VOL. 1 NO. 36 fRIll [Ml N)\RY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT iIOUH! OF ASSEMBLY OR TILE PERIOD: 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. IUESDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1982

November 9, 1982 Tape 2080 NM - 1 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. $ MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please: ORAL QUESTIONS: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, here we are, day two in this part of the session of the House of Assembly,and no statement forthcoming yet on the state of the economy, or on the financial mess that this administration has gotten this Province into. Mr. Speaker, I ru1d like to direct a question to the hon. the Premier. Does :he hon.

Premier not think that it is important, as a matter of fact it is a matter of life and death that a statement on the precise financial condition of this Province should be made immediately if for no other reason than to reassure the people who loan money to this Province that the financial situation in this Province is not going to collapse completely? And, Mr.

Speaker, does the hon. gentleman not Lhink that it is important that a statement be made on the economy and on the financial mess that the administration has created in order to reasure investors who are lookine at this Province for investment?And also, Mr. Speaker, does the hon. gentleman not think that it is important enough to make a statement so that people will not be left hanging, suspended in mid-air, people on welfare, people who are sick, people who are frightened that they may lose their jobs? Mr.

Speaker, does the hon. gentleman not think that the statement should have been made yesterday .4 but, since this is day two,a statement should be made at once on the state of the economy of this Province and the financial mess that this administration has gotten us into?

November 9, 1982 Tape 2080 NM - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) The hon. premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I expect that that was a question, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I think it is extremely important, Mr. Speaker, I think it is absolutely essential. think that the government is under severe scrutiny to come up with a financial statement, an economic statement as soon as it can, and as soon as it can, Mr. Speaker, will be early next week. S

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2081 ah-1 PREMIER PECKFORD: We have indicated already to the people of Newfoundland that if present trends continue for the next six months in the way they have in the last three especially, then we will be facing a deficit situation,and every single province of Canada and the federal government are facing similar revenue short falls from what they had predicted, every single jurisdiction in Canada. Not only that - MR. CALLAN: You told us that yesterday. PREMIER PECKFORD: Well obviously you did not hear it.

And not only that,even in the United States the congress and the executive debate over what the latest deficit forecasts are. It is worldwide,and it is Canadian-wide to bring it back home. So I think it is absolutely imperative that the government provide a statement to this hon. house. And we indicated before the House even opened that when it did open we would provide such a statement. We are, Mr. Speaker, as we have indicated to the press,and to the people of Newfoundland through the press,that we will be making such a statement to the House.

We realize what will happen over the next six months if no action is taken and sotherefore,being the responsible managers that we are, we have gone back to all departments of government, we have gone back to all the agencies and Crown corporations and said, 'Now here is what is going to happen if present trends continue,and therefore we want you to start looking at ways of cutting your uxpenditures, look at ways of revenue generation nd be ready to come in under a plan of action on a

schedule which will see a statement to the hon. House early next week.' And so we have made that clear, Mr. Speaker, so , yes, I agree wholeheartedly with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) that there should be a statement

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2081 ah-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: and there will be one at the earliest opportunity. The earliest opportunity to do it in a businesslike fashion,after having gone back to all the departments,will be early next week. But I reiterate again, Mr. Speaker, for the record that the allegation by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) that we have put this Province in a financial mess is completely erroneous, completely incorrect, he cannot substantiate it.

I went through the figures yesterday for all the provinces and for the federal gover;nt and when the Leader of the Opposition talks about everybody hanging on a thread and all the rest of it,the federal government ant from a projected deficit of somewhere around $10 billion to $23 billion before they even made any report to the House of Commons or to the people of the country. So if we had to go by ou so-called national government then we would not begiving a statement yet and would not be giving it for some Lime. So, Mr.

Speaker, yes, I wholeheartedl" auree with the Leader of the Opposition. ?s a matter of fact,what it comes down to is that the Leader of the Opposition agrees with us because, before the House opencd,we indicated that we would be going back to all the departments and after that was done that we would after the House openedbe issuing a statement to the House. So we are glad a 42.

November 9, 1982 Tape 2082 EC - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: that the Leader of the Opporiion (Mr. Neary) has taken a cue from the government and that as we have said a week or two ago, we will be making a statement to the house of Pssembly. MP._SPEAKER (Russell) The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. 1J.NEARY: Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate indeed that the hon. the Premier, such a well-meaning fellow, does not understand; he does not seem to understand how the system works. And in his answer that he just gave the House, Mr.

Speaker, the hon. gentleman was trying to be humorous on what we consider to be a very serious matter, possibly the collapse of the financial situation in this Province. It could very easily lead to that. The hon. gentleman told us that every single government in Canada has that problem and the Government of Canada itself has it. That is true. We are not saying that the administration is totally to blame for thir financial mess we have, but 50 per cent of the blame must go on the hon. gentleman for mismanagement, extravagance and waste over the last couple of years.

At least the other provinces are up front and when they saw that a deficit was occurring, they immediately took steps to try to remedy the situation. Now, Mr. Speakrr1 t1r, hon. gentleman has known since June of this yeat, just a few weeks after they brought down a budget in this House the hon. gentleman knew we were headed for a deficit. He confirmed that in the House yesterday. MR. MARShALL: On a noint of order, Mr. Speaker. N 1 SPtAfLt: Order, please On a point of order, the hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSIII\LL: While it is refreshing, Mr.

Speaker, to hear today the non, gentleman thinks we are 3 6

November 9, 1982 Tape 2082 EC - 2 MR. MARSHALL: only 50 per cent responsible, the hon. gentleman is still making a speech and this is the Question Period. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! I repeat what: I mentioned yesterday, that the Question Period is only thirty minutes and I am sure hon. members to my right have lots of questions. I would ask the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) if he would be more specific with his question. MR. NEARY: Well, Mr.

Speaker, the reason I am not pressing the hon. (Jentleman so hard is because, as I said, he does not seem to understand how serious the situation is and what remedies have to be taken to reassure ari restore confidence, especially as far as the borrowing of this Province is concerned. Now, would the hon. gentleman tell the House what advice he has received on these matters from the government's fiscal agents? And would the hon. gentleman also go a step further and tell the IJouse if he is prepared to lay on the table of this house any recom- mendations, letters or any memos between the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) and the qoverneent's fiscal agents on this $70 million deficit? 4

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2083 MJ - 1 MR. S1'l'AKER (Russo I

I) Iho lion. the Premict. PREMIER PEcKEORD: WeU, Mr. Speaker, first of all let me deal with the extravagance. I indicated yesterday to Lhe hon. House and I indicate aqain today that it was not it the management of the expenditures where the deficit arose. And you would need,in order to have extravagance, in order for the allegation of extravagance to be upheld, in order for that to be a valid alieqation one would need to be able to prove that in the management of the expenditures that somehow the government was way off base. In actuality we are not off base on our expenditures,so there is no extravagance.

The point of the matter is that revenue has been down from the federu 1 government sources • that they predict md the money that they give us, both. They qive us money both through EPF, through equalization, and they predict the corporation income tax and personal income tax. And on the corporation income tax they were oijt somewhere around $20 million, they were out $6 million on equalization and $20 million on EPE. That is just for starters. The rest of the money is where the prediction on RST, Retail Sales Tax, and other like taxes in the Province did not measure up to what was expected earlier in the year.

So in order to prove extravagance, if the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. S. Neary) wants to use the word extravagance, he has not been ahe to prove that there has been any extravagance in this cjovernment. It is on the revenue side where we find the budget downfall or short fall, not on the expenditure side. And you must spend money to be extravagant. If you (lit not have it to spend how can you be extravaqant? So the Leoder of the Onenert ten iso little off base on it. NeW in talking about the other as the Loader of the Opposition did, let me inform him as I did yesterday that most of the other -7

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2083 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: provinces have not to this date, outside of some wage restraint programmes in certain provinces, taken action as a result of the second quarter results- have not taken action as a result of the second quarter results in their provinces. They all have revenue short falls of one size or another, but none of them have taken any action in the way we are taking action now as it relates to the second quarter results.

We did take action in Auqust,when we saw the way the economy was going and the way our revenues were qoing,by implementing the wage restraint programme of 5 per cent, 6 per cent and 7 per cent and 4 per cent, 5 per cent and 6 per cent. That was our first measures Then we waited for the stats to come in on the second quart I before taking the actions now that we are involved in and which will be announced next week. So one has to look at it now. And the last point that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. S.

Neary) mentioned on our fiscal agents,I indicated to the Leader of the Opposition yesterday and I repeat it aqain today that there was a review done of all the provincr of Canada. Even Imperial Oil, I think, and some of the large corporations got credit downqradinqs this year in the bond market after the review was done. Great Imperial Oil got a downgrading. They reviewed everybody right up until July and Auqust, we have given them all the latest fiqures of what our revenue situation is, and 1

November 9, 1982 rpapo No. 2084 PK-1 PREMIER PECK1ORD: they are satisfied that we are being good managers. There were two provinces that were downgraded, the Province of Nova Scotia and the Province of Quebec. The Province of Newfoundland was left unscathed after a very extensive review by both bond rating houses. MR. NEARY: We could not go any lower: PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh, yes we could. MR. MORGAN: You would love to see that happen. MR. TULK: We are not like you. MR. HODDER: You are showing your ignorance again. PREMIER_PECKIORD: Yes, we could. Yes, we could.

I am very sorry to interrupt, I am very sorry to interrupt the hon. member for Port au Port, who apparently has the floor of this house right now, Mr. Speaker, I am very sorry to interrupt him to indicate that we could have got a credit downqradine. We could have got a credit downgrading. And all the little platitudes from the member for Port au Port (Mr. fodder) will not change that matter. So all of that 'review was done on the Province of Newfoundland, on the Province of Nova Scotia, and all the other provinces of Canada. And as a result of that we were reinstated at our present credit rating.

There are no letters on file from our fiscal agents or from the bond markets indicating that we have to do this, that, or something else. They have confidence in the ability of this government to manage its financial affairs and - SOME lION. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: PREMIER PECKEORD: - they know that over the next year or so we will continue to manage our affairs like we did

November 9, 1982 Tape 2084 PK - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: in the last three Budgets, where we brought in $129 million surplus. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Tie hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, it is a funny thing about the Premier, as I say he is a well-meaning fellow, but he has been accusing the former administration of not being able to forecast what was going to happen to oil when the Upper Churchill was developed. And now he is admitting that his own administration cannot even forecast six months ahead on their Budget. Mr. Speaker, what kind of logic is that.

They have been pork barrelling since June, since the election. The ministers and the members on the opposite side have been announcing projects, promises they made in the election. They have been pork barrelling. MR. SPEAKER: Order, ploase The hon. Leader of the Opposition is making an extented

preamble and I will request him to direct the question to some minister or the Premier. MR. NEARY: Now, Mr. Speaker, my question to the Premier is that next week when they do make a statement to the House will it be just in the fo" of statement by the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins), will it be a mini-Budget or will it be a full Budget? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD; Well, Mr.

Speaker, lot me respond to the Leader of the Opposition on the business of bein ible to predict oil prices on the TTper Churchill I think that is what he is talking about, that we have criLi.cized the Upper Churchill contracts and how could the overnment of the day predict where oil was going to go, and therefore there was not anything wrong with the three mils per kilowatt hour that was charged for rorty-five years. 14 ? fl

November 9, 1982 Tape 2084 PK - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, nobody on this side of the House has any aroument with the three mils per kilowatt hour that was charged to start to come into effect as of 1975 and goes on for forty-five years. What we do argue with is closing it off For forty years at three oils, no escalation- SOME lION. MEMBERS: Hear, hear PREMIER. PECKFORD: -no reopener. Nobody argues with the price that was charged at the time. But to close it off for forty years with no reopeners, no 2 7

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2085 SD - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: escalation1 that is what the people of Newfoundland are mad about. And then, Mr. Speaker, to have the gall to say that the contract opens and closes again automatically and the price actually goes down to about 2.5 mils for the last twenty-five hours, that is what the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are arguing about. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hear, hear. PREMIER PECKFORD: That is what they are arguing about. You would think the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) would have better sense Talking about people being naive, Mr.

