April 11, 2000 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 15

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statement by Members

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

MR. WISEMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today on a sad note as we acknowledge the passing of Gregory J.

Campbell, one of this Province's leaders in the business community. Greg was a

businessman who was involved in a number of successful companies including the

Campbell Group of Companies which include Campbell's Ship Supplies Limited,

Campbell's Meat Market Limited, SME Limited, and Striker Offshore. As well, he

was involved in several other businesses.

Mr. Speaker, from the very beginning of the offshore, Greg played an active

role in the development of this Province's offshore industry.

Mr. Speaker, Greg Campbell was a kind and gentle man who has made a

tremendous contribution to our Province and our country in general. On behalf of

all members of this House I want to pass along our condolences to his family,

especially his wife Eleanor and brothers Paul and Bruce. His presence will be

sadly missed by his many friends and acquaintances. A memorial service will take

place at George Street United Church here in St. John's tomorrow, Wednesday,

at 2:00 p.m.

Mr. Speaker, Greg's contribution to our business community will be long

remembered and we are saddened by his passing.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This being National Volunteer Week, it gives me great pleasure to recognize

two individuals in the local service district of Little Rapids, who epitomizes

the true spirit of volunteerism and community spirit.

Last October, Sandra Spencer and Linda Leamon started a Sunday afternoon

recreational program for the fifty-two children of Little Rapids at the town's

newly constructed community centre. To date they have had a Christmas party, a

sliding party, and a slumber party. They have had a Valentine's Day dance and

a St. Patrick's Day dance. They have had story times and craft times, but most

importantly they have had a great time.

In addition to their fun times, Linda and Sandra and their fifty-two kids

recently held a dance-a-thon which raised $1,538 for the new cancer treatment

centre in Corner Brook. These Sunday afternoon activities are provided at no

cost to the children. Sandra and Linda firmly believe that every child should

have equal opportunity to recreational opportunities regardless of parental

income.

Mr. Speaker, I ask this hon. House to join with me in extending

congratulations to Sandra Spencer and Linda Leamon for volunteering their time

and talents to establishing this worthwhile community activity at Little Rapids.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS M. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to

congratulate a constituent of mine who has played a huge role in the

preservation of the history and heritage of the Burin Peninsula. Evelyn Grondin

Bailey of Burin was recently recognized by the Historic Sites Association of

Newfoundland and Labrador for the Manning Award for Excellence in the Public

Preservation of Historic Sites. Ms. Bailey has worked diligently to promote the

Town of Burin's unique history to the Province. Through her work with the

Burin Heritage House, and the Oldest Colony Trust, as well as bringing the RCMP

Musical Ride to the Burin Peninsula last year, her work has showcased the Town

of Burin to all visitors. I congratulate Mrs. Bailey on this achievement, and

her contribution to her community and her Province should not go unnoticed.

Mr. Speaker, the importance of preserving our history is monumental with the

increase in our tourism sector, and contributions by such individuals as Mrs.

Bailey should certainly be commended.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to advise hon. members that government intends to introduce a

bill during this session of the House to enact a new Residential Tenancies Act.

I believe the proposed changes being put forward will be acceptable to the

vast majority of landlords and tenants. We have consulted in these areas on

these issues, and we have received a positive respond. I look forward to a full

and thorough debate on the bill.

Under the proposed legislation, a landlord will not be able to increase rent

during any fixed tenancy or during the first twelve months of a month-to-month

tenancy. This will be welcome news for tenants.

The proposed legislation would also provide for more flexibility in the

periods for term leases. A term lease would be permitted for any term of six

months to one year. The current act only provides for a term lease of one year.

The change to permit terms of six months to a year will be especially beneficial

to students who often wish to rent for shorter periods of time.

Under the proposed act, tenants would also be given improved rights when

apartments are converted to condominiums. For example, in circumstances where a

unit is converted to a condominium, a tenant who has resided in the premises for

five or more consecutive years will be given the right of first refusal to

purchase.

Another proposed change would see the maximum security deposit increased from

one-half to three-quarters of a month's rent. This would assist small

landlords, such as those with basement apartments, in making repairs as a result

of damages made by vacating tenants.

Whenever we introduce proposed legislation that affects different groups, we

must achieve balance. Such is the case with this proposed change. I would also

like to point out that, under proposed changes, the right of landlords to ask

for the last month's rent in advance will be removed.

Under the current system, we often receive complaints from tenants and

landlords that it is costly to collect amounts owing to them after receiving an

award in their favor from the Residential Tenancies Division. Under the proposed

act, awards for claims of up to $3,000 will be filed with the Small Claims

Court, rather than the Supreme Court, substantially reducing fees for

enforcement.

Mr. Speaker, these proposed changes and the amendments we brought in during

1997 will provide us with an effective act that fairly balances the interests of

landlords and tenants.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are some positive things here. I had a chance to read some to them in The

Telegram - the not-so-positive ones, I certainly read there today. A couple

of things are particularly noteworthy of mention; one, by having a period for

less than one year. Because, from my own experience, I know people who rented

for eight months - they thought they were renting for eight months - and could

not get out and had to end up paying, and were forced to pay for the following -

I think they let them by with three months by giving so much notice. That is

costly for students especially, who only want to rent for eight months. That

would be positive in that regard.

There is another particular point here that is probably not so positive. Now,

with paying three-quarters of the security deposit they are paying up front, in

addition to that month's rent that is coming up, they are paying almost two

months now with the security deposit up front for someone who moves into a new

apartment or new rental there. So that is going to be almost double one month's

rent up front as opposed to 1.5 under the past. That is detrimental for tenants,

I might add, in that particular case.

Another positive aspect, of course, is with the Small Claims Court, which is

a much cheaper process and allows people to be able to avail of that option as

opposed to the Supreme Court. That is a positive aspect. There are some positive

things here for tenants, but there is an up-front cost in one of the particular

things there that is not too enticing, especially for students who are trying to

borrow money, have not received student loans and they have to borrow from

wherever they can to try to carry themselves through until they get the money.

So that is not going to be possible.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly there is a need for significant improvements to the landlord tenant

act, and I am pleased that this is going to be done this session. It is the type

of legislation that I think is probably best studied by a legislative committee.

Although the minister has done consultations, there may well be improvements

that could be made in committee to the bill and perhaps modify some of the more

negative aspects of it.

The minister, for example, says that the three-quarters of a month's rent

is necessary for small landlords with basements apartments; however, he has not

indicated that provision will only be related to that particular type of

tenancy. So there may well be improvements that could be made and I would

recommend that this be studied by a legislative review committee as is provided

for in our rules.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

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

I would like to take this opportunity to inform the House that at the recent

Annual General Meeting of the Dairy Farmers of Newfoundland and Labrador, held

in Corner Brook on March 30-31, the third annual Daphne Taylor Milk Quality

Award of Excellence was presented to the Westvale Farm of the Goulds.

Mr. Speaker, the award was named after Ms Daphne Taylor, a dairy farmer from

Cormack who died prematurely in 1996. The Daphne Taylor Milk Quality Award of

Excellence program was established in her memory. The program is supported

through the joint efforts and financial contributions of this government as well

as dairy producers and processors. A key objective of the program is to

recognize excellence in the production of milk from our Province's dairy

farms.

Westvale Farm is owned and operated by Allan Ruby and family. The Rubys have

operated a farm on their present location ever since 1860 and in fact are still

working out of the original barn as well as a second one constructed in 1931.

They originally ran a mixed farming operation but changed over to a full time

dairy in 1923, first selling to the Newfoundland Butter Company - later known as

Newfoundland Margarine - and then to Sunshine Dairies.

Allan Ruby and his son, Sean, have won many awards in recent years including

being members of Purina's 1000 pound club in 1994,1996, 1998 and again in

I would also like to acknowledge the other winners of this year's Daphne

Taylor Milk Quality Award of Excellence. These include second place winner

Harcourt Farm of Musgravetown, and Mr. Aiden Williams of the Goulds who placed

third.

It is a result of the combined efforts of these farmers along with others

throughout the Province that the dairy industry has been able to achieve

significant levels of growth in recent years, reaching $100 million contribution

to GDP and self-sufficiency within our Province. I commend the dairy industry of

this Province on their commitment to quality and dedication to advancing their

industry.

In closing, I would like to reinforce government's commitment to supporting

the growth in our Province's agrifoods industry.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

It is ironic. I said to the minister before he came in that I had a private

member's statement done today because Mr. Williams and Allan Ruby are both

dairy farmers in the district that I represent. I would certainly want to be

associated with remarks from the minister and to congratulate both farms for the

top quality and the excellence that they not only have achieved but continue to

achieve in the dairy industry.

The dairy industry in the last fifteen years has come a very long way. It is

now a very important industry in the Province, contributing greatly, not only in

terms of jobs, money, economics, et cetera, but is known nationally for the

quality of the product that we produce.

Recently as well, within the agricultural industry, particularly in the dairy

industry, the amount of value added coming from that industry is increasing and

people within the industry are continuing to search for ways and means -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. E. BYRNE: Just by leave to clue up, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. E. BYRNE: They continue to search for ways and means to add value, to

promote our products, to export our products. I can only say to the Department

of Forest Resources and Agrifoods: Continue to support to the extent that you

can. One of the things dairy farmers need desperately in this Province today is

access to more land. In order to gain access to more land - much of it is now

covered certainly in a variety of trees that are known in Newfoundland and

Labrador - some seed capital is also necessary in order for land to be cleared.

That is the biggest challenge that dairy farmers are facing today in view of

the terms of free trade and the MAI. We are now at a stage where we are about to

compete nationally. The notion of marketing boards is coming into question. What

our industry needs and what dairy farmers need in particular is access to more

land. I urge the minister and his Cabinet colleagues - because I know he is a

minister that wants to produce it and move on side - but I urge his Cabinet

colleagues to support him when he goes to Cabinet requesting seed capital and

money to do exactly that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We too would like to congratulate Westvale Farm of the Goulds and the other

winners of the Daphne Taylor Milk Quality Award of Excellence. It is important

to have in this Province quality milk and dairy producers, and it is also

important for government to continue to support programs such as this whenever

the opportunity arises.

Thank you.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

My questions are for the Minister of Mines and Energy today, now that he has

had a day to reflect upon the questions yesterday. I will ask a series of

questions dealing with it again today.

