March 28,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIII No. 6

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (L. Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, we have not had the

opportunity to pay tribute to two former members of this House and Ministers of

the Crown who passed away since this House was last in session. Val Earle who

passed away on February 1, and Ank Murphy who passed away on February 18. Both

served their Province with distinction in the opposition benches and on the

government side.

First elected in 1962, Ank Murphy served as opposition member

and became Leader of the official opposition in 1970. Following the change in

government, he served under Premier Frank Moores as Minister in the portfolios

of Provincial Affairs, Social Services, Provincial Affairs and Environment and

Consumer Affairs and Environment. He retired from politics in 1979.

Mr. Murphy was one of the founders of the Boy Scout Movement

in this Province which has benefited so many of our children in the years since

then. He was also a very popular sports figure, serving for years as President

of the St. John's Amateur Baseball Association and earning membership in the

Newfoundland and Labrador Sports Hall of Fame.

I would like to note that, Mr. Murphy, who served as Member

for St. John's Centre was a good friend and caucus colleague of Senator and

former PC Opposition Leader, Gerry Ottenheimer, the brother of our current

Member for St. John's East who is a close member of their family.

Val Earle began his career in private business, working his

way up to President of Earle Sons and Company Limited of Fogo, and later

establishing Val Earle Limited. He was the first President of the Newfoundland

Fish Trades Association which he helped formed and a director of both the

Newfoundland Associated Fish Exporters of which he was also President and the

Fisheries Council of Canada.

He was the Commissioner for Canada on the International

Commission for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries and served as President of the

Newfoundland Board of Trade and the St. John's Rotary Club. He had a colourful

political life as a cabinet minister under both the Liberal and the PC

Administrations. When first elected in 1962, he served as Minister under Premier

Smallwood in the portfolios of Education, Public Welfare and Finance. In 1970,

he crossed the floor to the PC Opposition and following the election in 1972, he

served as Minister under Premier Moores in the portfolios of Economic

Development, Public Works and Services, Municipal Affairs and Housing and

Finance.

Both these individuals have made an important contribution to

this Province as members and as ministers and as well, beyond this House. I ask

the Speaker to send condolences on behalf of the members to Mrs. Geraldine

Murphy and Mrs. Jean Earle and their respective families.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. the Leader of

the Opposition has done an outstanding job giving a

summary of the history of

the lives of these two outstanding Newfoundlanders and we on the government side

would like to align ourselves and pay tribute as well.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join with the Leader of the Opposition and

the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology in offering public thanks for the

careers of these two men who served the Province in this House of Assembly. I

know both of them, and I know their families.

I would like to join in asking the Chair, through the

Speaker, to send our condolences to their families, and our thanks for their

public service.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I regret that I was late

arriving in the House, and came in the middle of the remarks by the Leader of

the Opposition, but I would like to join as well in associating myself with the

eloquent remarks of the Leader of the Opposition, setting out for all of us for

our reflection, and indeed to take this moment to again appreciate the

tremendous work and contribution of both of these individuals, both as members

of the House, as advocates and strong voices for their constituents during the

years they sat here, but equally as important but no more important as members

of the Cabinet in various administrations in seeing that the welfare of the

Province was represented properly, and that progress was made for Newfoundland

and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, those of us who serve in public life know that

it is an occupation fraught with many slings and arrows, and a great many

disappointments. I think it is appropriate, on occasion, for those of us who are

here today, as we see those who have gone before and have passed on, that we

take a moment to reflect and to express our appreciation for their work, and in

particular our appreciation for their families who, during their time of service

to this place, in this place, made their contribution as well.

MR. SPEAKER: Before we call the routine proceedings for

the day, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome to the public

galleries forty-one Grade V students from Park Avenue Elementary School in Mount

Pearl, accompanied by their teachers, Donna Warren, Tina Boudreau, and Sharon

Glover.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: As well, I want to welcome thirty-seven

students from Canon Richards High School in Flower's Cove, along with their

teachers, Mr. Levi Squires and Mrs. Lillian Dredge, and two chaperons.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: And I want to acknowledge the presence of a

former member of the House in the galleries, Fabian Manning, who was the former

Member for the District of St. Mary's - The Capes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today

are to the Premier.

There has been much talk of late about RST and GST

harmonization. We favour eliminating red tape and duplication for business, but

tax harmonization must be done right.

The federal minister recently said that he expected to have

an agreement with Newfoundland and Labrador and the other Atlantic Provinces by

the end of March, in three days time. I ask the Premier if he now has reached an

agreement on RST and GST harmonization with his counterparts.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I thank the Leader of the

Opposition for his question and for his interest in this important matter. To be

very direct, no. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador have not reached an

sales tax and the federal GST. We have been engaged in discussion both at the

official level and at the ministerial level with the national government and,

Mr. Speaker, those discussions are ongoing.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: My next question, Mr. Speaker: Because this

Province has the highest retail sales tax rate, we stand to lose the most from

harmonization. It has been reported that Ottawa is considering a $500 million to

$700 million compensation package for the Atlantic Provinces, to be spread over

three to four years. Will the Premier ensure that there is a long-term solution

to the loss of revenues under harmonization, or is the Premier going to be

bought off by a chunk of money from the Federal Government that we may pay for

dearly down the road?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I know that the Leader of the

Opposition is not cynical by nature and that he is an optimist. Therefore, it is

with great surprise that I hear him consistently over the last couple of days -

and I know this is being foisted upon him; it is not in his nature - putting

questions that always conclude with a doom-and-gloom scenario.

The Leader of the Opposition has just said that Newfoundland

and Labrador stands the most to lose from harmonizing our provincial sales tax

regime with the federal sales tax regime. What he has not said is that

Newfoundland and Labrador has the highest sales tax regime, the highest bar

none, in the country, and that the combination of the provincial sales tax as

currently constituted, 12 per cent, with the federal sales tax, 7 per cent,

gives us an effective sales tax of nearly 20 per cent - 19.84 per cent.

If the Leader of the Opposition is telling me - I am sure he

is not - that he wants the government, that he recommends this House, wrap our

arms around a 19.84 per cent sales tax regime and defend it, no matter what

happens, and refuse to enter into any discussions which could effectively and

dramatically lower that regime, then I am surprised, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would not want the Premier to be surprised, because I don't

support that and I don't want us to be guinea pigs either, in a pilot project

that is designed to give the impression that GST has been eliminated. Now, I ask

the Premier: will he ensure that groceries, prescription drugs, electricity and

other essential items that are now exempt from RST will continue to be exempt

under harmonization?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, first of all, the

Leader of the Opposition cannot comfortably resume his seat after that

statement. You cannot stand and say I am against the GST. I noted that when it

was brought forward by - I believe it was a gentleman by the name of Mr.

Mulroney, supported and endorsed by people by the names of Crosbie and McGrath

and others. I don't recall - public record will show - a large sign of protest

from that side of the House at that occasion, or from the sitting Conservative

Premier of the day. So it is not enough to say I am against something. The

question is what is the Leader of the Opposition for? Are you for -

AN HON. MEMBER: What are you for?

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, I am for looking for any kind of

dialogue and any kind of discussion that might have the effect of lowering the

sales tax regime in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador from the highest

regime today in Canada, an effective sales tax rate of nearly 20 per cent - but

that involves negotiation. I could assure the Leader of the Opposition that any

negotiation we are involved in will always be, as it must be, fully to the

benefit of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are for a

reduced harmonized rate in this Province, I want to make that clear, but we are

opposed to putting our groceries, prescription drugs and other such essential

services that affects the disposable income of low-income Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. I ask the Premier - with harmonization we will not need separate

GST and RST collections - can the Premier tell us how many jobs are on the line

here and will he ensure that the tax collection jobs now will stay in this

Province and not be siphoned off to other provinces?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, now, Mr. Speaker, this is getting

interesting. The Leader of the Opposition has now told us he is not for the

current regime, he is for a harmonized regime and he wants a lower rate. Now we

need to know how much lower the Leader of the Opposition would go, because he

has just told us he doesn't want to broaden the base. That means there would be

a revenue shortfall. So is he suggesting in the absence of that revenue that

large portions or chunks of the government be discontinued? If he is, which

parts of the government would he shut down?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question today

is for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. The Leader of the

Opposition today asked questions of the Premier on harmonization of the PST and

GST. Of course, he skated around that as usual. I would like to continue on with

the same line to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

The GST rebate to municipalities is 57 per cent of the 7 per

cent paid by municipalities. The intent of the rebate is that municipalities pay

no more under the GST structure than they previously faced under the

manufacturers retail tax system. The Province informed the Newfoundland and

Labrador Federation of Municipalities that it is pursuing harmonization. The

federal minister was pushing harmonization last week in his meeting with the

Premier, and the Premier confirmed that here today. Has the minister or his

department prepared financial analysis of the impact on municipalities, and if

so can he share the analysis with the House and the Newfoundland and Labrador

Federation of Municipalities?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs I'm glad to answer the question. First of all, there

has been no agreement. That was the first question asked by the Leader of the

Opposition. I gave a very clear answer.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: The Leader of the Opposition - you should

listen to your Leader.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

PREMIER TOBIN: He asks good questions on occasion.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: The first question he asked was: Has there

been an agreement, and will there be one by the end of the month, I think was

the question. You pointed out there were only a few days left in the month. The

clear answer was there has not yet been an agreement. Given that there is no

agreement and none has been negotiated, concluded, arrived at, initialled, it is

very difficult to then give you impact statements.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier is

skating again as usual. He never answered the question. My question again to the

minister is this. The rebate is 57 per cent of the GST paid by municipalities.

If harmonization occurs without commitments to the principal of no greater tax

burden to the municipalities it would mean, for example, a loss of $15,000 for

the town of Torbay, $9,000 for the town of Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove,

$114,000 for Stephenville, approximately $1 million for St. John's. The

approximate total for all the municipalities in the Province would be as much as

$3 million. My question: Will the minister assure that harmonization will not

add more tax burdens to the financially stressed municipalities? You don't need

an agreement to answer that one, Mr. Premier.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, Mr. Speaker, I submit you do need an

agreement to know what the impact of the agreement is. I would ask the member

who has asked the question to think about his question for a little while.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis on

a supplementary.

MR. J. BYRNE: I say to the Premier, you are soon going to

have to get your skates sharpened.

Mr. Speaker, the minister skated around questions the other

day regarding cuts to municipal operating grants. He is skating again today -

the Premier is skating today - over the effects of harmonization to

municipalities in the Province.

Again I will ask the minister: Will he, as minister, start

supporting the major municipalities in the Province, such as the Cities of St.