Sneaker, taikinq ibout people being naive and not knowinq well intentioned? Oh, yes The Leader of the Opposition is well-intentioned too, Mr. Speaker. The problem with the Leader of the Opposition is that he does not realize that inflation goes on regardless and the Greeks knew about that. So let us not talk about the Upper Churchill and suddenly try to justify some blatant ,wrong Liberal policy of twenty years ago or fifteen years ago. Oh, no, Mr. Speaker Oh, no, The Leader of the Opposition better stay clear of the Upper Churchill when he starts talking about people on this side of the House.

That is one of the reasons, Mr. Speaker, why there are forty-four over hero and only eicjht over there. SOME HONG MEMBERS: hear, hear. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, talking about pork barrelling, we are very proud that earlier this year we took action and we pre-tendered a lot of projects. We took action. Who was it? What government came to the assistance of all the small fish companies in this province and all the medium sized fish companies? Twenty-nine dollars If that is pork barrc']inq let us have more of it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Fhear, hear. PREMIER PECEFORD: Mr.

Speaker, i doing roads around the Province to the tune of $20 million to $25 million early /

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2085 SD - 2 PREMIER PEC}KFORD: in the year is pork barrel1ing1ot us have more of it, Mr. Speaker. I want more of it. SOME LION. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. * PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, if completing the hospital in Channel-port aux Basques, in the Leader of the Opposition's (Mr. Neary) district is pork barrelling, let us have more of it. SOME LION. MEMBERS: hear, hear. PREMIER PECKFORD: If doing water and sewer projects to the tune of $30 million this year is pork barrelling / let us have more of it, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hear, hear. L37

November 9, 1982, Tape 2086, Page 1 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: If building a hospital in Clarenville, Mr. Speaker, is pork barrelling, let us have more of it. I want more of it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: And if the member for Eagle River(Mr. Hisock) were here - where is the member for Eagle River? - I would suggest to the hon. member for Ea1e River if building a medical clinic in Forteau is pork barrelling, let us have more of it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NEARY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. PECKFORD: Oh, yes, Mr. Speaker, I am willing to stand and answer the charge. MR.

SPEAKER(Russell) .. Order, please! Order, please! I recognize the hon. the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NEAR'?: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Premier - SOMEHON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! MR._NEARY: - is very testy today. We know he is a well-meaning fellow, it is unfortunate for the people of this Province that he just does not understand.

The question that was put to the hon. gentleman, he does not seem to understand, had to do with whether we are going to have a mini-budget or a full budget or just a statement. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: So, Mr. Speaker, when I asked that - MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. the Leader of the Opposition rising on a point of order? MR. NEAR'?: Yes.

November 9, 1982, Tape 2086, Page 2 -- apb MR. SPEAKER(Russell): Okay, I would like to hear it. MNI:ARY: When I asked the question,Your rionour drew to my attention that I had to be brief in my

preamble. I believe the rules also say, Mr. Speaker, that the minister or the Premier when answering also has to be brief in the answers. MR. WARREN: Right on Hear, hear MR. SPEAKER: Order, please The hon. the Leader of the Opposition is correct in that the Question Period is thirty minutes; questions should be brief and answers should be brief. MR. WARREN: Treat both sides alike. PREMIER PECKFORD: I am very, very sorry, Mr. Speaker. I apologize to all members of the House. I apologize to everybody, I just got carried away. I got carried away, Mr. Speaker. When the hon. the Leader of the Opposition(Mr.

Neary) started taling about pork barrelling and trying to create jobs and telling about how bad a job we did on the economy, I got carried away. I got carried away for his hospital in Port aux Basques, I got carried away for the medical clinic for Eagle River, for all those Liberal districts whore there is P.C. money flowing in, flowing. SC) I am very sorry I ) 7 I .1 I

November 9, 1982 Tape 2087 NM - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: and I apologize, Mr. Speakers I will not be any longer than I can possibly be in trying to answer the question to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) Now we are going to in this case, Mr. Speaker, indicate,as I did yesterday to the Leader of the Opposition, that we are going to take our cues from Ottawa on this one, we are going to give a financial and economic statement to this House like the Minister of Finance in Ottawa. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hoar, hear MR. SPEAKER (Russell) The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR.

NEARY: That will be the first time that the Premier of this Province ever followed an example that was set by that great Liberal Government up there in Ottawa. Now, Mr. Speaker, we will deal with the extravaqence and waste and the pork barrelling at another time We could provide a list the length of this Assembly, it could stretch up and down the floor, Mr. Speaker, but I do not want to qet sidetracked off the seriousness of this matter.

Now, I want to ask the hon. gentleman what stops have been taken to reassure investors in the United States especially, the people who loan money to Newfoundland, the people in the international financial world, in the bond markets, what steps have been taken by the administration since this news was sprung on everybody about the $70 million deficit, what steps have been taken to reassure these people that we are not going to have total collapse of the finances of this Province Now wait now, J1JSL a !fi]flUtLO, 110W. I have another question. MR. TULK: Try and cool off. 47fl

November 9, 1982 Tape 2087 NM - 2 MR. NEAR?: Just take it easy. I know the hon. gentleman has good intentions, lie does not understand so therefore I have to

preamble my question. And would the hon. gentleman also tell the House if there have been any difficulties in the bond market, especially in the United States of late, with regard to Newfoundland floatinq a bond issue,borrowing, and would the hon. gentleman also tell us what steps he has taken - MR. WINDSOR: One question. MR. NEAR?: It is three questions in one, three questions in one. What steps has the hon. gentleman taken to reassure the investors, especially in the United States, that there will be no referendum in Newfoundland to separate from Canada ,that could - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh'. MR.

NEARY: Because, Mr. Speaker, as the hon. gentleman is well aware, the people who loan us money in the United States do so on the assumption that we are a Province of Canada and Canada will not allow us to go bankrupt and so therefore this referendum talk of separation and so forth would make the money lenders of the United States very nervous. Now what has the hon. gentleman done to put that situation at rest? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I am very, very pleased that the hon. member, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Neary) asked those auestions, those three questions. MR. WINDSOR: He walked into that one. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, did he ever. SOML lION. NEMBERS: Her, hear L 7

November 9, 1982 Tape 2087 NM - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: Number one, Mr. Speaker, the biggest problem the Minister of Finance (Dr. J. Collins) and myself, and other people have had in going to New York, and even to Toronto for that matter, and to Europe has been this, 'When is the Canadian Government going to get ride of FIRE?' That is the biggest problem we have. That is why the Prime Minister two weeks ago had to invite all the corporate heads from the United States up to Ottawa. They did not go to Regina, they did not go to Edmonton, or Victoria, they did not go to Halifax or St. John's - MR.

NEARY: What has that cjot to do with this problem? PREMIER PECKFORD: It has a lot to do because people in the United States - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear PREMIER PECKFORD: Are we a province, Mr. Speaker? Does FIRE apply to Newfoundland or does it apn1' just to Ottawa? The Foreign Investment Review i.goncy is :he inricst. defrrL - MR. NEARY: I asked about the referendum. 2 7

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2088 ah-1 PREMIER PECKFORD: r am answerLno the Loader of the Oppositions first point, He asked, 'flow are investors reacting to Newfoundland?' And this is how jnvestors are reacting to Newfoundland as a Province vi Canada. They are saying, tWe want to invest in Newfoundland. We believe in the financial management that you have )ut in place over the last three or four years. We are very confident of the Government of Newfoundland and the stability that it provides,but we cannot get in there becauso we have red tape to go through for about two years. We have to go through FIRA.

Every time we invest a dollar we have to make an application to IIRA.' 7\ndsecond1y, they say the 'ftional Energy Programme discriminates again foreign investment. You are allowed to come clown in the United Ptites and invest but we are not allowed to come to (',inada and invest.' What is going on here in the National Energy lrogramme? That is the two biggest inhibitors to investment in Canada today, Mr. Speaker, that any economist will tell the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) if he goes about to ask them for their advice. Secondly,any problem in the bond market?

The answer to that, the proof of the pU(I(f LOg is in the eaLinj. Go and chock how long it took our bonds to sell in the last two or three months in the bond markets of the world. They were swept up just like lightning, swept up just like lightning. Everybody has great confidence in Newfoundland and the Province • of Newfoundland. We had ahsol.iitolv no nrohlem. Other people did but we did not. MU.. NEARY: How about Newfoundland Hvdro? PREMIER PECKFORD. Newfoundland Hydro, the Newfoundland Government, Newfoundland Municipal Financing t 17g

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2088 ah-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Corporation, no problem, Mr. Speaker, no problem at all because they have a lot of confidence in the management that we have shown over the last three or four years. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, I have never mentioned anything about referendum or separation. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER PECKFORD: The Prime Minister of Canada is trying to push us out of Confederation but the Prime Minister of Canada will not be successful. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Ilear, hoar! PREMIER PECKFORD: The Prime Minister of Canada will not be successful in pushing ua out of Canada.

We want to be in Canada but we want to be equal partners in Canada and that might take the elimination of Mr. Trudeau. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Ilear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: So, Mr. Speaker, let those who have raised that spectre, let them answer their own comments. I have no comment to make only simply to say that the Prime Minister of Canada,by making those statements - he made them, I never, he made them - they are provocative and unnecessary and do not create the kind of the climate that we need to get an agreement on the offshore, Mr. Speaker.

We do not need those kind of comments made in Ottawa to try to flutter down here with a bunch of Liberal sheep up there clapping his every move when he made such statements. The people of Newfoundland are not to be insulted by the Prime Minister of Canada,nor are they to be insulted by the poeple up there representing the Liberal party. So, Mr. Speaker, if you want 11 ::i q it

November 9, 1982 Tape 2089 EC - 1 I PREMIER PLCKFORD: to NuOW about referendums and separation you ui 11 havo -n ask hc Prime Minister, I kno nOt]] I na aboUt itT ;oM1; lION. MEMBERS Bear, hear! MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell The hon. the member for Tornqat Mountains. SOME lION. MEMBENS. Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Rural, Agricultural aiid Northern Dovelcaument (Mr. Goudio) MR. ?I'ORGAN: Send a teleqram to the Prime Minister and ask him to resiqn. MR. WARREN: Mr.

Speaker, if the sculpin would have a mind to close his mouth I might have a word to say. My question to the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development is I under- stand that his department administers assistance to native students,in particular in my district and in the minister's district. Could the minister qive the house a definition of what his department considers a native student? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. MR. COUPlE: Well , Mr. Speaker, I feel eminently qualified to define a native student.

As it pertains to the Native People's Agreement - that is what we are talking about, funding which comes under the Native People's Agreement. 11erc are no registered natives in this Province as they exist in other parts of the countr- financial assistance is provided this year to twenty-six students from along the Coos- of Labrador and from the community of Sheshatshit in my district. These students L3Ri

November 9, 1982 Tape 2039 EU - 2 MR. GOUDIE: are attending high school in some instances, trade schools in others:, there are a couple of nurses and there are several university students. Under the financial assistance programme, tuitions are paid, cost of books are paid, food, board and lodging are paid, transportation to and from the school facility is paid, plus an additional trip per year either at Christmas or Easter, home to visit families; a clothing allowance is provided, out-of-pocket expenses are provided, and If that is not enough, then my colleague, the Minister of Social Services (Mr.

Hickey) has special programmes in place to assist in addition to all that. Under, the agreement itself and the assistance provided to native students, Mr. Speaker, a native student, a person who can receive assistance under this programme, is a person who resides, I believe, for three years or more in any of the designated communities in the Province, which are Nain, Davis Inlet, Ilopodale, Postville, Makkovik, Rigolet and Sheshatshit. SOME HON. MEMBERS: ricer, hear MR. WARREN: A supplementary, Mr. .Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : A supplementary, the hon. the member for Torngat Mountains. Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question to the minister Could the minister tell me that in the past year t L B

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2090 SD - 1 Mn Tnflflr'nl all of the twenty-six students who have received assistance under the Native Peoples Agreement are people who have lived in Labrador for at least three years? MR. SPEAKE7. (Russell): The hon. Minister of Rural, 1qricu1tural and Northern Development. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if there were twenty-six people assisted last year or not. There are twenty-six people being assisted this year. The recommendations come from a Committee in place to deal with such matters.