Last December the Premier told The Telegram reporters that the

transmission line was no longer a make or break condition for the development of

the Lower Churchill. Again on March 14, 2000 he told The Telegram that he

no longer believed a publicly funded transmission line was the best way to bring

energy to the Province, but now favored natural gas from offshore with

infrastructure being paid for by the private sector. On the heels of the Premier's

comment the Minister of Mines and Energy has publicly said that a natural gas

pipeline to the Island is certainly way off into the future.

I would like to ask the minister this question. What was the basis or

analysis that changed the Premier's and government's position in policy?

What was his source of information?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I presume the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is speaking about the

in-feed. Let me just repeat the answer I have given repeatedly in the House, and

that is that we have said from the beginning that the line to the Island was not

feasible unless the federal government subsidized it substantially. If the

federal government does not come up with any money, does not contribute toward

it, then it is not feasible to build it.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, let the it be known that the minister did not

answer the question. There was no reason for the change in policy. I am asking

what was the reason or the basis upon which the Premier changed his mind? He

clearly changed his mind.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, it is the same question -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: - and I will continue to ask it until we get an answer to

the question, I say to the Member for Topsail.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: What was the basis for the government's change in policy?

What analysis was it based on?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, I suppose if I say it often enough he will get

the answer, which I have given. There was no change in policy. What we said from

the beginning was that in order to build the line to the Island it would have to

be subsidized by Ottawa. It couldn't be built on its own merits if you looked

at the economics. The assistance from Ottawa does not look like it is

forthcoming. What the Premier said, basically, is that because of that it is

unlikely an in-feed will be built. Now there is no change of position.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, surely when the Premier of the Province speaks

publicly he communicates the policy of government, and surely government policy

is made at the Cabinet table and is based upon well researched information. The

minister, I know, has had difficulties in dealing with that, but that is the

truth. He must know the answer to my question. The federal-provincial working

group did an analysis on other aspects, some more information which I know was

submitted to you because it says right here it was. The federal-provincial

working group did an analysis of the lowest cost alternative for Newfoundland to

meet its present and projected energy needs. Was that the basis for the Premier's

change of heart and change in government policy?

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

MR. DICKS: No, Mr. Speaker, there was no change of heart. There was no

change of policy. The analysis that the federal government has been bringing to

the table is that in their view there are cheaper forms of alternative energy

available than building a hydro line to the Island. We haven't completed it,

we are still attempting to persuade them, but their position to date is that

they don't see the economics of it. That is not a change in position. That is

consistent with what we said from the outset.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the economics are skewed and I will explain

why right now. The federal-provincial working group, in a document submitted

early this year to the provincial government, a progress report submitted to

this provincial government - yesterday you denied it - the working group didn't

make a straight comparison of costs between the transmission line and other

energy sources. What it did, in fact, was to subtract the value to the Province

of exporting hydro power on the one hand to Quebec -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: - from the cost of developing alternative energy sources.

Mr. Speaker, the question is this. Using that basis, wouldn't any other

source of energy be cheaper than bringing power to the Island from the Lower

Churchill, using that skewed model? Why not reverse the formula, I ask the

minister, and subtract the value to the Province from oil and gas exports from

the cost of the transmission line? Wouldn't that make a transmission line to

the Province very economic?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member continues to refer to documents and not file them. I would

like to see the document he is referring to. I would like to have it tabled. I

would like to see the document the hon. member has. Yesterday he stood in this

House and asked a series of questions about some document he purported to have

obtained from the federal government. I asked him to show me a copy and I would

verify and answer his questions. Twenty-four hours later he hasn't had the

courage to send it over here so we can look at it. So if the hon. member

persists in standing up, referring to documents that may or may not exist,

refusing to table them, to provide them to us - I would be happy to answer any

question on any document he provides, but I would like to see it, of course.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, the documents I am referring to are his

documents. These are documents that the federal government sent to the

provincial government for their approval to either release or not release. These

are joint studies submitted to the Province -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. E. BYRNE: - in early January and it clearly says it. So if he is

looking for his documents, go to his own filing cabinet and pick up the

information that I have and he will find the documents that I am talking about!

That is what I say to the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

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

I would like to ask the minister this question: Isn't it a fact, minister,

that the study that was submitted to you, the study of the federal-provincial

working group, the progress report, is contrived to produce a predetermined

result? It is very clear if you look at it that it is contrived to produce a

predetermined result which is the continued export of Newfoundland and Labrador

power from the Lower Churchill River system across our border.

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The only thing contrived here is the hon. member's line of questioning. He

continues to refer to a paper that he doesn't have the courage to table in the

House so that the rest of us and the media can see what he is referring to, to

see if it is a legitimate document.

Now the only thing that has changed in this is the lack of support of the

federal government to date. As we have said from the beginning, in the kind

offer I made to the hon. Leader of the Opposition, if he himself wants, or if he

has a group of friends who want, to build a $2 billion hydro line to the Island,

we would be glad to put the power across, provided it doesn't increase rates.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, there were two consulting firms contracted to

give a financial analysis of the transmission line in 1999, and they were

supposed to report in January of 2000. One of those groups was AGRA Monaco.

MR. DICKS: Monenco.

MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the minister - Monenco? So you did hear

the word before. So you have read the documents before. Monenco, is it? I see.

We now know that they know, and they now know that they know that I know! That

is what is going on here, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the minister this question: Have the

consulting firms reported back to you giving their so-called independent

financial analysis?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

AGRA Monenco is one of the largest engineering firms in the world. They did

not, to my knowledge, do a financial analysis. We have had several engineering

firms involved in costing the Gull Island power project, the diversion, Muskrat

Falls and the line to the Island.

In all likelihood - and again I say the hon. member should table his papers -

I suspect that what he is referring to is an engineering report on the cost of

building that to the Island, not a financial analysis of what the cost would be

of power on the Island to say whether or not it can be justified.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: I would like to ask the minister this again. Their study is

done, it is supposed to be completed in January of this year. So I would like to

ask the minister: Does he have a copy of what they did study? If he does, will

he table it in the House for all of us to see?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government does not retain engineering firms to do financial analyses. I do

not know what the practice of the members opposite would be. Retain engineering

firms to tell us how much it would cost to build things? Yes, we have several

reports from several engineering firms saying what each of the components

involved in this development would cost. No, we are not prepared to release them

at this time.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: So, yes you have the information and no, you will not

release it. That is the answer essentially that you have given us.

Mr. Speaker, it also goes on to say that by January the joint studies done by

the provincial and federal working groups - the joint studies that have been put

in place - will be produced for a first look for this government.

I would like to ask the minister this. Yesterday, he said they had not

concluded their work. Have they concluded their work? They were supposed to by

January. Some of the work is completed. I know you have it. Why won't you

release it?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, the federal and provincial working group has not

completed its work.

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

MR. E. BYRNE: So they have not completed their work, but at the same time

they have written off a transmission line before the work is completed. That is

what they are saying.

Final question to the Minister of Mines and Energy. When do you anticipate

the federal-provincial working groups - the four separate groups that were

established on this process - when have you been told will they complete their

work? When will it be presented to Cabinet? When can we expect that information

to be released to the people of the Province?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker the working groups will complete their work when

it is finished. They will continue until such time as we believe there is no

further work to be done, and it is ongoing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal.

Minister, on the Bonavista Peninsula today there exists an opportunity for

work, but because of a silly rule or regulation that has been implemented by

your cousins up in Ottawa many people are being denied and deprived of an

opportunity to apply.

There is a film being made, and the name of the film is Random Passage .

They are about to build a model community. A lot of the fishermen in the area

are afraid to go and access employment because the criteria clearly states that

in order for them to maintain their core enterprise they must make at least 75

per cent of their employment from the fishery. We do not know if there is going

to be a crab fishery. We do no know if there is going to be a cod fishery.

Fisherman do not know how much money that they are going to be allowed to

make in order to come up with 75 per cent of their earnings. Hence, Mr.

Minister, we have fisherman here -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: - who are unable to access a job for fear of having their

livelihood taken from them because their licenses will be removed and they will

not be able to fish when the opportunity arrives. Is this the fair way to treat

unemployed people in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I am glad that the hon. gentleman brought up the

question that he did because this indeed should provide some employment for that

area of the Province that needs as much employment as they can get down there. I

want to say to him that we are in constant contact with the people who are

producing, spending some $16 million in Newfoundland and Labrador to produce

that film, Random Passage , for which the setting is, by the way, in my

own District of Bonavista North in Cape Freels. We are working on any problems

that are out there with the people who are producing it.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, the question is not answered. The employment

opportunities are there today. They were there yesterday. The fishermen are

unable to get an answer from their union. They are unable to get an answer from

government. I ask the minister: Can those fishermen go to work on this project

and still maintain licences so they can return again and fish within the

industry?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

understand that all of the bed and breakfast houses out there are full. People

out there are looking -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Oh, yes. I will get to your question in a second.

They are looking for people to employ. I would suggest to him that not only

should this employment be available to the fishermen, but it should be available

to other people out there who are carpenters and laborers as well. I want to say

to him that we are working with the production crew to iron out any problems

that are there for any employee who is working with the production company to -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, we are working with the production crew to try and

take care of any problems that they might have out there in regard to laborers,

carpenters, accommodations, or anything else.

I want to assure the hon. gentleman that it will employ a large number of

people in his district, and for that we are grateful regardless of what

occupation they are in.

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

South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that has been raised with

me several times. I have to ask the minister again: The laborers and carpenters

don't have any problem. They will apply for a job and, if they are fortunate

enough to get a job, it won't effect their employment opportunities down the

road.

I ask the minister again: Is he personally involved, or is the Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs personally involved in seeing that this problem is

resolved so that at least those people can go to work and be able to feed their

families - those fishermen?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I don't know how many ways the hon. gentleman

wants me to put it. I can tell him, I can only put it in two languages and the

that I think I have said to him twice already, and I am amazed that he has not

brought this to me privately -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, my member seems to be terribly upset again today.

I would ask him to cool down.

