November 28, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 37

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Today I have the pleasant task of formerly introducing a member who was

elected in the by-election held on November 12. He is Mr. Terry French, in the

District of Conception Bay South. I have been advised by the Clerk of the House

of Assembly that Mr. French has taken the Oath of Allegiance to the Crown as

required by the constitution and has signed the Members Roll.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present to you the Member

for Conception Bay South, Mr. Terry French. I request the right for him to claim

his seat in this House of Assembly.

MR. SPEAKER: Let the member take his seat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On Tuesday, November 26, following the statement of the hon. the Minister of

Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs announcing the round table discussions in

Happy Valley-Goose Bay on the proposed Gull Island hydro development, the hon.

the Opposition House Leader raised a point of privilege stating that in being

denied an invitation to the meeting the privileges of the members of the

Official Opposition were being breached.

Parliamentary privilege, as often been stated in this House, is "the sum

of the peculiar rights enjoyed by Members of (the) House... without which they

could not discharge their functions." Beauchesne's 6 th

Edition, paragraph 24. To constitute privilege there must be some improper

obstruction to the member in performing his or her parliamentary work. Beauchesne's

6 th Edition, paragraph 92.

In this instance the minister had invited a number of persons to attend a

meeting which was closed to others.

Members of governments and ministers convene meetings and briefings, all the

time, and on various matters, which are not open to Members of the House. There

have been a number of attempts to invoke privilege in connection with the

disclosure of information to some other groups before disclosing it to Members

of the House.

In a ruling made on March 19, 2001, Mr. Speaker Milliken of the House of

Commons ruled that the disclosure of information on a bill to the media before

it was introduced into the House did not constitute a breach of privilege.

Similarly, in a ruling of Speaker Fraser on June 18, 1987 - page 7315 of Debates

- concerning giving access to a number of individuals who are not Members of the

House of Assembly to the text of a White Paper before it was tabled in the House

did not found a question of privilege.

In paragraph 31(10) of Beauchesne the same point is made quoting

from Speaker Lamoureux, of the House of Commons Debates, October 30,1969, pages

269 and 270. "The question has often been raised whether parliamentary

privilege imposes on ministers an obligation to deliver ministerial statements

and to make announcements and communications to the public through the House of

Commons or to make these announcements or statements in the House rather than

outside the chamber. The question has been asked whether Hon. members are

entitled, as part of their parliamentary privilege, to receive such information

ahead of the general public. I can find no precedent to justify this

suggestion."

While members may think they are inconvenienced or that their work is made

more difficult if they are not included in such meetings or briefings it is the

opinion of the Chair that there is no parliamentary requirement that they be

included. In this instance the Chair finds that there is no prima facie case of

breach of privilege.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader on November 26 rose on a point of order.

The Chair would like to reiterate for all hon. members the ruling of November

21, in which the Chair referred to the importance of conducting the proceedings

of the House in such a way as to respect the integrity of all members. As I said

at the time, without such respect the proceedings descend into disorder and the

work of the House becomes secondary to wrangling and disputes. To quote Marleau

and Montpetit at page 525, "... the use of offensive, (or) provocative...

language in the House is strictly forbidden." "Personal attacks,

insults... are not in order."

On Tuesday, the hon. the Opposition House Leader raised a point of order

concerning comments of the hon. the Premier. In answering a question from the

hon. the Leader of the Opposition, the hon. the Premier said, "I am glad

that he has probably had an opportunity now to have a fuller briefing with the

former Chair of the Hydro board, whom I have great respect for, Mr. Speaker. In

fact, I guess the Leader of the Opposition is showing quite clearly that his

principles, his morals, are such that it does not really matter what questions

you ask, where you get the information base, or what you do, as long as it

furthers his political agenda."

The Chair is of the opinion that the hon. the Premier's words, which the

Chair has just quoted, impute to the Leader of the Opposition an unworthy

motive. As the Chair stated in a ruling on Monday, November 25, it is not

acceptable to impute bad motives or motives different from those acknowledged by

a member.

I refer members to Beauchesne 6 th Edition, 481. In the

opinion of the Chair, the Premier's language does fall within the prohibition,

and I would ask him to withdraw it.

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I withdraw the remarks.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise today on a point of

personal privilege. I rise reluctantly, but I rise out of a heavy sense of duty

to the members of this House and to myself in the first instance, as a member of

caucus, as a member of Cabinet, and as a member and minister of the department

who is currently leading on the file, the development of the Lower Churchill.

I want to bring to the attention of the Speaker, comments and assertions, I

guess, that were made by the Leader of the Opposition on November 27 on behalf

of himself, I guess, and his caucus, as he indicated here. The assertion was

this: that he and his members had been provided with information with respect to

the Lower Churchill development project by members of Cabinet and by members of

caucus.

To me, Mr. Speaker, that is a very serious circumstance for myself because it

immediately brings into question whether or not I, as a member of the government

of the day, as a minister of the Crown, as the minister leading on this file,

and as a member of the caucus on this side of the House, it brings into question

whether or not I have, in fact, been derelict - worse than derelict - that I

have broken my oath, in probably having it alleged that I may have been one who

was sharing information outside of the norm on this file, and that is

information that I would share with caucus, Cabinet, or other officials and

other agencies that would be appropriately involved in this file.

I ask the hon. Speaker today to take into consideration the issue that I

raise, because I believe my personal privileges have been breached, at minimum

my integrity as a member of government has been questioned, and I want to affirm

to this House and to the Speaker of the House that I have not been derelict, nor

have I been irresponsible, nor have I been inappropriately sharing information

with anybody that would be inappropriate, including members of the Opposition,

on this particular issue.

The assertion that I refer to, obviously, Mr. Speaker, is not lightly

considered by myself. I would think it would not lightly be considered by any

member of the House who would be, by way of extension of comment, brought under

such suspicion, and I would ask the hon. Speaker to rule on this. I am sure that

all members on this side of the House maybe feel like I do, that their

privileges have been breached and that their integrity has been questioned.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I say to you, Mr. Speaker, that I have been faithful in the

oath that I have taken to the Queen of our Commonwealth with respect to my

responsibilities on matters of confidentially, on matters of privacy, and on

matters of guarding against anything that would injuriously be inflicted upon

this government or upon this issue that has brought this comment forth.

I would ask you to rule, Mr. Speaker, on this issue of breach of my

privileges. I again attest and affirm that I, as one member of government, have

not being sharing inappropriately information with anybody on any file, on any

issue, at any time, on any account, and I would ask the public of the Province

and the people of this House to understand that I, as one member, as far as I

know, I have been faithful and I have not been one who has been sharing

inappropriate information, or sharing information inappropriately, with anybody,

at any time, for any purpose, on any issue.

I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, inasmuch as I feel that my privileges on this

issue have been breached - maybe I am not the only one - I would suggest all of

my colleagues on this side of the House might be of a similar feeling in this

context.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WILLIAMS: If he's clean, what about everybody else?

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Pardon me?

A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The Chair will hear the point of privilege raised by the hon. Minister of

Mines and Energy first.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I rise to speak to the point of privilege of the Minister of Mines and

Energy. Before I do, I want to say that whatever documents he has in his hand,

he is obligated to table those - those references - and I look forward to seeing

them.

If my memory serves me correctly, for a point of privilege to be raised,

privileges of the Minister or members of this House are not breached according

to Marleau, according to Beauchesne , and according to Maingot, if the

minister - and I believe he is - referring to statements made outside this

Chamber. If, in fact -

AN HON. MEMBER: Will he (inaudible)?

MR. E. BYRNE: Well, that is -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, to the point of privilege, while I appreciate

the Minister of Mines and Energy's, I suppose, motivation for standing up and

saying it wasn't me or that I did not breach my duties as a minister or relate

or give any information to anybody about the issue at hand, the fact of the

matter remains that, when it comes to his privileges as a member of this House

and his privileges as a minister of the Crown, they were not, in fact, breached;

because the statements that the minister refers to were made outside this House

in a media scrum and therefore have no basis for a point of privilege in this

House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

To the point of privilege that was raised, the Chair will certainly review

the comments that have been made by the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy,

take the point raised under advisement and rule on it.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker.

As my colleague stood and spoke to defend his integrity, the Leader of the

Opposition was laughing. He looked up and he said: He spoke, what about the rest

of you? That is what he said. I take personal offence to that and I would say, I

have never, directly or indirectly, given information out. I would still say, Mr

Speaker, when comments are made outside this House about members inside this

House, the people of the Province do not often make the differentiation. I feel

personally affronted, as I am sure everyone of my colleagues do, and I would ask

them how they feel about this too, Mr. Speaker, because I think it speaks to a

level that I would prefer never enter this House.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, there was no allegation yesterday outside this

House leveled on any member. The record of the House will show clearly that what

the Minister of Finance has just said was not said. The fact of the matter is,

Mr. Speaker, that what we are seeing today are points of frustration and not

points or order and not points of privilege.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. LUSH: The matter is easily resolved. All the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition has to do is to stand in his place and say that he didn't make the

statement or that he withdraws the statement. With respect to the point of

privilege, Mr. Speaker, everybody stood on this side of the House in

affirmation, that they divulge no information to the Leader of the Opposition or

to anybody on that side of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

Again, to the point raised by the hon. the minister, the Chair certainly didn't

hear the comment that the hon. member made, but I am sure if the hon. member

made any comment that was unparliamentary he will withdraw it.

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Saturday, November 16, I had the opportunity, on behalf of Loyola Hearn,

MP for St. John's West, to present to Mrs. Elizabeth Lee of Riverhead, St.

Mary's Bay, the Queen's Golden Jubilee Medal for her years of dedication to

her community, to her Province and, indeed, her country.