John's and Corner Brook, and the smaller towns in rural Newfoundland, and stop

pulling the rug out from underneath them at every opportunity?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I have an absolutely superb

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, and he served this Province with

distinction for many years, and will continue to do so in the years in the

future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs, I have to say to the member that you are asking me,

and you are asking ministers, and you are asking members of this party, to

respond to hypothetical situations that I know inadvertently, because it would

never be your intention, would cause municipalities, based on the question and

proposition you put, to lose sleep tonight, because you have set out this great

big scenario of millions of dollars of lost revenue, municipalities being hard

done by, on the basis of an agreement that does not exist and a negotiation that

is not yet completed. And because I know the member opposite is genuinely

concerned for the welfare of Newfoundland, and would not want to cause a

moment's lost sleep on the part of the mayors and municipalities of this

Province, I want to reassure him that his proposition is ill-founded. There is

no agreement yet. There are discussions.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis on

a final supplementary.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will say to the Premier that there are mayors in this

Province today who are worrying about the situation with respect to the

harmonization of the GST and the PST. I have a letter here dated January 19th

from the Mayor of St. John's concerning fears that they may lose as much as $1

million.

Will the Premier, in his negotiations with Mr. Martin, the

federal Minister of Finance, assure and work towards the fact that the

municipalities in this Province will not be struck again by this administration

with respect to tax increases with the GST and RST harmonization? Or will you

allow the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs to answer that one?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I have been involved with

municipal government now for almost twenty years, and last year I had to do what

all other ministers in the previous government had to do for the good of the

Province, and make some severe cuts to municipal operating grants to

municipalities around this Province.

I said in the House when I announced the cuts, if my hon.

colleagues on the other side who sat with me a year ago remember, I said it was

one of the hardest things I have ever had to do as it related to my own home

community of Carbonear, and all the communities that I would like to think I

represent as the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

I will say to the hon. member that I will, as the minister,

do everything I possibly can. If and when there are negotiations, if and when

there is a deal reached with this government and the federal government as it

relates to harmonization of the GST, I will do everything in my power that I

possibly can do, taking into consideration a number of things - the financial

ability, I suppose, of the Province to begin with - and most of all I will say

to my friend, and say publicly to municipalities, I will continue, like I have

in the past three years, to do my utmost for municipalities in this beautiful

Province that we live in.

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the hon. the Minister of Justice, and my

question is: Can the minister confirm for this House that there is a move afoot

to close subdivisions of the RCMP in the Town of Gander, in the City of Corner

Brook, and in the Town of Labrador City?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. DECKER: No, Mr. Speaker, I cannot confirm that. I do

know that the RCMP have been asked to make some cuts in their budget. They have

done some rearrangement with the administration, but I would have to take that

part of the question under advisement and report back to the hon. gentleman.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East on a

supplementary.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

If there are cuts to the budget, Mr. Speaker, I once again

ask the honourable minister how many jobs are in fact on the chopping block, if

in fact there are cuts in the budget, and is this just another example perhaps

of federal jobs relocating out of this Province to other provinces in Canada, in

all likelihood other provinces in Atlantic Canada?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. DECKER: No, Mr. Speaker, I do not think these are

examples that the honourable member is putting forward. I think he is comparing

two totally different things. The fact of the matter is that all the various

government agencies - the police forces, both the RCMP and the Newfoundland

Constabulary, have been asked to deal with the fiscal problems and in many cases

the problems that we had in this current fiscal year. The honourable member will

know that school boards, hospital boards were all asked to make some cuts in

their budgets and I assume that what the honourable member is talking about are

some of the cuts that the RCMP has to make. They are putting forward several

suggestions. At this time the specific cases he is referring to, the detachments

in Gander and Corner Brook, I am not aware of what he is talking about. I do

know there is some desire on the part of the RCMP to change the detachment from

Deer Lake to Pasadena, but I do not know specifically what the honourable member

is talking about actually.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East on a

supplementary.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If in fact there

are cuts, I ask once again the Minister of Justice, how will this affect the

overall concern of policing generally in this Province and indeed the protection

of the public, particularly in those communities, Mr. Speaker, where cuts may in

fact take place?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I am confident that the RCMP and

the Newfoundland Constabulary are able to provide all the policing that we need

and they are adequately funded, but just like any other agency in the Province

they have to deal with the fiscal realities that we live under, so I would

suggest to the hon. gentleman that there is no need for him to lose any sleep

over this issue. The policing is quite adequate in this Province, as it will

continue to be over the foreseeable future.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Social Services. Will

the Minister confirm that the Department of Social Services was found liable in

December of 1995 for departmental neglect in monitoring a foster home in

Conception Bay South? Will the Minister also confirm that the department has

been ordered by court to pay the complainant $15,000 and that the complainants

foster brother was ordered to pay $5,000 for physical and emotional abuse

against the complainant and further the foster parents were ordered to pay $10,

000 for their parts in the physical and emotional abuse suffered by the

complainant?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

The case to which the honourable member refers to is

currently under a publication ban and it is the policy not to relate any

circumstances which may identify the family, so in this particular case I will

not be answering it as directly as you have asked.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

You will note I did not identify the complainant nor did I

identify the foster home in question. Will the minister also confirm that these

allegations of abuse were made in 1991 and that the Department of Social

Services continued to permit this foster home to operate? Despite decisions

reached by Justice David Riche and the penalty imposed on December 18, 1995 this

foster home was still operating three weeks ago and may in fact still be

operating today?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

Again I am not going to refer to the specifics of the case,

but to put your mind at ease this foster home is no longer operating in the

functional capacity as a foster home, as I am sure you are aware.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I couldn't give you the exact date, but

since the court decision has been made known to the department, that home is no

longer operating as a foster home and is now operating as an alternate family

home.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader, on a

supplementary.

MR. H. HODDER: My supplementary is to the Minister of

Health.

Will the Minister of Health confirm that the Janeway

Hospital, in connection with the same complainant but involving a different

foster home has settled out of court for $40,000 after allegations that hospital

personnel knew or should have known of physical and emotional abuse suffered by

the complainant but failed to report these substantive allegations as required

by law?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not absolutely certain that the proposition that he puts

forward is exactly as it in fact is, so I will take the question under

advisement and provide the information to him.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. NOEL: I am glad to see the members acknowledge my

maiden question in the House.

I understand that the Premier has received a communication

from Councillor Shawn Skinner, Chairman of the St. John's Municipal Council

Civic Centre Committee, requesting a contribution from the Province in the

amount of some $8 million toward the construction of a civic centre in the city.

I wonder if the Premier has had an opportunity to consider the proposal,

particularly in view of the light of the questions being raised as a result of

concerns about whether the Maple Leafs are interested in continuing a franchise

in the City? Councillor Skinner assures me that they have no concern about that

and the City is still prepared to contribute some $17 million toward the

estimated $30 million cost of the centre.

I wonder if the Premier will be able to respond to that,

please.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the

member for his question.

Indeed I have received a representation from the City of St.

John's querying the Province's position with respect to the proposed civic

centre for the City of St. John's and I would say, Mr. Speaker, that the

Province's position is, for the moment, until we have had a chance to do further

analysis as follows, I intend to arrange to meet with an appropriate

representative group from the City. Clearly, we are not in a position today to

give any commitment of provincial government's participation in this project.

I can report that it was the position of federal officials

and provincial officials some months ago in looking at this project, but until

such time as a commitment from the City of St. John's, a firm commitment, could

be ascertained, until such time as the firm commitment of the Toronto Maple

Leafs organization toward extending their presence in the City could be

ascertained and until a business plan could be solidly ascertained, governments

wouldn't be in a position to determine whether or not they could participate. In

principle, I think it is something that we should look at.

Clearly, Newfoundland is a very attractive location for a

great deal of the convention and other business traffic that circulates around

North America and around Canada; clearly, for the moment the Province and indeed

the City is limited in what we can offer by way of a host facility, having said

that and having said there should be an interest at the end of the day, we have

to insure that the taxpayers dollars, as scarce as they are, are being fully and

properly spent, Mr. Speaker, and so we will carry on the assessment. For the

moment I can't say more.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question today for the Minister of Health.

During the last provincial election there was a great deal of

concern, Mr. Speaker, concerning the closing of hospitals in this Province. The

concerns were raised regarding the move of the Janeway facility, were prevalent

during the election campaign and continue to be so today.

Prior to Christmas, the Minister of Health in the former

Cabinet indicated that he would present a plan outlining the proposed move of

the Janeway and the effects that it will have.

I ask the same Minister of Health today, if he could present

that plan to us.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you for

the question.

Back on June 29 of last year, we announced jointly with the

Health Care Corporation that there would be substantial site reduction and

restructuring of programs in the city. We indicated at that time that we would

hope by the end of the year to be able to bring forward a plan that would detail

or give further details as to exactly what new construction might have to take

place and what program adjustments and transfers might have to occur.

What I have said to the Health Care Corporation in the first

instance is this, before you bring forward anything for public reflection or

before government's consideration, I want you to do diligence to the major and

significant question of restructuring in St. John's and take whatever time you

need to ensure that your planning and the processes you are following will lead

to a good outcome at the end of this whole process. The fact that they have not

come to me by the end of December with a picture of a new Janeway in no way

dismays me. As a matter of fact, I take some comfort in it, to this extent, that

I know they are giving full consideration to the issue and when they do come

with a plan for a restructured system in St. John's, it will be a good plan that

you will be able to support, that the people of the Province will be better

served by.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South, on a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, it certainly appears to me,

anyway, on this side of the House, that maybe there is no plan. Can the minister

tell us, then, how much money this government will save by moving the Janeway

Child Health Care and how much it will cost to do so?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I indicated to the hon. the Member for Ferryland, my

critic in the last government, the basis proposition is this, that any time you

relocate a facility, any time you take a facility out of existence and transfer

those programs to another facility, you generally save in the order of 25 per

cent to 30 per cent of the operating budget of that facility. That has been the

experience of Vancouver, Windsor, Halifax and other areas where a similar

restructuring has happened. So, to your question about the Janeway, I think the

budget down there is about $41 million a year and 30 per cent of that will be

about $12 million. We will save that much, not theoretically but in fact, when

the conclusion of the transfer occurs.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay

South, on a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I would also like to ask the

Minister of Health - I understand at present there is an expenditure at the

Janeway for $350,000 to initiate repairs to the particular hospital. I just

wonder, are those repairs necessary at this particular time if we are going to

close the hospital. Is the expenditure of that money really necessary at this

time?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member, I believe, refers to the relocation of the

functions of the Rehab Centre to the Janeway for the next two or three years on

an interim basis until such time as we make the full transfer to the new Janeway

at the Health Sciences site. To answer your question directly, it is a good

expenditure of money. We will save considerably more by making the transfer of

services from the present Rehab to the Janeway for the next two or three years

than we will spend in the renovation to accommodate them in - it is not just for

the sake of moving them but it will accommodate them even for that interim

period, in better space, providing them with more adequate and appropriate

programs and services.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the new Minister of Forest Resources and

Agrifoods, on his request.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I will ask the first question

just to get an update, very simply, on the announcement made just prior to the

election by the Premier, on the centre for Corner Brook, the status of that, the

construction and the number of jobs that will go into that centre in Corner

Brook?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Let me thank the hon. gentleman for his

question.

