the spray blocks that we have delineated as priority areas. The areas where the budwbrm counts are higest are going to be sprayed 7120

June 19, 1981 Tape 2657 EC - 1 MR. POWER: first, just in case we do have further delays in the spray programme because of weather conditions. MR. TULK: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : member for Fogo. MR. TULK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary, the hon. the Mr.

Speaker, the effect of the spruce budworm in this P.rovince is well-known if you ~=avel around the Provi .nce. r would like to ask the minister, if he ends up with only one-sixth of the spray programme done this year, since it is deemed to be so important, what effect will that have on the overall timber supply in this Province four or five years down the road? MR. SPEAKER: Resources and Lands. MR. POWER: The.hon. the Minister of Forest Mr.

Speaker, as everybody knows from last year's Royal Commission report and its presentation here in the House and the reason and decision that government made in relation to the spray programme, we set down about a million acres that needed to be sprayed this year as·high priority areas where infestations were projected to be very high.

I am delighted to say that at least one block that was projected with high in~estation of the budworm, the counts,when we went back to check on a daily basis - we have been checking all through May and all through June every single day - that one of those fairly large spray blocks has less budworms in it than was projected and we were able to drop it from the spray programme. So that is certainly good news from a government management point of view. As it relates to the effect of what would happen if we did not complete all of the spray blocks this year, then we would lose 71 2 ·1

June 19, 1981 Tape 2657 EC - 2 MR. POWER: another significant amount of timber this year. I think the figures that were presented in the Royal Commission report was something like sixteen million cords of wood that had been lost out of a total cordage in the Province available for the resource of ninety million or ninety-two million or something in that area. So we have lost up to this year about 23 per cent of productive forest in the Province. Certainly, any further losses will make it extremely difficult to run the forest industry in the Province the way we would like to see it run.

We are still optimistic, Mr. Speaker, that in the next two weeks we can get most of the spray programme carried out and that that in conjunction and in combination with the massive forest management money that is being put into the industry over the next five years we will be able to continue to have a very viable forest industry in Newfoundland. MR. TULK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): A supplementary, the hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister, if he does not get his spray programme off, will that be, in a sense, money wasted?

And what else is the government planning on getting into such as thinning, replanting and so on? What other restrictions are they thinking of placing on the (inaudible) , supposing that the spray programme in this Province, given the regulations that you have are not successful? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. 7122

June 19, 1981 Tap e 26 57 EC - 3 MR. POWER: Mr.

Speaker, anyone in the Province who is informed on the forest industry certainly is fully aware of the massive improvements we have made since 1974 with our Forest Management Taxation Act and certainly the major initiatives and motives that we did last year where we first of all convinced the companies to put in $24 million to $25 million, where with the signing of a DREE agreei!\ent '\'Te have $45 million to put into silvicultural ope~ations over the next five years, the massive amount of money that has bee.n put into the forest industry by both companies and individuals, the new land tenure arrangements we are working out with both of the paper companies to make sure that we have full control over the management of the forest resource, a·ll of those things, Mr.

Speaker, are being done so that we can have a very viable forest industry . and a forest resource in Newfoundland for hundreds of years down the road. The problem related to the spruce bu.dworm is 7123

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2658 NM - 1 MR. POWER: exactly what balance you have and how much you lose this year. Obviously, Mr. Speaker, this side of the House, and the government particularly, support the spray programme for the protection of the forest resource. I am not equally sure that certain members opposite support a spray programme or the protection of the forest resource, from petitions being presented as of late, being signed by members opposite who are saying that they are against a spray programme, against the protection of the forest resource. All I can say, Mr.

Speaker, is that this government has done everything that is humanly possible to protect the forest resource and we are making great efforts in managing that resource and making it better. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LUSH: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. MOORES: MR. SPEAKER: MR. MOORES: MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker. The han. member for Terra Nova. Terra Nova? Deputy House Leader. Deputy House Leader. Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe), I will ask the question to the Premier,and I wonder if the Premier can - MR. MOORES: Here he comes. Here he comes. Here he comes. Here·he comes. MR.

LUSH: He is coming? MR. MOORES ,: Yes, he is coming. MR. LUSH: All right. MR. MOORES: He has been ducking out for the last three weeks or a month." MR. LUSH: Well my question to the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe) is, I wonder if he can specifically indicate to the House the criteria which was used by his department in allocating funds for its 1981-82 Capital Works Programme? In other words,can the minister specify the criteria 71 2 4

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2658 NM - 2 MR .• LUSH: that was used in the areas that were named in this document passed to us a couple of weeks ago? What criteria was used? MR. MOORES: Now that is appropriate enough. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. Minister of Transportation. MR. DAWE: Mr. Speaker, the criteria of course has two main components, the first one being need and the other is how efectively the individual members from different ridings presented the case of their constituents. SOME HON. MEz,mERS : Hear, hear! MR. LUSH: MR. SPEAKER: for Terra Nova. SOME HON. MEMBERS:. A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

A supplementary, the hon. meiilber Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. member for Terra Nova, a supplementary. MR. NEARY: That is pretty low politics. How childish and how foolish can you get! MR. MORGAN: cannot take it. MR • SPEAKER: You can heave it out, but you Order, please! The hen. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSfl: Having said that, Mr.

Speaker, given that answer, I would ask the minister whether or not the minister submitted to Cabinet a brief that was submitted to him from the Port Blandford to Winter Brook Rural Development Association, a brief putting forth their case why their road should have been paved? Did the minister submit that brief before Cabinet? - without the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry) prompting. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Transportation. 7125

June 19, 1981 Tap e No . 265 8 NM - 3 MR . DA WE : Mr. Speaker, there are a number of petitions presented to my department from time to time and I do not feel a need on all occasions to bring them to the attention of my colleagues in Cabinet. If I consider it a need I will do so. MR •. BARRY: MR . LUSH: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: That is telling them. A final supplementary; Mr. Speaker. A final supplementary, the hon. (Inaudible) having briefs presented and Hansard will reveal, Mr. Speaker, who has been doing the work. MR. BARRY: MR. MOORES: you not run against him. MR.

SPEAKER: Now, Mr. Speaker (Inaudible) • Sure if you think he is so bad why do Order, please! Order, please! MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, there is not a member who has put forward more representations - MR. BARRY: MR. SPEAKER: MR. LUSH: (Inaudible). Order, please! - more petitions for the pavement of roads in his area than the member for Terra Nova. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. LUSH: And I am the member for Terra Nova and the minister can go through the records and find it out. MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. LUSH: Order, please! Orde .r, please! Oh, oh!