Let me say to the hon. gentleman again that we are working with the

production crews to work out, in as far as possible, any problems that people

might be encountering out there in getting both accommodations and in getting

work, regardless of who they are. I can only put it in one language that I am

best at and that is Newfunese'. We are doing our best, chappy!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Health and Community Services. I

understand the minister met this morning with members of the Newfoundland and

Labrador Medical Association.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: I understand the minister met this morning with members of

the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association regarding payments to

emergency room doctors outside St. John's. Now, doctors in Newfoundland have

given notice that they will withdraw services effective the 17 th of

this month if the matter is not resolved. I want to ask the minister: Did their

meeting this morning resolve those unsettled matters?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am a little surprised, actually, that the hon. member did not get up and

tell me the result of the meeting; his sources are usually that good. In fact -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. GRIMES: Probably I will just sit down and in the supplementary he

will give me the answer to the question as he knows it and then we will go from

there. That is what we will do.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for the very informative update on the

status there on a very serious issue, I might add, in the Province.

I want to ask him just a simple question: How do you expect to attract and

retain doctors in rural Newfoundland when you are paying them $17 an hour less

than they are getting paid for doing the same work here in the City of St. John's?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can give one further piece of information. From what I know in the meeting

that we did have this morning dealing with several issues of importance to the

physicians of Newfoundland and Labrador, that I was not informed at that meeting

by Dr. Smith, who is the President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association, that the hon. Member for Ferryland will now become the spokesperson

for the physicians of Newfoundland and Labrador. I understood that Dr. Smith is

still taking that role very seriously.

We dealt with, as we usual do at our meetings, several items of importance to

the physicians of Newfoundland and Labrador. They are taking some information to

their physicians that provide emergency room coverage in all of Newfoundland and

Labrador, including St. John's, and they undertook to get back to us at some

time in the not-too-distant future.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to ask him probably in another manner if they are going to

continue to pay doctors $17 more an hour for doing the same work here in the

City of St. John's? Does the government have some other contingency plan to

enable doctors to stay in rural Newfoundland and practice there at this

differential? Is there some other plan other than payment that the minister has

proposed to fall back on? If not, we are going to see a further exodus of

doctors from rural Newfoundland into urban areas.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: We have been trying to reverse that trend in the last

while.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, I think that when Dr. Smith speaks on behalf of

the physicians of Newfoundland and Labrador he will explain that the proposition

put forward by the Opposition health critic is not totally correct, that there

is not a blanket situation in Newfoundland and Labrador whereby emergency room

physicians in other parts of the Province are all paid less than the ones in St.

John's. There are a whole series of payment schemes for the physicians in

Newfoundland and Labrador, and for the hon. member to suggest that every single

emergency room physician outside the overpass is being paid less than the

emergency room physicians inside the overpass, and that is the case all the

time, he should check his facts and check his information; because that is the

impression he is trying to give, that we have a particular problem in rural

Newfoundland as opposed to St. John's.

The Medical Association takes this issue very seriously, we take it very

seriously, and I am sure with the appropriate people representing the

physicians, that being the Medical Association, and with the appropriate people

speaking on behalf of the government and health care boards, we will come to a

satisfactory resolution.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy. A recent presentation on

a redesign gravity based structure for White Rose demonstrated the cost of a GBS

for White Rose would be $1 billion less than the GBS built at Hibernia.

Mr. Speaker, why does the government, through the Premier, persist in talking

about concrete versus royalties for GBS and not recognize that the proposal for

White Rose is an economic proposal that is designed to ensure gas production at

a cost comparable to the FPSO and not a choice between royalties and concrete or

jobs as the Premier seems to be putting it forth? Why will the minister and his

government not recognize that this is a serious option?

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

MR. DICKS: None of what the hon. member said is true, Mr. Speaker. The

government has not decided before hearing the evidence which is a preferred mode

of production.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, the Premier is quoted on CBC on March 31 as

saying: concrete means jobs, but not much in the way of royalties.

Now the minister should know that this proposal for a GBS has nothing to do

with jobs versus royalty. Why does not his government take seriously and either

advance, promote, or even investigate, a strategy that would guarantee not only

production at White Rose of oil but gas that could have the potential of

creating many, many jobs onshore.

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government does take it seriously. We take it so seriously, in fact,

that we want to hear the evidence before we make up our minds and not do it vice

versa. I say to the hon. member, the Premier has made some comments in recent

days illustrating the effect that the gravity base at Hibernia has had on our

royalties in this Province, and they would be substantially higher were it not

for the gravity base system at Hibernia. The Premier has never said that a

gravity base system at Terra Nova would cost more than an FPSO. That we do not

know. We have dealt with both parties. We have met with North Atlantic

Pipelines. We met with Husky on several occasions and we have told them both, we

are going to listen to them both. We expect the hearings at the C-NOPB, that

they will bring forward their evidence and that we will consider and we will

make a final decision when it comes to us.

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

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

I presume these questions can be directed to the Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs. Mr. Speaker, we hear of oily sea birds washing upon

the shores almost every month, and the reason that they do it in our waters is

because the Americans have stiffer penalties and enforce those penalties. The

American surveillance is greater, which is an insult to the people of this

Province that the Canadian Coast Guard has not kept their surveillance strong

here. What is government doing to eliminate this serious environmental concern

off the shores of our Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, we are working constantly with the federal

government to ensure that we have the level of protection and services that we

need off the coast of our Province and we will continue doing so in the future.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.

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

We have asked this question in the House on a couple of occasions now. The

first time we asked the question dates back two years. I would like to ask the

minister more specifically what he has done? If the American government can

deter ships' owners from pumping bilges in their waters, why haven't we been

able to deter them from pumping their bilges in our waters? Our fines simply are

not strong enough; the surveillance is not strong enough. What specifically has

this government done in the past two years to eliminate this concern?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, we are constantly working with our federal

counterparts to deal with problems like this. Some of the ships that are doing

this sort of thing have been charged in the past and will continue to be

charged. We will continue to work with our federal counterparts to ensure that

we have the strongest enforcement possible around our shores.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Recently we had a court case out of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland where

again it was found that our provincial government had violated the provisions of

the Public Tender Act. When tens of millions of scarce taxpayers' dollars are

repeatedly being misappropriated because ministers are failing to comply with

the act, some sort of action or education is needed, I say, Mr. Speaker.

Teachers require in-service, medical professionals require in-service, so I

ask why not the ministers of the Crown? I ask the Minister of Justice and

Attorney General, as the minister entrusted with ensuring that the law is

upheld, will he strongly recommend to the Premier and all his ministers that

they participate in a compulsory course on the importance of and the provisions

of the Public Tender Act in the Province, when it is applied, how to apply it,

and what constitutes a breach of the act?

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I assume the hon. member is referring to the

Johnson's Construction Limited case, for which the decision was rendered back

in January of this year by Justice Welsh out of the Supreme Court in Corner

Brook. That case in not finalized. A decision has been rendered but there still

has to be another part of the proceeding to deal with the matter of damages that

would be involved there.

I feel a little uncomfortable addressing a matter that is certainly not

finalized, but the judgement itself has indeed been rendered. As in any case

that goes to court, there are at least two sides to every story. In this

particular case, decisions were made based upon proper advice. I think it is a

complete insult to the ministers of the Crown, and certainly to the staff who

are employed by the Department of Justice if they are involved in giving legal

advice, to suggest that they are incompetent. I feel they are indeed very

competent. They give advice based upon the facts which they are dealing with at

a particular time, and what they feel is in the best interest of this

government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As the Minister of Justice and the Attorney General, obviously you must be

concerned about these decisions; and this most recent one is the last in a

series of such decisions, I say to the minister. You are obviously concerned

about it. You must be concerned about it, as the person who is entrusted with

ensuring that the laws of this Province are upheld. I ask you, Minister, as the

Attorney General for this Province: What are you going to do about it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, again, the hon. member can rest assured that we

do certainly have very competent staff in the Department of Justice. They are

all very experienced and well-trained solicitors.

With regards to the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: Maybe if the Opposition would take an opportunity and look,

there have been fifty-nine decisions that this government has been involved in

since 1996. For the record, we have won the majority of those cases.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: Were the hon. members interested in an answer or interested

in chirping? I am not sure what -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

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

My questions are for the President of Treasury Board, or maybe the Minister

of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. As we know, the Province is very quick to

charge taxes to the municipalities but they are not very anxious to pay the

taxes that municipalities would assess by way of property taxes.

Taxation of municipalities, I say to the minister, by the provincial

government is counter-productive and a great limitation on the restrained

financial resources of our towns and cities. We applaud the government on a

decision to change the payroll tax but we regret that this tax still applies to

our large municipalities, and payrolls in excess of $400,000.

Given the fact that this tax is very regressive, and given the financial

constraints of all municipalities, particularly in view of the changes to the

grants that come from the Province: Why has this government not abandoned

completely its policy to impose the payroll tax on municipal governments in

Newfoundland and Labrador?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, it is really a finance issue. I would like to

point out to the hon. member that we have not relieved municipalities of the

payroll tax for the same reason we have not relieved government of the payroll

tax. The provincial government, all its institutions, pay the payroll tax, and

the municipalities are treated the same way as every other government in the

Province, including the federal government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Resource Committee has considered the matters to them referred and have

directed me to report approval, without amendment, of the Estimates of the

Departments of Fisheries and Aquaculture; Forest Resources and Agrifoods;

Tourism, Culture and Recreation; Industry, Trade and Technology; Mines and

Energy; and Development and Rural Renewal.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port. I am sorry -

MR. JOYCE: Bay of Islands.

MR. SPEAKER: Bay of Islands, right.

MR. JOYCE: Mr. Speaker, I gave it up for ten years but I am here now.

Mr. Speaker, the Government Services Committee has considered the matters to

them referred and have approved, without amendment, the Estimates of Expenditure

of the following departments and agencies: Finance; Works, Services and

Transportation; Government Services and Lands; Municipal and Provincial Affairs;

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, and the Public Service

Commission.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this time to thank all members on both

sides of the House for their assistance and their diligence in these matters. I

would like to thank all the ministers for their support and their social

activities, except the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

Thank you.

Petitions

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

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present yet another petition on behalf of the constituents in

my district, and I will read the prayer again: To the honourable House of

Assembly:

WHEREAS the deplorable and unfit condition of the La Scie Highway, Highway

414, makes travelling to and from school unsafe for our children; and

WHEREAS road conditions jeopardize the safety of the travelling public,

betray a lack of commitment to rural areas of our Province;

THEREFORE we, the undersigned residents of La Scie and area, in the District

of Baie Verte, do hereby petition the government to upgrade and pave Highway

Mr. Speaker, this is another petition, of course, that I am continuing to

present. What is interesting about this one is that, as I look down through the

list, there are people from Corner Brook, Marystown, and all over the Province.