And as far as T am aware the people who received assistance are people who have been residents of their respective communities for three or more years, yes. MR. WARREN: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, my final supplementary to the minister is: If the minister (loon find out that some students have been paid assistance in the past two or three yearsand in fact this year, who have not been native residents of Labrador for the past three years will the minister endeavour to get the money back into the Treasury? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. MR. GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, I would certainly have to be advised of the details of any such cases. I can recall phone calls that I had received from people living in L. John's, for instance, who were residents of Nain or Makkovik,or whichever community, under this designated communibies programme who appealed to me to receive assistance because they were originally from these communities and were native people and were not eligible for such assistance. For instance,

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2090 SD - 2 MR. GOUDIE: in the community of Happy Valley - Goose Bay, again in my district, there are quite a number of native families but they cia not qualify for student assistance either. In the event that someone was wronqly given student assistance , I would have to be aware of the specific case and the circumstances surroundinq such aid provided to a person who may not qualify,and then make a decision based on that individual case. But at this point in time I am not aware of any. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, pleasc Time for the Question Period has expired.

Before we proceed to other business, I am sure the House would wish me to welcome to the galleries today a gentleman who served this House very well in his capacity as a former Sergeant-at-Arms I refer, of course, to Mr. Heminens,who is sitting in the gallery. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Bear, hear. V 14 (J

November 9, 1982 Ta1.o No. 2091 MJ - 1 MR. STEAKER (Russell) ; I have been asked to welcome a (Ipleqrttion from the Port aux Basques Municipal Council. I do not have their names so I cannot mention them personally, but I do welcome them to the galleries. tOME lION. MEMBERS: hear, hear! NOTICES OF MOTION PREMTER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKF'ORD: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution; - although on Orders of the Day I will ask the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. S. Noary) if he agrees to deal with the matter immediately, without debate -

WhEREAS the seal fishery is an important source of income to hundreds of fishermen in our Province; and

WHEREAS the European economic community is moving ripidly and swiftly to ban the importation of all seal products; and

WHEREAS the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador has Telexed the Prime Minister twice in October to express Newfoundland's concern and to request federal action; Afl

WHEREAS no response from the Prime Minister has been forthcoming;

WHEREAS the Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans han expressed his concern in the touse of Commons and indicator' Oo would request the Prime Minister's involvement \N')

WHEREAS the Prime Minister is presently meeting Euroaean leaders; 14

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2091 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: HE IT TIIERF'ORE RESOLVED that this House endorse today the following telegram to be sent to the Prime Minister in Europe: "The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has expressed its concern to you about the actions being taken by the European Economic Community Lo hen the importation of seal products. As you know this woud be a serious economic hardship to hundreds of lishermen in Newfoundland and Labrador.

We request,therofore, that you raise this issue in your talks with the appropriate European leaders and support Newfoundland's position that the European economic community refrain from taking such action against Canada's fishery." SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. 14 C

November 9, 1982, Tape 2092, Page 1 -- apb MR. SPEAKER(Russell): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, we will support the wording of the telegram but not necessarily the ISolution b Because we are not sure, Mr. Speaker, the * bolievabiliLy and the credibility of this Premier has been so badly damaged in the last several weeks, we are not sure if the facts as set out in the

preamble are correct. We have not seen any documentation or any evidence to prove that the facts are correct. But the telegram is all right, once you remove the politics from the

preamble, from the resolution. MR. TtJLK: Straight politics. MR. NEARY: Yes, it is straight politics, Mr. Speaker, it is just as well to face it. Mr. Speaker, we will support the telegram to the Prime Minister providing the hen, gentleman will eliminate the

preamble. PREMIER PECKFORD: Ne, Mr. Speaker. There is no support. The Government of Newfoundland,with all these signatures of the people on this side, I am sure, will send it. But if the Leader of the Opposition(Mr. Neary) does not believe that I have not heard from the Prime Minister, that is his problem and he can send his own telegram. SOME lION. MEMBERS: hear, hear: SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame Shame: MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: Order, please: SOME lION. MEMBERS: Sham& Shame MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, if I may - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: Order, please MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please Order, please The House seems to be getting into a debate on the Notice of Motion as raised by the hen, the Premier. I did allow the hon. the Leader of the Opposition a few moments to seek some clarification,or make a very brief statement, but now it seems to be getting into the realm of 1117

November 9, 1982, Tape 2092, Page 2 -- apb MR. SPEAKER(Russell): debate. It is really notice of a resolution, and I gather from what has been said that there is not agreement to receive this without any further debate and it will be accepted by the Chair in that way. MR. NEARY: No. On a point of order. On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: That is not quite correct, as Your Honour outlined it, with all due respect.

We are prepared to endorse the telegram, but the part that I wanted clarification on was,'WHEREAS the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador has telexed the Prime Minister. Now, the Premier, in his response to what I said, said,Well, if you do not believe I have telephoned the Prime Minister, that is your problem. But it says in the resolution telexed'. It would be a very simple matter for the hon. gentleman to lay on the table of the House the telexes and then we can make up our minds. And we would be glad toif the hon. - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order,I just say to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, I just say to them,just for the record, so it is in the record, That is an unnecessary condition for the leader of the Opposition to put on his support. I will table the telexes, if he does not believe me, and I will table the 4 3t

November 9, 1982 Tape 2093 PK - 1 PREMIER_PECKFORD: I will table the telexes if he does not believe mc, T will table the telexes anyway. But whether or not the Opposition supports it or not the government * wLll send a telegram today with the support of all the members on this side of the House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame, shame MR. SPEAKER (Russell Order, please MR. NEARY: It is obvious they do not want our support, Mr. Speaker. SOME 110N. MEMBEHP: Oh, oh MR. SPEAKER: Order, plcase I think the Chair has allowed enouqh discussion on this particular resolution. NOTICES OF MOTION MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Finance. DR. J.COLLTNS: Mr. Speaker, I qive notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain resolutions for the granting of supplementary supply to Her Majesty. SOME LION. MEMBERS; Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! DR. COLLINS: And also - * MR._SPEAKER: Order, please: The Chair is having some difficulty hearing the hon. Minister of Finance.

November 9, 1982 Tape 2093 PR - 2 MR. iOii:RTS tie would have done i L four months aqoif he cared. MR. SPEAKERRuSse11): Order, picasH The hen. Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, U also give noLce that I will on tomorrow move that the house resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider cert' n resolutionr relating to theadvancing or quaranteeinq of nrtain loans made under The Loan and Guar'ntee Act, 1957, and move that this House resolve itself into (:onirnittee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions relating to the guaranteeing of certain loans under The Local Authority Guarantee Act, 1977. MR. SPEAKER: Are there any other Notices of Motion? Before proceeding to Orders of the Day,I would like to welcome to the galleries Mr.

John Mullins, the Chairman of the Board of Western Memorial Regional Hospital, Dr. Harry Watts, the Hospital Administrator, and Mr. Dennis Waterman, the Assistant Administrator. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear ORDERS OF TilE lAY Motion, the hon. Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The i'ensi on (Auditor General) Act, 1968, carried. (Diii No. 58). On motion, Dii] No. 58, read a first time ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Motion, the hon.

Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, "An Act Respect.) rig Pension Benefits," carried (Bill No. 69) On motion, Dill No. 69, read a first time ordered read a second time on Lomorrow. 14 0 f

November 9, 1982 Tape 2093 PK - Motion, the hon. Minister of FinancE to introduce a bill, "An Act Respecti.nq Pensions For Tiie Members Of The Royal Newfoundland Constabularly And The St.John's Fire Department And The Staff OF 11cr Majesty's nitentiary, carried, (Bill No. 66).

November 9, 1982 Tape 2094 NM - 1 On motion, Bill No. 66 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice to introduce a bill,

An Act To Amend The Judicature Act," carried. (Bill No. 60) On motion, Bill No. 60 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Motion, the hon. the Minister Responsible for Communications to introduce a bill, 'An Act To Amend The Public Utilities Act," carried. (Bill No. 59) On motion, Bifl No. 59 road a a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Transportation to introduce a bill, "An Act To Promote Public Safety In The Transportation Of Dangerous Goods," carried. (Bill No. 61) On motion, Bill No. 61 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Motion, the hon. the Minister of Transportation to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend the Department of Transportation Act". (Bill No. 65) On motion, Bill No. 65 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. MR. MARSHALL: Mr.

Speaker, in view of the Opposition's refusal to unanimously endorse the resolution proposed by the hon. the Premier today, 1 call Motion 8, which was the motion that the hen, the Premier proposed yesterday. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I might say in response to the hon. gentleman that the statement he made is complEtely untrue and I want to tell the hon. gentleman that we already had a resolution passed at the Liberal Convention in Ottawa dealing with the seal fishery that Mr. Trudeau is taking to Europe with him.

Novembcr 9, 1982 Tape No. 2095 SD - 1 S MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, p1ease The hon. I'adcr of the Opposition did not indicate that he had risen on a point of order and so he was not rocoqnized. The hon. the Premier. PREMIER_PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, yesterday, on behalf of the government and this side of the house, I moved a resolution which was sparked by two things that happened over the last number of weeks, really over the last month or two. I moved the resolution:

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland has sought a political settlement to the offshore resourses question; AND

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland placed a compromise proposal before the Federal Government on January 25, 1982; AND

WhEREAS the Government of Canada has not answered this proposal; AND

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland continues to seek a political settlement; AND

WHEREAS the Prime Minister of Canada has made statements which are provocative and unnecessary; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this house go on record in (

a) condemning the statements of the Prime Minister as helping to destroy a climate necessary for a political settlement; and (

b) request the Federal Government to answer the Government of Newfoundland's compromise proposal. And I put the resolution forward, Mr. Speaker, for two reasons. One is that over the last while many people in my view have lost sight of the fact that the Federal Government of Canada in this whole long dispute and impasse, that the Federal Government of Canada has not ever responded to our proposal of January 25th, 1982. And sometimes that gets lost with all the press releases and statements and so on from various federal ministers, from the TV extravaganza that Mr.

Lalonde had on one of the private TV stations down hero during the Spring and Summer. From time to time I get the feeling,in talking to people outside of the Province especially, 4

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2095 SD - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: hut also to a large segment of people within the Province, that they forqet that that proposal that during the election campaign I held up on the TV debate, that compromise proposal has never been responded to to this day by the federal government. And all they did when after seven months they finally put somethinq on the table themselves, all they did was to put on the table a Nova Scotia agreement.

After seven months and after qolnq through a lot of study and spending a lot of money - hundreds of thousands of do] Ian-; spent to prepare that very, very comprehensive compromise proposal nothing but nothing has been heard from the federal government. They have ignored it, completely iqnnr'd it. It could never happen in any other province. Mr. Speaker, I submit it could never happen in any othed province.

It is only because we are small, it is only because we have seven seats that the Federal Government of Canada can get away with not responding to a proposal which would see a settlement to the largest oil field ever discovered in Canadas history, to the third largest offshore oil field in

November 9, 1982 Tape 2096 CC - 1 I'REMI ER PECKFORI the world, 1.8 billion barrels known. It boggles the imagination, Mr. Speaker, when one thinks that about fhree or four weeks ago, the Department of the Interior for the United States of America issued new tenders for * creaqe to be tendered upon by oil companies in the Alaska area, in the Prudeau Bay area. Prudcau Bay has already had a very successful oil discovery.