So the minister now, Mr. Speaker, has come forward with two criterias. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) • MR. MOORES: Well take him on. 7126

June 19, 1981 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Nova has the floor. MR. MOORES: her go. MR. LUSH: Tape .. No . 2658 NM - 4 Order, please! The hon. member for Terra Let her go 'Tom' , boy, let Mr. Speaker, the minister has identified now two criteria. I am asking now whether they have - and the two criteria were needed, Mr. Speaker, an=. of course the representation by the individual M.H.A. , or the kind of effort that he put into it, neither of which was identified in the government blueprint, that great blue­ print, which said that the primary criteria will be for resource development. Now I am asking the minister, have the scrapped that? 7127

June 19, 1981 Tape No . 2659 EL- l MR. LUSH: Has his d~partrnent scrapped that criteria now for resource development - paving roads, doing r roads to help develop resources. Have they now scrapped that one? MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS): MR. NEARY: The hon. Minister of Transportation. Boy, I will tell you you have got it coming. You would not win fourteen seats right now. SOI!E HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPFAKER: MR. BARRY: MR. NEARY: to the test . MR . BARRY : MR. SPEAKER: Oh, oh! order, please! Have you got a poll? I can show you a poll. Put it Poor boy! Order, please! The hon. Minister of Transportation has the floor. MR.

NEARY: The truth hurts. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I will ask the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) to whisper maybe so we ~an hear what the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe) is saying. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: MR . MOORES: MR. SPEAKER: MR. DANE: of this government - MR. MOORES: Ho'\"T about the Premier? And the Premier, too, yes. Our Brian is ready to qo. The hon. Minister of Transportation. Mr. Speaker, it is the objective We are going to send him to Alberta when we give him the flick. MR.

DAWE: - to always develop the resources of this Province for the benefit o£ the residents of this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 7128

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2659 EL-2 MR. DAWE: And unless DREE has changed part of their mandate to help develop the resources in the economic base of individual areas of Canada, perhaps they should be spoken to about their withdrawal of funding for various road projects that have been submitted by this government. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ MR. LOSE: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS): A final supplementary, the hon. member for Terra Nova. SOME BON. MEMBERS: MR. 'SPEAKER: MR. LUSH: Oh, oh! Order,please! I think that was an amazing play by the minister this morning. SOME HON.

MEMBERS : Oh, oh~ MR.. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. LUSH: Two questions that I asked the minister that he just completely disregarded. MR. MOORES: That is the worst display we have seen by a minister. You asked for it. MR.

LUSH: I l'Tant to ask the minister whether or not he submitted the brief that was submitted to him by the Rural Development Committee from Port Blandford to Winter Brook, whether that brief was submitted to Cabinet and, secondly, whether the government have now discarded that criteria that was put forward by the blueprint for development, namely that the roads would be paved in those areas with resource potential? Is the minister now scrappinq that and did he present the brief presented to him by the Port 7129

J une 19 , 1 98 1 Ta pe N o. 26 59 EL - 3 MR. LUSH: Slandford to Winter Brook Rural Development Association for pavement of roads in that area? MR. SP~ (Simins}: portation. MR. DAWE: The hon. the Minister of Trans- Mr. Speaker, I have already that this .government is in favour of resource deveiopment and roads are a primary objective in that development. on in Cabinet is MR. MOORES: MR. DAWE: SOME HON. MEMBERS: SOME HON.· MEMBERS: MR. CALLAN: MR. SPEAKER: MR. LUSH: Secondly, Mr.Speaker, what goes None of our nusines.s. EXactly. Thank you very inuch. Oh, oh! Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The hon. member for Bellevue.

The people of Terra Nova, when they get the Hansard they will know what they have over there. When they get the Hansard,they will know what they got for ministers. MR. SPEAKER: MR. LUSH: The hon. member for Bellevue. They will know what they got for ministers. They will know how concerned they are for the Terra Nova district. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please~ I will ask the h6n. Deputy House Leader to restrain himself. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ 7130

___ .,._ .......... _ June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2660 ah - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hen. member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, approximately three months ago during the Bellevue campaign, a gentleman from Hodge's Cove announced that there would be an expansion to the Boy's Horne at Whitbourne. And if I can get the attention of the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Hickey) for a moment, I would like to ask the Minister of Social Services what will be the narure of that expansion which was announced approximately three months ago by the gentleman from Hodge's Cove?

What will be the nature of the expansion to the Boy's Horne at Whitbourne and how soon can \ve e:~pect a tender call on that particular project? MR. SPEAKER: The hen. Minister of Social Services. MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, I will have to take the question under advisement (inaudible) • SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. MOORES: The Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe), he is always out of the House. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! There was an answer there,I believe. MR. CALLAN: A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. The hen. member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that - we assume at least that that was an empty politicai promise, that it will be a promise that will be kept like the promise to the people down in Southwest Arm regarding their roads, that . there will be an expansion to the Boy's Horne at Whitbourne - I want to ask the Minister of Social Services does this mean that there will be a turnaround as pertains to thinking regarding the Boy's Horne? A while ago the staff was being cut back there and so on. Can we expect an upgranding of the facilities and the staff at the Boy's Horne at Whitbourne? 7 1 3 1

J une 19 , 198 1 Tape No . 2 660 ah - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Sirnmsl...:_ The hon. Minister of Social Services. MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, my department has already_ - MR. NEARY: Where did you stow Peddle away? MR. MORGAN: Down in (inaudible) near Panama. MR. NEARY: That is a. l.ong way from Panama. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) • Order, please!" I must ask the hon. member-for LaPoile to restrain himself. There are other people here in the House who have to talk and we cannot hear a word they are saying. MR. HICKEY: The hon. Minister of Social Services.

In response to the hon. gentleman's question, my department is always making changes and improvements in our overall policy with regards to various programmes, programmes pertaining to - SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR . lUCKEY : - oor:rections are certainly no exception. We have expanded a number of areas in terms of community based services - SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR . SPEAKER: MR. HICKEY: or ahother. Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS : AN EION . MEMBER: Oh, oh! Order, please! - {inaudible) homes of one kind Oh, oh! This is a disgrace. 7132

June 19th., 1981 Ta pe No. 2661 DW .. 1 MR. T. HI CKEY: -there are changes taking place at the federal level with regards to the Young Offenders Act,which is in the House of Commons on the Order Paper, I understand. And the corning on of that new legislation, the Young Offenders Act,has all kinds of ramifications pretaining to institutions and institutional care. It is not known yet exactly what role and what the future of Whitbourne might be.

But certainly the corning on of the Young Offenders Act is a matter which will have to be gone into and the institution at Whitbourne ce~­ tainly would be one that would be taken into account. So I will have to get some further detail with regards to the specific question. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. member for Burin- Pla- centia West. MR. D. HOLLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the hon. Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe). In his absence I probably could direct it to the Premier or otherwise. MR. S. NEARY: He is over there looking out the window. MR. TULK: MR. D. HOLLETT: He is corning!