I asked why these names were there, and was told that these were people who were

visiting the area for some reason or another and had to travel that particular

road, and they were glad to be able to sign a petition or help in any way they

could. Those people saw firsthand what they had to travel over. Of course, the

entire Province saw what they had to travel over recently when the cameras

visited that area.

Mr. Speaker, it has gotten worse. It has deteriorated to a deplorable state,

and the people are still protesting today. How long that will go on, I don't

really know. Now they have decided that they will continue a protest to a point

until they get some answers.

They have also been frustrated by conflicting reports of how this could be

resolved. At the end of the day, whether there is enough money in the provincial

budget or whether there has to be some compromise or some partnership with the

federal government, the people in the district really don't care how it is

done, whether it is through a partnership, an 80/20 slip, a 50/50 split.

Whatever way it is done, provincially and federally, it has to be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, this problem will not go away. The people in the district have

made sure that they are going to make their statement. They did not want - and

this is the point I want to make today, that was made clear to me by the people

who continue to call and write - the last thing they want to do is to be on the

highway at 6:00 a.m. to protest road conditions. They are not looking for a

luxury. They are not looking for an office tower or a ring road. They are

looking for a basic, two-lane highway that they can put their children on in the

mornings and feel safe about.

Of the many calls I have been getting lately, more and more today are from

businesses in the area who are so frustrated that even over the last couple of

days they have seen their business jeopardized because of the protests going on.

Really, they are in a Catch-22 when they don't know if they should be

protesting. They don't want to hurt their businesses, they certainly don't

want to have their kids out of school, but they have to continue to do it

because they are in a desperate situation and they are trying to send a message.

Mr. Speaker, although I don't support the fact that they have to keep

children away from school, and I don't support the fact that we have to

jeopardize businesses in the area, what else can they do? I am certainly hoping

that they will have some kind of indication very, very soon, sooner rather than

later, so they can get on with their lives and not have to be out at 6:00 a.m.,

as decent, hard-working people, to prove a point again and put a point forward.

I am hoping that we can hear something very soon.

I totally support these people in whatever they have to do, even if it has to

be this type of situation, which nobody really wants to see. I hope that, at the

end of the day, we can say: Yes, it is going to be addressed and it is going to

be addressed immediately. We are hoping to hear something very soon.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition, and the petition reads:

To the honourable House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative session

convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland;

WHEREAS approximately 4 kilometers of the main road through the Community of

Lethbridge was upgraded and paved in 1999; and

WHEREAS approximately 4 kilometers of the main road through Lethbridge

remains in a deplorable condition; and

WHEREAS this

section of the road has not been upgraded since it was paved

approximately thirty years ago; and

WHEREAS this

section of the road is in such terrible condition that vehicles

are being damaged, including school buses serving three schools in the area, and

schoolchildren are finding their daily trips over the road very difficult;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador

to complete the upgrading and paving of the main road through Lethbridge in this

fiscal year.

Mr. Speaker, this is another in a series of petitions that the residents of

Lethbridge have brought to me and asked me to present here in this House. They

are not asking that all the roads in Lethbridge be paved and upgraded. There are

several gravel roads there, and they understand that it is not a time when there

is a lot of money on the go, or when government can go in and pave every road in

a community. What they are asking for is the main road through the Community of

Lethbridge, and the two approaches to the town, that those two areas be upgraded

and paved. Last year half the work was done and the minister took time out to

meet with the concerned residents there because we thought that we might get the

road completed at that particular time. We thought it was an opportunity, with

the contractor was in town, that we would look after the main road through

Lethbridge and then we could move on and look after the need that was somewhere

else in the district.

This road has continued to deteriorate. It is to the extent now that a lot of

times vehicles driving the road drive just as much on the shoulder of the road

as they do on the paved portion of the road. It was only yesterday, in fact, or

a couple of days ago, that I went into a service station there to get gas and

there was a gentleman pulled in with the two front tires of his car flat. I

said: What do you have, a couple of flat tires? He said: Yes, boy, I had the air

pounded out of them on the pavement out in Lethbridge. That is how bad this

particular road is. While the department of highways go there and try to use

some kind of a coal mix to fill it up, and make it, I suppose, a little more

acceptable, if you would, the first time it rains then you have this filling

coming out the potholes again and out on the side of the road.

They are not looking for sidewalks. They are not looking for double-lane

highways. What they are asking for is for the main road through the community

and the two approaches, which makes up for the approximately the four kilometers

that is left, to be upgraded -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: - and paved in this fiscal year. With the new school

going in the area, Mr. Speaker, it will certainly mean that there will be much

more traffic using this road. Their plea is real and I plead with the minister

to look at those petitions and at this request. Hopefully we will see this road

work done in this fiscal year.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Motion 1, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Budget.

MR. TULK: Yes, we are going back to the Budget Speech today, aren't we?

Yes, we are going back to the Budget Speech today.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1.

MR. TULK: Motion 1, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We are back here, I guess, to the motion of non-confidence in a budget set

out here that does not tell the real truth. When I was talking about that the

other day I was asked - I think the Minister of Health is all ears there. I will

get on health now while he is so attentive.

Estimates show that $31.7 more has been put into health care than last year

and all their news releases say $130-odd million. I cannot figure out why the

Estimates are not accurate. Why are they putting false information in the

Estimates and why are they putting out false news releases to the contrary? It

is the same thing the minister said in the House. Somebody is wrong. The

Minister of Finance is wrong or the Minister of Health is wrong, because the two

of them are saying different things. Both of them cannot be wrong, I suppose. It

is quite possible, based on past performance, but I have a funny feeling that

the people who prepared this document here, called Estimates 2000, provided what

they perceived to be accurate information. If you look at Health and Community

Services on page 206, it shows that the budget increased in this area from

$1.212 billion to $1.244 billion. When you do the math it comes to $31.7 million

more in health care. I cannot see where they are getting all those figures

telling what extra is put into health care, because it is not accurate and we

are not getting the right impression.

Then somebody tried to intervene and said: Tell us about the debt that

occurred when the PCs were in power. I said sure, I will tell you about it. I

told you it increased by 40 per cent. I was at this yesterday and I had to

finish it. It has increased from 1989. The total public sector debt was $4.845

billion, and today it is forecast to be $6.672 billion. That is $1.8 billion on

top of $4.8 billion. If you work that out, 40 per cent would be about $1.92

billion, a little over $1.8 billion. That is about a 39 per cent increase since

1989. A lot of this debt had been incurred prior to 1972. There was $1 billion

of that debt up to 1972. The total accumulated debt was $1 billion and $35.93

million in 1972 when the PC Party came to power.

So you take $1 billion financed, because we had shown deficits every single

year. This year it is $35 million, last year there was a deficit of $10 million

or so it came in under, whatever it was. I think it ended up as $4.9 million

when they threw all that money in, the big handout from Ottawa, and they spent

nearly all that they could. They were left with another five. It shows that

$1.8-some billion has gone on the debt since 1989, and another $1 billion was on

it before 1972. You have almost $3 billion in debt incurred by the Liberal

Administration of the Province. It is not accurate when people tell you: Look at

what debt has been incurred.

Nobody like to incur debt. One of the big factors, and I was touching on this

briefly the last day, is that the total public sector debt is only relevant - it

is not necessarily the amount - to the economy and its ability to be able to

generate growth, your ability to repay the debt, and how that progresses here.

That is important on the gross domestic product of our Province. If we have a

province that is showing positive growth by having a balanced budget or just

slightly out of balance in a budget, that would not have such a serious negative

impact then if it were to continuing to grow. Because really, the GDP to debt

ratio are pertinent things. I was trying to find the exact figure here. I do not

see it here in front of me. Anyway, the GDP has been increased over the last

three years from close to $10 billion up to now. I am not sure of the exact

figure, probably eleven point some billion dollars, in the range, whatever. It

is in that ball park. Our debt has leveled off somewhat. The GDP to debt ratio

certainly is improving now. The ratio has improved in the last while. I think

that is the relevant factor there. If we are not getting economic growth and we

are increasing debt, then it is a very serious problem.

Overall, I think we have to look at, and one of the areas I wanted to touch

on a little in this amendment here, our health care system. Because I do not

think our health care system is the most efficiently administered system not

only in this Province, but in the entire country. I really think we need to go

back and look at how we deliver health care right across this entire country.

Maclean's magazine made reference to 40 per cent of the money spent in

health care in this country as inefficiently spent. I made the statement that

based on our Province that is about $500 million. I am not prepared to say we

waste $500 million out of $1.25 billion. In fact, I do not think there is that

much waste at all. In fact, I am sure it will be in the tens - who knows what it

is? - but I can identify dozens of areas of inefficiencies within the system.

Let's say you are going to buy a piece of equipment, even. Just take an

ordinary piece of equipment that you need several hundred thousand dollars to

buy; or multi-million dollar machinery, sophisticated diagnostic equipment. Look

at MRIs or various other pieces of equipment used in nuclear medicine. Do you

buy a piece of equipment - I will just use an example - a $120,000 or a $250,000

piece of equipment? Maybe the $250,000 piece of equipment might have double the

life span. It might have very little maintenance cost and ongoing cost. You have

to look at it in a business sense to say: Where can we get the best return on

that equipment? On the cost of buying it and the overall maintenance contract

over the life of that, how expensive is that compared to that?

I would hope that tenders don't just look at the cheapest piece of

equipment you can buy. That is not necessarily the best return for the dollar

that you are spending. Those type of investigative, closer looks at spending do

not really show up in costs really to people that are using the system. They do

not see those costs.

I will tell you, a lot of costs that people are seeing today in health care

in this Province are increased transportation costs. We have sort of

regionalized health care facilities, and with declining populations it has

probably become necessary in many areas. You cannot have sophisticated equipment

in every single nook and cranny of the Province. That is not practical.