PREMIER TOBIN: He has been waiting a long time to give

this answer.

MR. TULK: I have been waiting a long, long time, yes, Mr.

Speaker, to give this answer, indeed I have. Let me assure the hon. gentleman

that I am sure we will get lots of questions from him in the future, as time

goes on.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier, in the election, as I understand

it, yes, gave a commitment that there would be a centre for management with the

forest eco-systems in the Grenfell Campus at Corner Brook and I think there

should be an expenditure of some $5 million that was announced. Let me assure

the hon. gentleman that the officials of the department are looking forward to

seeing that centre of excellence go in place as we attempt to manage the forest

eco-system in a far better way than perhaps some other people who have managed

the fisheries eco-system off this coast. The hon. gentleman - well, it started

to get management when the Premier was the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans in

Ottawa.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: You want to get the last question. Let me say

to the hon. gentleman, we realize fully that the forest eco-system, the

wilderness eco-system in this Province, are on the edge. This facility in Corner

Brook at the Grenfell College will go a long way to seeing that indeed the

forestry and the wildlife and so on in this Province is adequately taken care

of. We look forward to its construction. We have to remind him that there are

going to be a fair number of jobs created in the construction industry as a

result of it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte, on a

supplementary.

MR. SHELLEY: Close. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the

minister for his first answer, although he did not answer the question. I asked

him how many jobs would be going into the forestry centre in Corner Brook as

compared to the centre that was here in St. John's that was closed down.

Apparently, what we are going to see in Corner Brook is really - although I

applaud the announcement for Corner Brook, and a forestry centre certainly

should be in Corner Brook. I ask the minister: How many jobs will there be in

comparison with what we had in St. John's in the centre, and also, what

expertise will be lost in the centre in Corner Brook that is actually going to

now take place in New Brunswick?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman,

it is the hope of the government, obviously, to add expertise, not to take it

away. This government thinks positively, not in a negative fashion. We are

hoping to add expertise as a result of this move in Corner Brook. Obviously, all

those matters will be a subject of negotiation and are presently under

negotiation.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has elapsed.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I have two reports I would like

to table. The first is the Report of the Public Tender Act Exemptions for the

months of November and December, 1995, and January, 1996. The second report that

I would like to table is the Annual Report for 1995 from The C.A. Pippy Park

Commission.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, today it gives me great pleasure to stand in my

place and present a petition on behalf of - there are 807 signatures on the

petition, mostly from the District of Cape St. Francis, and it deals with the

rate increase to Newfoundland Power. The wording of the petition is as follows:

To the Honourable House of Assembly of Newfoundland in

Legislative Session, the petition of the undersigned residents of the District

of Cape St. Francis, that:

WHEREAS recently Newfoundland Power has applied to the Public

Utilities Board for permission to raise its monthly rates by approximately 4.5

per cent;

WHEREAS it serves to increase already significant profits for

Newfoundland Power;

WHEREAS it will decrease the ability of many to pay for basic

electrical service;

WHEREAS by charging more for monthly services it punishes

those who make an effort not to waste electricity, or use alternate energy

sources;

WHEREAS an increase at this time is not only unjustified but

unfair to Newfoundland Power customers;

THEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that your Honourable

House may be pleased to request the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to

do whatever is required to prevent an increase in Newfoundland Power electricity

rates, and as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray. Dated March 28,

1996. And, Mr. Speaker, I signed this petition.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that this petition actually

was prepared and put together by an individual by the name of Mr. Kelly, who

lives in Torbay, and he was quite concerned when he heard about the rate

increase, or the proposed rate increase. He phoned me, and I suggested that he

get a petition. Mr. Kelly from Torbay, as I said, put the petition together,

went to all the different public outlets in the district, and in Pouch Cove, the

stores and areas in Pouch Cove, and the same thing with the stores in Flatrock.

He also went to the various areas in Torbay, and up in Airport Heights, in

Penetanguishene and that area, and Bauline. He left the petition there for a

week, and ended up with 807 names, which is quite substantial, I would believe,

from a district of 10,000 or 12,000 people.

As I said, he was quite concerned and he was upset. He

believes that the rate increase for Newfoundland Power, the proposed rate

increase, if it is approved by the Public Utilities Board, is morally wrong, and

he believes that corporations such as Newfoundland Power should start bearing

some of the responsibility and some of the weight that has been heaved upon the

people of the Province with respect to the economic downturn.

Newfoundland Power - and he brought this to my attention in

the first place; he is the one who made the point, I suppose, first to me -

Newfoundland Power, over the years, has been promoting the conservation of

energy, and we stated that here a number of times in this House of Assembly this

past week or so, and that Newfoundland Power, or the people who promoted the

conservation of energy, now what they want to do is give a differential rate

increase to the people of the Province, and the consumers, especially the people

on the poor end of the scale who would have a hard time paying for this.

As I said the other day, I know people in the district, and

in my district, and I talked to some of the other members on this side of the

House, actually, and they know of people who went through an extra expense to

put in extra installation in their homes, in their attics, and in their floors,

and in their walls, type of thing, and now they are being asked, quite possibly,

to pay for insulating their homes and trying to save money in the long haul.

As I said before on a number of occasions, Newfoundland Power

received $28.7 million last year in profit. Now, I find that to be quite

reasonable in these economic times for any company or any corporation to receive

that type of profit after they have paid their bills and paid dividends to their

shareholders.

One point I would like to make at this point in time with

respect to this petition. I was planning on - actually I was half I guess in

thought to adding this to the petition that is ongoing in various areas of the

Province today. I believe that there is an organization now that was planning on

having a petition this weekend in all the stores in the malls in and around St.

John's. It is hoping to have a large number of signatures to that petition to be

presented to the House of Assembly. I would imagine a copy of the petition would

be presented to the Public Utilities Board. I would encourage the public,

anybody who has access to this petition, to sign the petition and let the Public

Utilities Board know and understand the feeling of the people in this Province

with respect to Newfoundland Power's request for a rate increase. Maybe the

Public Utilities Board for the first time since the Board was (inaudible) -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: Just in conclusion, Mr. Speaker. I would

like to say, maybe for the first time the Public Utilities Board will refuse a

rate increase to Newfoundland Power based upon the size of the petition,

basically, that it will receive in the very near future. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand to support

the Member for Cape St. Francis' petition today requesting that the Public

Utilities Board deny and not grant the request by the Newfoundland Power company

for an increase of 4.9 per cent at this time.

Yesterday in this House we debated the whole issue, many

speakers on both sides. I believe that the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile may agree

with me in that what we passed here yesterday was a unanimous resolution to

ensure that the government of the day, and that Cabinet ultimately, give

whatever power and resources are necessary to the consumer advocate to ensure

that no increase is passed by the Public Utilities Board.

I trust that the resolution that was passed by this House

yesterday is taken seriously by Cabinet, and that the consumer advocate Mr.

Browne is in fact given all the financial resources necessary, all the human

resources necessary, by this government through whatever department he may need

people or finances from to ensure that he brings the best possible case before

the Public Utilities Board and then brings the best possible experts to it.

Failing that, the Minister of Mines and Energy has said in

response to questions in this House that we as members of the House should not

prejudge what the Public Utilities Board is going to do. At one level I know he

is right, and I agree with him, that we shouldn't prejudge what the Public

Utilities Board will do in the upcoming months on this particular request by

Newfoundland Power. But if history proves itself and bears itself out to be

true, then I can tell you that the Public Utilities Board will grant some form

of increase to Newfoundland Power. Since 1977 any increase that has been

requested by Newfoundland Power at the Public Utilities Board, the Public

Utilities Board has accepted that Newfoundland Power has needed an increase and

has provided them with an increase. It may not have been to the level that it

initially requested, but nonetheless it did get an increase.

I would like to serve notice on the government today that if

the Public Utilities Board on this issue grants any increase - a 1 per cent

increase, a .5 per cent increase or the 4.9 per cent increase - that as energy

critic who represents and articulates the views on this issue for our party, we

will be asking Cabinet to overturn the decisions of the Public Utilities Board.

It is as simple as that.

I think what happened here yesterday when all members

unanimously, I might add for the record, who were in the House yesterday when it

came time to vote on the resolution or the amended resolution, supported that

resolution as put forward by myself, and in particular the amendments that were

made by the Member for Conception Bay East & Bell Island. But I want to be clear

to the House and to the public at large that we on this side support a zero

increase. We do not support any increase in power rates. We look forward to the

Public Utilities Board saying no. If it does not happen here then we will look

forward to the Cabinet of this government saying no to that.

Thank you very much.

Orders of the Day

MR. TULK: Order No. 2, Mr. Speaker, Committee of Supply.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (P. Barrett): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One of the benefits of speaking on Interim Supply and I guess

in the Committee stage is that it gives members, all members, an opportunity to

get up in ten-minute intervals and discuss many issues that this Province is

dealing with, many issues that people in the Province, particular sectors of the

Province are dealing with and certainly it gives, in a parliamentary sense,

members of the opposition a chance to talk about recent government initiatives,

restructuring of government, how that will take place over the next little while

and especially when we are dealing with a new government.

I had a conversation last night with somebody who said: When

is the House going to close, how long will it be open? My answer was, that I

don't anticipate it to be opened very long, based upon the reasoning that there

is a new government being formed, that they have not had the opportunity really,

to focus their minds in terms of hard-core legislation that can be debated in

detail in the House, legislation that may impact energy policy, legislation that

may impact upon social services recipients, legislation that may impact upon a

transshipment facility for this Province and certainly, Mr. Chairman,

legislation that may impact upon what royalty schemes may or may not be coming

up in terms of the Voisey's Bay development.

But in the next few minutes, I would like just to focus in on

the new Department of Development and Rural Renewal, and to say to the new

minister that she has a tremendous challenge ahead of her. But, there are some

highlights, Mr. Chairman, in terms of what that new department can do, should do

and what I think most people would hope, Mr. Chairman, will have tremendous

success.

One notable feature in the new Department of Development and

Rural Renewal, Mr. Chairman, is the fact that we see Enterprise Newfoundland and

Labrador that has been taken from the Industry, Trade and Technology portfolio

and we see the Employment Services Division taken from the former Department of

Employment and Labour, and as I see it, Mr. Chairman, and I hope the minister

can correct me if I am wrong, but I see it as a pretty bold policy move when we

talk about Employment Services leaving Employment and Labour and going in to a

Department of Development and Rural Renewal, and I am not sure.