He is corning! Mr. Speaker, the question is since you so kindly ~d the curtains and the sun has come out,it reminds me of a very important issue to a lot of people in this Province right now. It is con­ cerning calcium chloride. I would like to ask the Minister of Transportation if the supply of calcium chloride for the Province this year has arrived in the Province? If it has, has it been distributed to the depots 1 and if it has been distributed to the depots when will it be spread? 7133 ·

June 19th., 1981 MR. SPEAKER (Simms): MR. R. DAWE: Tape No. 2661 OW - 2 The hon. Minister of Transportation. Mr. Speaker, the contract for the calcium chloride was in two parts, one for the Eastern

section of the Province. That was a liquid calcium and that has already been .put in most areas, if not all areas now with an appli­ cation in the bUilt up regions where they have dirt roads. The second portion is what is known as a flake. It has about the consistency of salt and it is applied to the roads in the Western

section of the Province. That supply should be in the Province at Botwood, stored there in the depot 1 by the end of this month. MR. D. HOLLETT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. member for Burin - Placentia: West. MR. D. HOLLETT: Mr. Speaker, a quick supplementary. The minister referred to the Eastern

section and the Western. Is there a central sectibi:i or which

section does the Burin and Bonavista peninsulas come under? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Transportation. MR. R. DAWE: MR. SPEAKER: expired. It is included in the Eastern section. The time for Oral Questions has 7134

June 19, 1981 Tape 2662 EC - 1 ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Motion 1. Committee of Ways and Means, the Budget Debate. Yesterday we were debating the amendment which was proposed by the hon. the member for LaPoile {Mr. Neary) and the debate was ad]ourned by the 'hon. the member for St. John's North, who has about fourteen minutes remaining. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CARTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday I used the few minutes I had to prove conclusively that the Prime Minister of Canada is a snak~, and that would make the hen. gentlemen opposite, I guess, snake charmers.

In fact, the chief snake charmer is seldom in his seat, the member for the Strait of Belle Isle {Mr. Roberts) who sits on the corner there. He obviously does not take much interest in his district, spends most of his time downtown making money. I suppose that is his prerogative. He is certainly in a profession that allows him to make a great deal of money, and I suppose he prefers that to representing a district. Why he bothers to represent a d~strict - he does not live there, he seldom goes there and he shows no interest there; there is none of his family who have any connection there.

I find it very hard to understand why he would even bother to represent that district. Perhaps he is just keeping the seat warm for some other Liberal, I do not know. Anyway, that is all beside the point. The member for Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) made a very penetrating point here the other day. He said that most of the members opposite are absentee members, they do not live in their districts, they have no interest in their districts~ tney only go there for quarterly visits; they have no family connection 7135

June 19, 1981 Tape No . 2662 EC - 2 MR. CARTER: with their districts. They are carpetbaggers in every sense of the word. MR. LUSH: Who are you talking about? MR. CARTER: Most of them. MR. LUSH: Most of the hon. members opposite. I know more of my constituents than the hon. member will ever know of his, on a first name basis. MR. CARTER: Well, I would ask the hon. gentleman, doe ,s he know their last names? SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR . BARRETT: MR. CARTER: Oh, oh! Name them! Yes, name them! I would gladly take my seat while he names the handful of his constituents that he knows. MR. LUSH: That is so ricdiculous !- MR.

CARTER: If the hon. member would like to name the constituents that he knows, first names or last names, r will gladly take my seat for the few seconds that it would take. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER(Simms): Or4er, please! MR. CARTER: As I say, the member for Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) made a very good point. MR . LUSH: Sit down, boy. MR. CARTER: He made the point. There is no need for me to repeat it, :I: am just referring to it in passing. MR. LUSH: What arrogancel What tripe and arrogance. MR. C~TER: But it is absolutely true, Mr. Speaker.

I do not wish to drive home the point, but I could go from dis­ trict to district. The hon. mem,bers have very little interest in their districts. Now, perhaps if tney played musical chairs, pernaps if those who actually lived in one of the districts that is represented 71 3 6

June 19, 1981 Tape 2662 EC - 3 MR. CARTER: by some other Liberal were to exchange - and I wonder would it be possible by leave for members to change districts without going through the formality of an election? Perhaps if the member for Carbonear (Mr. Moores) were to represent - I cannot think where he could represent. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRETT: Try it! Why do you not try it? MR. CARTER: I do not know if it is within the competence of this Legislature to permit su.ch rearrangement 1 but it might call for better district representation.

However, this is the Budget Debate and I have been sidetracked by dishonourable members. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh !· MR. CARTER: should be made. There are a number of points that A columnist for whom I have a great deal of respect has put it in a nutshell saying that we can always do a little bit better. And he is right. I do not think any of us can come up with some instant solutions to our problems, except to say that if we work a 7137

June 19, 198 1 Tape No. 2663 SD - 1 MR. CARTER: little harder we -can perhaps do a little bit better. Members of the Opposition,if they tried they could harangue a little bit more, they could be a li ttl .e more obstructive; they could be a little more abusive if they tried - although I wonder if they could; they have been doing pretty well in that department. And it has been proven, shown beyond any shadow of a doubt, that economic power does not have to be concentrated in order for the economy to work.

And by the same token I would like to suggest that political power does not have to be concentrated for our political system to work, and in that re_spect I would like to just sow this seed among hen. members - I would like for them to consider the possibility of a county system for Newfoundland along the same lines as Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Now I realize they have a.lonqer tradition- AN HON. MEMBER: .(Inaudible) Peter Worthington. MR. CARTER: about Peter Worthington? AN HON. MEMBER: MR. CARTER: Peter Worthington? What is this (Inaudible) in reverse this morning.

So I would just like members to think in terms of what a county system would do if it was introduced into Newfoundland. I do not suggest that the counties have the same boundaries as the electorial district, I think this would be a mistake. MR. CALLAN: St. John's? MR. CARTER: How about the ward system in I think any ward system that had the same boundaries as the electorial boundaries would be a mistake because you just have two tiers competing with each other,or three tiers. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh, MR. CARTER: But the burning question that I find when I am going around out in the streets is not the 7130

.-".- June 19, 1981 Tape No. 266 3 SD - 2 MR. CARTER: economy, is not the Constitution; the burning question on many people's minds - it is addressed to me time and time again - they say, 'Tell me once and for all, does the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) have or not have the manners of a pig?' And this is the question. I find that very hard to answer. MR· BARRETT: There is no problem to answer that one. Yes, a resounding yes. MR. CARTER: Some people say yes, some people say no. The question has not yet been resolved. So on that happy note, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to say that I oppose the amendment and I certainly support the government's budgetary proposals, Thank you. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Baird): de Verde. MR. F. ROWE: Hear, hear. The hon. member for Trinity - Bay Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, that so-called speech made by the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) started yesterday and finished this morning is a kind of speech that does not do any service to this hon. House or to the people of this Province. SOME HON. "MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. F.

ROWE: It is a shameful display of personal attacks going from the Prime Minister of Canada to hen. members on this side of the House of Assembly. Now I challenge the Premier of this Province to publish the Hansard, the speech made by the member for St. John's North in defense of his administration on a vote of non-confidence. And the people of Newfoundland will really see what the 7139

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2663 SD - 3 MR. F. ROWE: government side is made up of. It was a shocking, shocking half hour, Mr. Speaker, and did nothing for the decorum of this House or to gain the respect of the people in this Province. Now, Mr. Speaker, it will not come as any surprise to hon. members opposite to know that I will be supporting whole-heartedly the amendment introduced by my colleague,the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary), which essentially says this, that we are calling for a vote of non-confidence in this administration for the simple fact that the provincial debt controls the actions of this 7140

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2664 NM- 1 MR. F. ROWE: provincial government. There is one big factor, one big item, one big thing that is behind every decision made by this government, that is controlling the actions of this government, and that is the magnitude of the provincial debt. The provincial government itself has lost control over the provincial debt, and in fact the provincial debt is controlling the actions of the government. Now, Mr.

