March 24,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 19

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

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

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, as acting Minister of Tourism and

Culture, I would like to inform all hon. members of the House of Assembly that

1994 marks 40 years of provincial parks in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The official launch of the 40th anniversary celebrations is

being held this evening in Gander.

In 1954, government preserved the land surrounding Big Falls,

on the scenic Humber River, by establishing the first provincial park in the

Province, Sir Richard Squires Memorial. In creating this provincial park,

government preserved and protected 16 square kilometres of the Humber River and

the adjacent land to provide quality recreational angling opportunities for

Atlantic salmon anglers.

Over a span of 40 years, the provincial park system has

evolved from small rest stops along the Trans-Canada Highway, into a diverse

system of provincial parks, wilderness reserves and ecological reserves. Many

provincial parks offer a diverse range of outdoor recreational and environmental

education opportunities for our visitors.

In celebrating the 40th anniversary of our provincial parks,

the goal is to inform Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and visitors to this

Province, of the variety of unique experiences available through parks and

reserves and to demonstrate the vital role these sites play in preserving our

natural heritage. In connection with the anniversary, a series of events are

being planned that will enable visitors to celebrate our natural heritage. I

encourage all resident and non-resident travellers to take

part in the

activities scheduled and to help celebrate this natural heritage and

congratulate the employees, Mr. Speaker, of the department who gave so much time

and energy to make these parks such worthwhile areas.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the hon. the acting Minister of Tourism

and Culture for sending me a copy of his statement beforehand. I am disappointed

that he didn't invite me out to Gander with him this evening, but I suppose I

will have to put up with that.

I am sure that the establishment of provincial parks in the

Province forty years ago, made sure that an important asset was added to the

total tourism product of the Province. I have, in my district, several

provincial parks such as Gooseberry Cove, Point La Haye, Cataract and

world-renowned Cape St. Mary's, and the possible tourism development of those

parks certainly add to private enterprise and also to the total tourism product

of the Province.

I hope throughout the year, as we mark the 40th Anniversary

and celebrate our natural heritage that the people of the Province would become

aware -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. MANNING: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

- that the people of the Province would be come aware of the

natural beauty that we have on this Rock and that we would hope to keep it for

generations to come. I also would like to -

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

The hon. member's time has elapsed unless he has leave to

continue?

MR. MANNING: By leave, just for a moment?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. MANNING: I would like to say that I am sure that many

people who are involved in the tourism industry in the Province are waiting for

a full-time Minister of Tourism and Culture to be appointed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. the Member for St. John's East have leave to

address the House?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join with the minister in helping to

celebrate the forty years of the establishment of provincial parks in the

Province. They do add a special mark to our natural heritage and have also given

an impetus to others to enjoy the wilderness and participate in outdoor

activity. I hope that this 40th anniversary of provincial parks doesn't mark the

time when the provincial government decides to privatize these parks, Mr.

Speaker. I think that would be a negative move.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have now had a chance to review the tape of the Premier's

Province-wide address on Tuesday night past. In that speech, of course, the

Premier disclosed a conspiracy orchestrated by himself to hide from the people

of Newfoundland the real reason why he is selling Hydro. I want to return to the

questions and his response to the questions asked yesterday by my colleague, the

Member for Burin - Placentia West, when the Premier said, quote: He had not

apologized to the people of the Province for his deceit, that he hadn't asked

for their forgiveness. But clearly, Mr. Speaker, after reviewing that tape, he

does owe the people an apology. I want to give him another chance here today.

Will he now apologize to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador for hiding the

truth from them?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I didn't deceive anybody. If

anybody wants any justification for the action of the government, all they had

to do was listen to the hon. member who spoke last night when he started talking

about attacking Hydro Quebec contract.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: All they had to do was listen to him and

they will see the justification for the government's following the position that

we took.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: All they had to do was listen to the hon.

member talk about the purpose of this legislation. All they have to do is listen

to the hon. member talk and suggest that the purpose of this legislation is to

attack the Hydro Quebec contract - utterly false, Mr. Speaker. That is not the

purpose of this legislation. But now people will understand why I wanted to keep

that down. I didn't want to provoke that kind of debate and cause the defeat or

the challenge of this legislation. That is the sole reason. I've told that to

the people of the Province very clearly, Mr. Speaker, and I've acknowledged my

bad judgement in proceeding in that way. I have no quarrel with doing that.