I have done some research on it over the last week or so but

I do not think that since Confederation really, and in modern times anyway,

since the 70s, that employment programs have ever been put in the department

responsible for economic renewal, and I think it is a wise move. I think it is a

move that if used properly, Mr. Chairman, will pay big dividends to employers in

this Province, will pay big dividends to the people of the Province generally

and here is why.

The bureaucracy is something that we have all been hamstrung

by from time to time. Even ministers, believe it or not, most people in the

general public do not believe that ministers are hamstrung or held up by the

bureaucracy but they are, and I have seen tremendous proposals go before

Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador that could have created economic wealth,

that could have created jobs, were initially approved but in the short-term

failed, because there was no assistance there with operational capital or there

was no assistance there with labour and what we see right now under one minister

is the opportunity on the one hand to stimulate business, no matter where it is

in the Province, but on the other hand to support that business through

employment programs, when and if it is necessary, especially in the formative

years.

So, I wish the minister well. I first met her I believe in

1983, when I was on the student union at the University and at the time she was

the Director of Public Relations. I believe that is true, is it? I think that

was the position you were in. In terms of what that focus will bring and what

you should bring to it, I suggest to you that you have an opportunity to link

directly under one control, to marry the services of ENL with the employment

services programs that now fall under your jurisdiction specifically, that will

hopefully lead to better economic times and at least for people who have

tremendous ideas, who are ready to go to work, but need some help in the first

twenty-four to thirty-six months and there are many, many examples, but

operationally new businesses that need to get off their feet can have the best

idea, they can have the best capital plan, they can have the best physical

structure.

When it comes to operation and operational capital whether

that be in terms of salaries that need to be paid out, this is where most new

businesses from my experience, and I have had some experience in the creation of

new business, this is where most new businesses fall and get into trouble. I

think that if we can use employment programs like the graduate employment

program, like the job bridges program that places women into non-traditional

roles, like the student employment program and many others that are at the

minister's disposal. If we can use that and those programs and match them more

with businesses to use them as somewhat of an economic lever, then I think we

will have more success on the one hand with new business that is starting, but

on the other hand we will see long lasting effects from the employment programs.

If there is one criticism that is circulated in this House

about employment programs since I have been a member, it has been from time to

time when opposition members, including myself and even government back benchers

and in some cases ministers, but not publicly certainly, we have talked about

the need for an emergency employment program and the criticism has been that

that is only a bandaid solution, it is a short-term solution, it is not a

long-term solution. I think that in putting the Department of Employment

Services again in with the new department that the minister has a terrific

opportunity and I hope that she not only takes full advantage of it, but seeks

to take full advantage of it from the business community, because I think and, I

should say I know that used properly as an economic lever and matched with the

skills that are there and with the businesses that hope to be there, I think

they will have more success in terms of creating wealth, specifically in rural

Newfoundland, but in all parts of the Province as well.

One of the other interesting things while the Minister of

Education is in his seat is that in this particular Bill No.2 members of the

House have been asked to grant, I guess by Friday has been the request from the

Government House Leader, we could be here until Saturday sometime from what I

understand from the Opposition House Leader, he is not really prepared to go

12:00 p.m. tomorrow, but $1 billion - some odd million to the Province by

Friday.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I have not said that. I certainly did not

say that you were not nice though. For the record Mr. Chairmen, I did

congratulate the Minster of Forestry and Agriculture and the Government House

Leader on his appointment and assured him that as his member in the House of

Assembly that if he wants to bring any concerns forward to me I will hopefully

and adequately represent him in the House, but the Minister of Education -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: But the Minister of Education, Mr.

Chairman, has a terrific and a horrific challenge in front of him. I do not envy

the job he has been put into because the salesman of the government in the view

of the Premier has been taken out of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and now his

feet has been nailed to the Provinces floor, he will not be taking flight from

here to Bonn or Germany or Paris to sell Newfoundland and Labrador, but he will

be taking flight from here to St. Anthony to Swift Current to Little Heart's

Ease to sell the closure of schools and that is the job that he has before him.

That is the job, Mr. Chairman, that the Minster of Education has before him, but

I know he is up to the challenge, I know he is up to the challenge. First stop

Kilbride.

I should say to the minister there was another Liberal

candidate like yourself who was going to make a first stop in Kilbride also, but

he made three stops, this was his third stop, Mr. Chairman, and the wave came

in. The Premier was in place in my district, stood up in the Goulds Recreation

Centre up in the high school, hired the local cheer-leading team, made a

significant donation to them and said: If you need water and sewer, if you need

pavement, send me a representative. That's what the Premier said on one occasion

in there. I'm glad, I can say to the Premier, that I will have the chance to

talk about municipal infrastructure in my district with the Premier, personally

but here was the representative they sent, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I say to my hon. colleague from Ferryland,

that I do not believe that the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation at

the time, the Member for Port de Grave would be that political and that

partisan. He never, ever, ever demonstrated that in this House while I have been

here anyway, never. Never, Mr. Speaker, have I heard that.

But back to the Minister of Education in terms of granting

Interim Supply. The largest issue that his department faces is far beyond -

there are many issues. I should not try to attach importance to one over another

but there are many significant issues that his department faces. Within the

post-secondary institution level the re-configuration of what the community

college structure will look like or the bigger question, Mr. Chairman, will

there even be a community college structure? The former Minister of Education

and now the Minister of Justice and Attorney General for the Province knows

exactly what I am talking about, knows exactly. How many unsolicited proposals

by - at least two private companies that he talked about in bringing to the

former Premier's office. There were more than two. There were two significant

ones though but the former minister knows exactly what I am talking about. What

will be the impact of HRD? Lack of funding to the community college to people

who want to attend community colleges. The impact of that will be real. It will

be swift and it will be significant. The former minister also knows -

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. E. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Chairman?

CHAIR: The hon. member has leave.

MR. E. BYRNE: But the former minister knows that the

scaling back of funding to individuals at the post-secondary level, particularly

at the community college level, will be real, it will be significant and it will

be swift in terms of the impact it will have on this Province. Not only that,

Mr. Chairman, but what will be the fallout of it? The associated costs for

people who leave high school who want to further themselves post-secondary wise

to gain new skills, to create new opportunities for themselves, to position

themselves for a life which is enhanced by family, which is enhanced by a job,

which is enhanced by earning a living and feeling productive will be seriously

diminished. What will be the costs that students will have to bear? What sort of

debt loads, Mr. Chairman, will these people have? What will be the impact upon

family, immediate-wise and extended family members? Thus, Mr. Chairman, what

will be the impact upon communities?

I suggest to the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal

that her new department has a significant role to play in terms of what happens

in the Department of Education at a post-secondary level, at the community

collage level and what that new community college structure will look like. It

will be ultimately important for all of us to ensure that post-secondary

programs are accessible, are as cheap as possible and open to as many as

possible but I am not so sure that that is going to happen.

The news on that will come out through the obvious means;

press conferences, news conferences, questions in Question Period but in one way

or another it will come out, we will dig for it. Whether you give us the

information, that is another story, that will be up to yourselves but we will

get it one way or another. We will find out the information, dealing with

post-secondary education and what the cost will be.

Another question that the Minister of Education has to

answer, Mr. Chairman, is this. Last year it was anticipated that Memorial

University's budget would be downgraded or would be asked to take another cut by

about 10 per cent to 15 per cent. It doesn't sound like a lot, but it is. What

the University would in effect be required to do would be a combination of three

things. It would be a combination of lay offs of some 400 to 500 people, laying

off or completely eliminating some departments within the campus. The Department

of Psychology could be gone. Med school could be closed altogether. Maybe the

Department of Engineering, maybe the Department of Religious Studies. These are

realities that Memorial University is going to face and is facing right now in

terms of its administration. This is not fear-mongering, this is fact. This is

based upon meetings that I've had personally with administrators, student

leaders, on campus.

The other thing, the third option that we could see as a

result of claw backs and cutbacks, is a significant increase in the cost of

tuition. Maybe about, from what I understand, between 15 per cent and 25 per

cent. Not one of these measures alone will offset the devastating impact a 15

per cent cut would have on Memorial. But all those measures taken together - lay

offs, dramatic rise in tuition, and closing down of some departments - would

have to be taken to ensure that the target of a 10 per cent or 15 per cent

decrease in Memorial University's budget could be met, and met in an expedient

way from a budgetary point of view.

There is another option. The former minister probably is more

in tune with it than the present minister because he has had to deal with it.

Presently Memorial University is not allowed to borrow. It has to operate on the

grant that is provided, it has to operate within that grant. It cannot borrow

one dollar over that grant. Administrators, the president of the University and

the administration around that person at this time, has asked and requested that

the University be allowed to borrow for the next two years, maybe three, to get

itself out of this budgetary jam that not only the University is facing but all

departments are facing. That as a result, in about three to four years Memorial

University would be in a better position because of declining enrolments that it

would not need to do so.

It has requested and looked at a one-time stop-gap measure

that would offset the dramatic and severe consequences of what a 15 per cent cut

would do for the students, faculty, staff, and in effect what it would do to the

local economy in terms of the spin-offs that are associated with that campus,

which are significant and very positive.

The Minister of Education has that challenge before him right

now. I think that what he brings to his Cabinet colleagues and ultimately what

Cabinet decides and what the Premier decides, and I hope that on that day when

that issue comes up that the Minister of Justice is in Ottawa meeting with other

ministers of justice from across the nation. Because I think I know for sure

what his view on what Memorial University's borrowing would be.

The other significant challenge that lies before the Minister

of Education deals with the viability criteria of what schools will be. During

the election there was much talk about consultation, there was much talk about

an open process whereby people in this Province, parents, teachers, NTAs, PTAs,

would have an opportunity to come to open meetings, open the door of the Premier

and in that all of his ministers and members, to talk about what they see as

being the priorities for education. We have to get on with the job and we have

to get on with it soon. I hope that the Premier lives up to his commitment, and

the government live up to its commitment, of consultation, because there are

many people who are concerned about what type of education is going to be

offered to them in their communities and to their children.

I was in Swift Current about two weeks ago. I talked to a

number of people in Swift Current. We talked about how they would like to build

homes there; they have small children there, are in a position to build homes,

but are waiting to see if Swift Current is going to have a school, or if they

are going to be bused to Clarenville. It may not seem significant to most

members, but it touched me in an unusual way, having known some of the people

there, and we talked about it at length, that, you know, it makes sense. Why

build a home in Swift Current when you have to put your five-year-old on a

school bus to travel back and forth to Clarenville each day? And that is a mild

example compared to some of the other situations that we, as a Province, and we,

as a government, are going to face over the next two years.