Speaker, that is a very serious situation and one that hon. members on both sides of the House should speak to very, very seriously, not in the jocular joking, silly, foolish manner that the member for St. John's North (Mr. J. Carter) spoke to it, because it is a very serious amendment. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that we have a debt in the order of $3.2 billion in this Province at the present time. Now the President of the Council (Mr.

Marshall) yesterday related back to the terribly difficult times that they had back in 1972 when they had to deal with the strangulation debt that they inherited from the Liberal Government at that time. The President of the Council, Mr. Speaker, in making that statement proved the seriousness and the gravity of this amendment that has been moved by the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary).

If the debt in 1972 was $750 million, less than $1 billion, if that was the debt in 1972, and the Province, according to the President of the Council, was on the verge o£ bankruptcy then, and the PC Administration had a strangulation debt to contend with,as he described it, what kind of a situation must we be in today with a $3.2 billion debt? We must be past the point of bankruptcy. We must be completely strangulated. And this 714 1

June 19, 1981 Tape No . 2664 NM-2 MR. F. ROWE: is why the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) brought this particular amendment in. MR. HANCOCK: That is a fact. That is no bull. MR. F. ROWE: If a government was defeated partially because of the size of the debt in 1971-1972 - MR. HANCOCK: be called now. I would hate for an election to MR . F. ROWE: ,... what would happen if an election were called today, Mr. Speaker? ~d why is it that we b~~ught this pa:rticular amendment in as a vote of non-confidence in the government? It is for that particular reason. Mr.

Speaker, we are now in a situation where this administration is on the verge of having to borrow money, having to borrow 'money for the purpose of servicing the debt that now exists. DR. COLLINS: No, it is not true. MR. F. ROWE: 'No, it is not true.' Well I hope I will heard from the hon. Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) when he gets up to speak on the amendment, and on the main motion. DR . COLLINS: I have already spoken. MR. F. ROWE: Well probably the hon. Minister of Finance can educate one of his other colleagues over there to correct me if I am wrong. But, Mr. Speaker, I again go back to 1972 and Messrs.

Crosbie and Company were going around this Province making the very same accusation, "We are on the verge of bankruptcy. The Province is now on the verge of borrowing money in order to service the debt." And he said at that time that any business or any household in that particular situation that has to borrow money to pay the interest on their debt is in fact bankrupt. Well, if that was the 71 4 2

•• June 19th., 1981 Tape No. 2665 DW - 1 MR. F. ROWE: situation in 1972 with a $750 million debt. what must be the situation now in 1981 with a $3.2 billion debt? It is a very serious situation, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) yesterday used the foolish, silly argument, an argument completely lacking in logic,that this vote of confidence, non-confidence in the government is a vote against hospitals, roads and that sort of a thing. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is so lacking in logic it is hardly worth bringing up as a subject of debate here this morning.

Need I remind the President of the Council, Mr. Speaker, that in 1971 we had a newly elected administration, the P.C. adrninistration,who carne before this House with the Throne Speech televised for all of the people of this Province, presented the Throne Speech in this Chamber,and via the T.V.'s and radios to every person in this Province, and the Throne Speech was defined by the President of the COuncil a number of years ago as the most important document that a can present because it lays out the year's programme, the year's programme for the government: And what did the government do then, Mr. Speaker?

They turned around - they did not even debate it in the House of Assembl~ - they turned around and dissolved the House of Assembly and went before the electorate. Now that is far worse than what the President of the Council was trying to indicate yesterday, that a vote of non-confidence is a vote against hospitals, roads 1etcetera. No such thing, Mr. Speaker. This is a device-as all hon. members know in this House about a vote of non-confidence- for hon. members to get up and point out the weaknesses in the government's strategies and plans and lack of action. It gives hon. members on both sides of 7143

June 19th., 1981 Tap_e No . 2665 DW - 2 MR . F . ROWE : the House an opportunity to debate it and then vote accordingly. Now, Mr. Speaker, one of the greatest indicators of the fact that the provincial government actions is being controlled by the pro­ vincial debt in this Province is what is going on in the field of education, what is going on in the field of education. Mr. Speaker, in the .Throne Speech of 1974 1 seven years ago,one of the big items in that Throne Speech was that a new polytechnical insti­ tute would begin construction immediately. A poly­ technical institute, Mr.

Speaker, seven years ago was promised for the people of this Province. And that was a legitimate and a good aim, a good policy statement for the government to make, particularly when one realizes that this Province could become highly industrialized as a result of offshore exploration,then the developmental stage and then the production stage with respect to o11 and gas, with respect to the harnessing of the lower rivers in Labrador and then the spin-off industries, such as aluminum plants and what have you,that one could attract to this Province as a result 7144

June 19,1981 Tape No. 2666 ah-1 MR. F.ROWE: of these particular resource developments. A polytechnical institute was an absolute prer~site, was an absolute necessity for this Province, for our young people to become trained in the various technologies that were required so that we could have true Newfoundland job preference by a natural occurence instead of this silly declaration of Newfoundland preference for jobs when we have a true Canadianism where Newfoundlanders in the thousands, Mr.

Speaker, have the opportunity to cross borders in this nation of ours, go to Alberta, go to British Columbia, go to Manitoba, go to any part of this great nation of ours and seek employment if they cannot get employment here in Newfoundland,which they cannot. Mr. Speaker, the greatest part of Newfoundland's work force is working outside of this Province because we are a nation. But here in Newfoundland we have a declared Newfoundland job preference which is making Newfoundlanders ashamed throughout this nation. We would not need such a job preference policy, Mr.

Speaker, if we had in this Province what was promised by this administration seven years ago, a polytechnical institute in order to train our young Newfoundlanders and educate our young Newfoundlanders to go into the types of jobs that are springing up in this Province now. But it goes to show, Mr. Speaker, that the government debt is controlling the actions or lack of actions of this government. We do not have a polytechnical institute, Mr. Speaker. Why not?

Because the administration has allowed the provincial debt to close to quadruple in half the time that it took the previous Liberal administration to increase its debt. We go to another thing, Mr.Speaker. We can remember in 1975,another Throne Speech, that it was promised by this administration that work would begin on residences for the College of Trades and Technology 71 4 5

June 19, 198 1 Ta pe No. 2666 ah-2 MR. F.ROWE: and polytechnical institute. No such thing has oc=ed in the last six years, Mr .Speaker. We still do not have these residences for the College of Trades and Technology and the polytechnical institute. We do not even have the polytechnical institute, another indication, Mr. Speaker, that the provincial debt is contro .lling the actions of this administration. Educational television systems were going to be introduced into the Province, Mr.Speaker. subsidies for teachers in rural Newfoundland and Labrador, regional colleges all over the Province, Mr. Speaker.

None of the .se things have been forthcoming .And what do we have, Mr. Speaker? Instead of these new institutions and residences and new systems of education being introduced in the Province,we have actually had a retrenchment as far as education is concerned in this Province. Let us look, Mr. Speaker, at the situation at the university this year. The university did not get the vote from this administration that they had counted on. Consequently, .M.r.