Mrs. Elizabeth Lee has been a tower of strength in ensuring that the Royal

Canadian Legion, Branch 62 of Riverhead, St. Mary's Bay, has prospered and

grown through some very difficult economic times in the past number of years.

I was always aware of Mrs. Lee's involvement but since being elected to

this House I have witnessed first-hand the true commitment and dedication of

this woman.

She has been an advocate for the perseveration of the Legion Building in

Riverhead, but much more than that, she has been a strong advocate for the

perseveration of remembering those who fought and died for the freedom we all

enjoy today. The Queen's Jubilee Medal is being awarded to those persons who

have made a significant contribution to Canada, their community and to their

fellow Canadians.

In my words, Mr. Speaker, this medal is being awarded to those among us who

have made a difference.

There is no doubt in my mind, and I am sure in the minds and hearts of all

those who know and have witnessed the actions of Mrs. Elizabeth Lee, that she

has indeed made a difference and is very deserving of this prestigious award.

I ask all Members of this House to join with me today in congratulating Mrs.

Elizabeth Lee of Riverhead, St. Mary's Bay, on receiving the Queen's Golden

Jubilee Medal and wish her all the best in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Her, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to congratulate two members from my district who have

participated in the Youth Ventures Program. Kirk and Kris Bussey won two awards

for their achievement this summer as owner-operators of Burger Boys', a

mobile hot dog and snack vendor headquartered in Port de Grave. Kirk and Kris

tied for the High Achievement in Marketing award and won the Venture of the Year

award.

They both began this enterprise three years ago as a water stand. During this

time they have grown to be able to employ not only themselves but seventeen

other students. They purchased an RV, created logos and a brand name, and

provided uniforms to their staff. The Burger Boys' have been present at the

Regatta, the Klondike Festival, the Salmon Festival and won exclusive contracts

to sell their products at the Shaggy concert held this past summer.

There were a number of other students that were presented with awards for

their participation in this program. Although they are not from my district, I

would like to recognize Andrew Cross, Robert Gear, Donovan Parsons, Roland Reid,

Amy Pollard, Christopher Mitchelmore, Kristian Wiseman, and Hilary Oram.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to acknowledge the importance of the Youth Ventures

Program for Newfoundland and Labrador. The program teaches business skills,

builds confidence and strengthens the entrepreneurial spirit of the youth of our

Province; it instills an appreciation of the contributions of the small business

sector to the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador. I think it is fitting that

we extend congratulations to the Youth Ventures Program, Kris and Kirk Bussey

and to all the youth who have participated in the program.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the tremendous efforts of

SmartLabrador, an organization that was chosen as the Smart Communities

Demonstration Project for Newfoundland and Labrador. SmartLabrador is one of

twelve smart communities from across Canada that uses innovative technology to

enhance services for people in the Northern and remote communities so that they

may enable a traditional way of life, yet access the global market.

The SmartLabrador Initiative named Technology on Top of the World' is an

initiative of the geographic, social, cultural and economic community of

Labrador. Earlier this month, I had the pleasure of attending the first-ever

Northern Solutions Conference that was held at Happy Valley-Goose Bay. The

three-day conference gave the public the opportunity to witness first-hand some

of the new technologies at work in Labrador.

It was amazing to see the Smart Services technology that the project has

implemented and the number of communities that this organization has reached

across Labrador. We were able to use the technology to allow participation from

other provinces such as Ontario, Saskatchewan and Nunavut in the conference

itself.

Labrador is certainly a smart community that is clearly representative of a

community with a vision for the future and is using the information and

communication technologies in new and innovate ways to empower its residents and

its institutions within the region.

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask all members to join me in extending our

congratulations to SmartLabrador for it truly is an innovative organization that

makes the most of the opportunities that new technologies afford to improve the

health care system, the education system, and provide training and new business

opportunities for people in our northern communities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I recently attended the Newfoundland and

Labrador Soccer Association and the Burin Peninsula Soccer Hall of Fame

induction ceremonies as nine new members were elected to the Burin Peninsula

Hall of Fame and seven new members were inducted to the Provincial Soccer Hall

of Fame. All who attended agreed that these inductees have made a significant

impact to the growth of soccer in this Province.

I want to send a special congratulations to Joanne Mallay-Jones of Marystown,

one of the nine new Burin Peninsula Hall of Fame inductees. She won five soccer

scoring titles in the Burin Peninsula Soccer League between 1985 and 1994, and

was also part of university teams at Memorial and the University of British

Columbia.

Mr. Speaker, I would like also to congratulate the rest of the Burin

Peninsula Soccer Hall of Fame Nominees this year: Albert Anstey and Bill Grandy

from the Burin Area; Luke Edwards of Lawn; Yvonne Edwards, Keith Farrell,

Murdock Hiscock and Howard Lake of St. Lawrence; and Eli Lee of Grand Bank, who

have all played an integral role in development of soccer on the Burin

Peninsula, and I, along with my hon. colleague from Grand Bank, believe they

should be recognized.

I would also like to congratulate Mr. Don Turpin of St. Lawrence, a familiar

voice to soccer fans on the Burin Peninsula, who was inducted into the

Provincial Soccer Hall of Fame, along with Keith Farrell of St. Lawrence; Eli

Lee and John Russell of Grand Bank; Ken Hunt of Deer Lake; Adrian Miller of St.

John's; and Jean (Lake) Thompson of Paradise.

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate all of these inductees for their accomplishments

and it is just further proof that soccer will continue to have a strong link in

this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, today the report from the Royal Commission on the Future of

Health Care in Canada was tabled in the House of Commons. For the past eighteen

months, the Commission, led by Mr. Roy Romanow, has been working to develop

policies and measures to ensure the long-term sustainability of a universally

accessible, publicly-funded health system for the country.

Mr. Romanow has made a number of recommendations to improve the health system

in this country. We will immediately review these recommendations as they relate

to health services in our Province.

Premiers have for some time being calling upon the federal government to

assume its fair share of responsibility by joining with provinces and

territories in a new funding partnership that will allow us to make the

adjustments necessary to sustain health care.

There are a number of positive forward-looking recommendations, such as the

reference made to taking a needs-based approach to the allocation of the Canada

Health Transfer. This gives us some hope that our needs may be partially

addressed in the longer term. We are somewhat concerned, Mr. Speaker, by the

lack of a recommendation for immediate new funding to stabilize our current

health and community services system.

We are also pleased that Mr. Romanow recognizes reform of the equalization

program is critical to the sustainability of health care programming in smaller,

less-wealthy provinces such as Newfoundland and Labrador.

The health care budget in our Province is $1.5 billion. Since1996-1997,

government has consistently invested new money into health and community

services. It has meant a 46 per cent increase in funding in this Province over

that period of time. The health budget in our Province now makes up 45 per cent

of the total program spending of the government. For every $1 billion put into

health care in the country, a per capita transfer would mean about $17 million

in Newfoundland and Labrador.

While some of the suggested funding allocations contained in the report may

seem like large investments in health care nationally, we are concerned about

the portion we would receive. For example, our budget for the Prescription Drug

Program alone increased 30 per cent from 1998-1999 to this current year. The

cost for us to pay for our doctors, nurses and other health care professionals

is hundreds of millions of dollars.

Mr. Speaker, provincial and territorial governments are already working

diligently to manage our health care systems effectively both to sustain and

improve the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of core health services. The

provision of any new federal funding will assist us in fulfilling our plans.

However, I must point out that provinces and territories are in the best

position to know how and where to allocate any funding.

I have directed the Minister of Health and Community Services to review the

Commissioner's recommendations in light of our own priorities and advise on

how we can support our own plans through these recommendations. As we are all

aware, Newfoundland and Labrador has recently released its own provincial

Strategic Health Plan, Healthier Together, which lays out a broad, innovative

approach to health and community services for this Province.

I have also directed the Finance Minister to analyze the funding proposals

recommended by Mr. Romanow and provide advice over the next few weeks leading up

to a First Ministers' meeting early in the new year.

Next week, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health and Community Services will be

meeting with his provincial and territorial colleagues on the Romanow Report. On

December 17 and 18, the Minister of Finance will be meeting with her colleagues

on the same issue. I am encouraged that these key ministers will meet quickly to

discuss the recommendations of this report.

I join with other premiers across the country in that I am pleased to see

that many of the recommendations we have been making have been echoed by Mr.

Romanow, and others, recently. What is important now is that we turn these

recommendations into action and reality. We have continuously increased our

health care budgets and we feel it is now time that the federal government do

its part by restoring its fair share of health care funding in the country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, are extremely pleased with the recommendations in the Romanow

Report. I think there is a real lesson in the Romanow process because he truly

demonstrated what it is truly like to have full public open consultation in

developing a vision and a future for our health services.

Mr. Speaker, we are particularly pleased with the notion that there is going

to be an expansion of the Canada Health Act to include such things as home care

and pharmacare in the future. These are futurist - very important issues facing

Canada's health system. For a Province like Newfoundland and Labrador, it

continuously references focus on rural Canada and that is important for us.

We, too, Mr. Speaker, share the Premier's comments with respect to ensuring

that these bold new initiatives have adequate federal funding attached to them,

so I am extremely pleased to see that.

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that he continued to echo in his release

today, and in his public press comment, was that he was calling on all of the

premiers in all of the provinces in Canada to come together in a spirit of

co-operation. I trust one of the comments that the Premier made about pointing

out that it is, in fact, the provinces who know best what to do with their

health care, that comment is not indicative of the spirit in which he is going

enter into discussions with the federal government with respect to having a much

more cooperative arrangement for health care in this country.