We raised the issue back a couple of years ago. Granted, the Member for Grand

Falls-Buchans, the President of Treasury Board, spoke too on the very same issue

here in the House on, for instance, dialysis. I think the minister said: It is

more than plugging in a machine. I said: Yes, but it is not as complicated. We

have home dialysis. We can haven that overseen by specialists in that area, and

it can be done. It was done in Grand Falls-Windsor and now there is a waiting

list even more than there is enough to utilize the machine. Then we pushed the

issue and we said it is needed in other areas of the Province. I would not be

able to say exactly how many other areas, but I did say there should certainly

be one in maybe Clarenville, one on the Northern Peninsula, and possibly another

region or two, such as Baie Verte and other areas. We saw, too, this year -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I am very pleased with that. I think that is positive too.

The point I am getting to is the untold costs that people bear out of their

pockets because facilities are not available in their area. Imagine the young

man who has since passed away. He had a problem. Mr. Quigley (inaudible) had to

come in here away from his young family three times a week, and could never get

home. I spoke to people from St. Anthony. There was a man who left St. Anthony

who was about eighty years old, who never lived out of there in his life, had to

leave his home and come to St. John's and get a basement apartment. He was an

eighty year old man out of rural Newfoundland who had never been accustomed to

it had to do all that just to hang on and be able to carry on his life. Had that

been in St. Anthony then, that person could have gone to the hospital for the

few hours, gone back home, and could have the comfort of living at home.

People have been turned to social assistance. The Member for Bonavista South

has a constituent who I visited in the hospital, and he related his story to me

about a year ago. He was here on Budget Day and he was tickled pink with the

announcement that it is now going to be in Clarenville. Because he doesn't

have to pack up the pickup truck and the little fridge and all that and come in

to a hospital on Sunday evening, and have to get out on Friday to make room for

someone else; and come back again Sunday and drive all the way down for

three-and-a-half hours.

Those type of things are the costs we don't see. The cost of coming in from

Labrador is another area. I get numerous letters and calls from people all over

the Province mentioning the personal costs. They are coming in here from

Labrador to get treated in a facility because they can't get the service

there. You are treated for it, and then you are told to find your way back to

Labrador. It is not like calling a cab and going down the street, or calling a

friend to come to pick you up. It costs several hundred dollars to get an

aircraft, that is basically what it is, and you have to wait to get that rate.

If you want to go right away you are paying closer to $2,000, or $1,500 to

$1,600 in many parts. It is an extraordinary expense.

A young boy who had a body cast on was discharged and wouldn't be flown

home. He had to take up three seats on a small plane, and they had a job to even

get him on to the aircraft. The cost had to be picked up by the family. Granted,

a group in Goose Bay, the Forces or somebody in the area, chipped in and they

helped pay for those costs they didn't have to incur.

That is the cost of coming in for services. I read a letter this morning,

dated earlier this month. (Inaudible) who spent nineteen years coming back and

forth here for every type of diagnostic test for a particular ailment. I called

her when I read the letter. It was something that struck home to people I have

been talking to regularly.

People don't appreciate what people who live outside the City of St. John's

have to go through in extra costs out of their pocket. Not just the medical

costs. Coming in, maybe you don't have any family here. If you do, you have to

try to move in with them, and that creates a great inconvenience too. You lose

your own (inaudible) privacy. Sometimes you are here for weeks at a time. It is

difficult. We have to look at moving services as much as possible out around the

Province.

Another area, for instance, is audiology. That is just one other area. I

haven't even really got to address this much at all. I think we need possibly

a mobile audiology clinic that can go out into areas on a basis and access

people in those areas. Can you imagine getting in your car in Port au Basques

and driving in here for treatment? I have talked to people from Stephenville and

all over the Province who come in here across the Province. One person I have

spoken with earlier, and I must say we got a positive response - I went through

the minister's office on this rather than make it a public issue - on a person

who had to come from Corner Brook regularly to get a certain injection. It was

done in hospital and it wasn't considered a hospital treatment which it should

have been. Granted, eventually it saved hundreds of dollars if not thousands of

dollars actually on a yearly basis for somebody who should have had that covered

earlier.

Those type things are crucial to the individual. Their life has to go on and

there are so many medical problems there that it affects their normal course of

life. They don't see their young kids for days and weeks at a time because

they have to come to an area where the services is available. Granted, in the

City of St. John's, the Health Sciences Centre and the Janeway and that are

tertiary care facilities that serve the whole Province. We don't expect to

have those services everywhere because they would be spread so thin you wouldn't

be able to combine your resources, but there are services we can bring out to

the people of the Province, and they are ones we can make available.

While we have seen over 1,000 beds closed in this Province over the past ten

years, pulled out of the system, down from over 3,000 to about 2,000, we have

not developed community health care to the level and put the funding there to

allow a sufficient number of community health nurses to go out and work on

changing dressings. I know people who had gaping wounds and had to do dressings

themselves, and put ice-packs and things like that on their own on weekends and

that because there was no one available to do it.

My colleague for St. John's South raised an issue, too, on home IVs. That

one got resolved. A community health nurse now can go in and do these. That is

an important part, really, to develop the community resources and so on there

that eases the burden on institutional care because care in acute care

facilities is expensive. It is in the vicinity - I think, it was, at last count

when I looked - of $800 a day at the Health Sciences. At one time it was, up to

two years ago anyway. I think it was around $600 a day or so at St. Clare's

and the Grace. That was the cost per person per day, and that is pretty

expensive.

There are inefficiencies in the system. One person from Labrador was flown in

last month and unfortunately -

MR. SPEAKER (Smith): Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SULLIVAN: Just leave for one minute to finish up?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

MR. SULLIVAN: Just one minute.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. SULLIVAN: I just wanted to mention this. One person had to be flown

in by air ambulance from Labrador to come in here to the City of St. John's,

and unfortunately the person has since passed away. The person was here for two

weeks on a procedure. A part had to be brought in to help feed that person, a

tube. They brought it in from the mainland.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) a body part?

MR. SULLIVAN: No, a part had to be brought in, a feeding tube for this

person who was very seriously ill. The person was here two weeks and the part

hadn't arrived then. If a part broke down on a machine in a business, in your

operation, your factory - I happened to spend twenty years in business - you

didn't wait two weeks to get it in because your profits for the year could be

gone, if it is during a busy period. You have to look at the mechanics of having

something available. Why tie up a bed in a critical care facility or in the City

of St. John's if the person wasn't going to get the procedure done? They

could have been in the hospital in, we will say, Labrador City or wherever

without incurring those higher costs. When it is ready, have the person brought

in and the service provided. Those types of things are costing the system money

in the long term and we need to be looking at those types of efficiencies.

I won't have time to elaborate on them all here in my time today, but I

certainly thank you for the extra minute to clue up.

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

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

I have just a few comments on the Budget. It is interesting to note that it

was labeled a health care budget. The Budget received different types of

reviews, I say to the Speaker. Some people praised the budget. The business

community praised the budget because of the elimination of the payroll tax to a

higher level. There were other people in the health care industry who condemned

this health care budget, saying it didn't do enough for the health care

industry. There were others in the social sectors who condemned the budget as

well. There were many people who condemned the budget. However, it was a good

budget for the business community. It should have been labeled the business

community budget not the health care budget.

Government are speaking out of both sides of their mouth. The Premier has

said on record throughout the country, in his own campaign, that this Province

is performing well, that he has done a great job as Premier of this Province,

that he is somebody that can be trusted on the national level. They say that the

GDP in this Province is leading the country. It led the country last year, it is

leading the country again this year. The economy is growing faster than it is in

many other provinces.

Exports have grown. The Minister of Industry just this week mentioned to us

that exports have grown by some 13 per cent in this Province. The manufacturing

industry has grown. Manufacturers are manufacturing more. The fishing industry

is now more valuable than it has been for years. The oil industry is growing. In

fact, we are being told by the Premier that very soon this Province will be

producing approximately 40 per cent of the nation's light crude. Yet there is

not enough money for health care.

The government has gone to Ottawa with hat in hand again, begging Ottawa for

more money, for more social transfers. This government has condemned Ottawa for

not providing enough health care money to this Province, and that in itself is

ironic, because the Premier in 1995 was part of the federal Cabinet, was in fact

this Province's representative in Cabinet, when there were massive cuts made

to the health and social transfers to this Province. Now we see the same Premier

taking his banner and riding across the country, back and forth, promoting

himself as the health care savior of Canada.

Mr. Speaker, people are complaining in this Province about a number of issues

through the health care system. They are complaining about the dialysis services

offered by the Province. We heard the people from the health care boards

condemning this year's Budget because it did not provide enough for essential

services. All we saw in this Province in this Budget really was enough money to

pay off some of the debts of the health care boards throughout the Province.

Government has put a freeze on beds and even children's cribs for newborn

children, and that freeze has still not yet been lifted. Brand new children,

infants, coming home from the hospital are expected to sleep in the bed with

their parents. There are no cribs available. Yet, this was a health and social

Budget. This Budget had a social conscience. According to who? That is the

question: According to who?

Mr. Speaker, people in the Province are complaining about school

reorganization. We hear complaints on a regular daily basis from people down in

Milltown, St. Alban's area, from people out in Arnold's Cove area, from

people throughout many areas of the Province, and they complain about how

government are going about school reorganization. They complain that government

promised during the referendum that money saved would be redirected back into

the education system to improve education at the classroom level; that people

would be going to neighbourhood schools; that children who lived next door to

each other - the great thing that was being shouted loud and clear by the

Premier - that the children who lived next door to each other and played with

each other in their gardens should be able to go to school with each other in

neighbourhood schools. Yet, we hear in many parts of the Province that the

neighbourhood schools are disappearing and the children are, in fact, being

bused further than they had been bused before.

We hear, here in St. John's, that they are removing the high school system

from the West End of St. John's. We hear in this city that the children in the

West End of the city who have had a high school for decades now have to give up

that high school.

Mr. Speaker, there is not enough money being spent on the upkeep of schools

and we hear that shouted loud and clear by the people who are doing the upkeep,

the people who are operating within the school system, that there is not enough

money to do the upkeep within schools. We hear of air quality problems within

schools. We hear of problems with curriculum development and the professional

development of teachers.