Speaker, they are having to cut back not only in new programmes being developed, they had to cut back in some of the existing courses, they had to cut back in the 7146

~---- June 19,1981 Tape No . 2667 EL - 1 MR. F. ROWE: care and maintenance of the university. They a:re not re­ hiring staff who are leaving for other universities. They are pruning back in_the area of administration. Mr. Speaker, this university, which was dreamed of by the previous Liberal administration as being one of the top and best unive.rsities :i.n Canada, the only universiFY in Newfoundland and Labrador 7 the aim was to make this university one of thes best, amongst the best in all of this nation.

It is slowly becoming, because of the government•s policy and lack of money and supp0rt of our university, this university is slowly be­ coming not only a second-class university,·Mr.Speaker, but a university for the elite, a university for only the students whose parents can afford to send them to univer­ sity. Mr.Speaker, how many thousands of young students do we have graduating from our high schools this year, from all over Newfoundland and Labrador who are dreaming and wanting and desiring to go to our university? And the only way they can get there, Mr.

Speaker, some of them and many of them, they can qualify as far as their results are concerned, they can qualify as far as their brains are concerned, they can qualify as far as their education, formal and self-education is concerned but they are disqualified, Mr. Speaker, because of the lack and the size of their wallets. They have to put themselves into terrible d.ebt i:f they wish to go to un£ver­ sity.

It is a shocking situation, Mr Speaker, when twenty-one years after the opening of our new university - I am sorry - the new campus, it was not in 1960 1 it was in - the new· campus was built in 1962 or 1963 - was it? AN BON. MEMBER: Opened . 714 7

Jun e 19, 198 1 Tape No. 2667 EL - 2 MR. F. ROWE: Opened; yes. Just about twenty years after, the building of our great new campus, Mr. Speaker, we are going to nave thousands of students who want to go to un­ iversity not being able to go this year because of the high tuition fees and the high residence fees. The people who live in St. John's, Mr. Speaker, and who happen to be sons and daughters of well-to-do people are at a tremendous advantage as far as going to university is concerned. And that is only one aspect of it, Mr. Speaker. Let us look at the more important aspect of this whole situation.

The university, Mr. Speaker, the ~niversity is not the only institution of higher education that is made available to people leaving high school. There are very many other important institutions: The Fisheries College, which I hope I will get an opportunity to talk to, the College of Trades and Technology, the Vocational Schools, the Nursing Schools, the regional colleges, the community colleges and other forms of education. But, the university, Mr.

Speaker, is the most important centre in any state,or in any province with regard to the articulation of the educational system and the policy and the direction of a province. At this time, Mr.Speaker, when we have tremendous developrents in offshore oil and gas or pot­ ential great develoFfOE!II!:s, when we have potential great de­ veloprents ' in spin-off industri.es, when we have the possibility 7148

June 19, 1981 Tape 2668 EC - 1 MR. F. ROWE: of great things in Labrador with respect to hydro-electricity~ hnd some day we will be able to mine the rich uranium deposits in Labrador when uranium becomes more economically feasible to mine than now because of the long distances up there. All of this, Mr. Speaker, requires scientists, technical people, engineers, but not only that, Mr.

Speaker, it requires sociologists, educators, doctors, dentists, teachers, people who can lead in the various communities of rural Newfoundland and urban Newfoundland when you have these great sociological, technical changes occurring in the Province. And this is the greatest weakness, Mr. Speaker, the greatest sadness, the greatest disappointment that our Newfoundland people are being subjected to today, that these things are not ongoing. Why, Kr. Speaker? Because the provincial debt has complete control and a strangl~hold on the actions of this administration, the administration, Mr.

Speaker, which was going to solve the provincial debt. MR. CARTER: That was Joey's fault. MR. F. ROWE: Oh, yes, Joey's fault! Joey Smallwood, Mr. Speaker, in twenty-three years, managed to build a debt of $750 million. In half that time, Mr. Speaker, the present administration has a debt almost four times as much, $3.2 billion and going up. And what is the basic difference, Mr. Speaker? MR. CARTER: .MR. F. ROWE: It is the inflation we have. Inflation applies to everything, Mr. Speaker, and I will tell you now, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. the member for St.

John's North will just keep quiet for one second, why we have that small little debt being built up. We had hundreds of fish plants openP-d in this Province with government subsidies, we had hundreds of new schools built in this Province, we had hundreds of 71 4 9

June 19, 1981 Tape 2668 EC - 2 MR. F. ROWE; new hospital beds opening up in this Province, we had highways being built, we had roads being reconstructed, we had teachers' salaries going up, we had vocational schools being built, we had a new university campus, industries were being opened, Mr. Speaker. Some of the industries failed, some of them were successful, but, Mr. Speaker, things were being done. What has this administration done? Not one new industry since they took over, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. F. ROWE: We have the spectacle today, Mr. Speaker, of the Minister of Environment (Mr. Andrews) going out to Conception Bay to officiate 7150

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2669 NM - 1 MR. F. ROWE: at a great new opening ceremony, an opening ceremony, Mr. Speaker. Guess what it is? MR. CALLAN: No, what? MR. F. ROWE: They are going to open up an open-pit incinerator employing three people. And we are going to have a Minister of the Crown officiating at this great opening. MR. CALLAN: TWo. Two ministers. MR. F. ROWE: TWo ministers of the Crown going out there, Mr. Speaker. What other great progress did we see, Mr. Speaker, by this administration?

I forgot to mention another great develoP!I_\ent on the part - another new thing this administration has opened up in this Province. MR. HANCOCK : No new industries. MR. F. ROWE: A couple of new jails, Mr. Speaker, a couple of new jails. So open-pit incinerators and a couple of jails is about the only thing, Mr. Speaker, that this government has increased besides the provincial debt. It has increased the provincial debt. Mr.

Speaker, I arn absolutely amazed, absolutely amazed when the Premier of this Province, when he gets on his constitutional kick, starts pleading with the people of Canada and propagandizing with the people of this Province about the need of provincial equality, and how Newfoundland is not qettinq its fair share in Canadianism. Well, Mr. Speaker, the hon. Premier better look a little more closely at home, a little more closely at home when we talk about equality. There are regions of this Province, Mr. Speaker, that are far from equal 7151

June 19 ., 1981 Tape No. 2669 NM - 2 MR. F. ROWE: to other regions of this Province. There are school tax areas, for example, that do not have the economic base so that the school taxes can be collected at the same magnitude as other school tax jurisdictions. For example, how can one compare the collection of school taxes on the Great Northern Peninsula where there is a tremendous amount of unemployment, where the economic base is not the same as in more indus~rialized centres such as St.

John's - not industrialized centres exactly,but economically higher profile centres- or even Corner Brook, or even Grand Falls, or even Stephenville now that it is coming into its own? There is no comparison. There is massive inequality throughout this Province, Mr. Speaker. There are school boards, Mr. Speaker, that have schools under their jurisdiction that are simply not fit to go into, simply not fit to go into, Mr. Speaker. And there are other school boards, Mr. Speaker, that have beautiful schools that are a pride to the teachers, a pride to the parents, and a pride to the students.