One of the other things that is extremely pleasing, Mr. Speaker, is Romanow's

suggestion that he is going to add a sixth principle to the Canada Health Act,

and that is the principle of accountability. If there is anything that this

country needs and this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador desperately needs

is a provision, a mandatory provision, in legislation holding governments

accountable for the scarce health care money that we are spending. So, we are

extremely pleased and overwhelmingly endorse that particular principle. I think,

with that principle in place, it will give the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador some level of comfort, that someone will now be finally held

accountable for the $1.5 billion that we are spending on health care.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, are very pleased with the report of Roy Romanow today which we hope

will bring to an end the debate about health care in this country and make a

turning point towards improving our system, rather than trying to take it apart

by dissecting it and replacing it with a private for-profit system.

Mr. Romanow has affirmed the principles of the Canada Health Act and their

value to this country, suggested adding accountability as a feature which I

believe is necessary, and also has outlined proposed directions for change to

add coverage for home care services to the Canada Health Act, to add support for

home mental health case management and other support for mental illnesses to the

Canada Health Act, expand the Canada Health Act to cover home care for

post-acute care and medication management and rehabilitation services, and also

palliative care services.

This is the beginning, Mr. Speaker, of a national drug program and also a

national home care strategy, one which I hope will be now turned into

implementation and firm support by this government and governments across the

country.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to rise today to inform this hon. House that the Premier's

round table discussion on the proposed Gull Island project in Happy Valley-Goose

Bay on Wednesday was a resounding success.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: More than thirty business, Aboriginal and community leaders

from all over Labrador came together, Mr. Speaker, to discuss this very

important proposed development, and we all walked away with a sense of

accomplishment. My colleague from Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair and the Member

for Torngat Mountains, along with the Member for Labrador West, all participated

in the discussion, as did the MP for Labrador.

In all my years of public life, Mr. Speaker, I can honestly say that this was

one of the more productive meetings I have had the pleasure to attend.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: What we have managed to accomplish, Mr. Speaker, was a

consensus to move forward with discussions to develop the Gull Island project.

People made it very clear that specific benefits must be provided to Labrador,

and I would suggest you listen to these.

These include, Mr. Speaker: A plan to address the high cost of electricity on

the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, just to repeat. It is very clear that specific benefits must be

provided to Labrador, and these include: A plan to address the high cost of

electricity on the Labrador coast; the ability to recall electricity from Gull

Island for industrial development in Labrador; and a Labrador economic

development fund, to be administered by and for the people of Labrador and for

the communities in which they live.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: Mr. Speaker, more than anyone else in the Province, the

people of Labrador, both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal, have felt the injustices

of the past when it comes to resource development. This injustice has been

compounded by false starts, heightened expectations and lack of consultation by

past governments.

I have been involved in public life for nearly thirty years and yesterday was

a turning point - a point in our history when the people of Labrador said the

decision to develop in Labrador must begin in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I want to again thank the Premier

for his continued commitment to listening to the concerns of the people of

Labrador.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, there must have been two meetings in

Labrador yesterday. Today's media quotes the Mayor of Labrador City as saying,

"Maybe it is my own fault. I came here with false expectations. I'm not

getting the information that I thought I would get today so I'm in no better

position than I was this morning to make a decision on whether it is a good deal

or not."

The Mayor of Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Mr. Hickey, is also quoted as saying,

"I'm not comfortable with the idea of having our banker for a

partner." He continues to say, "We said here are out demands, Mr.

Premier. Now you put our demands in your framework with Quebec.'"

Mr. Speaker, the frustration of the people of Labrador is shared by all of

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. The people of Newfoundland and Labrador

feel shut out and dismayed, primarily for two reasons on this issue, because of

the little amount of information that they are aware of and because of the vast

amount of information that they are not aware of.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I know one thing that did not happen at the meeting in Labrador yesterday,

the people who were there did not even get the power point presentation that was

supposed to be presented to the board of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. The

meeting was not about the Premier's deal. What was made clear at the meeting

yesterday was: no major development in Labrador for Gull Island or anything else

- whether it be by this government, by a Tory government or by an NDP government

- is going to take place without proper consultation with the people of

Labrador, without them having a say, without them putting their demands and

preconditions on the table.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: What they have done is put preconditions on the table for any

deal. They did not approve any deal. They did not comply with any deal. They did

not see any deal, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: They made preconditions for any deal that should take place,

and that is a good thing.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to update the hon. House on a resolution which was passed

unanimously here on Thursday past.

Mr. Speaker, the resolution read in part, BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this

House unanimously request that all Newfoundland and Labrador Members of

Parliament and Senators meet with the Premier, the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture and the leaders of the Official Opposition and New Democratic Party

to ensure we are working collectively and cooperatively for the best interests

of the people and communities of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to inform the House that a meeting has been

arranged and an invitation has been extended to all the aforementioned

individuals. The meeting will be held in Ottawa on Monday, December 2, 2002.

Mr. Speaker, the main purpose of the meeting will be to discuss a common and

cooperative approach to identifying and addressing potential impacts of possible

cod fishery closures in this Province, including the need for Ottawa to develop

a comprehensive compensation package for affected Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

While in Ottawa on Monday, Mr. Speaker, I will also be attending a meeting of

the Atlantic Fisheries Ministers along with the federal Minister of Fisheries

and Oceans. Mr. Speaker, the potential cod fisheries closures and the state of

the Atlantic cod stocks will be the main agenda item at this meeting, and I will

once, again, bring forward the concerns of all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

regarding this issue.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, would like to say that we are happy that the meeting is arranged on

this very important issue, Mr. Speaker, but I would like to bring up a very

important thing. In the debate that we had on Thursday past, a fine debate in

non-partisan politics, we talked about working collectively and cooperatively

for the best interests of the people in the communities in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture was informed at 1:00 o'clock

yesterday that the Leader of the Opposition was unable to attend any meeting on

Monday coming, that he was available for any other day in the next two weeks.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TAYLOR: Any other day in the next two weeks, and it matters not why.

He was informed of that. What happened to the non-partisan politics? What

happened to working collectively?

The minister also knows that the Leader of the Opposition -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TAYLOR: - could have attended any meeting here in Newfoundland on

Monday. So, Mr. Speaker, the cooperation, where is it and why has he left it out

of this important meeting?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to say that we certainly welcome the opportunity to have

the meeting that we agreed upon last week. As it happens, I am available on

Monday. I was asked yesterday about my availability and I was available. I do

not know whether or not - and I am sure the minister -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: I am sure that the Leader of the Opposition was as well, and

I hope it could be arranged for a time that all people involved in this proposal

can be available for the meeting.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this afternoon I would like to inform members that last night I,

along with the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development, the Minster of

Human Resources and Employment, and the Minister of Government Services and

Lands, attended the 10 th anniversary celebration of the Newfoundland

and Labrador Environmental Industry Association and the 1 st

Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental Industry Awards.

We would like to congratulate the winners of the following awards announced

last night: Capacity Building in the Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental

Sector - Newfound Disposal Systems of St. Johns; Environmental Performance in

Newfoundland and Labrador Industry Sector- Corner Brook Pulp and Paper;

Community - Evergreen Recycling; Outstanding Individual Contribution to the

Environmental Industry in Newfoundland and Labrador - Mr. Bevin LeDrew and also

Mr. Paul Antle, owner and CEO of Island Waste Management.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank NEIA for its

co-operation and partnering to assist our Province in dealing with waste

management issues and providing expertise and advice in developing environmental

policy and legislation.

Newfoundland and Labrador's environmental industry has grown steadily

during the past ten years. Today, there are more than 200 companies operating in

the environmental sector, employing more than 2,000 people. The sector brings an

estimated $120 million in economic value to the Province annually. Our

environmental industry is diverse and dynamic today and, according to industry

sources, is expected to grow at a rate of 8 per cent annually for the next ten

years.

The work of the Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental Industry Association

will continue to play an extremely important role in the implementation of the

Province's Waste Management Strategy and providing partnerships in

environmental initiatives in our Province.

Government recognizes that the environmental sector is an emerging force in

our economy and that a strong industry association is a key ingredient to

achieving the full potential of the sector.

Again, Mr. Speaker, congratulations to the Newfoundland and Labrador

Environmental Industry Association on its 10 th Anniversary and the

significant accomplishments it has achieved to date.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, was at the dinner last night, along with the ministers, Mr. Speaker,

and I wish to congratulate Corner Brook Pulp and Paper, Newfound Disposal

Systems, Evergreen Recycling, Bevin LeDrew and Paul Antle.

The recycling and waste management industry in this Province has a long way

to go before we catch up to what Nova Scotia has been doing for the past ten

years. It is groups like the Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental Industry

Association that have been the driving force in this Province to force

government and the Department of Environment to take on some of the initiatives

in this Province that are long overdue, that have been taking place in other

provinces for years.

I would like to recognize and congratulate the Newfoundland and Labrador

Environmental Industry Association for the work that they have been doing

throughout the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join in congratulating the Newfoundland and Labrador

Environmental Industry Association on its 10 th Anniversary as an

industry organization in the Province, and to say that an industry organization

like this creates a sense of professionalism amongst the members and creates

higher standards for the work they do in helping to clean up our environment and

making our environment more responsive to recycling and other needs. Waste

management is very important, but also environmental management and

environmental sustainability.

I would also like to join also in congratulating the winners of the awards-

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - who have demonstrated excellence in this area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions this afternoon are for the Premier.

If I could, Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out and welcome, first of all,

Terry French's wife Denise, and his mom, Betty French, in the gallery, and his

daughter Abbey, who obviously is not too impressed with the Ministerial

Statements because she is asleep.

I would certainly like to welcome them to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, on Monday of this week, the Premier said, and

decision to not be involved in funding and building new megaprojects...".

Mr. Speaker, could the Premier please table the most recent request he has

made to the federal government, and/or federal Minister Gerry Byrne, to help

finance the Lower Churchill project for the benefit of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am delighted to have the Leader of the Opposition chase after another red

herring today. It has already been exposed twice in the last little while, Mr.