If I could provide any advice to the Minister of Education

and the government, I would say, do what has to be done. Do it in such a way

that people are affected as little as possible, but be up front. Lay your cards

on the table so that we can deal with what is, not what we think it is, deal

with the reality of the situation. People want to know.

The same is true with the new Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture. Our capacity - many, many people in this Province, and I would hope

that each and every member in this House, would know, and should know, that our

capacity to the process has far outstripped out ability to catch and to keep up

with the resource that is there; but for the last three years, and maybe four -

certainly precipitated by the closure, the moratorium on the Northern cod stocks

- but, for the last three years, communities in this Province have lived in hope

and fear of: will their plants remain open?

Many communities along the Southwest Coast, the Northern

Peninsula, the Northeast Coast, are wondering today: two or three years from

now, will their plant be alive? Will it remain open? And will it have access to

a stock? But the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture - and I believe the

Member for Port de Grave, if he were best suited for any portfolio, it is for

the one he is in presently. But he has tremendous, tremendous challenges facing

that department, the department he administers. And he has to begin the process

right now to start travelling this Province from community to community, to

start informing people of which plants will remain open in this Province and

which plants will shut down.

In Marystown and Fortune, will two plants remain open there?

When we move into Harbour Breton, will that plant remain open? When we get into

MR. RAMSAY: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, that depends.

MR. RAMSAY: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: It is an excellent idea, I say to the

Member for Burgeo and LaPoile, let the market decide, but let us compare apples

to apples. If we are going to let the market decide, then we had better start

ensuring that when the stock returns, especially in his neck of the woods where

we could be looking at a fishery by as early as next spring, or next winter, who

gets access to the stock? Will it be opened up? Will certain companies get a

total allowable catch and others not?

AN HON. MEMBER: History will have to play a role in that.

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, if history plays a role in deciding

who gets access to the stock, then if the Provincial Government, or the Federal

Government, make a decision on who gets access to that stock and how much, the

Federal Government will be, in effect, deciding who will be working at which

plants and in which communities. It goes hand in hand. You cannot provide FPI

with a stock, for example, or access to the stock, or total allowable catch, and

expect them to take all their fish that they have caught and process it in other

plants, I say to the member. It does not work that way. But if we are going to

throw our hands up, as members in the House here, and say, `Let the market

decide on where processing capacity will take place; let the market decide what

plants will remain open, or what plants will close down,' then I think that we

shall have behaved like forty-eight Pontius Pilates and washed our hands of a

situation that we were elected to get involved with.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: What I am talking about now in terms of

with the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture is that it is a big challenge

that he has. I am willing to participate in a process, if he is willing to

initiate it, to look at what is best for processing in the Province, and what is

best for the Province in the long view. I have no problem with that. What I am

talking about is the challenge that lies before his department. And I will say

again, if there is any portfolio that the Member for Port de Grave is suited to,

I think it is the portfolio that he is in now. That is my viewpoint.

MR. FITZGERALD: I think he would be too partisan

(inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: I don't know. He seems to have demonstrated

a kinder, gentler side to him in the last week. Maybe it is just too early to

tell, is it?

MR. J. BYRNE: Who are you talking about now?

MR. E. BYRNE: The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. FITZGERALD: He should never be there.

MR. E. BYRNE: Should never be there?

MR. FITZGERALD: Should never be there.

MR. E. BYRNE: But it is a concern and it is a danger, and

it is a road in making those decisions that is fraught, Mr. Chairman, with many

pitfalls. I think we have to be wary of them.

In terms of energy - you are still going to let me go on?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, go ahead.

MR. E. BYRNE: I will keep going if you let me go on. I am

still operating under leave, I believe, am I?

In terms of the Department of Mines and Energy -

CHAIR: It is my understanding that the member is speaking

under leave and leave has not been withdrawn.

MR. E. BYRNE: Okay.

MR. TULK: Just don't be nasty.

MR. E. BYRNE: In terms of the Department of Mines and

Energy, it is a department that has the biggest responsibility. The Department

of Mines and Energy today has a bigger responsibility, believe it or not, I say

to all members, than it did fifteen years ago. The opportunities in the oil and

gas industry are tremendous. We are, as a province, in terms of that industry,

not even born. We are still in, what most would agree, an embryonic state when

it comes to oil and gas. Talk to any oil and gas analyst, talk to people who

have operated in this business for twenty, twenty-five or thirty years, and talk

to the people who have come to this Province to offer their advice, technology,

and to make money as well in the oil and gas industry, and they will tell you

that we are on the eve of an oil and gas explosion in this Province.

We have to ensure, Mr. Chairman, in the greatest possible way

that the net benefits from that industry come here. There is no way today that

we should be talking about the closure of Marystown. There is no way today that

we, as people in the House of Assembly, should be talking about the sale of

Marystown, scaling down its operations, or otherwise. What we should be saying

is that whatever work is going to be done in fabrication or other work that

needs to be done in this Province, or can be done in this Province related to

our oil and gas industry, should be done in Marystown or should be done in the

Newfoundland Dockyard - nowhere else.

Mr. Chairman, that has to happen; that has to happen right

now. There are many - I believe there are in reserves about 20 billion barrels

of oil.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: And Port aux Basques. I'm sorry, I say to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, agreed. I think that the three larger

companies, the three companies that are into that business in this Province

should have the opportunity to compete, but it takes a local preference policy.

Do you know today that companies in Quebec can come in and tender bids

associated with the Newfoundland Hospital and Nursing Care Home Association, can

come in and sell beds to the Health Sciences, can sell beds to the Grace, but

companies from Newfoundland are not allowed to make a bid on the same services

in the Province of Quebec? Why does that situation exist?

That is what we have to get at. We have to ensure that there

is a local preference policy not only in place but more importantly that there

is a local preference policy enforced. In terms of oil and gas, the technology

transfer has not taken place over the last several years as it should have taken

place, but the opportunity is not lost. There are still tremendous benefits not

only in employment - not only in work, not only in royalties that will accrue to

this Province, and not only in the supply effort, but there is a tremendous

opportunity that still exists for a technology transfer to take place on the one

hand from other specialized regions of the world to people in this Province that

we then can take and sell to the rest of the world.

That is an important aspect of this industry that we must

keep our hands around. If we lose control of that at all, then what have we

done? We have really thrown our hands up and we have accepted work for a period

of ten to fifteen years and the jobs that it has created, but we haven't looked

beyond the tip of our political noses if we let that happen. That is something

that we must, as I said, keep our arms around, keep our hands on, keep our grips

on because if we do not, the opportunity will be lost, it is not going to happen

for ever and a day. But in that industry there lies tremendous opportunity and I

think that we must ensure that the questions are asked in this House, that the

legislation is debated, that the people of this Province get the best deal that

they can possibly get.

I will have to sit down Mr. Chairman. Some of my colleagues

on the right are about to withdraw leave. I know some are anxious to get up, so

with that, I look forward to getting back into the debate on Interim Supply

later on this afternoon and talking about some other areas that I see where

there are challenges and where I think we can all play a role that will

positively affect the people of the Province. And I guess that is what we are

all here for individually, to positively affect the people within our districts.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairmen.

Well, Mr. Chairman, I am glad to rise today just for a few

minutes to make a few comments and to continue along with the conversation I had

during Question Period with the new Minister of Forestry, who is now on our side

of the House. Maybe it is the proper place for him, Mr. Chairman. I will be

asking a lot more questions of the minister on forestry. Of course, the

questions that were raised today are very serious concerns, not just for us, as

members in this House, but many people in the logging industry and the forestry

industry have some very grave concerns about the forestry in this Province. Mr.

Chairman, many people say also that often it seems like we put it on the back

burner and it is forgotten about or it does not seem to be urgent. Well, Mr.

Chairman, many people who are involved in the forestry industry will tell you,

there are some very serious concerns and it is too bad that the previous

Minister of Forestry did not take it so seriously.

Mr. Chairman, as you talk to people in the industry, of

course they still raise the concern that we will raise here in the House, and

that is whether we have a sustainable industry, whether we are going to see this

forestry industry go the same way as the fishery.

Mr. Chairman, there is a good comparison between the fishery

and the forestry in this Province, when we compare the draggers to the

harvesters and right on down the line to when we talk about a man not being able

to jig a fish these days, the same way we are going to end up with the forestry

industry, where we are going to tell people sooner or later, you will not be

allowed to cleave a junk of wood for your fire. That is what we are going to get

down to.

There was an old story of three gentlemen back in 1949. It

was in a t.v. program, a black and white film that I saw - I guess it was on the

NTV Reflections program. I will always remember the story of the three

men sitting there; the three were to vote in the next couple of days for or

against Confederation. The older gentleman said he would vote against

Confederation, the two younger men, about age thirty, said they would vote for

Confederation. And the biggest argument the older gentleman had for not joining

Confederation was, he said: `If we vote for Confederation, you will see a day in

the Province when you will not be allowed to jig a codfish.' And, of course, the

two younger men laughed. They said: `Don't be silly, boy; we will never get to

that stage in Newfoundland! You have to vote for Confederation.'

Now, Mr. Chairman, you have to ask yourself a similar

question as we look at the forestry industry, and the comparison is simple. If

we continue to rape our forests as we did our fishery, then we are going to see

a day in this Province in the not-too-distant future when a man is going to say:

I am not allowed to go and cut a stick of wood to put in the fire - the same as

we cannot jig a fish. Who would have ever thought, even ten years ago, five

years ago, that we would not be allowed to go out and jig a fish in

Newfoundland! Mr. Chairman, that is why, since two years ago, eighteen months

ago, a year ago I have supported a food fishery in this Province. And I continue

to support a food fishery, for the simply principle that that is what made

Newfoundland - that what brought us here, our forefathers, was to fish. And now

we look around the Atlantic Region and we see Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia,

Quebec - I was in Price Edward Island last summer for a holiday and I could not

believe that here I was, a Newfoundlander walking around Prince Edward Island,

and I was told: `Yes, boy, go jig a fish if you want, you are allowed to over

here' - a Newfoundlander on Prince Edward Island. Now, Mr. Chairman, who would

have ever thought that we would come to that stage in our history when you were

not allowed to jig a fish for food!

Mr. Chairman, the message to the minister, from not me, from

the Province, from the people in the industry, is that unless we get our act

together and unless the forestry centre in Central Newfoundland that you talk

about so much - unless we get a plan in place, unless we control the bigger

companies, Abitibi and Kruger and unless we start taking seriously the problem

we have in the forest industry, then we are going to see a day, and it is going

to be a sad day in this House of Assembly, when this forestry minister or some

other forestry minister will have to stand in his place and announce a

moratorium in the forest industry. That will be a sad day, Mr. Chairman, unless

we take heed and act immediately - and I don't mean six days down the road or

five years down the road, I mean immediately. The plans have been in place for a

better monitoring of the forest industry in this Province.