The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, the point that I am making is if the Premier of this Province is going to go around making a fool of himself on the Mainland about us getting the gears by Ottawa . when in fact we are not, us not getting our fair share from Ottawa, Newfoundland and Labrador not being treated equally in this Canadianism, he had better first look at home and look at the inequalities that exist within our own Province 1 from one school tax authority to the other, from one school board to the other 7152

-·--------- June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2670 SD - 1 MR. F. ROWE: from one municipality to another. My friend and colleague from Carbonear (Mr. Moores) yesterday pointed out how one of his municipalities is being treated compared to others in this Province. Was that an example of government equality, government fairness, Mr. Speaker~ Of course it was not. Now, Mr.

Speaker, if the hon. the Premier wants to talk about more provincial control, let us extend that piece of logic just one step further~ The Premier says that the federal government has too much control, too much power and some of that power and control should be handed over to the provinces. Well, there is a certain element of truth in that except that the hon. Premier exaggerates it and becomes narrow-minded about it and looks in the eyes of other Canadians to me mean about it and grasping for something that we do not yet have. But, Mr.

Speaker, if that logic was to be extended to its natural conclusion,that ia move more federal control to provincial control, would it not seem logical, Mr. Speaker, to transfer some of the provincial control to local government control, to the municipalities throughout this Province? It would seem to me that that would be a natural trend. If we are going to move more federal control to provincial control,why not move more provincial control to the local government control? And that is where the Premier's logic ends, Mr.

Speaker, Because this administration have been doing things, bringing legislation into this House,such as the Regional Government ~ill, property taxes, have brought this kind of thing into this hon. House, Mr. Speaker, without proper consultation with the municipalities, without giving the municipalities more control. More responsibility, yes, more responsibility to collect taxes for the government. And not only that, Mr. Speaker, hon. members shouted from across the way, 'Sure, 7 1 5 :1

June 19, 1981 Tape No . 2670 SD - 2 MR. F. ROWE: the municipalities are accepting the property tax. They are going along with it • '!'.hey are agreeing with it'. They have no choice, Mr. Speaker. Because if a local government, if a council is to get one red copper from the gover~ent it has to send a declaration to the government that they are prepared to and agree with the implementation of the property tax. That is the only way a municipality . can get one cent from the government. So, Mr. Speaker, what would you expect councils to do?

Sure they are going to try to implement the property tax against their will, because they have no other choice. That is an example, Mr. Speaker, of too much provincial government control and not giving local government the opportunity to be the architects of their own destiny as far as the local level is concerned. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is a lot more that I can say ~ particularly in the field of education, with respect to how - SOME RON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh.. MR. SPEAKER (Baird): Order, please! MR. F .

ROWE: this amendment is probably one of the most serious amendments to a Budget Speech that has ever been brought into this House, Mr. Speaker. ~t 71 5 ~~

June 19th., 1981 Tape No. 2671 DW - 1 MR. F. ROWE: states very clearly - and this is what the amendment means that this administration no longer has control over the provincial debt, the provincial debt has control over the actions of the administration. That is a very serious matter, Mr.

Speaker, particularly when we have a situation in this Province where very little is being done in increasing the rate of expenditure in the area of public services, where we are seeing very little in the way of the opening up of new industries for the purpose of jobs and employ­ ment, where the only thing the Premier is hanging his hat on is if the oil companies and the governments at all levels are successful in uncovering economically viable gas and oil wells off our Province. We sincerely hope that that will happen, Mr. Speaker, but that in itself will not save this Province.

And I would ask hon. ~s opposite to probably speak a heck of a lot - I implore them to speak a lot more seriously than the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) just spoke because this is a very serious matter and this amendment should not be the subject of irresponsible,silly jokes coming from hon. members opposite such as we saw from the member for St. John's North who would be onlyentertaining if he took up Ray Guy's position in writinq columns. That is his only shining characteristic, that he would make a good replacement for Ray Guy if Ray Guy ever departed this particular Province, Mr. Speaker.

So I will be supporting the amendment, Mr. Speaker, and I would say that hon. members opposite,if they thought about it seriously, would think very seriously of supporting it themselves. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 71 55

June 19th., 1981 MR. SPEAKER (Baird): on the amendment? MR. J. MORGAN: MR. SPEAKER: MR. J. MORGAN: Tape No. 2671 DW - 2 Is the House ready for the question Mr. Speaker. The hon. Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Speaker, seeing that we are not going to be ready for the question I might as well have a few words on this non-confidence motion which is, I guess, almost an automatic thing to expect from the Opposition, to put forward a non-confidence motion in what the government is doing or not doing and with regard to their policies and programmes.

Unfortunately, the Opposi­ tion that we have today in the House of Assernbly,whether it is misguidance or-what the reasons are is, I guess, not important. But it seems that the Opposition are always, at all times,negative in their criticism of government. And I have talked to many prominent Liberals around the Province in my travels and they say, 'Well, look there must be something you fellows are doing which is good for the Province. There must be something you are doing.

Because no matter what you people say or do and put forward as policies, whether it be in fisheries, in fo~, in supplying roads and water and sewer services, no matter what it is you are doing or what you put forward, the Opposition always criticizes. They never have any good word or give any credit to what you are doing as a government.' And the question is why not? Why not? Surely, the Opposition,if they are going to be sincere - as I mentioned a couple of days-in their representations on behalf of their own constituents, they must recognize the things that are good and criticize the things that are bad.

I am sure ~he people of Newfoundland are not in agreement that eve~ing this government has done in the last two or three years is bad for our Province. In fact, it is the very opposite 7156

June 19, 1981 Tape 2672 EC - 1 MR. MORGAN: So it would be much more beneficial to the Opposition in their attempt to gain more seats in the next general election - I do not know, maybe we should not be giving them any ideas because they may very well take them in a serious way - but it would be much more beneficial out in the rural parts of our Province to one day be able to say publicly, Well, the Minister of Fisheries,or the Minister of Forestry,or the Minister of Tourism,or the Minister of Transportation did something that we are pleased with.

And if they did that, they would have more credibility in the eyes of their constituents than in always standing up condemning ministers on this side of the House. Because all of us cannot be that bad. So, I mean, when I go this Summer and travel in the ridings of these Opposition members and look at the fishing issues - and I will be doing that this Summer, I will be doing it extensively the same as I did last Summer.

I will be travelling throughout the Province whenever this House closes, meeting fishermen's committees, meeting organizations, sitting down discussing with them the problems they have in their respective regions. And I have no objection to having members sit in on the meetings, no objection what­ soever. They are the official representatives elected by the people,and they deserve to be in on what is going on in their own areas. I am not saying I am going to take them with me in my travels because I would not be .out there campaigning for them, naturally.

I am going to be out there doing some campaigning for our own party, and rightly so; the same as I now see the federal Minister of Fisheries (Mr. LeBlanc) here ~oliticking to the very utmost with his colleague, the Minister of Revenue (Mr. Rompkey) and with his colleague, the M.P. for the Humber - St. George's area. And rightly so. Why not? Why should 71 57

June 19, 1981 Tape 2672 EC - 2 MR. MORGAN: he not be here politicking? He is a politician. How often do we hear statements , in the House today, 'Oh, well, that is political trickery, that is political activity'? Well, what do you expect from politicians? What do you expect from politicians but political activity? We are all here for our own survival as politicians. If I am doing a job as an engineer, if I do not do it well I will not be there very long. If I am doing a job as a fishermen and I do not do it very well, I will not survive.