Speaker, here in the House today most definitively, in terms of dealing with

this very serious issue by innuendo, suggesting that he has information in his

possession that is confidential, that he should not have, he sees nothing wrong

with that. The sources, he said, were the caucus and the Cabinet, and every

single member on this side of the House today denied that in person in this

Legislature and he laughed at it. That is how seriously he takes this, because

he spreads these rumours by innuendo.

Now he is asking about a report in the media yesterday -

MR. E. BYRNE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind hon. members that we should keep points of orders until the end of

Question Period.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to stand here and allow the

Premier to get on with innuendo, imputing motives. You have made him withdraw

statements today, imputing motives -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: You have made him withdraw statements today, and I ask you

to make the Premier, to advise him that what he just insinuated is imputing

motives again to the Leader of the Opposition, and ask him to withdraw those

statements inside this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Chair will just review Hansard to see the context in which the

hon. Premier has used the words that the hon. member has referred to.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

So his tactic of suggesting that it is people on this side of the House who

have been giving him information, therefore trying to cast doubt amongst the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador, has been fully and totally exposed.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: He has also insulted the bureaucrats of Newfoundland and

Labrador by suggesting they have been giving information as well, Mr. Speaker.

Now he is trying to deal with a story in the press from yesterday -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

- a story in the press that suggested a transmission line between Manitoba

and Ontario was discussed between the Prime Minister and the Premier of Ontario,

and I have asked to have information with respect to that collected right away.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, it was with great interest that I read

yesterday's National Post

article entitled: PM touts Manitoba hydro dam

to Eves.

According to that article, which the Premier just referred to, the Prime

Minister raised the issue of the Manitoba dam with the Ontario Premier because

Ontario - poor Ontario - could not afford the cost of transmission lines from

Manitoba without federal assistance.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to now get to his question.

MR. WILLIAMS: The Premier of Manitoba said he was even encouraged by the

Prime Minister's intervention.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question now.

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: Why can't

the Premier of our Province convinced the Prime Minister that Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians are also Canadians, and that we deserve federal assistance to

develop our power project just as much as Manitoba and Ontario?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: And why is it that the Premiers of Ontario and Manitoba can

progress their energy plan with Ottawa when our Premier simply cannot?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That was a classic example of the tactic and approach of the Leader of the

Opposition. I do not jump to conclusions, Mr. Speaker, I get the facts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is this: As soon as I

read the story yesterday, I instructed officials and others to find out the

background of it.

The Leader of the Opposition stands up today and would suggest to members of

this House and the people of the Province that there is already a deal struck

between Manitoba, Ontario, and the federal government. That is the approach that

the Leader of the Opposition takes. We are having it checked out because that is

the way we do business - cautiously, prudently - because we want to do it in the

best interest of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, not to grandstand and to play

politics with it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, this Premier stood in this House on Monday and

megaprojects. Now, I can only read the paper. I am only the Leader of the

Opposition. This man is Premier of the Province; he should know that the Prime

Minister is prepared to consider this under the Kyoto Plan.

Mr. Speaker, for some reason, we, as a Province, as not leveraging our

bargaining power with Quebec as a result of their shortage of power in the next

decade. As well, we now know that the Prime Minister of Canada is determined to

ratify the Kyoto Accord in order to address climatic issues and change -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question.

MR. WILLIAMS: - and you know, Premier, that he is now prepared to

consider funding on that basis.

Mr. Speaker, would the Premier not agree that our cheap and our clean energy

in Labrador puts us in a favourable position to solicit federal support for

developing the Lower Churchill when the Prime Minister is now considering

supporting the Conawapa power project to reduce emissions in Manitoba and

Ontario?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We do know two things. There have been no agreements reached between Manitoba

and Ontario and the federal government with respect to any development. That is

a fact today. We do know, at least we thought until a few days ago, that the

Opposition shared with us the concerns about Kyoto because nobody knows what the

plan is. I thought we shared a view on that in a private member's motion here

a week ago Wednesday, where everybody voted together and said -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER GRIMES: Well, the Leader of the NDP did not - because there was

no certainty about what the plans are for the federal government, but we are

dealing with issues that are in our own control.

Mr. Speaker, we do know something else: that, if the Opposition has its way,

and this is the stated view on the public record of Newfoundland and Labrador,

because his position, stated on Open Line and again reaffirmed in this House, is

that unless and until Quebec agrees to renegotiate the Upper Churchill contract,

the Lower Churchill will never be developed anyway supposing the Government of

Canada is willing to pay for all of it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Because his position is, it will never be done unless the

Upper Churchill contract is opened.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, it seems that everyone is interested,

including the Prime Minister, in helping Ontario and Manitoba, and certainly

including this government who is prepared to let billions of dollars worth of

our nickel, our cobalt and our copper go to Ontario and Manitoba as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: Now, Mr. Speaker, to a related subject on the Lower

Churchill, I ask -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his question. He is on a supplementary.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank heavens for the media. The Quebec newspaper, La

Presse - silence - reported on Tuesday -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question,

quickly.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Does the Premier know that the Quebec newspaper, La Presse , reported

on Tuesday that most of the design and engineering work for the Lower Churchill

will be done in Quebec? Mr. Speaker, can the Premier please confirm that, in

fact, most of the design and engineering work on the Lower Churchill will be

done in Quebec?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can confirm the exact opposite. The Leader of the Opposition suggested he

has documentation in his hands that he got from sources within this Cabinet and

within this caucus, which was found out today to be not true. Which is not true

now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER GRIMES: Which is not true. So, he has the information and if he

is looking at the information that he has and he is not supposed to have,

because he wants us one minute to believe that he has it and that he got it from

a Cabinet Minister. He wants one minute -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER GRIMES: - to believe that he has it and he got it from a caucus

member. He wants us to believe that he has it and he got it from some

bureaucrats. He wants us to believe that he has and he got it through some

e-mails. He wants us to believe that he has the information and got it from some

brown envelopes. Well, read the information that you have or admit that you do

not have it, because you will find out that there is not only that statement in

the story in the press which is dead wrong, but several others in the same

story. I can confirm that for you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Mr. Speaker, if this project is subject to a fixed amount

of financing -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: - and if this project is subject to a fixed cost or a fixed

completion date, then the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is going to

have to do whatever it takes to meet those terms and avoid overruns or otherwise

lose ownership of the project.

Mr. Speaker, would the Premier agree -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, would the Premier agree that employment benefits to the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador could be compromised and, in fact, reduced

dramatically if it becomes necessary to employ Quebeckers to meet those

deadlines, which would be set by the people who are, in fact, loaning us the

money in the first place?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, now maybe we can use this question to get

back to the crux of the matter.

He talks about overruns and suggests now that he knows something, based on

information that he is supposed to have. He has now said to the media: I have

this information. Now he is denying that he has it. Either he has it or he does

not have it; because, Mr. Speaker, it cannot be both ways. You cannot stand up

and suggest that you asking questions on the basis of information because

otherwise he would have known the answer to the last question was that it was

dead wrong what was in La Presse . Absolutely dead wrong!

Maybe now we can suggest: Do you have information that you should not have?

Are you asking real questions or are you just grasping at straws to try to

create a negative attitude towards this project in Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question is for the Minister of Justice.

Minister, could you please confirm for the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador that nowhere, anywhere in this deal or anywhere in any of these

contracts, have we waived or postponed our right to sue anywhere in this deal

with Quebec Hydro?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I believe the people of the Province are finally, maybe seeing through the

tactic used by the Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Speaker, let me restate again. Our position clearly is this: When we are

finished the negotiations - because we are trying to do something for the

benefits of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians - we have already committed to the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador that we will disclose all of the detail, all

of the information, have a full debate, have a full debate in here, have a

standing vote and a free vote. That is the democratic process.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: I understand now that the Leader of the Opposition,

outside of the House, wants to talk quite openly and brag about the fact that he

has information from sources and maybe he is calling a rally to talk about the

details next Monday.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer, quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES:

Whereas in here, if he really has the details he would

know that the question he asked about the La Presse was dead wrong.

Mr. Speaker, he has to make up his mind whether he wants the people of the

Province to believe that he has information and that he should tell us where he

got it because it did not get it from this crowd.

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I ask the hon. the Premier to take his seat.

MR. GRIMES: He did not get it from this crowd, Mr. Speaker, which is what

he was saying last week, and then we will deal with the facts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Another question for the Minister of Justice, the lawyer in Cabinet, the

Attorney General for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Justice - the same question that I asked

the Minister of Energy yesterday - please confirm for this House and the people

of our Province that he has seen, and he has read, all documentation submitted

to the Board of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and that he supports each and

every condition contained therein, therefore he supports the deal as presented

to the Board of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro in its entirety?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I would say and advise the hon. Leader of the Opposition, same as I did

in the Voisey debate, I will have the benefit of seeing all documentation, I am

sure, if and when a deal is struck. Similar to my comments on Voisey's, I look

forward to any loopholes that might exist, as he suggested in Voisey's and we

are still waiting to hear from.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, rather than operate in a fearmongering or

create the bogeyman scenario, as the Leader of the Opposition would like to do,

rest assured, that when there is a deal this minister will have his view of it

and his opinions of it.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture has a small capital

grants program that fishermen's committees throughout the Province can access

to do work on community fisheries infrastructures. The grants are usually small

in nature and in the order of $3,000 to $5,000.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm how much of the budget for this

program has been spent to date, and on what types of initiatives it has been

spent?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is a program in the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture and it is

worth in the area of $300,000 to $350,000. The purpose of this program is to

help fisheries committees around the Province replace a few planks on their

wharves or to do something to their stages or whatnot. It is a very good

program, and I think all the members in the House who have availed of it will

tell you it is probably one of the best ones that we have in the Province.