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

Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: In that same speech on Tuesday night the

Premier said he had asked his caucus to refrain from any comment about his

scheme. He confessed that night to a cover up, and there was a cover up, and I

will tell the Premier why. On March 3, the day the Electrical Power Control Act

was introduced in this House, while I was speaking in the debate, I asked the

Premier if he felt

part II of that legislation could be used to recall power

from the Upper Churchill? His reply to me then was that he didn't know, maybe it

could, maybe not. He would have to look into it. Well, we all know now, Mr.

Speaker, that he already had looked into it. We all know now that there was a

deliberate cover up and that you misled me, as Leader of the Opposition, and

other elected representatives in this House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Now I want to ask the Premier here today to

apologize to the House, to the elected representatives of the people for leading

a conspiracy to deceive us, will he do the honourable thing and apologize?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, when I introduced the bill to

the House on March 3 - all I have to do is get Hansard of March 3 and I'll have

it in just a moment. I'll get Hansard of March 3 in just a moment and I will

read precisely what I said. I have nothing whatsoever to apologize for, no

matter how much the hon. member shouts and rants and raves. As soon as I have it

- does nobody have the Hansard of March 3? May I have the Hansard of March 3,

please? I will get it and read for the House the precise comment and then I'll

answer the hon. member's question.

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

Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have the Hansard here. It

doesn't matter what he wants to read and read into the record of the House. I

said when I was speaking, when I asked you the question and what you said. Now

in his speech also, Mr. Speaker, on that Tuesday night, that infamous Tuesday,

he apologized to his own Caucus for forcing them to participate in his plan to

deceive the House and the people. Here's what he said and I quote, `I apologize

to them if the position I have taken has caused them difficulty or embarrassment

with their constituents.' Now, Mr. Speaker, that is an outright admission that

he breached their privileges as elected representatives of the people of this

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, if he owed an apology to his

Caucus then he owes one to this House and he certainly owes one to the people of

the Province. So I want him to stand in his place here now today and issue an

apology to the elected representatives of the people and to the people of the

Province, will he be man enough to do that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I'll now address the question

that he just asked a few moments ago. Here's Hansard, page 111, March 3, during

my introduction of the legislation - I believe it was the Member for Mount Pearl

or it might have been the Member for Burin -Placentia West or both of them at

different times - some hon. member raised a question and here's what I said,

`Well, we didn't exempt any power. Whatever it does, it does. We didn't exempt

anything. We didn't exempt Kruger. Kruger has been there since 1924. Abitibi and

its predecessor, AND, and Price has been there since 1904. No power is exempt.

There is no basis for exempting anything.'

Then some hon. member said something, part of which was

inaudible, but the last five words reported are, "taking back control of

Churchill?" It might have been the Member for Mount Pearl, I believe, who said

that. I said to him, "No, we are not taking back control. Churchill will

continue to operate. But whatever is necessary, whatever the PU board has to do,

it will do, with any power in the Province, but that is not taking back control.

It is not altering -" Then the member interrupted again. I asked his pardon and

he said something else all of which appears to be inaudible because the

transcriber did not get it, but my answer is here, Mr. Speaker. "It is not doing

anything with the power. It is setting in place a management regime for the

Province - all power in the Province. If we say we are not prepared to exempt

Abitibi, which has had rights for ninety years, and we are not prepared to

exempt Kruger, which has had rights for seventy years, why should we exempt

Churchill Falls which has had rights for only thirty years?" Now, there is the

answer I gave to this House and I stand by it.

Mr. Speaker, when I spoke to the public of the Province the

night before last, I indicated clearly in retrospect: I realize this was error

on my part. In reality the legislation should speak for itself, and I went on to

explain why I had done it. I simply wanted to avoid the possibility of the

repeat of the fiasco of the Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act to which

the hon. members opposite contributed a major contribution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the Premier to draw his remarks to a close.