It is now being developed and the oil is now flowinq across Alaska by pipeline. if is then being taken at a port on the other side of Alaska, on the Southern side of Alaska, into tankers and is taken down the West Coast of Canada and on down into Washington, the Seattle area,and then put in a aipeline and shipped across the United States. Well, thei think they have other acreage near Prudeau Bay in the salt water on the ocean floor, which equals or comes close to the Prudeau Bay one.

And in some statements made in Time Magazine and some of the oil industry pamphlets over the last three or four weeks, there was a great flurry of activity and all the major partners and oil companies in the world qof involved in bidding upon this acreage. And the Department of the Interior of the United States estatically announced, enthusiastically announced, that they are sure in their own minds that when this acreage is let out under tender to the successful bidder and when that successful bidder begins drilling, that they are going to find every bit of 1.3 billion barrels of oil, Mr.

Speaker, 1.3 billion barrels. And we have out here already discovered, known to be able to be taken out of the ocean floor 1.8 billion barrels of oil. That will give you an idea of the dimensions of just that one oil field that we have out here. So here we have the largest oil field in Canada's history sitting dormant out here

November 9, 1982 lape 2096 CC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: while the federal government, the Canadian Government, can,without very much problem at all, completely ignore a proposal, a reasoned proposal put on the table by this Province to settle a jurisdictional dispute and to see matters go ahead from a political point of view through a political settlement. I mean, it is absolutely incredible! historians will write about it, Mr. Speaker, in decades to come, how for so long one government could completely ignore another government within the Canadian Confederation. It never ceases to amaze me.

We did, earlier this year, as part of our campaign to explain to other Canadians Lhe reasonableness, the Canadiinism of our proposal, tar n British Columbia with our negotiating tcam and we met with all the provinces of Canada, with their economists, with their finance people, with their oil people, with their energy people, and presented the proposal to them and explained the proposal and allowed for questions and answers, and had a dialogue and had a debate and a discussion with all the provinces of Canada.

Then we rut with all the editorial boards of all the major newspapers in Canada and the editorial boards of all the major magazines in Canada. And then we met with the Conference Board of Canada, that economic organization, private organization, which from time to time comments upon the economy and talks about what growth you can ace in the Canadian economy in the next quarter, in the next year, and how all the provinces are doing, which ones are going to grow more than others, where unemployment is going to go, where inflation is going to go and all the rest of it. It is a

November 9, 1982, Tape 2097, Page 1 -- apb PREMIER PECKEORD: very reputable economic organization, national organiza Lion, and we presented it to them, the Conference Board of Canada.

We presented it to the Iconomic Council of Canada, which is an arm, really arm's length, but an arm of, agency of the federal government. funny that the Canadian Government should have this very elaborate Economic Council of Canada, which is supposed to comment upon the economy and give advice to the Canadian FederaL Governmont,and hero now the Prime Minister has onn off to appoint a royal commission on the economy when he already has very axpert peoplo,oconomists and financial analysts,eaiinq out of theirerirs, already in place to comment upon and to give advice to the government on the direction they should take for the economic recovery of this nation.

It is very odd that the Prime Minister should suddenly find - what he is really saying is,'l do not believe the Economic Council of Canada. What he is really saying is,I do not believe the Conference Board of Canada. It is just an unusual circumstance. Starting the MacDonald platform, that is what he is doing. PREMIER PI:CKF0RD: Yes. No doubt it is a Macdonald platform for the leadership to keep Turner away. But in any case, Mr. Speaker, we presented that proposal to the Economic Council of Canada, to the Conference of Canada, to the Institute on Public r'olicy,and to all the editorial hoards across Canada.

And what was the unanimous, what was the overwhelming response a to that proposal? After scrutiny, after questions, after they had the proposal for a number of weeks so they could study it themselves, experts in the field of oil and gas, experts in the field of finance, experts in the field of economics, what did they all say? "Newfoundland, this is a

November 9, 1982, Tape 2097, Page 2 -- upb PREMIER PECKFORD: very reasonable proposal, this is a very workable proposal, this is a very Canadian proposal'. So, Mr. Speaker, the problem lies not with the Canadian people, not with the institutions of Canada, not with the Governments of Canada, the provinces, not with the Economic Council of Canada, not with the Ontario Government, or the Alberta Government, or the Now Brunswisk Government, it lies directly at the seat of power in Ottawa today. I had a meeting with the Leader of the New Democratic r'arty, Mr.

I3roadbent, I had a personal meeting with him on the proposal, in Ottawa. I sat down and sent it to them, gave them all the things on it, allowed his research people to take it and chew it and tear it up, dissect it. And what did Mr. I3roadbent say? have no great love for the Socialists of this world, but what did Mr. Broadbent say? lie said he could not see anything wrong with it. As far as he was concernc it was a good proposal and it should be accepted. Mr. Clark even went further. The Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, when he was Prime Minister, agreed in writing.

The lettr is outstanding, it is there sitting in the files, lie said, 'I will treat, the Government of Canada under my leadership will treat the oil and gas on the Continental Shelf the same way as if it was on land', Mr. Speaker. Then a couple of weeks ago here in Newfoundland, in Corner Brook, Mr. Clark reiterated that position, that if he becomes Primo Ministor of Canada and his party forms the Government of Canada, then they will honour the letter that they signed. 14 1 Hi

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2098 ah-1 PREMIER PECKFORD: Now, Mr. Speaker, here we have it. What an odd, stranje situation we have here, what a strange situation. Everybody in Canada who is anybody,eithcr economic councils, governments, leaders of all the other political parties, everybody Idrees that the oroposal that we have on the table is a reasoned Canadian proposal, a great way around very difficult problem, Mr. Speaker, a great way around a very dillicult problem. And it saddens me, Mr. Speaker, as a Newfoundlander and as a Canadian, it saddens me when 1 heard the comments of Mr.

Smallwood, the Premier from 1949 to 1972, to hear what Mr. Smaliwood said. FThcause I had occasion to go back and read some documents,and not only the Throne Speeches which he wrote and some of the comments that he made in this very chamber about Newfoundland's status, I went back even {urther.The former Premier of Newfoundland , Mr. Smallwood, the Only Living lather of Confederation, wrote a book in 1930 Entitled The New Newfoundland. it was just two ycar; before we got into financial problems but at that time he was very optimistic. Mr. Squires had just been elected Prime Minister in 1928. He loved Mr.

Squires and thought the world of him and Lady Squires. There is a great

chapter on Lady Squires who was, by the way,a Green ilay girl, she came from Little Pay Islands. She was a Stronc; and she was elected in that election of 1928 as well. in any case, Mr. Smallwood wrote that book, The New Newfoundland to try to tell all the people in Newioundland, and especially those coming into Newfoundland, ibout this wonderful country called Newfoundland and Labrador - diet a wonderful thing it was, how big it was, how many people were here , of course, how i q

November 9,1982 rape No. 2098 ah-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: many schools and how much roads, the same as he did after he became Premier in 1949. But in one part of his book he talks about the status of Newfoundland,and in that he categorically states - and the book is available for anyone to look at - in that

chapter he categorically states then as a journalist, as somebody who had studied the politics of Newfoundland, that Newfoundland has the same status today -all you tourists who are coming in here and you people who want to know about Newfoundland this book is Joing to be read all around the world, and L want to tell you about the political status of Newfoundland. This Newfoundland has the same status in the Uritish Commonwealth, in international law as the I)ominion of New Zealand, as the Dominion of Canada, as the Dominion of Australia or any of the other great dominions around the world.

That is a statement that Mr. SmaUwood made. It saddens me to think that in the last several weeks the A I, fl 11

November 9, 1902 Pape No. 2099 NJ - 1 PREMIER l'ECKPORD: Same gentleman who was so iosLromental in having us join Confederation in 1949,that the Seine gentleman Would now contradict that statement that he made in writ ing in his book in 1930. Because I am sure he fervently believed that and oven after Confederation his statements right hero in this House confirmed that position. And now he has deserted the cause, deserted the idea.

Forget cibout opposing me or opposln)j the Tory party or opposing this party or that party, he has deserted the concept, he has deserted the idea, He has not doserted me, he has not doserted a party, he has deserted a very fundamenti ,1 idea which all Newfound landers and Labradorians believed fervently right from 1 1355 when we lot llespons i bin government, right up and i ncl.u)ling 1949 and ri g ut on UI) to this very moment and this very second this very clay, that we did have all of the powers that any other Dominion had in the British Commonwealth, and that when we joined Confederation in 1949 we joined on that basis.

And, Mr. Speakor, as I say it saddens me also as a New found lander, it saddens inc deeply to see so many of our own people who From time to time through comments try to lay the blame equally on both (love rnmonts, 'Oh, both governments shou 1)3 get together ' - as ii both governments were equally to blame. Well, Mr. Spoakor, that is doing an awful injustice to the cause that this whole idea of te offshore represents.

That is doing an awful. injust ice - again, forget about the party, forgot about the government - it is doing an awful injustice to our Future, it is doing an awful injustice to destiny which we could have i f we were getting a fair and reasonable deal.. Those poople who perhaps for their own monetary gain, for their own business gain, who continue to articulate positions which somehow puts them as the kingmaker in the middle, say, 'Oh, but both governments must get

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2099 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: toqether' , do a qreat disservice to the concept that we are tryinq to advocate and to the proposal which we have put on the table since January 25, 1982 a great dissorvice. And they will live to regret it one day, Mr. Speaker. They will live to rejret it one day because if there is one thing anybody knows who has been in politics or around public life in Canada very loni, if there is one thing the federal Liberal Party - a lot more than the provincial Liberal Party in recent years - the federal Liberal Party knows is they know the Polls and they know what is going on in every nook and cranny, of Canada every day. They monitor it 11 I

November 9, 1982 'tape 2100 PK 1 PREMIER i'ECKFORD: very, very cloc'1". And when uu have five MP5 who continue to say nothing about a proposal put forward by the Government of Newfoundland, when you have business interests who continue to throw 4 ]ust as much blame on the Government Newfoundland as they will on the Government of Canada, that is a victory for the Government of Canada. That is a victory for Mr. Trudeau. That is a victory for Mr. lalondo.

And when they view the vacillation of the opposition parties in this l'rovincewho one day say one thinq out of one side of their mouth and the next day say somethinq out of the other side of their mouth,then that is o victory for the cause to ensure that Newfoundland never has an opporleini ty to be equal i.n this Confederation, Mr. Speaker, and they will live to reqrei it one day. SOME lION.

MEMBERS: lear, hear pRl:MrElf PECEFO11I): And that is what saddens me most about this whole affair since it became hot and heavy and since it has pot the public focus that it has pot since we started to neqotiate and since we put the proposal on the table last January. So T want, on behalf of the qovernmcnt and of the members on this side of the House,to put this resolution forward for the opportunity to say that there are Group and political parties in this Province who have since January 25, 1982, the election of April 6th. notwithstandinci because, Mr. Speaker, do you know what April 6th. proves?

That there is a lot of wisdom in the crowd,that very often the people are a head of their leaders. SOME LION. MEMBERS: llcar, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: That is what April 6th. proves- way ahead of their leaders. SOME LION. MEMBERS: Hear, hc'a r li I

November 9, 1982 Tape 2100 PK - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Then every day to have to sit and listen or stand and listen or jr ' to sleci, and listen to five Newfoundlanders in Ottawa who will not stand up for their Province as having the some riuhts in Confederation o Saskatchewan has, as Alberta has, or B.C. has, or Ontario has, who will swivel away and quctly say notihinq, quitely say nothing! They have to come back, Mr. Speaker, and try to get re-elected.

And no amount of fanfare over Canada Works, no amount of lanfiure over calling up this one or that one down in this particular district, and this particular community and say,'I got you this $20,000 or $30,000'is going to buy off a Nowloundlander who knows that these same people sold them out in the house of Commons. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Fleer, hear PREMIER PECK1ORD: You know why, Mr. Speaker? Because the next federal election - talk about trying to drag us 'ut of Confederation Mr. Trudeau is going to have to try another tactic. Mr. Turdeau does not know who he is intact with yet.