I do not know exactly how much I have spent in that program right now, Mr.

Speaker, but I can certainly have that information for the member in the next

couple of days.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, he is right, it is a good program and a lot of committees do

avail of it.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier's good news ad campaign has cost approximately

$250,000 and the Premier says that it has come from existing departmental

communications budgets. I would like to ask the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture this: Did any, and if so how much, of the money from the department's

grant program went to cover the cost of the Premier's ad campaign?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I don't know where the hon. member is coming from but I am not aware that

one cent from that program has been spent on any ads.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for The Straits

&White Bay North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, Mr. Speaker, that is different from the information that I have. I have

been given information that the grant budget has been, effectively, exhausted,

that in excess of $50,000 has been taken from this program to cover the Premier's

ad campaign.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister confirm that the program money from the

Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture has been taken to cover the Premier's

ad campaign?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, I think that the information the hon. member has

is much like the information his leader is always talking about, he is floating

around here all the time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. REID: Put the information forward.

Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that one cent of that capital grant program, Sir,

has been spent on anything other than wharfs and slipways around this Province

for the benefit of Newfoundland and Labrador fishermen and fisherwomen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Finance.

I want to ask the minister, why she is allowing a company such as Archean

Resources to pay 20 per cent on a net smelter royalty and an overall tax burden

of 57.34 per cent, when a multi-billion dollar company such as Inco only has to

pay a tax rate of 46 per cent?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I think the question will be more telling

than the answer, and I will say that, that piece of legislation has been in

place since 1975. I think it might have even been brought in during the Tories

time in government, when they were the actual government. I would say, Mr.

Speaker, the member opposite knows that every corporation in the Province pays a

corporate income tax. The member also knows, I would imagine, that when they pay

their federal portion, they pay out the dividends, they get a 5 per cent rebate.

Still, Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is, even with this 20 per cent tax that we

are imposing - and we make no apologies for imposing a royalty tax for

non-renewable resources that everyone in this Province owns. The members

opposite are always standing on their feet saying we are not getting enough

royalties. What way is it, Mr. Speaker?

I can say that the money we get, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this royalty tax

is going into our health care system, and I would still say that the 3 per cent

royalty regime -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: - that Archean Resources negotiated and the millions and

millions and millions they have, we are happy they are getting it, but we are

also quite happy that we are getting our royalties to put into the health care

services for the people of our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This was brought in on the conclusion of the Goundrey Commission in 1976, the

levy of taxes on companies or individuals who could contractually transfer the

right to mine. There is no other province in this country collecting it, and

this Province never collected it on Nugget Pond until Archean initiated some

legal action and then they collected from them so they would be able to cover

their backs on this particular issue here.

I say to the minister, you should be aware, as minister, of the impact that

exportation companies are going to have, because they go to areas to avoid high

taxation, to areas of lower taxation, and we are not competitive.

I want to ask the minister: Has she considered the impact that this is having

on exploration in our Province, and for many years to come?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows that future

exploration expenses can be deducted, so that is the answer to the first

question, but a bigger question is: Am I ascertaining - because I would not

create innuendo, but I will ask the question. Does it mean, if that member

formed a part of a government, that they would allow millionaires to keep the

millions and not put it in to the people of the Province for our health care

programs and services? Is that the agenda over there? Because this side, this

government, we make no apology for collecting the due royalty regime that is due

for the people of our Province for the delivery of health care services. It has

been in the legislation and, Mr. Speaker, more importantly, has been omitted. It

has gone to the courts twice.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer quickly.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Once, to the Trial Division, which they lost; secondly,

to the Court of Appeal, and the Court of Appeal unanimously upheld government's

decision. So, Mr. Speaker, we are on the side of the people here and that is

where we are staying.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Every single group in this Province - Newfoundland and Labrador Chamber of

Mineral Resources, the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada,

Newfoundland and Labrador prospectors, have all indicated it is going to

(inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister one simple question: Are you saying that

Archean are wealthier than Inco?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, only Archean can answer that question, but

I can say unequivocally, this government makes no apology for collecting a 20

per cent royalty on a non-renewable resource that every single person in

Newfoundland and Labrador owns. We are proud of Archean Resources. We wish them

all the best with their good fortune.

Mr. Speaker, with the money we collect, we have no problem putting it into

health care for the people of our Province, and we make no apology. We do not

know what they are doing with their money, but we wish them well with it and we

are happy for them. We know what we are doing with our money, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Premier.

About ten days ago, the Premier said that negotiations were all but concluded

and that we could expect an announcement on the Lower Churchill some time last

week. He had concluded with the Innu, he had concluded with Hydro-Quebec. Will

the Premier confirm to this House that the only people that the Premier was

negotiating by mid to last week were his own caucus?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have known the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi for a long time and I did

not know he had that much of a sense of humor. It was actually pretty good.

Mr. Speaker, the fact of matter is this: I wanted to send a signal to all the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador that we, this government, have worked hard

at a negotiation with respect to the development of the Lower Churchill at Gull

Island, and that we are trying to get to the very final stages of negotiation,

and that if things go well we could do it fairly quickly. I wanted to send that

message very clearly so we could start focusing on a debate and be ready for it

when we do conclude and present information to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Any issue that is outstanding, because I did indicate that we were not

finished but we could be by the end of the week - and I did indicate that we

were not finished with the Innu, and we still are not, Mr. Speaker, and those

two pieces have to come together, but it has been useful for two weeks because

what we found is that we have a Leader of the NDP who I understand is willing to

wait to get the information and cast judgement at the time, which is what we

found that the people of Labrador were willing to do yesterday, Mr. Speaker.

They would like to get the information and then make a judgement. They do not

want to prejudge, like the Leader of the Opposition has already done.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: The Leader of the Opposition has already prejudged that

this is bad, this is no good, he will never sign it -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer.

PREMIER GRIMES: - and unless the Upper Churchill is renegotiated, they

will never do it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Will the Premier not confirm that the full tentative deal that he had last

week was presented to the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro Board, the financial

terms, the benefits to this Province, the full parameters of the recall rights

and the rates of return to this Province? Will he not confirm that they were

presented to the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro Board last week for their

consideration?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro Board

was presented with a framework agreement and some pre-release agreements that

were very close to their final form, and ready to be signed if we could conclude

the agreement on them. They were also, because they needed to have it, Mr.

Speaker, provided with some, I guess what are called term sheets or working text

in terms of negotiating documents that were not yet negotiated but were being

negotiated for things. There were also some dates in there of things that will

happen next year, the year after, the year after, and will be concluded at

certain points in time, because they needed to have that information. They were

asked to make a serious decision about having their president and CEO sign on to

going to the next steps and start spending some money, and asked to make a

serious decision about creating a subsidiary of Hydro which could build the

project for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. So they were provided in

confidence - in confidence - the Leader of the Opposition takes great glee in

suggesting that he has the information - so they could do their work and report

back to us, because they take their task -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier now to conclude his answer quickly.

PREMIER GRIMES: - very seriously on behalf of the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador, and so do we.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

MR. LUSH: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, as all hon. members would know, a number of our

rules come from precedent, and I respectfully ask Your Honour to comment on the

circumstance with respect to points of order during Question Period.

I know that it has been a precedent in the last number of years to try to

discourage points of order during Question Period because that interrupts the

flow, and I know that I had tried to observe this rule. I do not believe that I

have ever transgressed that particular rule. Mr. Speaker, I have noticed that

the hon. the Opposition House Leader has, on a couple of occasions, stood up

during the Question Period. Now, both sides can play that game. I do not want to

do it because I like to see Question Period flow in its natural flow and with

its fluidity. Maybe if hon. members know the rules, know what we do, then they

would not continuously abuse the rules.

MR. E. BYRNE: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to make three points. First of

all, the hon. Government House Leader either knows or ought to know, that while

it is not recommended to rise on a point of order in Question Period, it is not

against the rules to do so.

Secondly, I want to let the Government House Leader also know that any time

that the Leader of the Opposition and the leader on this side of the House,

where allegations are going to be made against him or motives are going to be

impugned to him, then we will rise immediately at any point.

The third point I would like to make, Mr. Speaker, is this: I propose to the

Government House Leader, when you have your next caucus meeting, have a chat

with the Premier and if he is willing to fall within the parliamentary language,

I guarantee you I will not rise on a point of order during Question Period.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to comment on who used

unparliamentary language. That is a known fact in this House. I am not going to

get down to that level, but I just want to say to the hon. the Opposition House

Leader, if he is going to insist that he is not going to abide by the rules -

and I quite understand; I do not need any pontification from him what the rules

of the House are. I clearly pointed out that it is a precedent in this House,

that it is established by precedent, our Standing Orders do allow it but over

the last number of years we have been devout in a precedent that it not be done

and I simply ask for the Speaker's

interpretation, for his clarification,

without getting into any wrangle as the Opposition House Leader feels that he is

obligated to do every time somebody raises a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair will take the point raised by the Government House

Leader under advisement.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have been asked to present a petition on behalf of over 450 residents of

Newfoundland and Labrador, spanning all across the Province, and indeed several

from my own district. The petition reads:

To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative session

convened. The petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and

Labrador;

WHEREAS the government has requested the Board of Regents to consider a name

change of our University; and

WHEREAS Memorial University of Newfoundland is excluded under the

Newfoundland & Labrador Act; and

WHEREAS publicly funding universities can be named for a region of a

province; and

WHEREAS when other political entities changed, the name of the university

within it did not; and

WHEREAS our educational mandate is not limited to this Province; and

WHEREAS the University is on the Island of Newfoundland; and

WHEREAS the first university in other provinces did not reflect the entire

name of the province; and

WHEREAS there will be enormous costs to undergo this name change; and

WHEREAS there are enormous disadvantages to not having a geographic identity

attached to the University; and

WHEREAS another proposed university in this Province is more suitable to have

Labrador added to its name;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador

to retain the current name, Memorial University of Newfoundland, as in duty

bound your petitioners will ever pray.