Mr. Chairman, with that said, we start to talk about Labrador

and going into Labrador, not only for minerals now, we are talking about going

into Labrador for the forest industry. And the Labradorians are saying it loud

and clear: before you set foot on the land in Labrador for the forest industry,

you had better get your act together and do a much better job than you did on

the Island portion of this Province. It is no good for these big companies to

come in and rape the Island portion of the Province and say, now we want to move

into Labrador. They had better show that what has been done on the Island won't

happen in Labrador.

Mr. Chairman, I don't think it is too late but it is getting

close to crunch time when we talk about the forestry. Any man or woman who goes

into the woods for any reason, for a walk, hunting, to cut wood or to work as a

logger - for any reason - will tell you that our forestry is in bad shape. Our

forests here in Newfoundland are in bad shape and the question is, can we

sustain a forest industry? Are we going to have a forestry ten years from now if

we continue the same practices as right now, Mr. Chairman? That is what we have

to consider and that is why there are points to bring forward in this House so

that the minister can hear them, so the government can hear them and we can

continue to address them. It is not a threat to the minister. All it is, is a

point where we draw attention to the forest industry. Let us stop putting it on

the backburner, so that people are not urgent on the matter. It is an urgent

matter, I say to the minister, in all seriousness.

The monitoring in forestry in this Province has to come to a

head where we say finally, is it sustainable? Is the route that we are going

sustainable? Are we going to have a forest industry for our children and for

future generations? We cannot be thinking about two and three years down the

road. We have loggers that have come to me saying: We don't know what we are

doing next year. I have had loggers in my district - and, Mr. Chairman, my

district, in particular, as the minister knows, is probably the birthplace of

logging in this Province - the Green Bay area and also the Baie Verte Peninsula

area. Many loggers have been in those areas for years and years, Mr. Chairman,

and they are very concerned in that they don't know what they are going to cut

next year or the year after. What we need are long-term plans.

The minister has mentioned already that we are looking at

five-year plans but we are a year past due already and there are no plans in

place. Now, unless we start to put long-term plans in place - Mr. Chairman, it

takes forty to fifty years for trees to grow, unlike the fishery. We are hoping

that the fishery may return somewhat in the next two or three years and we will

have a small fishery. The fish will grow again.

Mr. Chairman, the trees don't grow that fast, and with the

fishery, we could not count the biomasses. That was the big problem the

scientists had, they could not count for sure where the fish were in the sea

because they kept moving. Well, Mr. Chairman, we don't have that excuse for the

forest industry. Trees are in one place - we can count them, we know how many

are there. If there is not a tree growing back for everyone that is cut, you do

not have to be a mathematical genius or go to Ottawa like we did with the

fishery to find out that sooner or later we will have a decrease in the number

of trees here. The forest industry will not be sustainable, and not only that,

Mr. Chairman, we cannot blame the foreigners like we did with the fishery. We

cannot come in and say the foreigners took away the forestry. The Province has

the jurisdiction of our forest. The Province can control what the two main

companies in this Province do. They can monitor, and if it is not being done

right, there will have to be changes. It is going to take a strong political

will to do that but it has to be done before it is too late for our forest

industry and before the sad day comes - and we all hope it does not - when we

have to have a moratorium in the logging industry, the forest industry in this

Province. That would be a sad day, Mr. Chairman.

So the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods has a big

job ahead of him, and he is new in the minister's post. He will have his time, I

say to the minister, he will have his time to show us examples - us as a

Province, us as Newfoundlanders - to say that the forest industry is not heading

in the right direction right now and that there needs to be long-term plans. He

has to show us, and I, as the critic for forestry in this Province, will be

watching very closely and asking questions here in the House to make sure that

he follows those plans, Mr. Chairman. If he comes off the rails on either side

we are going to be there to remind him that the forest industry in this Province

is a renewable resource that has to be sustained and we have to watch it very

closely.

The other portfolio that I shadow, of course, is the mining

industry. The mining industry you hear lots about, because it is in the news all

the time - Voisey's Bay and (inaudible) in the Green Bay area, we have the

Captain William Jackman find, we have the Nuddick Pond find, we have the Pine

Cone find and so on.

Although we all think great things about Voisey's Bay, Mr.

Chairman, we cannot forget the smaller companies who open up these small mines

and employ eighty and a hundred people. They are just as important. A lot of

small mines make up a big mine. The thing about a big mine, by the way, is that

once it is over, it is over and a lot of people lose their jobs, but if we have

a lot of small mines in the area, it helps in long-term employment for a lot of

people.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: By leave, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: By leave.

MR. SHELLEY: Just a few minutes, Mr. Chairman, to clue

up.

As far as the forestry and mining are concerned - and my last

critic portfolio this session is the portfolio for Development and Rural

Renewal. Mr. Chairman, this is a very interesting portfolio. This is one that

every single Newfoundlander and Labradorian will be watching very, very closely.

I have already congratulated the new minister on her appointment as a new

minister of this new department, but very simply put, I say to the minister:

Rural Newfoundland is hurting; hurting very badly; they need some help. They

need the help of the government and not be choked by bureaucracy and red tape

with which they have been choked for the last ten, fifteen years, Mr. Chairman.

The minister has already referred to the red tape that we see

in rural development for small entrepreneurs, small businesses, which really

make up what this Province is all about. We always talk about the big Hibernias

and Voisey's Bays and so on, but the minister knows and everybody in this House

knows that the real Newfoundland is made up of the small-time businesses, the

young people, the entrepreneurs, the small businesses that employ four and five

people. And, Mr. Chairman, the minister knows, I am sure, in her travels along

with the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, that there are many bright

Newfoundlanders who have very creative minds and who have come up with very good

ideas.

Mr. Chairman, in my short time here in this House of

Assembly, in two-and-a-half years, I have had many young people and good

Newfoundlanders come forward with great ideas, not great, big ideas just small

ideas to employ three, four and five people. But we all know what the end result

usually is, I say to the minister, and it is that they are lost in the

bureaucracy. They get choked with red tape. And what happens to that great idea?

It dies. The ideas die, Mr. Chairman, and that is the real shame of it.

Newfoundlanders who are creative, who have the entrepreneurial spirit and who

want to succeed, who do not want to rely on welfare and unemployment - not like

Mr. Young said in New Brunswick a few days ago, he believes that we are

depending on unemployment, that that is our attitude.

Well, Mr. Chairman, Newfoundlanders want to work. In general,

by-and-large, Newfoundlanders want to work. And the seasonal workers like the

loggers and so on who go away to Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island to scrape

up another few weeks work, tell Mr. Young these people are not going on a

holiday, they are going to get what they have to get to support their families,

that is what they are doing. They are going to do what they have to do to

support their families, because they live with dignity; and Newfoundlanders have

for years. Mr. Young is out of touch if he thinks that it is an attitude problem

we have. We don't have an attitude problem, we have a job problem. There are no

jobs. We had a group from HRD come down before Christmas and present us with the

great UI changes. The statistics were on the wall and everything was so

hunky-dory, they showed us all the great statistics and the history of Canada's

unemployment, like we needed to know that.

We don't need anybody to tell us about the history of

unemployment. So, after an hour and fifteen minutes of a presentation of the

great statistics and so on, I said: `I have one question for you.' And he asked:

`What's that?' I asked: `Where are these jobs that you keep talking about?' It

is not a problem that we don't want to go to work here, the jobs are not there.

So what we need to do is, free Newfoundlanders to use their creative minds and

their ingenuity to go out and make a living for themselves. And in this

portfolio that the new minister has taken upon herself, her main thrust and her

main aim must be to free Newfoundlanders who have creative minds and want to

build for themselves. They don't want the handouts of welfare or UI or anything;

they will tell Mr. Young what to do with the UI, they don't want it. That is the

reality in this Province.

MR. RAMSAY: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Pardon?

MR. RAMSAY: There is a new name on the Province.

MR. SHELLEY: Newfoundland and Labrador? Yes, I certainly

know it, because I lived in Labrador, I say to the Member for Burgeo and

LaPoile. I lived in Labrador, and I know all about the Labrador needs, and I

know about their concerns. And let me tell you, the Labradorians are going to

speak loud and clear very, very soon. I can tell you that the Labradorians are

going to speak loud soon. If any more resources are going to be raped away from

that part of this Province without full benefit, you are going to hear loud and

clear from the Labradorians.

You talk about the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians having

great entrepreneurship and ingenuity, Mr. Chairman, there are many of them in

Labrador - and I have talked to them - with great business ideas about the

outdoors up there, and the potential it has for eco-tourism in Labrador and so

on. The ideas go on and on and on, and those same people come to the government,

not for a load of money, just for a little bit of help, just a little bit of

assistance to get them started and get them on their way. And what happens? They

get choked with red tape, their idea dies, and they give up. It is called

apathy. They don't care anymore. They tried to do everything they could, but

they could not get anywhere. That is why this minister, in her particular

portfolio of rural development, has to start listening to those people, has to

help them, give them a boost, so that they can go on and become productive

members of society.

AN HON. MEMBER: Give them the boost, not the boots, hey?

MR. SHELLEY: That is what I mean, the boost and not the

boots, as the Member for Kilbride just said. It is so true. I have had so many

young people come to me from eighteen or nineteen to thirty years of age, with

great ideas, excited, wanted to take on a challenge, and three weeks later I see

them again, after they have travelled to ENL - Enterprise Newfoundland and

Labrador, or the Economic Recovery Commission, and they come back with sad faces

and say, `I have to give up. I can't go any further. I can't get any help.' That

is what this minister has to take on. She has to open the doors for these people

and let them use their creativity so they can make a living for themselves and

be productive members of society, and not sit back without work.

Mr. Chairman, there is one more comment I want to make before

the day is over here, and I will probably get up again before the day is over,

and I brought this up during the debate on electoral boundary changes. This

year, or this term, this election, I picked up eleven communities from the Green

Bay side of the Baie Verte Peninsula, eleven more communities, and I welcome

those communities, and I have made some good friends there in the last few

weeks; I have gotten to know a lot of people.

AN HON. MEMBER: And you got a good vote there.

MR. SHELLEY: And I certainly got good support from that

part of the district, big support.

AN HON. MEMBER: Big time.

MR. SHELLEY: Big, big time support from that part of the

district. I am very proud.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Paul Shelley wave out there.

MR. SHELLEY: That was the one break in the wave out in

Central Newfoundland, but it was certainly a break.