If I am doing a job as a politician and I do not do it well, I will not survive. It is the same thing over and over. I mean, we have to be political if we are politicians. And it is fine for members to stand in this House yesterday and today anq talk about the roads programme for our Province and say, well, certain members got more funds than others. The member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush) this morning was complaining he had no money for Terra Nova district. The member for LaPoiie (Mr. Neary) was complaining yesterday there was no money for water and sewer for his district.

And I talked to my colleague, the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mrs. Newhook) and I said, 'Colleague, how often has the member for LaPoile been in your office to talk about problems in Burnt Island?' And do you know what, Mr. Speaker? That gentleman from LaPoile,who yesterday was so concerned about the Burnt Island problems, the water and sewer, has yet to put his nose into the office of the Minister of Municipal Affairs, has yet to go in and sit down and say to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and her deputy, 'Look, I have a problem on Burnt Island.' 7158

June 19, 1981 Tape 2672 EC -- 3 MR. MORGAN: Now, some hon. gentlemen over there, I agree, are doing their jobs, they are working hard, they bring in - I have had them in my office - representations from Fogo; the member for Twillingate (Mr. W. Rowe} has been in on a number of occasions. I recall the member for Twillingate came in a little while ago - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR· SPEAKER (Baird): Order, please! MR. MORGAN : - and he sat down in my office with a delegation from Twillingate,talking about roads. And his main point was - he came to see me. He said, 'Mr.

Minister, you are representing the fishing industry, and down in the Twillingate area,in Herring Neck,there is a little fish plant. And there is a gravel road and we have to transport fish every day over that road. Can you help us get something done?' Now, that is what I find a very reasonable manner of representation. That man does not stand in the House and criticize the ministers with stupid, silly little questions 7159

June 19,1981 Tape No. 2673 ah-1 MR.MORGAN: and call names across the House as I saw taking place today. MR. CARTER: It is shocking. MR. MORGAN: ?ersonal names, personal attacks, I saw that today~ My colleague who was referred to, he will get back at the hon. gentleman for that. I ~ sure he will. But he does not do that. He comes in the office and sits down with the minister in a reasonable way and says, "Mr. Minister , I have a problem here, can you help me out?" What happened to that? I will tell you what happened. Tpere wasno money in the Terra Nova district but their is money for the Twillingate area.

That gentleman got some money for his road 1 this year,down to Herring Neck- Not because he is a Liberal member ~1e should not give him anything,no. He =arne in and sat down and worked out the situation and we gave him some funds to get the problem resolved in Herring Neck.But the members of . the Opposition want to always score little political points and in scoring these little political points all they are doing is hurting their own constituents. Now,the hon.-gentleman from down in Grand Bank (Mr. Thoms) I must say I find"him to be a gentleman.

We all know he does not get on with personal attacks in the House and he never did. I have not heard him yet#And every time I have talked to him about the fisheries he is always genuinely sincere, he is talking in a genuine, sincere way. MR. CARTER: MR. MORGAN: MR. CARTER: That is Marystown. Marystown I mean. Marystown. Burin. MR. MORGAN: Burin - Marystown. Yes. And the hon. gentleman from Fogo (Mr. Tulk) is also a pretty reasonable man when it come to - he realizes the fishing 716n

June 19,1981 Tape No. 2673 ah-2 MR. MORGAN: industry is so important to his riding and we sit down and talk about the things that involve the fishery. But I mean yesterday was an example. ~he member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) is actually tearing down the Liberal party.And the sooner that Mr. Stirling. - he is not in the House today and I cannot refer to him by name -but the member for Bonavista North (Mr. Stirling),the sooner that he realizes that if he does not do something to control that member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) the same thing is going to happen to him as leader as happened to two previous leaders.

AN HON .MEr·!BER: That is right. MR. MORGAN: Two previous leaders. The member for Twillingate (Mr.W.Rowe) who was the leader of the party was destroyed and the member for the St. Anthony area, the Strait of Belle Isle (Mr. Roberts), at the time was leader and he was destroyed by the same member. The fact is we do not mind. Why should we mind? We do not care if there is a Liberal party but we do want an opposition. Premier Peckford is going to win the next election sweeping,there is no question ~n my mind. He is going to win the next election sweeping. He will have more seats than is over here now.

But listen, to have an effective administration in the Province you have to have an effective opposi~ion. If you do not have an effective opposition it destroys the whole means of politics.And we do not want to see four or five membersin the Opposition, we want to see some of those frontbenchers,the more qualified fellows who have been around for a long time, come back again. I hear rumblings that somebody is going to quit their caucus, they are going to quit the party over there and resign and go into private life. I say do not do that. You may 71 61

June 19,H81 Tape No. 2673 ah-3 MR. MORGAN: be disgruntled with you leader, disgruntled with the way the member for LaPoile (Mr .Neary ) is controlling things and running things ,but hang in there and give us - SOME BON . MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. MORGAN: - some constructive opposition, do not be always standin g up in the Bouse of Assembly and criticizing like the member for LaPoile, yeste rday {Mr . Neary) . He thought he was a\.,fully smart by talking about something he thought I did not know a~ything about, sharks. SOME BON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! 716?.

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2674 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: He thought that was a major scoring point. Now,if he was genuinely concerned about getting a little industry going for LaPoile he would have called me down to the office and said, "Jim, I have a little proposal for you now. There is a possibility of getting a shark industry going over in LaPoile." And I 1 being politically sure, I would not say to him, "No, now,because you are in a Liberal district I am going to cut off the fishermen." MR. HOLLETT: No sharks allowed. MR. NEARY: I would not say no sharks allowed. But, Mr.

Speaker, to be serious for a little while before my time is up on this debate. The fact is that what we are doing today as a Province is for the benefit of all constituents of all members. And all we are trying to do is to ride out ,- to ride out a very tough period in the history of our Province. we have a limited revenue. We have .5 million people here. They have not got the services they need,and that is obvious from the requests put forward to Municipal Affairs this year for --what?- $110 million worth of water and sewer. We could only come forward with $31 million.

We cannot supply all the needs of the people. We cannot supply all the monieE required for the paving of roads,whether it be in Bellevue district, or Terra Nova, or TWillingate or anywhere else. We have $21 million for roads this year - $21 million - $31 million for water and sewer _ But we have not got the necessary funds. Why is it that we have not got the necessary funds? It is because we have not got the economic base to get the source of revenue required to do the things we need to do for our Province. 7163

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2674 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: And all we are saying now is let us work together in the proper management of the resources we have. And seriously, we do have some good resources. And if we had the kind of jurisdiction - there is nobody who can tell me that if the Province today had jurisdiction over the fisheries -irrespective of what the Opposition think of me as a minister, irrespective 1 totally irrespective, we have a Department of Fisheries provincially, we have the most qualified Deputy Minister, the most knowledgeable man in fisheries anywhere in Canada.