As I said, Mr. Speaker, this petition has been forwarded to me from over 450

residents of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. They find a problem

with, I guess, the political correctness of bringing forward a situation where

Memorial University of Newfoundland would be changed to Memorial University of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, there are many reasons that have been heard right across the

Province over the past number of months, since this became an issue with the

people and the people have put forward this issue and signed their names to the

petition because they believe that there is no need for this. The people here,

as I said, over 450 of those people believe that there is no need to change the

name of Memorial University of Newfoundland to Memorial University of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad to present this petition on behalf of these people

today, as we have done with petitions that have come forward here in the House

on numerous occasions. It is important that the government take into

consideration the views and opinions of all people in the Province as they make

any decisions. These 450 people just wanted to make sure that their views are

heard here in this hon. House, and I am pleased to present this petition on

behalf of these people today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. LUSH: Motion 6, Mr. Speaker. I move first reading of Bill 25,

An Act

to Amend The Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy Act.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General to introduce a

bill, "An Act To Amend The Access To Information And Protection Of Privacy

Act." (Bill 25)

On motion, Bill 25 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

MR. LUSH: Motion 7, Mr. Speaker. I move first reading of Bill 27,

An Act

to Amend The Forestry Act.

Motion, the hon. the Minister Forest Resources and Agrifoods to introduce a

bill, "An Act To Amend The Forestry Act." (Bill 27)

On motion, Bill 27 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. LUSH: Order 17, Mr. Speaker, second reading of a bill,

An Act To

Amend The Teachers' Association Act. (Bill 26)

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Teachers'

Association Act." (Bill 26)

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table in the House today amendments to the

Teachers' Association Act. These amendments have been requested by the

Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association is established as a

legal entity under the Teachers' Association Act. The act establishes the

Association, describes its objectives and functions, provides for an annual

meeting and provides for a president, vice-president and the number of members

to be elected to the executive committee.

The NLTA, by resolution of its convention, has decided to hold biennial

rather than annual meetings. Subsequently, the NLTA has requested that the

Teachers' Association Act be amended to give effect to this change. The

proposed amendments to the Teachers' Association Act change the requirement to

hold annual meetings to a requirement to hold a biennial meeting, provide that

the number of members constituting the executive committee will be determined by

the bylaws of the Association and provide that the executive elected at the last

election should hold office until the next election.

I look forward to this amendment being approved by the House in support of

the NLTA.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to offer full support to Bill 26,

An Act To Amend The Teachers'

Association Act. It is a bill which has been requested by the Association, an

Association that I am very proud to say that I have been a part of for something

onwards of a quarter of a century. Not only myself, but a number of members in

this House also were part of that Teachers' Association.

These changes, again, requested by the Teachers' Association and changes

that have been brought about by, I guess, progression with regard to the

Association. This Association, I do not know if it is the oldest labour

association in the Province, but certainly it is one of the oldest. I think it

was only five or six years ago that they celebrated their 100 years as an

association. That Association was groundbreaking with regard to - I would say

leaders, Mr. Speaker, would be a better word, right through the full century and

some years - looking after the welfare of teachers, their spouses and survivors.

Of course, not only did they look after the welfare of their members and

families of those members, but the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association - a big part of their mission is not only the welfare of their

members but the welfare of the children of this Province. They have been given

the, I guess, responsibility of delivering education to them.

I say to you, Mr. Speaker, the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association, again, they have a very, very long and proud history. Just to take

some time to bring up to the present day the reason for these changes. As an

association - going back well over 100 years - there were many, many milestones

associated with this group. In particular, of course, in the early 1970s, Mr.

Speaker, the collective bargaining that they were able to negotiate and bring

about a tremendous change in, I guess, the way that teachers were looked upon

and dealt with, with regard to, not only pay, but working conditions and so

forth.

The turning point for the Association regarding collective bargaining was in

the late 1960s, early 1970s. What happened back in those times, certainly it

followed through right up until this present day, because many of the teachers,

who are still in the system almost thirty years later, began their teaching

career in the early 1970s and were very strong in making the life of a teacher

and the lives of students better in this Province. Not only collective

bargaining and, again, the welfare of the teachers, Mr. Speaker, but teachers

down through the hundred-and-some years, that this Association has been into

effect, have seen such tremendous changes.

I look at the 1960s and the Warren Commission, I believe in 1967, and again,

teachers were a big part of lobbying for changes that were to come about at that

particular time. Fast forward up into the 1990s with regard to the Williams

Report and, once again, teachers were front and centre in putting forth what

they thought were the best interests of the students of this Province. So, they

have been involved in making the learning environments, I guess, of this

Province better learning environments, the collective bargaining.

Also, I might add, Mr. Speaker, that they have not forgotten their social

responsibility either. When we talk about social responsibility, what comes to

mind is one of their, I guess, efforts to make the lives of children a little

bit easier in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Every year in our

schools throughout the Province, the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association sponsor a Janeway Day where there is a collection made from the

members for different events. All of this money is brought together and given to

the Janeway. Again, in support of some of their particular programs.

This Association, Mr. Speaker, has always had the ability to deal with

changing times. I guess there is not enough time for me to go back over the

120-some odd years that this Association has been into effect, to highlight how

the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association have been able to gauge

the times, and not only react to the times, but have the vision to react before

changes are necessary. The membership is a strong membership, and the work that

they carry out on behalf of the education system in this Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador is astonishing, and I am sure I join with all members

of this House in congratulating this Association for their long and proud

history.

Of course the Association, I would say, is no stronger than the membership,

and throughout this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Island and the

Labrador portion, there have been branches of this Association is in every nook

and cranny of this particular Province. We all know that schools played an

important role, not only in education but in the social fabric of this Province,

and schools played a key role, especially in many of the rural districts, as a

community focal point, as a community centre, as a place where the communities

surrounding that school certainly took great pride in the school itself. So the

branch network throughout this Province involves - and again just in a general

sense - we are looking at something like 6,000 teachers and perhaps as many as

2,000 supply teachers, so somewhere in the vicinity of about 8,000 teachers make

up the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association. These are

highly-skilled, highly-educated professional who not only give to - as I pointed

out, Mr. Speaker - the education system. You only have to look throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador and look at the volunteer organizations, and there are

many - church related, community related: the Lions, the different groups that

are out there - and I would be very much surprised if you did not find teachers

involved in these organizations. Teachers not only give during the working hours

that schools are open, but in many, many cases you will find that teachers have

a leadership role in community life as well, and the Newfoundland and Labrador

Teachers' Association support those efforts of teachers over and beyond, I

guess, their professional lives.

With that in mind too, Mr. Speaker, I certainly would like to again talk

about the members of this Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association who

are involved in volunteer activities outside the regular school hours in

extracurricular. The extracurricular of the membership of the Newfoundland and

Labrador Teachers' Association - if you were to look at the hours that

teachers spend beyond the classroom, beyond the school, in dealing with

students, taking them on outings, coaching them on various sports teams, their

drama clubs, their public speaking clubs, I tell you, you could almost match up

the number of hours they spend in the classroom with the number of hours that

they devote to extracurricular.

There is great pride amongst our teachers of Newfoundland and Labrador, great

pride in what they do and how they do it. It is very, very important that, when

we are given the opportunity, as we are given right now, when teachers come - in

this case, I guess, it is housekeeping to some degree, but it is important that

we continue to support our teachers in Newfoundland and Labrador, and we support

them in any way possible. They are front line when it comes to opportunity for

the children of Newfoundland and Labrador. We must, I say, Mr. Speaker, stand up

and do everything we can as legislators, do everything we can as a government,

to give these teachers the opportunity not only to do their work within the

classroom but also to encourage them to use their skills in extracurricular

activities and volunteer activities throughout Newfoundland and Labrador.

To get back to the bill, Mr. Speaker,

An Act To Amend The Teachers'

Association Act, I referenced a little earlier, in my comments, that the

Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association certainly have, in my mind - I

may be a little bit biased - but in my mind they seem to have been always on the

leading edge of, I guess, social change, labour change. They were involved in,

certainly, the fight for collective bargaining in this Province. They have

lobbied hard for better working conditions in our schools, because better

working conditions for teachers, Mr. Speaker, certainly mean better learning

conditions for our students.

Over the last number of years, the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association has certainly gone ahead with regard to a change, I guess, Mr.

Speaker, in how they do business as an association. This bill reflects the

changes that have come about because of changes they have put into their

Association. We know their Association is governed by

an act of the Legislature,

and that is great support for this particular Association, but it wasn't so

long ago, Mr. Speaker, that the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association were simply the Newfoundland Teachers' Association. They were one

of the first associations that I am aware of that, certainly, changed their name

to include the Labrador portion of our Province in their title.

MR. LUSH: (Inaudible) big audience.

MR. HEDDERSON: I know, and I hope that is not indicative, I say to the

Government House Leader, of the support that I see on that side for the teachers

of our Province.

I see people are starting to trickle back in. I would imagine that, as they

continue to listen -

MS FOOTE: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, I know. I certainly would say to the Minister of

Education, that any time, Minister, I get a chance to talk about the wonderful

teachers in Newfoundland and Labrador, I am going to talk about them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: I would say to you that Mr. Speaker is going to have to

sit me down, because I have so many good things that I can say about the

teachers of Newfoundland and Labrador that it would take me more than the twenty

minutes that has been given to me.