Mr. Speaker, we have to wonder, if this Province is performing so well, if

the Province is leading the country in economic growth, if the Province is

leading the country in GDP growth, why is it that the Province is cutting back

in some essential areas? Why is it that we hear that children are not provided

beds, that infants coming home from hospitals are not provided with cribs? These

are some of the questions that remain to be answered by this year's Budget:

Why the Premier can go across this country and proclaim that he is the savior of

Newfoundland and, in fact, could be the savior of Canada; why this Premier can

go across the country wearing his Captain Canada uniform, waving his health care

banner, when this was supposed to be the health care Budget and we find out that

it is not; far from that. It falls far short of being a health care Budget.

When we were told that this Province would see a better tomorrow over four

years ago - and while we see the GDP growing in the Province, while we see

offshore oil production growing, what is the Premier's claim to fame on that?

That was put in place long before this Premier came back to the Province; and it

is the offshore oil, I say, that is creating the economic growth in this

Province, for the most part. It is the offshore oil industry that is creating

the growth in the GDP in this Province, for the most part. It is certainly not

the deal that the Premier has worked out on Voisey's Bay, because there is no

deal on Voisey's Bay.

In 1996, he campaigned that he was the great negotiator. He was going to put

a deal together on Voisey's Bay. In 1999, over a year ago, we heard him

campaign on the same promise, that he was the best one to negotiate a deal on

Voisey's Bay. He was the best one to negotiate a deal on the Lower Churchill.

Those are the same things we heard him say in 1996.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to make a prediction. I am going to predict that the

great negotiator is not going to be leading the Liberal Party in the next

provincial election, because the great negotiator has not delivered. He has not

delivered on Voisey's Bay, he has not delivered on the Lower Churchill, and he

is not going to deliver on those items before the next provincial election.

Instead, he is going to dress up as the saviour of the health care system of

Canada and run off to promote himself as that saviour.

He did the same thing with the Estai . We can all remember the Estai .

He said he was going to be the saviour of our offshore fishing. He was going to

prevent overfishing from foreign nations. Well, there is just as much

overfishing by foreign nations today as there was in 1995 when he held a turbot

up in New York. When he fired a shot across the bow of the Estai and

hauled them in to St. John's Harbour, and took their catch and took their

nets, and at the same time treated the crew of that ship probably better than

they have ever been treated before - he put them up at the hotel. They had the

finest kind of accommodations and the finest kind of meals while their ship was

in port. What did we see then? We saw him give back the equipment, give back the

gear. They received their nets back. They even took their fish back and sailed

off back to Spain. The next thing you know, they are suing Canada. We have to

ask the question: What has this Premier done for this Province? That is a

question without an answer.

MR. ANDERSEN: (Inaudible).

AN HON. MEMBER: Now, Wally, don't get like that now. Honest to God,

Wally. Go back to sleep now. Your seat might be safe.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Wally, I say this to you: If this Premier has done

anything good, it has been for your district. Your district is probably the only

one that has received major benefits from this Premier. So I can see how you are

praising him. I understand why you are praising him. I can certainly appreciate

where you are coming from, but I can say this: What did this Premier do for the

people of this Province? Nothing. That is the answer to that question.

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that your final answer?

MR. T. OSBORNE: That is my final answer.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. T. OSBORNE: I have lots of those, I can tell you that. Over 4,000 of

my friends put me here. I can tell you one thing -

AN HON. MEMBER: Blind trust.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Is certainly isn't. It might have been blind trust in

1996, but they knew exactly what they were getting in 1999. They were getting a

member who worked for them, a member who delivered on his promises, a member who

is willing to speak out for them; not somebody who was willing to take a flag

and run around saying that I was the savior of Newfoundland, that I was going to

negotiate a deal on Voisey's Bay, that I was going to negotiate a deal on the

Lower Churchill, and not deliver.

I certainly would not tell the people of Marystown that I was going to save

that community by giving away their shipyard for $1. One hundred and fifty

million dollars worth of assets, he gave away for a $1, and he didn't even

have the guts to put in place a $5 million fine when they did not deliver on

their employment promises. They did not even audit the company to ensure that

the employment statistics that they were providing the government were accurate.

Now we have more layoffs taking place in Marystown. We see Friede Goldman

signing a Memorandum of Understanding with a Brazilian shipyard which is going

to take even more work away from our shipyard. He stood up in 1996 on a steel

plate and told the people of Marystown that they could drop him from that steel

plate into the ocean if he did not deliver on those promises.

Mr. Speaker, I would say that is the reason we have not seen this Premier in

this House in over a week, because he is afraid the people of Marystown are

going to come in and take him and bind him in the steel plate and throw him out

with the promises on the Estai and the promises on the Lower Churchill.

Mr. Speaker, I am sick of what that Premier has had to say. I am sick of his

empty promises. I am so sick that I don't even know if I can speak about it

any more. I am going to let one of my colleagues here get up and say something,

because I am sick and tired of even talking about his broken promises.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker..

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair recognizes the hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Well, I guess the news and the attitude around the Province is just too much

for the Member for St. John's South and the Member for Ferryland.

I had the chance, a couple of weeks ago, to address The Rotary Club in Grand

Falls-Windsor. The feeling out there in this Province today did not happen

overnight. Four years ago, when this government came to power, we had a lot of

work to do. We had to deal with a $350 million deficit. For the first time since

Confederation, we have been delivering balanced budgets here in this Province.

What does that mean to the economy of the Province? That means that there is a

great deal of stability in our public sector right now.

When you look at the employment figures around the Province, and I will zero

in on what Peter Fenwick said. He indicated that the "central tiger"

in Central Newfoundland were the group to look at. The Member for

Windsor-Springdale should be paying attention right now, because he would be

able to get some important information here that he can bring back and tell the

people from his district.

The region in Central Newfoundland, so-called the "central tiger",

last year alone had an increase in employment of 3,000 people. Do you know what

has happened over the past four years? The people of this Province have

developed what we call a can-do attitude. All you want to do is go out around

the Province and have a look, see what people are doing. People are remodeling

their homes, they are buying cars, they are investing in the big ticket items.

A couple of weeks ago when I talked to The Rotary Club, there was a business

person in the audience who said - this particular person had been contacting me

for three years in succession, saying: Why don't you remove that horrible

payroll tax? It is such a deterrent. I want to hire more people and I cannot do

it because of the payroll tax.

Of course, we were in no position to do that. We gradually worked up to where

we are today, and with the recent Budget Speech there are over 1,300 small

companies that are benefitting from the floor of $400,000 for payroll tax.

In the Throne Speech that was delivered a short time ago in March, the plan

was outlined where we should be going with our economy. People who are out there

investing in this Province will tell you that the two biggest indicators of how

our economy is doing is in new housing starts and new car sales.

I happened to be talking to a business person recently who told me that they

cannot keep up with new car sales. The trend, of course, in new car sales

recently is to lease. If you look around the Province, and particularly the

Member for Baie Verte who is driving home almost every weekend, whenever he is

driving home he will tell you, apart from the road in La Scie, most of the cars

on the highway are in good condition, so that tells you a lot about our economy.

Not only that, look at the new housing starts. In a small community like

Grand Falls-Windsor - not small, but urban by nature - look at the growth they

have had in new commercial building starts over the past few years.

AN HON. MEMBER: Where is that?

MS THISTLE: Grand Falls-Windsor. The area known as Hardy Avenue is almost

completely built up.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: And what did you see?

AN HON. MEMBER: All built up.

MS THISTLE: All built up. That is an indication of people having

confidence in the economy and confidence in new investments. You see that all

the time. In fact, Grand Falls-Windsor has become a distribution point where

companies all over this Province have set up because it is so accessible. They

can drive right in off the Trans-Canada, load and unload, and drive out again

without any hassle.

I want to tell you about tourism; tourism on the Northern Peninsula this

summer. It is going to be a record year. Tourism has been so for the past three

years. Cabot 500 has done, I think, for this Province, what we could never have

purchased through advertising. We would never have had a budget to offset it.

Cabot 500 set the stage for us and, of course, next year with Soiree `99 and

this year the Vikings! 1000 Years, and Marconi next year. I think what we have

to do as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in this Province is look at creating a

theme every year that we can build our tourism on, and keep building, because

the clientele we will attract this year on the Viking Millennium is going to be

different than the ones we will attract next year for the Marconi. We have a

great number of European visitors who have already given us an early indication

that they would like to come next year and take

part in our Marconi

celebrations. So for those history buffs out there, get thinking. All we need to

do is come with another theme after Marconi and build on those.

I was talking to a bed and breakfast operator in Bishop Falls last year who

was making a presentation to our Jobs and Growth Consultation as we were

traveling the Province. What struck me the most when I listened to that person

was that he had been in business for two years and actually last year he had to

turn away more people from his establishment than he actually rented a room to

in the previous year. That tells you how we are doing with tourism in this

Province.

The tourism potential is unlimited. We are seeing a high calibre of bed and

breakfast establishments opening up throughout the Province, and the Northern

Peninsula, even last year, with just the Soiree '99 that was happening, it was

almost impossible to get a room. I think the plan they have out for this year,

actually allowing visitors to come into private homes, will probably take up the

necessary extra rooms that they need.

I want to tell you what government has done for health care in this Province.

Health care is our highest priority in this Province and I know that the members

opposite, and particularly the Member for Ferryland, was talking today about

dialysis. I appreciated his comments because we recognize, too, that we needed

to do something about dialysis both in Clarenville and St. Anthony. Of course,

we would like to have the ability to even put in more dialysis units throughout

the Province, but it is based on our fiscal ability and spreading our budget is

always quite a challenge.

We have a large number of facilities now that are under construction. We have

fourteen major construction projects in health care throughout the Province. We

have three that are about to open this year: the new Janeway Children's Health

and Rehabilitation Centre, which we are looking forward to, the health centre in

Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and of course the Harbour Breton Health Centre. What a

beautiful hospital. I'm sure the Minister of Health would agree with me that

the facilities now under construction throughout this Province are going to take

care of the need that is out there.

We have a $30 million contingency fund put aside for any unforeseen

circumstances that might come up over the next year. I guess what is happening

around this Province means that many of the people, particularly the members

opposite, cannot stand the good news. All the economic forecasters around the

country are predicting we will lead the growth in the economy of the country. I

know that is hard for the members opposite to accept, and they will be doing

their best to squash any of this good news. However, all of this good news

changes the attitude of any possible investor out there that might want to

invest in this Province and in communities all over.