Seventeen, eighteen years with the federal government and now for the last eight years with us as a deputy minister. Totally qualified, totally qualified, the most knowledgeable man in the fishing industry. We need him and we have an Assistant Deputy Minister, Mr. Ray Andrews. First there is the Deputy, Gordon Slade; then there is the Assistant Deputy, Ray Andrews. Ray Andrews served, again,for sixteen, seventeen years with the Federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Totally , fully knowledgeable of what needs to be done in the fishing industry. MR. TULK: You are the problern 1 the minister. MR.

MORGAN: Then we have - beneath that again we have a second ADM, a young Newfoundlander who carne from Trinity Bay, Les Dean. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear! A good worker. MR. MORGAN: Excellent - his qualifications, there is no question. Then you go on 1there is another ADM, Mr. Herb Goudie. Herb Goudie was with the federal government years ago, carne 71 6 4

r, June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2675 SD - l MR. MORGAN: came with the Province, and he is an engineer, kno-v1s all about the need for facilities and th.e kind of facilities required, etc. and I can go on. The provincial Department of Fisheries - AN HON. MEMBER: Confederation. MR. FLIGHT: SOME HON. MEMBERS: r-iR. MORGAN: He is the best minister since Hear, hear, Oh, oh! Irrespective of the views of the Opposition of the minister, ministers come and go, pol .i ticians come and go but nobody b'.It nobody - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : Order, please! MR.

MORGAN: - can tell me today that if we had the jurisdiction over this Province~s most important industry, if we had the jurisdiction that we are asking for, that we would be able to develop that industry in a way that fishermen would be able to make a good living at fishing, that fish plants would be able to survive and make a reasonable return on their investments and we have a good buoyant industry in the fishing industry. But the prob1em is, as Mr.

Etchegary said a few days ago, it is rather difficult to do that and to have that kind of an environment in the fishing industry if you have one sector going out in one direction, another sector going in some other direction and you have a government in Ottawa going in one direction and we here 1 after consultation with all concerned which we feel is the most important thing MR. TULK: You do not get together though. MR. MORGAN: - the hon, gentleman said, 'We do not get together' . I have met with Mr. LeBlanc, since I have been Minister of Fisheries, I think it i.s five times.

I. recall sitting down in a hotel room with Mr. LeBlanc one afternoon, him and his officials, for five hours; sat down and went over 7165

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2675 SD - 2 MR. MORGAN: all the issues. I recallsitting down shortly after that with Mr. Cashin there and 1;he Fishermen's Union,a~ain with Mr. LeBlanc, in a meeting, and people like Alec Moores, Mr. Etchegary and the Fish Trades , Bill Wells and these people, all knowledgeable people in the fishing industry. And again it is not the point of sitting down; we sit down and we discuss and we talk and we discuss and we talk.But, Mr. Speaker, the unfortunate

part is that somebody up in Ottawa,whether it is the advisors to the federal ministers, whether it is senior staff or whether it is the minister himself I do not know, I just do not know what the problem is, but you talk to anybody today in the fishing industry- the Economic Council of Canada just s-aid it quite clearly in a report across Canada, they just said it quite clearly what is happening, the federal government is not listening to the provinces, this present federal government. And because Premier Peckford has taken such a firm stand on the constitutional changes that Mr.

Trudeau wants to bring into thi!'! country, and because of the confrontation he had in the public eye of the country_where this Premier of our Province, this young Premier - one of the brightest in Canada today - took on this great iptelligent,knowledgeable Prime Minister of the country; took him on in the eye of the public at the Constitutional Conference and won,and whipped them in the eye of the public, that, Mr. Speaker, is the prime reason why that man in Ottawa is so vindictive , 7166

.... June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2676 EL - 1 MR. MORGAN: and I say vindictive. MR. AYLT.VARD: Right on! MR.MORGAN: That is why - and to answer Mr. Ed Roberts' comments this morning - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : Order, please! MR. MORGAN: To answer the member for the Strait (E.Roberts) this morning in a front page

article in The Daily News condemning this government for not gett- ing money from DREE, condemning this government for not getting - why does he not call a spade a spade and say the reason why we are not getting money from Ottawa is be­ cause they are penalizing Newfoundland, penalizing the Prem­ ier and his government here because he is standing up for the rights of Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders. MR.THOMS: . MR. SPEAKER: MR. MORGAN: MR. THOMS: MR. SPEAKER: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. MORGAN: MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: The traitor speaks. Order, please! That is the only reason why. A traitorous speech. Order, please!

Traitorous. Treachery. So, you see, Mr. Speaker, if Oh, oh. (Inaudible) Friday. Order, please! MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, you already called order this morning to the member for LaPoile. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, the problem is that when these members stand up.as they did this morning and criticize the government, this government here, the people down in the areas know differently 1 they know that the real 7167

. June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2676 EL - 2 MR. MORGAN: problem is the Federal Government is refusing to put the money in to help us out. And you know the reason why they are not doing itc Mr. Speaker, the reason why they are not doing it is this, the Federal Government wants to keep this Province depending on Ottawa. It .is like us tomorrow going into a community where there are lots of welfare recipients and instead of us taking some kind of initiatives as a government to help these people get off welfare, make their own living, no longer depend on government, no longer depend on the Social Assistance programmes - MR.

THOMS: weekend. MR. SPEAKER (But~): MR. MORGAN: We are going to be here all Order, please! -}tr. Speaker, we go into a comm- unity and we say to these people, 'Now ,1 we want you people not to be independant, we want you always to be dependant so that we can control what you get and what you can do in your community. You get X amount for your accomodations, X amount for your food, X ammunt for your survival. Now, that is exactly the Federal Government's philosophy and policy towards the poorer regions· of our country today. MR. HOUSE: That is a Liberal policy. MR. MORGAN: They want to keep us down - AN HON.

MEMBER: Tory lies. MR.MORGAN: So as we will always AN HON. MEMBER: Tory lies. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. MORGAN: - so that we will ahrays have to depend on Ottawa to help us with fishing facilities in Labrador, to help us pave the roads across Labrador, to help us pave the roads to some of these peninsular areas of the Province, these secondary roads, to help us out in other things because we 71 6 A

... - June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2676 EL - 3 MR. MORGAN: have not got the necessary re- venue, as I mentioned earlier,that we need to do the things we want to do for our people. But they want to keep us down. That is the phisosophy. That is the philosphy. MR. HOUSE: The Liberal philosophy. MR. MORGAN: That is the philosophy in Ottawa. Instead of ~oming along and saying to Premier Peckford, look, Mr. Peckford AN HON. HEr1BER: That is the r,eason why you (inaudible) separatists. MR. SPEAKER (Butt): Order, please. MR. MORGAN: 'Mr. Premier, we are going, - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please~ MR. MORGAN: Mr.

Speaker, please this gentle- man who just walked into the House (inaudible). MR. SPEAKER: Order, please~ I will ask the hon. members to my right to restrain themselves, please. The hon. the Minister of Fisheries (J. Morgan) has the floor. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, instead of that, what they should be doing is the Prime ~~inister should be saying to the Premier of this Province and his Cabinet,'we are going to do everything possible to help you develop the resources you have so that you no longer will 716!=1

June 19, 1981 Tape No. 2677 N,M - 1 MR . MORGAN: have to come to Ottawa looking for fishing facilities for Labrador, no longer looking for the paving of roads in Labrador, no longer looking for the paving of roads in different areas of the Provi