MS FOOTE: You are not allowed to ask me any questions. Go for it.

MR. HEDDERSON: Okay. Maybe I will incorporate some questions that I am

sure the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association may want you to

answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: I think we will leave it at that, Minister, and I will go

back to talking about, once again, the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association.

What I was talking about, before the Government House Leader indicated that

the audience on that side is not very much, but I must say the audience on this

side of the House are very attentive and certainly, not necessarily sitting on

the edge of their seats, but they are listening.

To get back to it, the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association was

one of the first associations that I know of that certainly - and the resolution

at one of their annual general meetings clearly stated that they wanted to make

a statement to show that their Association dealt not only with the Island part

of it but certainly the whole Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. They put, I

would imagine it was a unanimous resolution, forward that certainly changed the

name of that Association from Newfoundland Teachers' Association to

Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association.

The reason that I would bring up that particular point is, once again, to

indicate to the House here how they have, as an association, dealt with changing

times and reacted to changing times and have been visionary in many different

ways in dealing with what is going on in the world around us. As we all know,

change is so prevalent. Of course, without change we are never going to move

forward, but reacting to change - because we know change is there, it is

inevitable - getting ahead of change and getting out front of change so that

there would be a smooth transition, this is where the Newfoundland and Labrador

Teachers' Association certainly have proven over their history that they have

the vision, the capability, of jumping out ahead of things.

With that in mind, again I bring to the attention of the House that it was a

couple of years ago that this same Association saw that annual conventions were

costly, that annual conventions certainly could be turned from annual to

biannual, that by looking at an annual general meeting - I guess every two years

- that they could save money but not at the expense, of course, of their

Association. These annual general meetings were very, very important to bring

the delegates from all around the Province in to a centre, usually St. John's,

to discuss the business of that particular Association - the finances of it and

the changes that were required. It worked very, very successfully. Again, the

Association saw that they could, and many other associations throughout, I

guess, North America, were looking at the same thing, but the Newfoundland and

Labrador Teachers' Association certainly got out front and did that.

Mr. Speaker, with regard to the 1990s - and it is the 1990s that I am

referring to because, once again, even though, as I pointed out, the

Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association have been there well over 100

years. We know, when we look at the 1990s, how much change came within a

relatively short period of time. The Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association did not shirk their responsibility in the 1990s to lobby, to make

their opinions known. They did not shirk from their responsibility of standing

up and complimenting changes on government's part or, on the other hand,

condemning some of the practices that were taking away from the delivery of

education to our children.

The 1990s were a difficult period of time for the Association because during

the 1990s, especially during the 1990s, not only did we see a decrease in the

number of students but naturally what was to follow would be a decrease in the

number of teachers as well. The number of teachers during the 1990s have dropped

dramatically and this has affected the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

ability, I suppose, to provide the services that are necessary to run an

association and to protect the welfare of not only the teachers, which they

serve, but certainly the children.

When we look at the 1990s, once again, as I pointed out to you, I guess to

try and help the situation of declining number of teachers, to try and help the

finances of the Association, that they reacted and reacted in a positive way,

and set up their Association so that annual general meetings would be every two

years. Not only did they take care of their own particular business but they

also, during the 1990s, had to contend with a situation where there were

tremendous changes being placed upon their membership to carry the load of

bringing about restructuring of the physical plants, the schools, because

schools were being closed down and school boards were being shut down - I guess,

from twenty-seven of the school boards to the eleven. The Association certainly

were left, and sometimes scrambling, to try to maintain - when I say the

Association, the members of that Association were left scrambling - and trying

to make sure that the level of education, that the quality, Mr. Speaker, of

education was as good, if not better, than when we entered the 1990s.

I tell you, Mr. Speaker, it was a struggle; a struggle that still goes on as

the Association, once again, tries to put before the government of the day

proposals to make sure that our quality of education is one that we can be proud

of. I am certainly proud of the work that the teachers are doing and the

Association. The Association, in the 1990s, responded, Mr. Speaker, to the

Williams Report. They responded, and whether their recommendations were looked

at or not is another question but they did respond. They did put forward what

they thought was the position of their teachers, to make sure that the quality

of education remained at a high.

When the Canning Report came out in 1996, it was the NLTA, again, that

certainly supported that report. Not only supported it, because the Canning

Report basically dealt with special needs within our particular system. One of

the areas which the government put forth as a response to the special needs of

children in our system is they came up with a Pathways Program; a Pathways

Program that, on paper, is certainly as solid as any program that I know but,

Mr. Speaker, the NLTA were front and foremost in indicating that even if you

have a program on paper, and that you can do the diagnosis, that you can sit

down and say what is best for any individual child in the system, what the NLTA

and what teachers and other groups in this Province said is: you must have the

resources to make sure that the teachers can do the work, so that they can put

forth a program for any child, that is in the best interest of the child.

Through the 1990s the resourcing of the special needs have been put front and

foremost for the teachers of this Province, for the NLTA, in making sure that

the government realizes, that the Minister of Education realizes, that

resourcing properly - it is not enough to say that something should done. It

must follow through with a statement that it will be done.

The Pathways, even to this day, there are still difficulties with regard to

the implementation of the special needs program. I would be the first to admit

that the teachers of this Province have taken that Pathways Program and taken it

from a point where it was a difficulty to where many of the children in our

Province are getting the best possible programming, but there are still gaps. I

am sure that the government and the NLTA will, hopefully, continue to work to

bring about - but, Mr. Speaker, it is the NLTA that I compliment for making

themselves present, making themselves vocal, and pushing to get the very best;

not only for the teachers, because oftentimes we hear the NLTA: You know, that

is only for teachers. The NLTA, and I stand firm in saying, that they, too, are

not only looking after the welfare of the teachers of this Province but they

look after the welfare of the students of this Province and, certainly, that is

where it is.

Again, with the Association, Mr. Speaker, I pointed out they have been on the

leading edge of making sure that their name was inclusive of every region of

this Province; the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association. In

difficult times they have tightened up their belts, cancelled their AGMs, and

looked at every second year. Also, one of the latest developments - and I assume

that is probably why this amendment has come in - was with regard to the

selection of their president and vice-president - I do not know but it is the

whole executive. They have decided - and it was decided two years ago at the

last convention - that they would go to direct democracy in the election of

their president and vice-president. I am not sure about the others. I am looking

at my colleague there. I am not sure if it is president, vice-president

province-wide. The direction is that the NLTA have decided that they are going

to go to direct democracy so that every teacher in the Province will be given a

vote as to who will lead their Association for two years.

It is an interesting concept that has been floated, not only in labour

associations, but also in political parties and indeed, in elections in the

various provinces or territories, you hear it come up every so often. I

certainly would take my hat off to the NLTA for them moving to this point where

they have now really a situation -

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you still active in the NLTA.

MR. HEDDERSON: I would love to be active in the NLTA, but as a teacher on

leave my membership is not recognized. Certainly, the NLTA has been very good to

me, I say to the minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: It has been good to lots of people.

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, exactly. It has been good to lots of people and I see

in its future nothing but positive things as they continue to grapple with the

demands that have been placed upon them.

To get back to the direct democracy model that they have approached to decide

who will be the leaders in their particular Association for two years. I might

add, Mr. Speaker, it was not just a: let's do this. This is an issue that has

been debated in that Association now for many years. It has been brought to the

floor, it has been duly debated and the resolution passed, and it is a situation

now where every teacher in this Province can now say that they do have a say in

how their Association is being run. I say to you, Mr. Speaker, what a model for

the students of our Province when they look to their teachers - that is an

aspect that I have not even touched upon yet, is the respect that the teachers

garner, not only in the larger society, but with regard to the students. Here

you have now an Association, the NLTA, who can literally, when they talk

democracy in their classrooms, when they talk about how the young people of this

Province should be involved in civics, in elections or understanding the

democracy of our country, they can say to the children of this Province that

they, in fact, practice the most direct of all democracies, which is, one vote

for every member of that particular Association.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association, Mr. Speaker, can be

very, very proud of not only where they have come from but where they are going.

The challenges for this Association never cease. They never cease because once

again there is a spectre - a head of this Association - as we see the

out-migration of this Province. It may have slowed but it continues; and not

only the out-migration but they have to contend with the decrease in the birth

rate as well. They are factors that they have to take into account, and they

have to scramble to address these challenges, and the challenges that are

forward for them are many and varied.

The thing about it, Mr. Speaker, is that the challenges are almost like

coming full circle. I mentioned to you earlier, or I mentioned to the House

earlier, that this Association is well over 100 years of age. They are the

original pioneers of education in our Province. They came into very, very small

communities with small numbers and had to teach, in many cases, in one-room

schools on a K to12 - it wasn't K to 12 at the time, it would have been I to

XI - and they had to be very, very creative in delivering to these small

numbers, in small communities, a broad education.

I would suspect, and I do not know for sure because I do not know the history

of the members who are in this House today, that some of the members in this

House today were educated in one-room schools in small communities. When they

reflect back on those times, because I can guarantee you that even though they

might have been in a school of five, ten, fifteen or twenty children, they were

given the best education that they could get at that particular time - a broad

education. I would suspect there might even be some members in this House who

actually taught in those sorts of situations.