We are seeing that, in fact, in Grand Falls-Windsor. There is a new

technology company out there called EXCITE. They moved into Grand Falls-Windsor

approximately eighteen months ago. They started out with a staff of five people

and now they have fifty-five people, and the fifty-five people are not from

Grand Falls-Windsor. They are from all over the Province. They are

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that have left home, realized that there was an

employment opportunity for them in this Province, and they have returned back

home. In fact, I had the opportunity to visit that location about three weeks

ago, and it was just a wonderful experience to move around amongst the employees

and talk to each one individually, just to see the smile on their faces and the

excitement that was within their eyes just knowing that they had come home to

make a new start in their home province and there was employment here for them.

I will tell you another thing that is happening with our health care

professionals. I attended a retirement party for a dentist in Grand

Falls-Windsor about a week ago. It was so heartening to be introduced to two

young dentists, two Newfoundlanders, who had come back home to set up a dental

clinic within the town of Grand Falls-Windsor. Apart from that, we now have

three doctors who are original residents of Grand Falls-Windsor who have come

back to Grand Falls-Windsor to settle into the medical profession in Grand

Falls-Windsor. Of course, that brings with them a bit of a stability for our

board because these are young people, and of course no doubt they will have

young families. Once young families get attached to a community it is highly

unlikely that the parents, the professionals, will want to move out. I think

people are seeing the benefits that are in towns and communities right

throughout this Province, and wanting to come back and make a life for

themselves and their families.

This government has committed $54 million into new equipment over the next

three years. I am familiar with a lot of this equipment in some of the

facilities that are in my district, and districts all over this Province. It is

well needed equipment that will enhance the lives of patients and of course make

life easier for the staff who will be operating that equipment.

Look at the money that is put back into education.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS THISTLE: What I am trying to say here today is that this is a time in

our Province that we have to look around and also embrace what is happening

here, be part of the positive attitude that is happening here. People in this

Province are investing heavily in the Province and people from outside the

Province see the benefits that are now springing on the horizon. We have to keep

this momentum going and we have to believe in this Province because the attitude

that is out there today is something that wasn't there four years ago, and in

1992 when our cod fishery collapsed. We have now reached a place where the rest

of the world is looking at us.

I would say to members opposite, don't squash the feeling that's out

there today. Build on what is out there today and we will all benefit from the

good feeling.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER (Mercer): The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I just spoke to the Opposition House Leader and by

leave he has agreed to let me give several notices of motion so that I can do

first reading either tomorrow or Thursday, and then give the members of the

House their bedtime reading for Easter so that when they come back after Easter

they will be well prepared to do legislation. As always, he has agreed to let me

give the notice of bills. What I would like to do is just read a number of them

into the record on behalf of various ministers.

I give notice, on behalf of the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

"An Act To Amend The Pippy Park Commission Act."

I give notice, on behalf of the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs,

that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills entitled,

"An Act To Amend The City Of St. John's Act" (Bill 10), "An Act

To Amend The Municipalities Act, 1999" (Bill 17), "An Act To Amend The

Municipal Affairs Act" (Bill 18), and "An Act To Amend The St. John's

Assessment Act."

I give notice, on behalf of the hon. the Minister of Government Services and

Lands, that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills,

entitled, "An Act Respecting The Tenancies Of Residential Premises,"

and "An Act To Amend The Lands Act." (Bill 15).

I give notice, on behalf of the hon. the Minister of Environment and Labour,

that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill, entitled, "An Act

Respecting Environmental Assessment." (Bill 12).

I give notice, on behalf of the hon. the Minister of Finance, that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill, entitled, "An Act To Amend The

Local Authority Guarantee Act, 1957." (Bill 13).

I give notice, on behalf of the hon. the Minister of Health and Community

Services, that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following bills,

entitled, "An Act To Amend The Child, Youth And Family Services Act" (

Bill 6), "An Act To Amend The Pharmaceutical Act, 1994" (Bill 7), and

"An Act To Amend The Psychologist Act." (Bill 8).

I give notice, on behalf of the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy, that I

will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill, entitled, "An Act To Amend

The Mineral Act." (Bill 14).

Mr. Speaker, I give notice, on behalf of the hon. the Minister of Justice,

that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act

Respecting The Enforcement Of Canadian Judgements." (Bill 16).

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: There are sixteen, I believe. I think there are about four or

five more that are not yet completed with Cabinet.

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

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to stand and make a few comments on the Budget and to

partake in the Budget debate. I listened with interest as the President of

Treasury Board talked about the glowing economy of Newfoundland and Labrador,

and how easy it should be for all people on both sides of the House and

throughout the Province to be glowing, to be up and announcing from the hilltops

what a great Province we have and what a great economy we have, and that

everybody is working, everybody is happy, and everybody is enjoying the good

life. Mr. Speaker, I beg to differ because I represent a district of the

Province that listened with interest back in 1996 as the Premier of the Province

travelled throughout the Province on an election campaign and talked about a

better tomorrow. I remember back when people bought into the dream. When I

listened to the President of Treasury Board today, I sat in my chair and said to

myself: Where is that better tomorrow?

I am going to take a few examples, if I could, of things that are happening

in the Province. I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board: Does she

think, or does this government think there is a better tomorrow happening in

this Province in health care? I will take one issue at a time.

We have, I guess, one of the most serious situations that has ever

encompassed this Province happening today in our health care system. It is hard

to give a glowing report. It is hard to be up in your seat thinking that

everything is wonderful when we have doctors, nurses, LPNs, all kinds of people

who are involved in the health care system in the Province, who are stressed to

the limit. I say that from experience, from talking to these people, listening

to these people in my own district and throughout the Province. It is hard to

think that they are enjoying a better tomorrow.

When you walk into any hospital in this Province, any health care centre in

this Province, and you find stressed out, lowly paid people who are working in

the health care system who are stressed to the limit because there are not

enough bodies there, there are not enough people there to provide the services.

Thank God we have people in the system today who are giving 150 per cent in

order to be able to provide the services that people need in our health care

centers throughout the Province today. Thank God we have these people who are

dedicated to providing the services they were trained to do. It boggles the mind

how we think that could be a thing to be glowing about, when we walk into the

Health Sciences Complex.

I happened to attend the health care forum at the Health Sciences Complex

last night, and listened to speaker after speaker talk about concerns and issues

throughout the health care system. I can guarantee you that there are many

people in this Province who don't believe they are living in a better

tomorrow, when it comes to the health care system in this Province.

I would like to talk about education for a minute. Education is another very

vital issue in our Province, a very vital aspect of the Province. I ask: Are

people in the education field, where we have large classes, a large pupil ratio,

where we have a number of teachers who have been laid off or taken out of the

system, where we have cutbacks in funding to these schools, where we have

buildings that are falling down around students, where we have air quality

problems, where roofs are leaking, and there are many concerns, are these people

in the education field in this Province enjoying a better tomorrow? Are they

enjoying a better tomorrow, I say to the Minister of Government Services and

Lands? No, I am willing to bet they are not; because I hear the concerns of

people from Laval High School in my own district, from St. Anne's Academy,

from Fatima Academy in St. Bride's, from St. Catherine's Academy and Dunne

Memorial Academy in St. Mary's. All these schools need extra funding. There

are cuts in programs, programs have been eliminated. Then we ask ourselves: Are

the people in the education field in this Province enjoying a better tomorrow? I

say not.

Then we look at the transportation issue. Yesterday and throughout the news

media over the past couple of days the people up in La Scie district - which is

only a touch or a small example of the transportation problems throughout this

Province.

I have the same problem in my own district, roads that have been put in place

twenty-five or thirty years ago that need major work done. The people who are

involved in this process, the people who are involved in providing proper

transportation in this Province - I ask, are they enjoying a better tomorrow?

Are the people who are driving over the highways and the byways in this Province

enjoying a better tomorrow? Again, I beg to differ with the President of

Treasury Board that everything is so glowing, as one would think.

Mr. Speaker, we talk about our students - the people involved in post

secondary education in the Province with the loans, when they are lucky enough

to be able to finish their degrees and they come out owing a fortune. For the

past ten years now we have listened to a government that has said, time and time

again, that they are going to do something to assist these people who are coming

out of the schools in this Province with their loans. What have we heard in ten

years? Nothing from the other side of this House to help alleviate the concerns

of parents, to alleviate the concerns of students, and to alleviate the concerns

of potential employees in this Province who can contribute to society in a

meaningful way after spending years training in whatever field they have chosen

in their life. I ask: Are they enjoying a better tomorrow? I think not.

We talk about the many people who have been forced on social assistance in

this Province due to changes in the EI system over the past several years. Over

$500 million has been taken out of the Newfoundland economy over the past couple

of years from changes in the EI system. Many people have been forced for the

first time in their lives to go on social assistance. Along with being very

tough on the individual themselves, it creates an atmosphere out in the Province

that certainly is not conducive to what we hear and what has been preached from

the other side of the House.

I ask here today, are the people who work with the social recipients in this

Province enjoying a better tomorrow? The people who have to go out and listen to

the stories and to witness the conditions these people have been forced to live

under - the family, the children of the family that has been forced on social

assistance. I ask the President of Treasury Board: Are these people enjoying a

better tomorrow?

When we look back over the last five or six years, 40,000 Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians have left this Province and gone elsewhere looking for work; 40,000

people who have had no choice whatsoever only to pack a suitcase. Instead of

packing fish in this Province now they are packing their suitcases. We have

40,000 people who have left this Province over the past four or five years who

have gone elsewhere looking for work. I ask the simple question once again: Are

they enjoying a better tomorrow? Maybe some of them have. Maybe some of them

have lucked out and managed to get a job elsewhere in some other part of the

country and are enjoying a better tomorrow in that regard.

I ask, are the seniors of this Province - I know several in my own district.

The cost of drugs and medication for these people, an aging population in this

Province now, we have people who cannot avail of proper medical services because

they live in a certain part of the Province versus if they lived in an urban

part of Newfoundland and Labrador. These people cannot avail of the services

that should be theirs. I have concerns in my own district down in St. Mary's

with a doctor situation. We had a pharmacy that closed up at the head of St.

Mary's Bay, up in the St. Catherine's area. These are all major important

issues that need to be addressed and certainly issues that concern our seniors.