He should spend a bit more time in Newfoundland. When Mr. Trudeau gets involved with the Newfoundland people on a basic, fundamental issue, on which their very c>istence and livelihood to be equal in Canada is based ,then no amount of verbosity, no amount of verbal gymnastics, no amount of Canada Works or direct delivery to any part of Newfoundland is going to change Newfoundlanders or Labradorions minds on that. 4 I,

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2101 NM-i PREMIER PECKFORD: tell Mr. Rompkey now, and Mr. Baker and Mr. Tobin, and Mr. Simmons and Mr. Rooney riqht now that when the next federal election is called they better answer well to the people who elected them the last time around, because we will be there right ready to tell them. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: S PHEMIERPECKEORD: hero is our MP for Dunn-St. George's (Mr. R. Simmons), "A Strong Voice in Ottawa", Like he was a stronq voice over here on the Opposition side of the House? Yes, some strong voice'. MR. MORGAN: That is a laugh.

PREMIER PECKFORD: The place for the member for Burin-St. George's, and I told him here in this House to his face two or three times, was to have the courage of his convictions and come out and run against me in Green Bay where everybody knew him at the time. SOME lION. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. MORGAN: He would not dare. PREMIER PECKFORD: Because he ran away. He ran away. MR. NEARY: Are you going to run in the next federal election? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh: PREMIER PECKEORD: So that is one reason, Mr. Speaker.

That is one reason because the debates in this House of Assembly are very important documents in the history of Newfoundland, very important documents. And it must be recorded, for the benefit of the people on this side of the House it must be recorded that those, over the last eight or nine months, nine or ten months now, who have refused to pick up the cause of our proposal and support it completely, categorically, those who have refused to do that will have their day to answer of why Newfoundland in 2010 or 2020 is still wallowing to rob Peter to pay Paul.

Why its government had to open the House and bring in a financial statement in the year 2009 because they got halfway through the year and found that the revenue was down. Because we will be always in the same t4 14 S

November 9, 1982 Tape 2101 NM - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: kind of circumstances that we are in today, Mr. Speaker, unless and until through revenues from offshore, through revenues from a change in the Upper Churchill, we can get out of the financial straight jacket that we have always been in, and that we ensure,more importantly, that we use the oil and the oil does not use us. We use the oil for fish, we use the oil for trees, we use the oil and the revenue for the renewable resources that will be here when oil is gone. That is why, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Neary) and bi 'arty have lost so badly,because they did not understand what "iewfoundlanders understood, that when we talked about oil we were really talking about fish, we were really talking about trees. Because in order to do the economic uplifting that is necessary in this Province you have (ct to be able to access a whole pooi of money, $500 million, $600 million, $700 million a year, just to replace equalization, and then build on top of that to bring us up. We have qot to do a whole bunch of catch up first and that is $500 million or $600 million. That is only catch up. Catch up what?

To replace equalization. No catch up at all. It is after we replace that $500 million that we start to catch up. We have to buii ahove the $500 million - $600 million now it is. 4 4 4 L H

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2102 SD - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: We are no better off if we just create another $600 million, not one cent, not one penny.

It i f.nr the 10fl mil.1 ion that we start to get better off. i\nd then there are those who say - Hio L;1 1 outside the Province, thank God - hat somehow we are greedy, that we are selfish , selfish because we want to be number five or number six in Canada that we are not satisfied to just take somebody else's wealth to build our community stages, to take somebody else's wealth to pay our UIC, to take somebody else's wealth to build the roads and all the other water and sewer facilities or whatever it is we have to build in the Province.

We are not satisfied with that because being a human being - not being Now foundlanders, not be fnq Canadians, not beinq Americans, not being Chineses or Frenchmen - being human beings mean that you have the dignity that you want to do it by the sweat of your own brow and create your own dollars and then contribute back into the larger whole of which you are a part the political jurisdiction that you are a part of. The silence is deafening, Mr. Speaker, the silence is deafening all across this Nation and especially amonq those of the leadership of this Province who have come to me, hundreds of them.

And my only answer back to them is: Tell me what is wrong with the proposal. Tell me what is un-Canadian about it. The onus is on you, the onus is on Newfoundlanders today, on the Liberal Party, the NDP Party, every orqanizabion, every individual in Newfoundland and Labrador and every individual in Canada to tell the Newfoundland Government what is wrong with that proposal. Why cannot that work for the good of Newfoundland and the good of Canada? And when they can answer that question and show to us that somehow we are being deficient or somehow we are being selfish , we will negotiate, we will negotiate.

But until somebody can show us where we are wrong,

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2102 SD - 2 PREMIER_PECKFORD: where we have gone wrong in our proposal—obviously it shines pretty bright, it must shine pretty bright, everybody stays away from it. And then secondly, Mr. Speaker, secondly, you have the Prime Minister of 3 14 14

November 9, 1982 Tape 2103 EC - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: Canada stand up at a gathering in the past week and try to raise the spectre - as other people have tried to raise tqainst me personally for quite a few years now - raise LIie spcere of separation, the spectre of referendum anmi iLl the rost of it. Somehow the Canadian Government, even though Alberta never had a claim, could give them their oil. Somehow the Canadian Government could give to Saskatchewan, even though they had no claim, the oil. Somehow they could give to Ontario and to Quebec all the resources, even though they had no claim.

But when it comes to Newfoundland, because now it is 1982 and not 1930, the same rules do not apply. Shame: Shame: We are too late. Somehow the rules got changed on us. Somehow the rules got changed on us. History has struck a queer and unfair blow to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. Because we are where we are, in 1982, we are not to be treated the same as Albertans were treated in 1930 or 1920, or whenever. So the Prime Minister can stand up then in Ottawa at a political gathering and raise the Separatist spectrc,Mr.

Spaaicer, and I think, as I have said already publicly, that what we object to is that the Prime Minister needed to say anything at all. It is not so much what he said as why say it at all. Why was it necessary to say it at all? If in fact there is still a chance for a political settlement on this very vital issuc,then let us try to refrain from being provorative one with the other so that the proper climate can be created, and,if there is the slightest possibility of change, that we can get back to the table and negotiate a settlement. But no. I guess the Prime Minister was advised, one way perhaps to get to

November 9, 1982 Tape 2103 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD. Peckford, boy, might be to start raising this business - a lot of people now in Newfoundland are talking about it - that a lot of people seem,when you mention to them, you know, that the Premier, he might be a Separatist, you know, he might be trying to take Newfoundland out of Confederation. Perhaps that IF is the way to get at the Government of Newfoundland, that might be a vulnerable spot, that might be a weak spot in the armour of the Government of Newfoundland.' Well, I have news for the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker. As I said in Question Period, I have news for the Prime Minister. •1

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2104 MJ - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: We are not going to get overly :ited about what the Prime Minister said. The only point want to make on that is simply that his comments were ecessary, completely unnecessary, and they have destroyed any chance in the next month or two for us getting together and trying to negotiate this very difficult problem. Because nobody is talking about separation, nobody is talking about referendum. What we are talking about is trying to get a fair and equal deal the same as other people who live in this country. That is what we are asking fo' - no more, no less.

And that has been interpreted in some political quarters as somehow to be a bad Canadian. I think that we have demonstrated many, many times, Newfoundlanders and Labradoriaris and this government, that we are good Canadians. But that does not mean that we are going to lie down, Mr. Speaker, and take the crumbs as they give them out to us like some of them would like us to do. Ohno We will negotiate and we will negotiate firmly on all the things that come across our bow, and we will defend the riqhts that we believe we have under the Constitution. That is all we ask.

So when the Prime Minister tries to raise the spectre of separation referendum,he does a great injustice both to himself and to Canada and ,most especially, not to me, but to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians,to the Canadians who live in this Province. That is who is doing an injustice to because all they are askinq for - they do not want to be lectured al - all they are anking for is a fair deal, the same kind of deal that the ther Canadians have gotten over the years. And the hon. 'Lerrtbers on the opposite side, just recently the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. S.

Neary) suddenly came out one day with a statement, suddenly he supports - he does net support our proposal, I do not think, I do not think he said that,but he supports better revenue sharing,whatever that means ,and

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2104 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: some say over the management of the development. MR. S. NEARY: These are the cn1v two items that are stopping an accommodation. PREMIER PECKFORD: And permanence too is a oro'om and trigger ooint is also a problem. MR. NEARY: They were not when. PREMIER_PECKFORD: You negotiated it, sure that is right, I forgot. Where was I when all this went on? Do not be foolish. Do not be silly. Act sensible. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER PECKFORD: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. S.

Neary) , different from some of the other Leaders of the Opposition-I will give him credit as long as he stands to it but where the Leader of the Opposition fell down is that because that proposal is on the table, the Leader of the Opposition should have said, 'Look, Prime Minister, people of Newfoundland, people of Canada, we support the principles contained in that proposal.' Not every last dot and cross every T and all of the rest of it, but, "We support those principles that are being enunciated by the Government of Newfoundland on behalf of Newfoundianders.

And it is clear that the majority of Newfoundlanders sii000rt it. MR. B. TTJLK: Ee wanted it rocorded in blood. PREMIER PECKFORD: No, you want it the right way so nobody can misinterpret it. The member for Foqo (Mr. Tulk) knows better than that,or should know better by this time. MR. J. MORGAN: He does not know any better. PREMIER_PECKFORD: Do not weasel around. Stand up and be counted. Do not be like Mr. Rompkey. Do not be like Mr. Baker and hide away and now and then come out with a little wormy statement. 41,

November 9, 1982, Tape 2105, Page 1 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: Stand up and he a man, stand up and be counted on principles. MR. TULK: You are trying to fight an election at a cost to Newfoundland. PREMIER_PECKFORD: There you go, Mr. Speaker. There it is. We are just fighting an election at the cost of Newfoundland. Forget about the long-term, Mr. Speaker, just think about the short-term. There they are, short-term politicians, Mr. Speaker. And how short they got. How short they went. From eighteen to eight, that is how short they went. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh, yes: Oh, yes: The member for Fogo(Mr. Tulk) knows where he is well off. The members for Fogo knows where he is well off, yes. MR. MORGAN: (Inaudible) to get you a job. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes. Yes. Well, Mr. Speaker, it makes no difference, the member for Fogo has not taken a clear stand, lie has been all over the place, everybody knows that. Why waste time on somebody who really knows all that? So, Mr.

Speaker, it is for these two reasons, one, that just for the record, for the record of this house, I feel obliged to indicate that we have a proposal on the table that has not been answered, has not been answered in any way, shape or form.

And really, I suppose, it is pretty hard that after all the hurly-burlying, and all the talk and all the rest of it by the federal authorities, I think just about everybody, even the people on the Opposite side of the House, in their own hearts and souls, and,I would say, by far, 90 per cent of Newfoundlanders, the people in the press, everybody figured for sure that the federal government, Mr. Lalonde, was not coming down to Newfoundland and putting the Nova Scotia agreement on the

November 9, 1982, Tape 2105, Page 2 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: table. I would say, if you took a poli at that time, most people would have said, By the Lord Harry, they are going to come down with something now that is going to be pretty hard for the Government of Newfoundland to turn down. They are going to have to accept this one. This is it now, after seven months and all the talk What a Newfie ]oke What an insult to our intelligence, to our way of doing things A proposal on which meetings had been held between the two sides, and then to wait seven months to come down and put that on the table.

Well, if we were not more civilized, Mr. Speaker, I dare say we would have thrown him in the harbour. MR. TTJLK: How low. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, that is how low. That is how low, Mr. Speaker, for any Minister of Energy in Canada to wait seven months to put only on the table what was already there after all the fanfare. MR. NEARY: Do not be acting like the Minister of Public Works(Mr. Young). PREMIER PECKFORD: No, Mr. Speaker, we did not throw him in the harbour, we treated him mannerly, courteously, with hospitality and all the rest of it.