PREMIER WELLS: I did not hear, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the Premier to draw his remarks to a close as

well.

PREMIER WELLS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On the night before last when I did make my comments to the

Province I asked the people of the Province to accept my explanation and

apology. I think that is quite adequate. I have already done so directly on

television and I have no intention of being pulled around by the strings of the

Leader of the Opposition.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We will deal with the Hansard quotes on Page 125, which are

the ones I am referring to, outside the House afterwards. I was quite surprised

to hear the Premier suggest somehow that we had something to do with the case

not being successful in the courts. We did?.. when he represented interests who

were opposed to our case, Mr. Speaker, at that same time. You talk about a

whopper! You talk about a whopper!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: If ever there was a whopper, there was one!

Mr. Speaker, let me get back to the Premier's Province-wide

speech on Tuesday. He repeated the statements of his ministers that we are

dealing with the most important piece of legislation dealt with in this Province

since Confederation. Now knowing that, proclaiming that, as he and his ministers

have done, how can he possibly live with the fact that he chose to mislead the

people of the Province, that he chose to use secrecy, propaganda and

manipulation to push this deal through the House of Assembly? How can he live

with that?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, all anybody of even average

intelligence has to do is read the legislation. All anybody of even average

intelligence, who doesn't want to deceive and mislead people, has to do is read

the legislation.

Now, Mr. Speaker, if I brought in legislation and introduced

it as being the solution to our Churchill Falls problem, that would tend to make

me a hero rather than a villain, so why wouldn't I do it? The only reason why I

wouldn't do it is that I didn't want to cause the kind of debate that took place

with the Upper Churchill Water Rights Reversion Act, and the Leader of the

Opposition is demonstrating in spades why that was the right decision.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the Premier there is only one person who is

deceiving people around here, and he confessed to it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: He confessed to it on public television

Tuesday night.

Now I put this to him, Mr. Speaker: The credibility of the

government is on the line here. The credibility of the Premier is on the line

here. Ministers and backbenchers, except for one individual, one member,

conspired with him in a dishonourable scheme to mislead people, to violate their

trust. How can anybody now believe the Premier on anything he says on this, or

anything else for that matter, but particularly on this deal? Why should they

trust the Premier on this one?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, everybody in the Province

will understand the Leader of the Opposition's political motivation for

characterizing it as misleading.

I have to apologize to the people of the Province for the

behaviour of the party opposite when they were here and they passed the

legislation that they did and caused this embarrassing situation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: Now, Mr. Speaker, I could have brought

this piece of legislation before the House and said: Look at what the heroic

Liberals are going to do; we are going to solve this problem where our

predecessors failed. I could have tried to present us as heroes, but I didn't. I

chose to do it in the way that would be straightforward and effective, and avoid

giving the members opposite the opportunity to defeat or to cause this

legislation to be challenged. It didn't work. I am sorry it didn't work. I agree

now that it would have been better had I taken the legislation directly and

spelled it out for what it was, and would have hoped that the members opposite

would have had the good sense to act responsibly. Clearly they don't have that

good sense. They are putting solely their political interest ahead of the

interest of the people of this Province, and they will never be forgiven for it!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Talk about blowing your own cover, I say

to the Premier; talk about blowing your own cover.

I want to pursue a line of questioning to the Minister of

Employment and Labour Relations that I pursued on Monday pertaining to the

lay-off of electrical inspectors and boiler inspectors in the Province. At that

time the minister said that they were putting a new system in place.

I want to ask the minister: Will his department continue to

sell permits for people who are doing electrical work on whatever types of

buildings in the Province? Will they continue to sell permits to those people?

How much will they be charged? And will those people who have to purchase

permits still be afforded inspection services such as they do now before the

system is changed?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The complete new regulations for the new arrangement in terms

of electrical inspection in the Province will be done, expected by the first of

June, and the procedure basically will be along the lines of the contractor or

individual who picks up a permit to do electrical wiring and installation will

have to demonstrate that they have certain certification. There is intended to

be three classifications that will be accepted and approved, and they are the

only ones who will be entitled to get a permit to do wiring, and then it is the

credibility of the individual and/or firm who picks up the permit and does the

installation with recognized, certified electricians who can make sure, and

guarantee the person they are doing the work for, that they are doing the

installation according to the provincial code.