So then I ask: Are the seniors of this Province enjoying a better tomorrow? I

beg to differ. One issue that is very important to the seniors of the Province

is an issue of a program that was announced several years ago and was

re-announced by the Minister of Municipal Affairs a few years ago, and it has to

do with the RRRAP. I get almost every day of the week three to four calls from

people who are looking for the RRRAP. Especially seniors, who were left with the

impression by a news release a couple of years ago that every senior in this

Province could avail of $5,000 to do some repairs to their homes. That was not

the case. It was a blatant misrepresentation of the facts in regards to what the

people really were allowed to do. This $5,000 was not there for all seniors to

partake of, even though the impression was left with the people and the seniors

of the Province that this was the case.

I think it is time that we brought in a program that was earmarked for

seniors' housing, that was earmarked to address some of the concerns that

seniors have. I hope over the next little while we can see that addressed in the

House with some type of agreement with the federal government. Definitely, the

RRRAP that is in place today is not addressing the needs or the concerns of the

people in my district, and it is definitely not addressing the concerns of the

seniors in my district which are most important in this regard.

When we look back and hear people talk about the glowing report and how great

the Newfoundland economy is doing, and we have to address some of these

concerns, we have to ask in all honesty: Is this the better tomorrow that was

promised to us a few years ago?

The Minister of Development and Rural Renewal has gone outside, but we talk

about the employment rate and how many jobs are being created in the Province,

and indeed the concerns we have in relation to the opportunities within the

Province. Sure, we have in some regards an economy that is moving in the Avalon

region, especially in the St. John's area, that has a lot to do - and not only

a lot to do, but I guess everything to do - with the oil and gas industry. I'm

very pleased to see that this industry is moving ahead in the Province, but at

the same time we have to take into consideration that it is not providing jobs

in many parts of the Province. I refer to the editorial today in The Telegram

where the unemployment rate on the South Coast of this Province has reached 37.6

per cent, a far cry from the thousands of jobs that people think are happening

in this Province.

We have a major problem in parts of rural Newfoundland that are not being

addressed and we need to have them addressed. Certainly the economic growth that

is happening in this Province is happening in most cases in St. John's and the

urban areas. Out on the West Coast, around the Corner Brook area, I think the

same thing is happening in some cases, but we have an awful problem between

Notre Dame and Bonavista Bay. The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate,

according to Statistics Canada, has risen to 22.5 per cent. These are staggering

numbers that are not a very good reflection of what the people opposite would

try to persuade us that we are going through in the Province.

The Avalon and the West Coast saw slight drops in their unemployment rate but

the rest of the Province saw increases, Mr. Speaker, and indeed it is something

that needs to be addressed. It needs to be addressed soon because what we have

once again in rural Newfoundland is massive out-migration continuing, because

people are finding it very difficult to work in the areas and indeed to have an

opportunity to raise their families. I come from a community that at one time

had almost 700 people, and now it has dipped below 500 in the community of St.

Bride's.

There are many concerns out there and I touched on a few here, and none so

important as the fishing industry. Most of the communities I represent depend

100 per cent, or pretty close to it, on the fishing industry, and certainly to

hear possibly - the talk now is that the crab quotas will be announced tomorrow.

They are definitely going to have an impact if any reduction takes place. They

are definitely going to have an impact on many communities and many families in

my district. Just in the past couple of weeks we saw a decrease in the cod

quotas for 3PS this summer. It went from 30,000 tonnes down to 20,000 tonnes. In

some cases, especially for small boat fishermen, these cuts could be drastic. It

could drive them out of business. Many people depend on their cod and crab

quotas. It is about the only income they will have all year. Trying to feed in

some cases two and three families from these boats for the entire year is a very

difficult situation. Indeed, the small boat fishermen and the concerns of small

boat fishermen need to be addressed.

The inshore fishery in this Province did not destroy the fishing industry. It

is the uncontrolled, out of hand, offshore fishery that we allowed to destroy

our fishery resource. The problem is that because of that we have a situation

where the inshore fishery and the smaller communities are paying a very

political price for that. It is unfortunate, because we have many people who try

to put the blame on the inshore fishery, but I stress again, in my view, and in

the view of many people I represent, the inshore fishery did not destroy the

fishing industry of this Province. I think that needs to be addressed and

certainly needs to be taken into consideration when any decisions are made.

We talk about transportation and we talk about the need for highway

improvement in this Province. I certainly need some dollars and some

improvements in my district in transportation. In 1989, the last year of the

Peckford administration, there was $40 million spent from provincial coffers on

roads in this Province. At that time, the economy was pretty tough.

MR. McLEAN: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: No it wasn't, I say to the Minister of Government Services

and Lands. No, it was spread around evenly and fairly, I say to the minister.

Everywhere except Port de Grave got some money in 1989.

Mr. Speaker, $40 million was spent in 1989 on the provincial roads program,

supposedly under a time when we were financially restrained and things were not

as plentiful as they are today in regards to financial resources. Now we have a

government that stands in its place and talks about how great the economy is,

how much money is rolling into the Province, how much money is rolling into the

coffers of the Province, and we go from spending $40 million in 1989 on the

roads to $17 million in 2000. If things are improving on one side of the ledger

you would think they would be improving on the other side of the ledger, but

that is not the case. We have gone from $40 million in 1989 to $17 million in

2000. You don't have to be a mathematician or a scientist to figure out that

that is a decrease of $23 million from the provincial roads program.

We sit down and hear then the government stand in its place and say: We are

announcing this year the largest road program in the history of the Province.

Then we have to sit down and say: If we have gone from $40 million down to $17

million, how do we announce the largest program for transportation in the

history of the Province? How do we do that? We go back to the federal and

provincial roads programs, the Roads for Rail program, the trunk roads programs,

that were put in place when there was a PC Administration. They were put in

place when there was a PC Administration in Ottawa headed up from this Province

by John Crosbie. Here we have a PC Administration six years ago that were alive

and well in Ottawa at the time that signed a federal-provincial agreement to

provide hundreds of millions of dollars to the transportation initiatives in

this Province. This provincial government can take the opportunity of still

spending that money; after ten years they are still spending Crosbie's money

on roads in this Province. Then we look at what the provincial government

themselves have put into it and we come up with $17 million for this year. I say

it is a shame on this government, it is a shame on the Minister of

Transportation, it is a shame on the Minister of Finance, that we can still only

find $17 million to spend on roads in this Province when there is such a need

for them.

Yesterday we heard conflicting reports from the MP out on the West Coast, Mr.

Gerry Byrne, to our own Minister of Transportation. Mr. Byrne said that if they

came up with $17 million he could match the funds. Now according to our own

minister that is not the case, but that creates an immense amount of confusion.

It creates an immense amount of confusion to the people of the Province and,

indeed, the people who are out there looking for much needed improvements to the

roads in their districts. Really, we have to try to find out - and the Member

for Baie Verte asked some questions here yesterday in the House, trying to find

out - exactly what is going on, trying to find out exactly who is telling the

truth, because really there is a difference of opinion. It is not only a

difference of opinion, when you get an MP who goes in the media and says that

the provincial government, all they have to do is ask and they will be provided

with the money. All they have to do is ask. I heard it myself. I say to the

Member for Fog, I heard it myself. He said that all you have to do is ask. That

is the MP, sitting shoulder to shoulder with the Finance Minister of Canada. He

is not sitting down with some fellow out on the side of the road. He is sitting

down with the Finance Minister of Canada and, shoulder to shoulder, says: all

they have to do is ask.

Then, we find out that the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation in

the Province has not asked yet. He hasn't asked yet, according to what the MP

for the West Coast says, Mr. Byrne. He said that all you have to do is ask and

you will receive.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: By leave, if I could, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, it is not very tough to pick up the phone and

call the MP, Gerry Byrne, call the Minister of Finance in Ottawa, and ask for a

few dollars for the roads in this Province.

If there is a misunderstanding there, if there is a misrepresentation of the

facts, if there is someone who doesn't understand what the other is doing, if

the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, all of these

different clichs that you could use, I would like to ask that the Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation get on the phone, call MP Gerry Byrne and get

the story straight so the people on the Baie Vert Peninsula, the people in the

District of Placentia & St. Mary's, the people down on the South Coast,

the people who are looking for road improvements, highway improvements in the

Province, are not listening to Gerry Byrne on TV saying that all they have to do

is ask. On the other hand, the local Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation is saying: It is no good to ask; there is no money there. Someone

has their signals mixed up there.

We have many concerns. That is just one of the concerns. We have the local

minister, the present Minister of Health and Community Services, making comments

with regard to the federal government going to put more money into health care

in the Province.

I found a little bit of information that I thought might be interesting. In

1994-1995, the Province of Newfoundland received $425 million in cash transfers

for health and post-secondary education. In this year's federal budget it will

receive $271 million. Twenty years ago, federal transfers paid for 50 per cent

of Newfoundland's health care costs. Today, the federal government pays for

less than 15 per cent. It sounds like we have a money crunch problem in health

care in this Province and in this country.

We have to ask the members opposite, and indeed the Minister of Health and

Community Services, to get on the bandwagon, get up to Ottawa and get them to

spend more money. We need more money put into health care.

Mr. Speaker, Paul Martin's $2.5 billion gesture would be great if the

Liberals had not already gutted the system over the past five years. The federal

government has gutted the health care system in the Province.

I heard the Minister of Health and Community Services the other day, talking

to some group in the Province, say: As soon as the federal government gives us

money, we will straighten things up.

AN HON. MEMBER: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's leave has been withdrawn.

MR. MANNING: You cannot be passing the buck, I say to the Minister of

Health. It is time that you stood up in your place and did what is right for the

people of the Province in regard to health care. Don't be passing the buck to

Ottawa, saying it is Ottawa's problem; as soon as they give us money we will

straighten it up.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MANNING: You have responsibility for the people of this Province, and

you should take your responsibility more seriously!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I like listening to the Opposition, I do,

but there comes a time when I can't take it any more, and I can't take it

any more.

If you want to find out what is wrong with the world, all you have to do is

listen to the other side. If you want to find out what is wrong with the whole

world, if you want to find out what the government is doing wrong, and what

everybody else is doing wrong, all you have to do is listen to the other side.

I was listening to the Member for St. John's South about half an hour ago,

and it was the most depressing speech I have heard since I have been in the

House of Assembly, the most depressing speech I have ever hear