I want to go on record in the House today as saying - and I

said it during the electoral boundary changes, I will be making a formal request

AN HON. MEMBER: It was a red wave. It was your red wave.

MR. SHELLEY: It was my red wave.

Mr. Chairman, I will make a formal request - I did it before,

during the electoral boundaries - that the name of my district should be Baie

Verte - Green Bay. There is no doubt about it. Just before the election, before

the changes, we were just talking about making sense of all these electoral

boundary changes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Green Bay.

MR. SHELLEY: Okay, I will just explain to the minister.

The district previously was called Baie Verte - White Bay; it was just the Baie

Verte Peninsula and one community of Great Harbour Deep, which I am sad to say I

lost that community - I had very close ties with that community - one community

on the White Bay side, so the district was called Baie Verte - White Bay. Now, I

have the Baie Verte Peninsula and eleven communities on the Green Bay side and

it is just called Baie Verte. Now, we all know the smart answer was from the

former House Leader, that Baie Verte -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Up to Little Bay Islands.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, the great area of Little Bay Islands. I

had a great trip to Little Bay Islands. It is a beautiful part of the Province.

There is great potential for tourism down in that area, and great, friendly

people; I got to know them very quickly. I tell you, I have been invited to more

homes... But, Mr. Chairman, they cannot figure out why Baie Verte - White Bay it

was called with just Great Harbour Deep on the other side, and now we have

eleven communities on the Green Bay side and it is just called Baie Verte. I

will be making a formal request that my district will now be called Baie Verte -

Green Bay, as it should be called, or Green Bay - Baie Verte, whichever way they

want to make it up, because twenty-one communities are now on the Baie Verte

Peninsula, and there are eleven communities on the Green Bay side of the

district.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Nippers Harbour?

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, Sir. I am glad the minister asked me

that. The traditional town, the community of Nippers Harbour - I have many

friends in that area. As a matter of fact, I will tell the minister this: I won

a large can of beans in Nippers Harbour, and I will tell you how I won that can

of beans. When I first arrived on the scene just two-and-a-half years ago,

running against Mr. Small from that area at that time, a very staunch Liberal,

the first day of the election I decided to go to the staunchest Liberal

community in my district which is Nippers Harbour. Or it was, I should say. Mr.

Chairman, I walked into that store, not known to anybody, and the gentleman

there, who is a very staunch Liberal, asked me: Who are you? I told him my name.

He said: You haven't got a chance of winning this district. I said: Very good.

So then I shook hands with everybody else in the store. He said: You haven't got

a chance, you should stop campaigning now, don't waste your time. I should have

too, because I lost twenty pounds by the end of it. I still had my weight then.

I said: How much do you want to bet? He looked around the store and he pointed

to the can of beans. He said: That is a can of beans. If you win, you can have

that can of beans. I just picked up the can of beans this election. I went to

see the supporter and he now supports me. It is through a lot of hard work in

the last two and a half years, and he does support me.

Liberal communities - and there are - by the way, for the

minister's information, or he probably knows. The District of Baie Verte has

been traditionally Liberal and it always has been. As a matter of fact, Tom

Rideout, who was the previous member, was a Liberal and elected a Liberal. I'm

pleased to say that I'm the first Tory ever elected for the District of Baie

Verte - White Bay. Previous to that it was Bill Rowe, and then Fred Rowe, his

father.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: No, he was elected a Liberal. He crossed the

floor and ran as a Tory but....

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Tory roots.

MR. SHELLEY: Tory roots. The first bona fide Tory elected

in my district, Mr. Chairman. The district is basically Liberal: Fred Rowe, Bill

Rowe and so on. I remember putting up signs when I didn't know any better, I

guess, when I was twelve years old for Bill Rowe and Fred Rowe, and of course

the former House Leader was White Bay South.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: No, I wouldn't (inaudible). His daughter

Tanya was a great supporter of mine in -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, you know Tanya. Tanya is a great

outspoken girl in Nippers Harbour who helped me tremendously, Mr. Chairman. The

Nippers Harbour count this time was tremendous. As a matter of fact, if I'm not

mistaken, it was the biggest count ever out of Nippers Harbour for me in that

district. Also, such places as Middle Arm and also Pacquet which are -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: No, as a matter of fact I didn't get the

three votes in Tilt Cove, Mr. Chairman, but I -

AM HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) forestry.

MR. SHELLEY: We certainly are, but the minister has

tracked me off a little bit. We certainly were talking about forestry, which is

very important in my district, I say to the minister. He knows he will be

getting a litany of questions on the forestry in times coming. I did the

minister a little favour today so he shouldn't say too much. Remember, that is

just the beginning. There will be many more questions on the forestry in the not

too distant future. If you don't shorten the answers, or at least give an

answer, I won't ask any more. I will go to the Premier. So there is your warning

today.

Mr. Chairman, I do have an enlarged district now, I do have

thirty-three communities. I'm very glad to welcome the new communities in my

district. I will be formally requesting that my district now be called Baie

Verte - Green Bay. I think it just makes logical sense to name it that way. I'm

hoping to travel around that part of the district a bit more this summer.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: That should be the first order of business.

I agree with the new minister, that we change the name of Baie Verte to Baie

Verte - Green Bay, or Green Bay - Baie Verte, whichever.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: It should be called Baie Verte - Green Bay.

Don't make the same mistake as the last House Leader who made the joke by saying

Baie Verte is Green Bay, because in French, that is the French name, green bay.

You wouldn't use that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: No, you wouldn't do that. I knew the new

House Leader wouldn't - we are not going to start the `Bring Back Ed' chant,

don't worry about that. We certainly won't do that.

Mr. Chairman, it is a great district now to be representing.

I'm glad to get to know the people in the Green Bay side. They have some very

serious concerns with road construction in that area. They have been left off

the list for a long time. The new Minister of Works, Services and Transportation

who is in the House today and she talks about fairness and balance, and I'm sure

that the minister will treat all districts equally, and that people will get

road construction. I'm very pleased -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: A lot, 1,500, 1,600.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: It was close enough. I'm still expecting a

thank you letter from the Premier for my win in the Baie Verte - Green Bay

district. I'm still expecting a thank you for displacing the former Minister of

Fisheries, Food and Agriculture. I'm sure that is forthcoming. Mr. Chairman -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, that is what I figure. I say I'm going

to get a few thank you letters from over there for the job I did in Baie Verte -

Green Bay on behalf of the Liberal Party.

Mr. Chairman, I'm sure that the minister will look at all

areas of the Province with fairness and balance. She knows, I guess, now that I

am already reviewing the areas around the Province and in my district in

particular, there is a lot of gravel roads and dirt roads. Of course, with -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) budworm.

MR. SHELLEY: There is no more budworm on the Baie Verte

Peninsula, but I can tell you that the minister knows, especially if it changes

the school system and so on now, Mr. Chairman, and the talks of forty-minute

drives and buses for school kids and we know what parents have been saying about

a five-year-old, a six-year-old getting on a dirt road and travelling over bad

roads and buses that are not good enough these days. It is just not fair enough,

and I know that I will be having a million discussions with the Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation to let her know first hand, what the road

conditions are in the Baie Verte - Green Bay area and that she will have people

who will look at those roads and assess them and agree with me that those roads

have to be upgraded and some paving be done.

I am also very pleased, Mr. Chairman, that the Baie Verte

Highway will continue this year and so it should be. It was signed in 1989 under

the former Premier, Tom Rideout and John Crosbie at the time and has gone ahead

this year, after many petitions in this House and many times being raised in

this House, it has finally gone ahead and so it should, and I guess in some ways

you could say the squeaky wheel gets the grease but last year it went ahead

twenty kilometres and this year, another twenty.

I am very saddened to hear, Mr. Chairman, and I have to get

it confirmed, that the stretch of highway from Springdale to the Baie Verte

Junction has been cancelled or postponed this year but I am not sure if that is

true at this point. I hear that it is possible and I am certainly going to be

asking the minister what happened to that, why it is delayed or why is it

cancelled or whatever the situation is with it, but that is a stretch of highway

that should be finished as well as the many trunk roads in the Green Bay and

Baie Verte areas that need upgrading and paving, I will be pushing for those.

Also, Mr. Chairman, water and sewer in my district is of

utmost concern for a lot of residents and in this day and age people should have

at least decent drinking water and they deserve those services. Those are some

of the ideas that I will be raising in the next session of the House and there

are many concerns in the district that I will put forward to the various

ministers and I am sure I will have further discussions with all of them.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: Now you are going to hear it.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, you will hear it now, look out.

Mr. Chairman, I have to say to the Member for Baie Verte, he

came over and asked me could he speak next and said he will be up five minutes;

it was twenty-five or twenty-seven minutes so I won't do that anymore.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to say a few words on Interim

Supply. I have been up on my feet a few times before this past week on Interim

Supply but before I get into that, I was just noticing the Order Paper. I hope

this is not a sign of things to come from this administration. In the Orders of

the Day, of course, we have the Committee of Supply, Resolution and Bill No. 2

respecting Interim Supply and on the back page, second reading of a bill: "An

Act To Amend The Law To Give Effect To Certain Recommendations Of The

Commissioner For Regulatory Reform". That is all we have so far, Mr. Chairman.

This House of Assembly has been opened now over a week; the

official opening I think was last Wednesday and that is all we have so far, Mr.

Chairman, the Interim Supply Bill to be discussed in this House of Assembly, so

if that is a sign of things to come from this Administration, boy, this Province

is in for some hard times, I would say.

Now, Mr. Chairman, with respect to Interim Supply itself, the

time is getting fairly short with respect to Interim Supply and getting approval

by the House for Interim Supply, March 31, I believe is the time it has to be

approved in order for the government to continue with the normal proceedings and

running of government. I would say that the people of the Province are getting

quite concerned as to what may or may not happen. It is only tomorrow I suppose

as someone mentioned here the other day that maybe we will go on into Saturday

and whatever it takes; Monday is April 1st so hopefully we will get something

done by then to get it approved.

Civil servants in the Province today, Mr. Chairman, are

concerned I suppose that they will get their pay cheques next week. Hopefully,

they will manage to get approval of the Interim Supply by then but I suppose,

when you sit back and look at the Interim Supply Bill itself, you have to sit

back and be responsible and realize how important it is to have the Interim

Supply Bill approved. We have the winter weather conditions still upon us and of

course, we have to have the roads cleared and the glitter sanded when we have

sleet and rain and what have you, although we had a poor example of that the

other night when we had sleet and we had the trucks in the City of St. John's

out sanding roads, a full hour-and-a-half before the provincial trucks were on

the highways. I believe I heard the number of forty-five accidents because

Works, Services and Transportation was slow in getting their people off the mark

with respect to sanding the roads this past week.