But it has to grate any individual1 it has to grate any individual to think that after seven months on such a fantastic issue, a monumental issue,that the best that the federal government could do was to come down and put on the table the same thing as they had put on in Nova Scotia months before without even answering one comma in our proposal. An incredible turn of events! 4 4 1

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2106 ah-1 PREMiER PECK1ORD: And as I say, as I introduce the debate , you know, it is unbelievable and it could only haen in Newfoundland. it would not happen anywhere else. There would be a national outrage about it, an national outrage. So, Mr.Speaker, we just want to make those two points. One, that we iro still waiting on the federal government for some kind of reasonable and rational response to a nroposal that has been sitting there since January 1982.

And secondly,we are saddened and regret that the Prime Minister of this nation saw fit this past week to destroy any chance, with the provacative comments he made somehow implying that this government somehow wishna to move itself or to move this Province out of Confederation. To make those comments and to imply that kind of thing, to imply that kind of thinq to this qovernment must be rejected by me as the leader of the government and as Premier of the Province, must be rejected outright.

The Prime Minister can make those statments till he is blue in the face but he will not push this Province out of Confederation. He can try all he like. He can do it through the back door, the side doer or the front door. We will come back to the Prime Minister every time and say to him,'Answer our Canadian proposal. Answer our proposal for a settlement which will give Newfoundland a fair share and give Canada a fair share so that we do have the chance to be equal in this Confederation.

So , Mr.Speaker, we will wait and see over the next few months whether these kind of statements continue by the Prime Minister or other members of the cieral government. We hope they do not. And we hope that ,,ncy see in the proposal that we have on the table the elements and the principles for an agreements which will 14 L 1

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2106 ah-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: take us out of this impasse It would be sad to think, Mr. Speaker, that a year from now we face - you know, we talk about facing a bleak time now. We have some budget problems as do all the governments of Canada and we will deal with it and we will do what has to be done.

But hiat is only momentary, that is only a small window in timi it would be extremely unfortunate that a year or two years from now we find ourselves as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians no further ahead on the Upper Churchill and no further ahead on the offshore and still with a government in Ottawa that controls 80 or 90 per cent of our fishery, and we are left to try to make our way and to balance our budget on trees and fish without any meaning- full 1ccess to the rest of it. One of the startling statistics when people talk about management and controlling their development and so on1 Mr.

Speaker, one easy way, one simplistic way, and I think most Newfoundlanders understand when we talk about directing the development so it does not overheat the economy and all the rest of it,that you still have a good interface between your fishery and your offshore and so on. MR.NEARY: Do not be such a fool, boy, overheating the economy. PREMIER PECKFORD: Ask Norway what happened on that score. I

November 9,1982 Tape 2107 PK 1 MR. NEARY: The only one who is in heat is you. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh PREMIER PECKFORD: There you go, Mr. Speaker. That is our alternate Premier over there. SOME FION. MEMBERS: Oh, oh: PREMIER PECKFORD: That is our alternative. That is what we have, the best we got. MR. NEARY: At least you are thinking about (inaudible). PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I stay awake every night thinking about it, Mr. Speaker. I have not gotten any sleep now ever since the Leader of the Opposition became more than interim leader of the Opposition because nobody else wants the job.

But in any case, my point was simply this: Look at the fishery, Mr. Speaker, look at the fishery. MR. NEARY: He is almost as bad as Haig - almost. PREMIER PECKFORD: How many federal employees of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans find their residences in the Province of Nova Scotia and how many federal employees of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans find their residences in the Province of New Brunswick - because Mr. LeBlanc was there for a while - how many in total?

I am told there is somewhere around, in total, 1,600 federal employees working for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. How many are in Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker? Somewhere between 400 and 600. Now, Mr. Speaker, what do they manage? I guess the New Brunswick federal officials of Fisheries and Oceans manage the fishery in New Brunswick and the Nova Scotians who live in Nova Scotia manage the Nova Scotia fishery. No, Mr. Speaker. 41, 1 7

November 9, 1982 Tape 2107 PK - 2 AN HON. MEMBER: The Bay of Fundy. PREMIER PECKFORD: Two-thirds of the resource that they manage is in Newfoundland and two-thirds of the employees are in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick - MR. MORGAN: That is right. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame, shame PREMIER PECKFORD: - just the opposite to what it should be. Sixteen hundred employees should be in Newfoundland helping to eliminate our unemployment problem and the 600 should be in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.

And so if you want to simplistically look at management of the offshore, just think about what happened in the fishery when that was given away for the most part, or traded away or negotiated away, legitimately negotiated away in 1949; it has meant that two-thirds of the people who managed two-thirds of the stock live away from where the resource is. What would happen, I wonder, Mr. Speaker, what would happen on the offshore, what would happen on the offshore?

If that happened in the fisheries - 1,600 of the federal fisheries people managing the fishery of Newfoundland from Nova Scotia and New Brunswick and only 600 from here - what would happen as the peak of the offshore development? 1 F

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2108 SD - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: There would be a run on people in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia like you would not believe, There would be a run on ponpie like you would not believe. And so I guess to forget about the OO feLon i.e hr .iseeoIn; of management and control and S direction and social and cultural considerations and dimensions to the problem, one only has to look at the employment situation and what has happened in the fishery. And we do not want that to happen here, Mr. Speaker.

If we have the majority of the resource, which we do, we have all the oil and as much gas as Nova Scotia has - they have a little bit of gas - the same thing is going to happen: two-thirds of them will be up there supposedly managing the gas but really managing the oil, and one-third of them will be down here.- the same kind of thing as we have in the fishery. They got less than one-third of the hydrocarbons, we got more than two-thirds,and the same thing will happen; they will have over two-thirds of the employment and we will have less than one-third of the employment.

That is the great danger simply put, simplistically put, but I think it accurately makes the point. In any case, Mr.

Speaker, I just want to conclude by saying that Labrador and the Upper Churchill is a very important issue For Ncwfoundlanders, and there are other vdry many important issues, but the offshore oil and gas and the promise that it holds to enhance our financial well-being, to enhance our fishery, to give us a chance to really do the things that we have always wanted to do but could not do because we never had the money, we must use it to our benefit, wrestle it to the ground and use it to develope S Newfoundland in our way so we still have a Newfoundland left and not a hamilton, Ontario.

The hydro is important, the fish is important, and so is offshore oil and gas. And I believe the day is going to have to come 1 whether it is this year, next 4 14 1 q

November 9, 1982 Tape No.2108 SD - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: year or the year after, when whoever are in power in Ottawa are going to have to say, 'Boys, we got to go down a strike a deal with them because they are not going to go away. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hoar, hear. PREMIER PECKFORD: Nothing to do with court decisions, nothing to do with proposals, nothing to do with anything else - Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are not going to go away. And those Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who believe that we deserve a fair share of the offshore are not going to go away. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hear, hoar.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Newfouncllanders and Labradorians who believe in a change in the Upper Churchill contract are not going to go away. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who believe in a greater share in the fishery are not going to go away. And some day, some day soon,I hope, there will be a realization up-along - MR. NEARY: Some day have-not will be no more. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, that is right. MR. NEARY: Oh, boy Oh, boy PREMIER PECKFORD: That is right, exactly. You are learning fast. You are learning fast, after ten years you are not doing a bad job. And, Mr.

Speaker, that is the great strength that Newfoundland has. It has it in its people who are not going to go away and their firm belief that what they are saying on those major issues is being very much a Canadian and also very much a Newfoundlandor. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. 4 L 211

November 9, 1982 Tape 2109 NM - MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please: I would like to welcome to our galleries today two visitors from Garnish, in the district of Grand Bank, Mr. and Mrs. Melvin Grandy. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Mn QDVAVVD- The hon. Leader of the Opposition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear'. Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to say that I followed MR. STAGG: One day you will come prepared. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the Premier was not interrupted when he was speaking and I trust that I will get the same courtesy from the other side of the House. Mr.

Speaker, I followed what the Premier had to say with a great deal of interestand I am sorry to say that there was nothing new in what the Premier said. As a matter of fact,I was wondering when he was going to get to the resolution. The hon. gentleman talked about everything under the sun except the resolution itself. Only in the last part, the last fifty or sixty seconds,did the hon. gentleman refer at all to the resolution. Now, Mr.

Speaker, during his remarks the Premier made a number of statements that I would consider to be anything but honest, a number of statements that I would consider, if not corrected, could leave the wrong impression and could mislead this House and indeed mislead the people of this Province. The Premier has a technique for being very loose with his words, in the way that he plays with the truth, Mr. Speaker.

I found that out observing the Premier from very close quarters in the last several years,that when he qoes into one of these fits of anger that he seems to have quite often, when he becomes hysterical,hc does not seem to be responsible for what he says t 7

Noventher 9, 1982 Tape 2109 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: and in the process some of these remarks that the hon. gentleman has made over the last two or three years, Mr. Speaker, have done the Newfoundland people and the reputation of this Province enormous damage. The Premier, as I said so often in this House and outside of this House, Mr. Speaker, is a well- meaning, well-intentioned individual, but he just does not seem to comprehend. He does not understand things, especially heavy items such as have you negotiate an agreement. The hon. gentleman does not understand that negotiations are a two-way street.

He just does not understand. It takes two to tango, The hon. gentleman does not understand that'ke maybe the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) who nas observed the way that union and management negotiate agreements, it is give and take, and you stay at the negotiating table until there is an agreement. L 7

November 9, 1982 Tape 2110 EC - 1 MR._NEARY: The Premier does not seem to understand that, Mr. Speaker. And if anybody in this world is responsible for provocative statements, for damaging relations, for creating a bad atmosphere between this Province and the Government of Canada, it is none other than the hon. gentleman who just took his seat. lie could not resist the temptation in his remarks, Mr. Speaker, to have a little dart at Mr. Rompkcy and the four other Liberal MPs from Newfoundland. He did not have a go at Mr. McGrath or Mr. Crosbie. MR. TOBIN: No, because they are Newfoundlanders. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: hear, hear! MR. NEARY: Oh, they are Newfoundlanders 4 I see. They are Newfoundlanders, Mr. Speaker. The hon. gentleman says they are Newfoundlanders. Mr. Speaker, do you have to be a Tory to be a Newfoundlander? Is that what the hon. gentleman is saying? And is the hon. gentleman toeing the party line saying that the only right way to do things is the Tory way, there is no other way? That is what the Premier just told us; if you do not do it the Tory way there is no other way to do it. Mr.

Speaker, the hon. the Premier is going to go down in the history of this Province as being the biggest flop and the biggest failure in the whole political history of Newfoundland. The Premier is continuously wrong. The Premier is wrong, wrong, wrong! i-he is so wrong that people are beginning to wonder if ho is ever going to be right. lie was wrong on the provincial Day of Mourning. MR. BAIRD: Fie was right in the last election, was he not? SOME I-ION. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! L 2 '

November 9, 1982 Tape 2110 EC - 2 NEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, if that is what it is all about, if that is their concern, if all they are concerned about is politics, if all they are concerned about is whether they are going to be elected or defeated, or if they are concerned about whether or not the Liberals are going to win federally or whether Mr. Rompkey and the four other MP5 are going to be re- elected, if that is all they are concerned about, why do they not say SO? Why do they not have the courage to get up front and say what they are doing, Mr.

Speaker, is fighting the next federal election and they have no intention, no intention of signing on agreement or negotiating an agreement until that is over? SOME lION. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would ask to be heard in silence. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. NEARY: Could I be heard in silence? MR. SPEAKER (Dr. McNicholas) : Order, please MR. NEARY: So, Mr. Speaker, when the hon. the Premier made the statement that he made a half hour or so ago that the proposal that was laid on the table by this government was ignored by Ottawa, that was a false statement. It was just not true.