Mr. Speaker, to get back, because I am looking at the challenges that the

NLTA have on their plate for the future, and I mentioned that it seems like what

goes around perhaps comes around because, with the out-migration, with the

decrease in the birth rate, with the declining number of students, we are now

going from the schools of 200 and 300 to smaller schools of less than twenty

children in some of the more isolated, not necessarily isolated but I guess some

of the more rural areas, and now we have certainly specialized, or the NLTA have

certainly encouraged their teachers to specialize, in the different disciplines

of science, social studies, history, language arts, or math. Most of the schools

could have at least a staff that reflected the different disciplines, but now we

find that the challenge is - and the NLTA are part of this challenge - how can

we now offer an education in some of these smaller schools whereby the equality

of education will be as good as anything in the Province, and a quality of

education that I feel would be in the best interest of the children. Now the

NLTA has the challenge of having in their membership, teachers who can go out in

those situations and be, what I might consider, an all-purpose teacher, a

teacher who can take twenty children and not only look at bringing them through

probably thirteen grades but also to be able to use the technology that is

available today to bring into that small school a quality of instruction -

through them, I guess - that is again comparable to any school in the Province.

These are the challenges not only, I say to you, Mr. Speaker, of the NLTA,

but the teachers who make up that organization, and it is most important that we

continue to encourage the quality of education that is necessary.

The NLTA have always been part of making sure that they are there to move

with the times, to change with the times, to adjust to the times, to be able to

do what is best or what is in the best interest of the children. We know that

the NLTA have done an exceptional job, and continues to do an exceptional job,

and that we certainly can support them in every way that we can in order to

bring out the very, very best in our children.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: I just heard from my colleague here -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, down at the end - that maybe I am hogging too much

time. Again - and I certainly apologize to the House - once I get on my feet and

I am talking about teachers, I tell you, it is very difficult to sit me down. My

House Leader is probably saying that maybe it is time for me to sit down.

I would like to end off by saying that this bill draws to our attention the

history of this great Association. It brings to our attention the changes that

have come about in that Association. It certainly should conjure up in our mind

the challenges that the teachers of the Twenty-First Century have in delivering

a quality education to the children of this Province.

I certainly support not only this bill but I say I support the NLTA to the

fullest and I wish them well as they continue on, to take care of our most

valuable, valuable, valuable resource, the children of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Mercer): The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

Mr. Speaker, I am happy to rise this afternoon to support this bill and to

compliment my friend, the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, on such a lengthy

but interesting presentation; a presentation that emanates from his many years

as a primary and elementary principal and also, of course, from his

twenty-something years of involvement with the NLTA.

Mr. Speaker, the principle of this bill is supported, I believe, by all

members of this House. It is a self-governance issue for the NLTA, but we on

this side cannot miss this opportunity to raise a few issues that are of some

concern to the teachers of Newfoundland and Labrador. We certainly want to say

up front that we agree with the change. It is an issue that the NLTA executive

and members have requested. We have no interest in deciding whether or not they

have their annual conventions every year or every second year. Let them be the

group that will make that decision.

However, because we are talking about an education matter it lets us, in this

House, address some issues that affect the teachers of Newfoundland and Labrador

and affect the deliverance of education programs in our schools. Certainly, my

colleague just mentioned the need to put more resources in our classrooms. We

have identified many needs, many special needs in our schools, but this

government has not put the resources in the classrooms that let the teachers be

able to do as effective a job as they would like to do in maximizing the

learning opportunities for those children who have those special needs.

Mr. Speaker, we know that there are always going to be more needs in the

school system than we can address on a daily basis, but certainly we call upon

this government to look at what it is doing, to look at what progresses we have

really made after the Williams Royal Commission Report.

MR. LUSH: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. LUSH: Listening to hon. members, Mr. Speaker, this bill is about the

governance of the body of the NLTA. It has nothing to do with instruction in the

school, Mr. Speaker, nothing in the world. That is so far away from this topic.

This is dealing with the governance of the NLTA. It talks about allowing them to

have biannual meetings. It has to do with the structure of their Association,

nothing to do with the workload of teachers, absolutely nothing. I ask the

teachers of this Province, who are observing this, why it is that the Opposition

is not giving quick passage to this bill so that we can allow the teachers to

carry out the governance of their organization the way that they want to.

I stress, Mr. Speaker, that this is about - I bring to Your Honour's

attention the order concerning relevancy. This is not relevant to the bill. It

is so remote that it is not even close. We are talking about the governance of

the NLTA, of structure. Not about instruction. Not about workload. Nothing

associated with that kind of thing and I ask hon. members to get on with

speaking to what the bill is all about; what the purpose of this bill is, Mr.

Speaker, to structure the governance of the NLTA.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the Opposition House Leader.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the Government House Leader is trying to leave

the impression, I believe - I do not know if he is or not - but it seems to me

that we are holding up passage. This is the second speaker on Bill 26. There are

nineteen members in the Opposition, all of which have a right to speak to every

bill if they so wish to.

Now, the second point that the Government House Leader has brought to the

attention of the Chair is the notion of relevance. Second reading of any bill,

in terms of dealing with

An Act To Amend The Teachers' Association Act, when

we get into a clause-by-clause debate in Committee stage, Mr. Speaker, we will

deal with the details clause-by-clause of the bill.

With respect to the points that my hon. colleague from Waterford Valley was

making, he is a past member of the NLTA. He is a past teacher. He is a past

principal. The changes that are -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: The changes that are reflected in this bill deal exactly

with - and I will read it: "The Bill would amend the Teachers'

Association Act to make a number of changes to the governance provisions

that have been requested by the association."

Mr. Speaker, that gives some latitude, I would say to you, for members to

talk about the NLTA, the governance of the NLTA, things that will occur to

biennial convention, the welfare of teachers and the -

AN HON. MEMBER: Sure it does.

MR. E. BYRNE: Absolutely, it does. Second reading provides that latitude.

The member was not up speaking about Gull Island. The member was not speaking

about the Adoption Act. The member was not speaking about a wharf that was put

in Reefs Harbour. The member was speaking strictly about Bill 26, the welfare of

teachers,

An Act To Amend The Teachers' Association Act. Mr. Speaker, our

point of view is that he has every right and he was within the rules and was

relevant.

MR. LUSH: A further point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the Government House Leader.

This will be the final interjection.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, on second reading members are to talk about the

principle of the bill, and the principle of this bill is dealing with the

governance provisions requested by the NLTA. Nothing to do, as I have said

before, with instruction. Nothing to do with workload. Why don't hon. members

get on with the job? I ask Your Honour to please have hon. members observe the

relevancy rule in this House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, could I just make one further point to the

point of order?

MR. SPEAKER: It will be the final point to the point of order.

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

One

section of the act - you talk about relevance, and the Government House

Leader says we are not relevant.

Section 1.(

i) part of the act strictly says,

"promoting the welfare of the teachers in the province by setting up and

administering those subsidiary services that the biennial meeting or convention

may decide."

Mr. Speaker, when you are talking about the welfare of teachers, I don't

see it in this act where it says the welfare of teachers - this bill talks about

a, b, c, d or e. It talks about the welfare of teachers that maybe is ascribed

at a biennial convention. I say, Mr. Speaker, that gives the latitude to speak

about the welfare of teachers in general principle.

The fact of the matter is, Mr Speaker, this is only the second speaker to

Bill 26. The Government House Leader - and finally, let me say this - talk about

holding up passage: Is he saying today that this act will be proclaimed today?

No. The traditional practice is that when bills go through all of the stages,

First Reading, Second Reading, Committee Stage, Third Reading, the

Lieutenant-Governor at the closing of the fall session walks in here signs the

bills and then sometime after Christmas Cabinet proclaims them. Don't be so

silly. Let the member get on and speak to the bill and to the welfare of

teachers in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Prior to the Government House Leader making his interjection dealing with

relevancy, the Speaker was, in fact, reading

Section 48 dealing with the point,

dealing with relevancy.

MR. NOEL: You had the

section (inaudible) in your own mind.

MR. SPEAKER: If you wish to become the Speaker, Sir.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I would ask members of this hon. House to respect the

section dealing with relevancy and to confine their comments to the matters

contained in the legislation. Any and all members can speak, of course, to the

bill and they will be given their full twenty minutes if they so wish to take

them.

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

Mr. Speaker, what we have just witnessed is an attempt by the Government

House Leader to try to express to this House his frustration, and, in doing so,

he is trying to deny members on this side an opportunity to compliment the

teachers of this Province, an opportunity to bring out the points relative to

the governance of education in this Province. In clause 2 it says that this bill

is about promoting the welfare of teachers in the Province. When we talk about

promoting the welfare of teachers, we can't do that without talking about

promoting the welfare of our children.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. H. HODDER: Therefore, when I talk about children, I talk about

education, I talk about the fact that many of them go to school hungry and we

talk about all the issues surrounding curriculum, because that is talking about

the welfare of the children of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, for that member to stand up and say that what I was talking

about was irrelevant, what he is saying is that clause 2 of this particular bill

means nothing to him. He is saying that this bill is not about promoting the

welfare of teachers and promoting our educational system. I suggest to the

member, when he stands next time he should make sure he reads clause 2 before he

gets on with that drivel that he was getting on with when he was trying to raise

a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I stood here last year and I stand here now, as a member who has

participated in education for thirty years. I stand here, as well, as a former

administration. I have seen the frustration of teachers when they haven't got

the means to do the job that they are required to do. I have seen the

frustration of parents when they come to their principal and say: When can my

child have the resources that are needed to promote that child's education? I

have seen the frustration of a whole community. In fact, just yesterday I stood

in this House and complimented the Father John B. Kent Council of the Knights of

Columbus at Mary Queen of the World, who are forming a group to get together to

help out with literacy in their school. We compliment them.

All that we are talking about here is all about promoting the welfare of

teachers, promoting the welfare of our children, promoting what is good for our

communities. For that member to stand and say that what I was saying was

irrelevant is an insult to the teachers of Newfoundland and Labrador -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. H. HODDER: - is an insult to the parents of Newfoundland and

Labrador, and, most of all, is an insult to the young children of this Province.

I say to the member, he should be standing on his feet and apologizing to the

people of this Province for having wasted ten to twelve minutes of this House's

tim