We have to have money in place, of course, for the running

and the operations of the hospitals. We have to certainly see that the money can

be spent on the health care in the Province, the Health Care Corporation, of

course, of St. John's has to maintain the Janeway, and we had some discussion

today on the closing of the Janeway, or some questions on it, very serious

questions. We have yet to receive any answers from the government with respect

to the full-fledged plan of the - I don't know how you would term it - I suppose

the restructuring of the health care in the Province, and in particular in the

St. John's region where we have the Janeway itself being closed, and the Grace

Hospital being closed, although it has been announced now, I believe, that they

are going to delay the closing of the Grace for at least a year.

With respect to the Janeway itself, and the closing of the

Janeway, I personally believe, and have said from the beginning, that the

Janeway should be a separate entity. I believe those words were first used at a

public meeting back last summer, maybe June or July, where the Opposition Health

Task Force had a public meeting at the Holiday Inn. I believe maybe there were

100 or 150 people at that meeting, and the people at that meeting were quite

concerned about the closing of the Janeway.

I said at that meeting that the Janeway should be a separate

entity, and only after a lot of pressure was put on the Minister of Health, who

was re-established as Minister of Health by the new Premier, and a lot of

pressure put on, that he decided that the Janeway should be a separate entity.

They decided that they would maybe build an extension on to the Health Sciences

Centre here in St. John's, and maybe share some services. I believe that was the

intent in the beginning, that they would share services with the Janeway and the

adult centre, or the Health Sciences Centre. Of course, the people did not

believe that would be a good idea because if you have an emergency situation,

you have children in an emergency situation, they are in enough panic and enough

stress as it is without seeing adults coming in from a motor vehicle accident

and what have you, adding further stress to those little children.

The Janeway itself, I believe, has to be a separate entity.

It has to have the staff who are used to dealing with children, who are trained

to deal with children, and I don't see any sharing of services, as such. Well,

that is not quite accurate to say, I suppose, that I don't see any sharing of

services. I can certainly see sharing of the operations of the - what would you

call it - the financial operations of the institutions themselves, or the

administrative operations is what I am looking for.

Again, I suppose, we have to look for savings. I have to

agree with the Administration on that, but not necessarily to the effect that it

would hurt or have a negative impact upon the children at the hospital,

especially sick children.

We also have to have the money in place for the running of

schools and other areas of the government, but schools is one area I would like

to talk about for a few minutes. As I say, the Opposition would certainly not

unduly delay the approval of the Interim Supply Bill - I am convinced of that -

because our leader has already stated that we would be responsible on that

issue, and on all issues with respect that come before the House of Assembly,

but with respect to the schools I would like to say a few words, I suppose, on

the education reform, or what has happened over the past year or so.

The previous Premier basically, in the last election - not

the Premier today; the previous Premier, said during the election that he would

not go for the constitutional amendment.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who did?

MR. J. BYRNE: The former Premier, before the last

election, in 1993, made a statement that he would not go for a constitutional

amendment. He would look for an agreement between the churches and the

government itself, and the people involved, but a few days after the election,

of course, he made the announcement that he would be going for a constitutional

amendment. Then he brought legislation to the House, and he said that he would

have a referendum.

AN HON. MEMBER: And he pulled it through.

MR. J. BYRNE: And he pulled it through. He did manage to

get 53 per cent of the people of the Province.

I say to the Government House Leader that it was strange, in

my district, in the old district of St. John's East Extern, the result was

exactly the same as it was within the Province. It was 53 per cent in favour,

and 47 per cent against educational reform. Now, I was in a situation where I

had to vote on the referendum in the House of Assembly last fall, and I gave

some serious consideration to what I should and should not do. I was one of the

few MHAs who voted against the results in their district.

The reason for that, Mr. Chairman, was the fact that I

believed that there was no need for a constitutional amendment to change a bus

schedule. I believed that most of the results that the government could have had

it could have had without having a constitutional amendment. Most of the results

that it wanted it could have had without a constitutional amendment. The

government decided to go for a referendum, and sobeit.

When the vote came in in my district, as I said earlier, I

sized the situation up. I was of the opinion that maybe I should go with what

the majority of people in my district supported, or voted for, but I had to sit

back and look at it and say: Was the government up front with the people of the

Province? Did it give them all the information? I don't believe that it was up

front. Because when we were in the House of Assembly last fall I remember the

former Member for St. Mary's - The Capes standing in this House and asking for

the schools viability criteria. He asked a number of questions to the premier,

and the premier of the day - he was just as good I suppose as the present

Premier at skating - skated around the issue and he would not answer the

question. He didn't have it, of course, because he didn't have the school

viability criteria.

What other issue was up at that time? There was another issue

that we did not get the answer to - the legislation itself. We asked that the

legislation be presented, that the people of the Province would know and see

what they were voting on. Of course the legislation was not prepared, or we were

told it was not prepared, and it didn't come before the House last fall. The

people didn't have it for the referendum. When they voted they were voting on

what they believed the Premier was saying, that they would have a consultation

process and what have you, and it would be a new reformed, revitalized education

system in the Province, and it would be to the benefit of the children in this

Province.

Once the legislation came out and they looked at the busing

criteria and the new schools viability criteria, they were quite shocked I would

say to learn of what the previous Administration was trying to put through. I

feel good about the fact that I did vote no at that point in time for those very

reasons. We have now people in the Province getting pretty upset that their

schools will be closing because the numbers were down. From what I know of it

and from what I read of it, it is pretty complicated for a school now to remain

a uni-denomination school, or a religious denominational school.

Here in St. John's two weeks ago I believe it was I attended

a public meeting at Gonzaga High School with over 500 people in attendance. The

Member for St. John's East spoke at that. He is a former student at Gonzaga High

School, as I am a former student of Gonzaga High School. I graduated from

Gonzaga in 1970. I have a son attending that school this year.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

CHAIR: The hon. member has leave, but if I could have the

attention of the House for a few moments.

It being Thursday I would like to inform the members of the

House of the three questions that will be debated in the adjournment debate,

commonly referred to as the Late Show.

Number one, the Member for Cape St. Francis: I am

dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Premier and the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs re: my question on GST and RST harmonization.

Number two, the Member for Baie Verte: I am dissatisfied with

the answer provided by the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods concerning

my question on the forestry centre.

Number three, the Member for Waterford Valley: I am

dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Social Services

concerning my question on the closure of Presentation House.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the

members opposite for leave for me to continue my few words with respect to

Interim Supply.

As I was stating, I attended a meeting last week at Gonzaga

High School here in St. John's, and the main theme of the meeting was to keep

Gonzaga Jesuit. We have had Jesuits at that school since it opened in the early

1960s. As I said, I graduated in 1970 and I have a son there today. Some of the

people who were at that meeting - I know one of the speakers who spoke at the

meeting, one of the invited speakers mentioned - actually at a public meeting -

that he voted in favour of educational reform but if had known the schools

criteria viability and the legislation that would be forthcoming he would have

voted, more than likely, no. I believe that a lot of the people of the Province

were hoodwinked. They were hoodwinked by the previous administration with

respect to education reform.

Now I have a situation in my district that I brought up

before - and I would like the Minister of Education to address it in the very

near future. It is an opportunity to show cooperation between the churches,

between government and it is an opportunity that can be done very, very soon

without even a constitutional amendment, without any changes in education

legislation, Mr. Chairman, and that is the fact that in Pouch Cove now we have

two elementary schools. We have Pouch Cove Elementary and we have St. Agnes with

very low numbers in those two schools. The buildings that they are in are

getting to be very old. There has been money set aside, for a number of years

now, to do a study and an engineering plan, what have you, to bring the two

schools together to create one school for the area.

Last spring I had public meetings with the parents of the St.

Agnes School, the teachers of St. Agnes School and I had meetings with the RC

School Board. After that meeting I had a public meeting with the parents of

Pouch Cove Elementary and I also met with the Avalon Consolidated School Board.

At that very meeting we knew there was $75,000 ready to be spent to design and

to study the location of where the new schools should go. Should it go in

Flatrock? Should it go in Pouch Cove? Should it go in Bauline? Should it go

between Flatrock and Pouch Cove, in Shoe Cove? At the meeting in Pouch Cove

Elementary the parents that very night, with this board present at that meeting,

voted that the two schools should come together.

Now we have a situation close to St. John's where we could

have two elementary schools come together to share services. What would happen?

The two buildings that are there now, Mr. Chairman, as I said, are getting old.

The gymnasiums are not in good condition. St. Agnes does not even have a

cafeteria. The classrooms themselves are small. This is just not a good

situation for the children, although it is a very good school. I go down there

quite often to the school and attend functions there. The calibre of the

students who are in that school is really quite extraordinary considering the

facilities that they do have. The teachers themselves are quite committed to the

students and it is the same thing with Pouch Cove Elementary. I have attended

different functions there and I have attended concerts at the elementary, for

the smaller kids and again, it is a school with quite a good record. So to bring

both of them together would be a great accomplishment for any administration.

I will be approaching the Minister of Education for funding

for that school this year. We are looking for anywhere from $3 million to $4

million for a new school. The thing that we have to do, Mr. Chairman, is to get

- what seems to be causing the problem at this point in time, in my opinion, is

that it is a territorial thing now. I remember a few years ago when the children

at the elementary school in Flatrock had to go to Pouch Cove. The school at

Flatrock was closed and the people in Flatrock were quite upset that they would

lose their school because oftentimes the school in the community is the heart of

the community. They lost their school and the children were bused to Flatrock.

Now we have a situation where those children are still going

to St. Agnes and if we can get this new school built - some of the parents in

Flatrock believe that the school should be in Flatrock and the parents in Pouch

Cove want the school in Pouch Cove. So that is the situation that we are in now

at this point in time with respect to the schools. I am wondering if the

Minister of Education should get involved here and lend some support to try and

bring these two schools together, to get a new school and show the co-operation

between the government, the school boards and the parents of those communities?

Now, the former Minister of Education was, I believe, put in

that position so he could cut, cut, and cut some more, and he was quite good at

that. Now, the new Minister of Education, I believe, was put there because he

seems to be more conciliatory. He seems to be a bit more of a person to

co-operate with the schools, and with the parents, and with the teachers, and

co-operate with the different churches involved and, of course, the government

itself, to try to come up with some kind of a solution to the problem and the

crisis we have today. I would say to the Minister of Education that this would

be a good time, a prime example of showing his negotiating skills, to get

involved and get this school built in the Pouch Cove, Flatrock area, to meet

with the people involved, and to come up with some solution.

The engineering study, when first started, looked at a number

of sites. I think they started out with six or eight, and they picked out a

couple, but now, because of the - how will I put it - probably the territorial

thing, maybe - they are looking at a couple of others now - b