And the Minister of Energy (Mr. Marshall), seated to the right of the Premier, knows that that is not true. In September,when Mr. LaLonde came to Newfoundland, he brought with him a proposal that was handed to the hon. gentleman - MP TtlTiC A counter offer. MR. NEARY: - a counter proposal. Now, Mr. Speaker, if the Premier has not received that proposal, it is only because his Minister of Energy did not give it to him, 2 'E

November 9, 1982 Tape 2111 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: it is only because the Premier did not want to see it. Now how do I know that, Mr. Speaker? 110w do I kno' there was a counter aroposal? And remember negotiations are proposals, counter proposals, neqotiations, talking until you reach an agreement. Is that not correct? Does that make any sense? Is that common sense? How do I know there is a proposal? Well, Mr. Speaker, I happened to be sitting down one evening watching the CBC News and I saw Mr.

Rick Seaward, I think it was, discuss this matter of offshore and proposals, and he produced on the CBC a proposal, a federal proposal, And I said to myself, 'That is funny. The Premier of this Province has been saying there is no counter proposal [rom Ottawa.' So I started the next morning to search for that counter proposal and I am happy to say that I found it. Through devious and various ways I found the proposal, the federal proposal, and in case hon. gentlemen think that I am MR. BAIRD: Which one do you agree with? MR. NEARY: That is not the point, r. speaker. MR.

TOBIN: How many times have you been on television. MR. NEARY: The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker- and I cannot accuse the Premier of deliberately misleadinu .his House or misleading the people of this Province, he probably did not know the difference. He made the statement probably in iqnorance, ignorance of the facts, Maybe the Minister of Energy (Mr. Marshall) forgot to lay the proposal on the Premier's desk - here is the federal proposal. I am holdinq it here in my hand. ER. TOBIN: Is that the one Roger Simmons Saici li( V1)111 not L

November 9, 1982 Tape 2111 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, there was a counter proposal,and the obvious thing to happen once this counter proposal was made was for the two parties to continue negotiations until an agreement was reached. That wao the obvious next step. We had a provincial proposal on the table, we had a counter proposal from the Government of Canada. The Minister of Transportation (Mr. Dawe) is shaking his head. I am holding it in my hand. MR. DAWE: Holding what? MR. NEARY: I am holding the federal proposal right here. Look. MR. CALLAN: He should be holding you. MR. NEARY: The obvious next step,Mr.

Speaker, was for the two parties to continue to negotiate until all itonis in both agreements had been settled to the mutual satisfaction of both parties,and the people of this Province and the Canadian people as a whole. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if the Premier has shown his caucus the federal proposal. Now, Mr. Speaker, having said that, having produced the federal document that explodes the statement made by the Premier,let me say this, that I do not necessarily agree with all the items in the federal proposal, no more than I agree with all the items in the provincial proposal.

There are two outstanding items, as far as I can see,that are stopping a negotiated agreement between the two rarties What are these items? They are revenue sharing and management or control of the resource. (4 I,

November 9, 1982, Tape 2112, Page 1 -- apb MR._NEARY: Mr. Speaker, let me deal With revenue sharing. The Premier took to the airways in a ProvincewideDroacIcast a few weeks ago and he used charts to tell the people of this Province that once the revenue from Hibernia was shared between the Government of Canada and Newfoundland that other revenues from other oil fields would he capped. That is the term he used. lIe said, after Hibernja there would be no revenues to Newfoundland, there would be a cap put on the revenue. That statement, Mr. Speaker, is false and misleading and is not true. Now, how do I know that?

I took the opportunity over the weekend to spend an hour with the federal Minister of Energy, I wanted to discuss these two points, revenue sharing and management of the resource. This morning I had a call from the Minister of Energy, the hon. Jean Chretien, who told me that revenue will accrue to the Province on all oil fields. Not only one oil field, but if there are two we will get our share of the revenue, if there are three we will get our share of the revenue. That is the truth of the matter. There is no cap, that is false and untrue and misleading. MR. BAIRD: You would believe Chretien, would you? MR.

NEARY: I would believe him before I would believe the hon. gentleman who does not know, who does not understand, Mr. Speaker. The hon. gentleman is like the Premier, he just does not understand. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is no cap on revenue. Now, the revenue may drop on oil field two, and drop on oil field three, and drop on oil field four, and if we get four or five oil fields we may be asked to share revenue with the other provinces of Canada. Mr. Speaker, there is no cap. And anybody who makes that statement is trying to mislead, deliberately mislead the people of this Province. 4427

November 9, 1982, Tape 2112, Page 2 -- apb MR. NEARY: Now, Mr. Speaker, the revenue sharing is negotiable; both of these items, by the way, are negotiable items, Mr. Speaker, both of them. The revenue sharing and management of the resource are negotiable items. Revenue sharing, you are talking about money, that can be negotiated. And the management of the resource, which is the makeup of the Committee that will control and manage the development, that is a negotiable item, Mr. Speaker. 1 4 4 7 Fl

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2113 ah-1 MR. NEARY: That is why I said that the Premier apparently does not understand the wa'' negotiations work. He is a nice fellow. He is a nice f:ellow and he means well,but he just has not got what it takes. He has not got what it takes. MR. YOUNG: He is the best Premier in Cana1a MR.NEARY: The Premier in his remarks almost got down to the same level as the Minister of Public Works (Mr.Young) . And if I were the Minister of Public Works , the guttersnipe, the hon. guttersnipe,I would go back to my seat, Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speakera point of order.

MR.SPEAKER (McNicholas): A point of order. MR.MARSIIALL: The hon. gentleman uses unparliamentary words when he refers to the hon. Minister of Public Works as a guttersnipe and I think he should be made to withdraw them. MR.NEARY: Show me. MR. NODDER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. member for Port au l'orL. MR. HODDER: There is nothing in Beauchesne, Mr. Speaker, or in our Standing Orders which precludes the member from using the word 'guttersnipe. MR.MARSIIALL: Mr. Speaker, it is clearly there. MR. NEARY: Show us where it is. Tell us where it is.

MR.WARREN: Go on outboy,and have a smoke. MR.MARSIIALL: It is clearly , Mr. Speaker, in the Standing Orders that members cannot use insultinq language to other members and that is obviously unparliamentary. SOME lION. MEMBERS: Oh, oh t4 311

November 9,1982 Tape No. 2113 ah-2 MR.MARSHALL: On page 114 of Beauchesne: "Unparliamentary words may be brought to the attention of the House." It is impossible to lay down any specific rules in regard to injurious reflections uttered in debate against particular Members, or to declare beforehand what expressions are or are not contrary to order; much depends upon the tone and manner, and intention, of the person speaking; sometimes upon the person to whom the words are addressed, as, whether he is," etc., etc.

But, Mr.Speaker, it is obvious and it is a matter that hardly needs statement by authority, even though I have given it, but insulting words of that nature are unparliamentary. MR.NEARY: If it will make the hon. gentleman happy, although I know I am in order, Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw the statement because I do not want to be sidetracked. This is too serious a matter, Mr. Speaker. If I hurt the feelings of the two hon. gentlemen, I withdraw, Mr. Speaker. I am not interested in getting sidetracked off this subject at all.

But I know the hon. gentleman just got up to try to use up some of my time because I am making some pretty hard hitting points. Mr. Speaker, now let me carry on. Negotiations, as I have said, should have continued. Now what happened after that, Mr. Speaker? Well, Mr. Lalonde was transferred to another department and the hon. John Chretien took over. And then a meeting took place between the Prime Minister and the Premier. Now, did anyone expect that meeting to succeed? Only a day or two prior to meotinq with Lhe Prime Minister, the Premier of IL h 3 11

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2113 ah - 3 MR. NEARY: this Province, out in Grand FaLls, hurled insults at Ottawa and at the Prime Minister - only a couple of days before he left for the meeting. Now, Mr. Speaker, if Iwas going to go down to the Bank of Montreal to borrow money, would I insult the manager here in this House before I went down and ask him if I could borrow some money from him? MR. BAIRD: In your case you could do anything. p

November 9, 1982 Tape 2114 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: That would be pretty poor strategy on my part, Mr. Speaker, pretty poor strategy. So nobody expected the meeting with the Prime Minister and the Premier of this Province to succeed. MR. TULK : The Premier made sure it soul d not. MR. NEARY : And the Premier made darn good and sure, because, Mr. Speaker, everyone in this Province knows now what kind of a game the Premier is playing; he is fighting the next federal election, and he has no intentions of negotiating an agreement offshore until the election is over, hoping that Mr. Clark will give him a better deal.

Well, Mr. Clark has been pretty silent on that matter lately, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Clark is making no commitments to the hon. qentleman. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, the Tory MPs that I talked to in Ottawa tell me that the Premier of this Province is an embarrassment to Mr. Clark - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: - and they cannot wait for the Supreme Court decision, we are told by the rpories in Ottawa. They say the hon. gentlenian is an embarrassment. Mr. Speaker, the Premier is playing a very dangerous game indeed. When the next federal election is called, it may be a completely new ball game.

You may have new faces, new players; you will have new players in that game and you will have new policies. So what do we have to do, wait another two years before we sit down and negotiate? - waste another two years? We have wasted ten years already and it is going to be seven or eight years before the development starts, even after we get a negotiated settlement. 4L4 3 )

November 9, 1982 Tape 2114 EC - 2 MR._NEARY: Now, Mr. Speaker, one other point before I get off that particular item. The meeting took place between a Lhe Prime Minister and the Premier. Now, should that be :he end of it, Mr. Speaker? Should that be the end of it? he hon. Jean Chrctien, who has a success record that is unequalled in Canada for negotiating agreements, for instance, for negotiating with the provinces the constitution - MR. TULK: He did something that could not be done in fifty years. MR. NEARY: lie did something that could not be done in a hundred years. MR. BAIRD: And then he uc and left.

SOME FION. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, do not make me laUgh! Mr. Speaker, nobody but nobody in this government, as of this day, nobody has met with Mr. Chretien to talk about continuing negotiations, nobody. There have been no meetings between a minister in this government and the hon. John Chretien, the federal Minister of Energy. They will not even return his telephone calls. MR. TULK: Right on! MR.NEARY: In that the crowd, Mr. Speaker, who are interested in a negotiated settlement? And I have to say this before I wind up this part of my remarks, that they have come a long way. S '4 0

November 9, 1982 Tape 2115 PK - 1 MR. NEARY: I remember the day in this House when the present Premier stood in his seat and said, 'We own the resource and everybody can go jump in the lake. We are not negotiating. We are nOt going to give up the ownership of the resource, it is ours, and they can come on their hands and knees to us. What has happened now, Mr. Speaker? The hon. gentleman accuses the Opposition of talking out of both sides of their mouth. We supported the Premier on that, because the people on this side, the Liberals, historically and trdiLionil1y suy we own the resource. MR.

BAIRD: I know you were not for us. MR._NEARY: Well, what did the Premier do? What did the Premier do? He said before he would go into negotiations, lay the ownership aside forever. That is what the hoe. gentleman said. That was talking out of both sides of your mouth. We owned it and we are not going to talk to anybody on anything else, the ownership is ours: And then he changed his mind and he said, 'Lay the ownership aside forever and we will sit down and negotiate with you'. MR. DINN: What did Trudeau say over at the University? MR. NEARY: And who was the first one to take it to court, the ownership question?

Put it before - AM ñM M'MTPP. 'lI- ,4,-1 - MR. NEARY: Oh, Mr. Speaker, the federal government Now the hon. gentleman has really walked into something. MR. DINN: - through the SIU case. That is what is wrong. 4 1

November 9, 1982 Tape 2115 PR - 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, what did the Appeals Court of Ontario do in the SIC case? They ignored the federal intervention and they ruled strictly on the labour relations aspect of the case. i1P.. DINN: After the fact. Hindsight is wonderful, is it not? SOME lION._MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: Ah, hindsight is great on the Upper Churchill too, is it not? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, they ignored the intervention. But, Mr.

Speaker, by that time the Premier of this Province had gone off his rocker, had taken the easy way out and put the matter before the Newfoundland Appeals Court. The first move to put the matter before the court, the ownership question before the court, was done by the Premier of this Province. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am appalled, I am appalled that the Premier and his colleagues are so obviously, even anxiously, Mr. Speaker, willing to continue to play politics with this question of the stalemat6 between the two governments in pursuit of an offshore settlement. Mr.

Speaker, I am still not convinced that the Premier is refusing to allow a settlement to occur until the next federal election, so that he can once again haul it out of its resting place the great spectre of the national bogeyman, the terrible feds, those nasty mainland politicians,those MPs who are less than Newfoundlanders if they are not Tories - MR. TOBIN: Tell us where you stand?

November 9, 1982 Tape 2115 PK - 3 MR. NEARY: - those people who are trying to take everything away from the poor old down-trodden Newfoundlander. Mr. Speaker, that is the largest, vilest, most sanctimonious lie ever perpetrated upon a populace since Richard Nixon told the American people, "Let me make this perfectly clear. MR. STAGG: Now he is reading his speech. You are not allowed to do that. MR._NEARY: No one in his right mind, Mr. Speaker, no one with even the gift of imagination could devise a scenario whereby a resolution worded in such a fashion could further cause an offshore settlement. I 4 4 A

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2116 SD - MR. NEARY: Look at the resolution, Mr. Speaker, look at it under your microscope and then study what it entails and find out its true nature, Mr. Speaker. The very first

WHEREAS" constitutes what I consider in my opinion to be a joke, that is, Mr. Speaker, a joke to those who have a warped, buttoned-down mind and a slanted sense of humour. It says:

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has sought • political settlement to the offshore resources question", what • preposterous, outlandish assertion. The truth is just the opposite, Mr. Speaker. The truth is that this government ran away from a political .settlement. They ran away from a political settlement last Fall when they decided to back out of negotiations, the hon. Minister of Energy (Mr. Marshall), who,I happen to feel, is the wrong person to negotiate for this Province anyway. It was not the federal governrnent,as the hon. member knows,who refused to negotiate.

Word is still coming down from Ottawa that they are prepared to get back to the barqainincj table, to get in a room - Mr. Chretien would be very happy to get in a room with somebody from this Province who he could talk to, who he could negotiate with. It takes two, Mr. Speaker, to tango. It was this Province that backed out. It was the federal government, Mr. Speaker, last September, that was left at the bargaining table, suspended in mid-air with its mouth open in astonishment wondering what was going on. Why was the Newfoundland Government ending negotiations?

Why was the Newfoundland Government refusing a negotiated settlement? Why was it cancelling any possibility of a solution to the offshore and the prosperity that it would mean to the people of this Province? Well, Mr. Speaker, we found out in April that the reason the Premier needed a fairy tale offer was so that he could call an unnecessary, costly, provincial election. Mr. Speaker, it is a political move. 4 14 .17

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2116 SD - 2 MR. TOBIN: And a good one at that. MR. NEARY: That is all they are interested in, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, it is so unethical in nature that it almost makes me gag. MR. TOBIN: Is it such a shame to will an election? MR. NEARY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, in case the hon. gentleman from the F3urin Peninsula is interested, the Premier and his mob managed to convince 27 per cent of 569,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that he was telling the truth, lie managed to convince 27 per cent of the population of this Province. Of course, Mr.

Speaker, if that is the case, he failed to convince the 168,000 eligible voters, some of whom did not bother to vote,

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2117 MJ - 1 me of whom voted for the people on this side of the House. C Jvlonty seven per cent - I will repeat that 1ust in case thc hon. gentlemen- any time they feel like getting too cocky * nd arrogant they better keep this figure in the backs of their minds; that all they managed to convince in this Province on this great issue of offshore, they managed to convince 27 per cont of 569,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to vote for them. MR. R. BAIRD: Yes. A big majority, 44 seats. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, the fact of the matter is that throughout the population of Newfoundland and Labrador there are 419,000 Newfoundlanclers and Labradorians, men, women and children who either cannot vote or refuse to vote or voted against the T'remier and his political highjackers in the last election. That is a lot of people, Mr. Speaker, who do not seem to have a voice or a say in the shenanigans of what we see going on in this House and outside the House. Now, let us take a look at the second

WHEREAS in the resolution: It says,' The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador placed a compromise proposal before the Federal Government on January 25, 1982,' Put, Mr. Speaker, this was long after the Province had abandoned the negotiating table. This was not a compromise proposal in any case, Mr. Speaker, it was a threat, it was a take it or leave it situation. And the threat was that if the Government of Canada did not respond to it hook, line and sinker,then there would be no point in negotiating. That was the threat.

The Premier has said on numerous occasions, I suppose on 100 or more occasions in this Province,that, there cannot be any preconditions to negotiations. Yet the oroposal ::hat he laid down had a precondition of his own attached to it. 4

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 21.17 MJ - 2 MR. S. NEARY: So, Mr. Speaker, what is sauce for the goose should be sauce for the qandor. Mr. Speaker, if the federal government cannot have preconditions to negotiations,then neither can the provincial government. The very definition of the word negotiate is that you barter on each point. You give and take. You make a concession hero and a concession there and you give a little ground here and you qivo a little ground there. Everything is negotiable at the outset until at least you have established certain mutual ground, common ground. I

November 9, 1982 Tape 2118 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: So, Mr. Speaker, I am sure that even members on the qovcrnment side sometimes look at the Frornior when he is making these statements about preconditions. Ttey must wonder what the logic is. What is the logic? Is the Premier and this government allowed to lay down preconditions, and nobody else can lay down preconditions? Is that the Tory way to negotiate? Now, Mr. Speaker, let us analyze the third "Whereas', 'WHEREAS the Government of Canada has not answered the proposal." Mr.

Speaker, did not the Premier a few weeks aqo force himself into the living rooms of every family in Newfoundland and Labrador to publicly reject the federal proposal? Is that not why he took to the airwaves? Is that not why, Mr. Speaker, the Premier forced his way into every household in this Province? Is that not why, Mr. Speaker, the Premier summoned the heads of churches to the Cabinet room recently?

Is that not why the Premierlast Thursday, summoned the heads of all the organizations in Newfoundland and Labrador to the Cabinet room and got told off by the President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Labour for playing politics and trying to suck the heads of the churches and the organizations into joining the Premier in the federal campaign that he is carrying on? Mr.

Speaker, if there was no federal proposal,why did he go to television and radio and the newspapers and put householder mailings in every house in Newfoundland and costly advertisements in the newspaper, and to call in the heads of the churches and the heads of the organizations last Thursday if there is no federal proposal? Because I am told what the hon. rntleman did was to compare one proposal with the other and then S try to force the heads of the churches, and the heads of the organizations to take a stand on one or the other proposal. That is not the way negotiations work, Mr.

Speaker, that is not the way they work and they are not qoing to work. It 414

November 9, 1982 Tape 2118 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: So the Premier is rejecting a federal counter proposal and he is telling us in the House today that there is no counter proposal. Mr. Speaker, that kind of atmosphere,in my opinion,seems to be lacking something or other. 'I 14 1

November 9, 1982, Tape 2119, Page 1 -- apb 11. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, look at

WHEREAS jiumber four.

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland continues - listen to this one, Mr. Speaker,

WHEREAS the Government of Ncwfoundland continues to seek a political settlement. Well, Mr. Speaker, I do not recall any invitation by the Premier of this Province, or his Energy Minister(Mr. Marshall) or his Deputy Energy Minister or anyone else, to the hon. Jean Chretien to come here and sit down and negotiate. And I can guarantee you, Mr. Speaker, right now, and I have it from the horse's mouth, that Mr. Chretien would welcome an opportunity to continue negotiations. MR. BAIRD: From the horse's mouth? MR. From the horse's month, alright. Mi.NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, if I was the hon. gentleman, in my simplicity and in my ignorance, both hon. gentlemen, I would keep quiet. Because they might show they know as little about these kinds of situations as their master, they just do not understand. Mr. Speaker, they have not invited the hon. Jean Chretien to come here and sit down and negotiate, and stay in a room until an agreement is reached. Mr. Chretien has stated publicly that if he could even get someone in this administration to answer the telephone calls he has made that he would be happy, let alone come out and have a meeting with him. Mr.

Speaker, as far as I know und I can ascertain, the hon. Jean Chretien is dying for an opportunity to get into a negotiating situation with somebody in this Province to negotiate an agreement. So if the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, led by the genius who spoke earlier in this debate this afternoon, asserts that JL is still seeking a political settlement in his resolution, then, Mr. Speaker, let them show their sincerity, let them 4 14

November 9, 1982, Tape 2119, Page 2 -- apb MR. NEARY: put action instead of words as their number one priority, and meet with the hon. Jean Chretien and stay in the room, Mr. Speaker, until they have a negotiated settlement. Not if you do not do it the Tory 1 way you do not do it, that is no way to negotiate. The Tory way has been wrong, Mr. Speaker. The Premier of this Province has been consistently wrong on every issue. On every issue that has come before this Government, the Premier has been consistently wrong. If he has been consistent in one thing, it is for being wrong. lie has been a failure.

And if the court case goes against the Government, goes against the Province, and for Newfoundland's sake I hope it does not, because we believe on this side of the House that Newfoundland owns the resource, you have nobody to blame, 1 14 14

November 9, 1982 Tape 2120 EC - 1 MR.NEARY: Mr. Speaker, but the Premier of this Province, who put the matter before the courts, Look the easy way out. And what about 'WHEREAS' number lye, Mr. Speaker? What does that say? What does 'WHEREAS' number five say? 'WHEREAS the Prime Minister of Canada has made statements which are provocative and unnecessary'. Well, Mr. Speaker, using what kind of logic I do not know, could you construe that statement as promoting a political settlement on the offshore? Is that resolution in itself not provocative? Is not that resolution in itself insulting? Mr.

Speaker, sometimes I wonder what kind of logic is locked up behind the doors down on the Eighth Floor and in the Cabinet room. I sometimes wonder, Mr. Speaker, inside of these doors if there are not fellows with white jackets. That is the kind of logic, Mr. Speaker, that is coming out of the Eighth Floor. That is not logic, Mr. Speaker, that is pernicious garbage. This resolution and this administration, the geniuses across the way, Mr.

Speaker, are asking you and me to believe that by announcing that the Prime Minister of Canada allegedly made provocative statements, that this will not promote a settlement or will promote a settlement on the offshore. MR. MARShALL: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentle- man is c;oinq Lo read a speech, perhaps he miqht tell us who wrote it for him. MR. NEARY: Cabot Martin did not do it or Frank Petten did not do it or the gawk from Springdale did not do it. The hon. qcntleman knows I am quite capable of writing a speech and putting a few paragraphs together. The hon. gentleman had better not get me started on him. Mr.

Speaker, the resolution does not say what provocative statements. The CBC 141411

November 9, 1982 Tape 2120 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: last night and the Eveninq Telegram yesterday published the statements in their entirety. The CBC last night went to great pains and great lengths - and I commend them for it- and so did I the Evening Telegram, to say, 'licro is exactly what the Prime Minister said,' responding to a question from one of the delegates at that great Liberal convention in Ottawa, and he was from the West. What did the Prime Minister say, Mr. Speaker? Did he mention Newfoundland? Did he mention offshore oil? Did he mention the name of the Premier of this Province? Mr.

Speaker, all the Prime Minister of this great country confirmed over the weekend to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador was that we have the same rights of self-determination as his own home province of Quebec, IF Li

November 9, 1982 Tape No. 2121 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: or Alberta or Saskatchewan or ay other province. One would have thought, Mr. Speaker, that the Premier of this Province and his little band of separatists - It anti-Canadians and anti-Confederates - would have dashed to the e1ex machine immediately to get a wire of thanks off to the Prime Minister to thank him for reaffirming democracy in Canada, in every provinceand reaffirming that majority rule is alive and well and healthy in Newfoundland and Labrador. Mr.

Speaker, one would have thought that the Premier and his motley crew would have dashed off to CN to send the Prime Minister a wire of congratulations - AN HON. MEMBER: For what? MR.NEARY: - on his astonishing astuteness in sayinq in the same breath in which he reaffirmed democracy in Canad