The other part of the regulations and the regulatory regime

that will be introduced along with that is that if the individuals or

contractors or companies who pick up those permits and do the work, if they are

found to be in violation at any point in time by report or by spot checking,

then they will lose their entitlement to carry on that kind of business in the

Province.

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

supplementary.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister didn't answer the question about the permits and

whether, when people buy the permits, they will receive inspection services such

as they do today. I guess the minister really is verifying that they won't, and

there will be spot audits done on the work throughout the Province.

I want to ask the minister this, in the calendar year '93,

from January 1 to December 31 there were 7,469 permits sold, 10,475 inspections

done, and 4,680 directives issued as a result of deficiencies or code

violations, I say to the minister.

Now that 4,680 violations of the code, or work deficiencies,

is what alarms me, and I want to ask the minister, as I did on Monday, isn't he

concerned with public safety, looking at the same people will now still be doing

this electrical work throughout this Province, who will now inspect themselves

and audit themselves. Isn't he concerned that those very same people, who in

calendar year '93 had to go back and make corrections, correct deficiencies -

4,680 violations of the code were noted then - isn't the minister concerned

about public safety when now he is going to have people doing the work inspect

their own work?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, and I answered the question a couple of days ago. Our

number one concern is for the public safety. It has been and continues to be,

and there is no question of that. The reality is that it is not at all a common

practice anywhere in the country to have every single installation inspected by

a government inspector, whether that inspector be hired by the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, or by one of the municipalities such as the City of

St. John's.

The concept clearly across the country that is most commonly

practised, and which is the idea of the day in terms of meeting the safety

requirements first and foremost and then being efficient in delivery is that the

contractors and the companies guarantee their work. The records of the company

are audited. There are occasional spot checks made on all companies to make sure

they are conforming. The real practice is that if they are found in violation

the companies and contractors know that they risk the loss of their licence to

operate in the Province. That is a tremendous incentive to make sure that the

people doing the installation on their behalf or as private contractors do it

according to the code or they will be disallowed to do further installations in

the Province.

In areas where individuals - because there aren't large

companies operating in some of the rural parts of Newfoundland and Labrador -

have traditionally done this wiring, those people will be given certification to

do so based on their past record of having met the code requirements. If they

are found to be in violation by checking these individual installations -

because it is expected, Mr. Speaker, that some 30 per cent to 40 per cent of the

actual installations will still be inspected and that the other 60 per cent

would be allowed to be done on the credibility of the installer. That in fact we

are not in any way, shape or form risking anything from a safety aspect.

Otherwise we would not have agreed to go with this new system.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Opposition

House Leader.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How can the

minister stand in his place today and talk about the risk to contractors who are

going to do the work and give the minister's department an undertaking that

their work will be up to par? How can he stand in his place and say that he

doesn't have any concern for the risk to public safety, to human life, in this

situation? It is too late after the fact when your department finds out that a

contractor didn't do work up to par and someone has died in his or her bed or

some people died in their beds. It is too late for you to be concerned about it

then. That is what the inspections were all about. Four thousand six hundred and

eighty deficiencies found in the last calendar year, I say to the minister.

Won't he scrap this crazy plan that a lot of officials in his department, by the

way, are saying they didn't recommend? Won't he immediately scrap the plan and

instead of laying off ten inspectors won't he hire more, so that there are

adequate inspection services throughout this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, the decision has been made with

this regard and the only thing that we are now planning on doing is bringing

forward for Cabinet consideration the regulations that will put into effect the

new system which is the norm across the country and which does not jeopardize

people to any extent because of the quality of the electrical inspections that

will occur in the Province.

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

Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

direct my question to the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Mr.

Minister, the salary vote for the urban and rural planning branch of the

Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs has been cut by more than half. I

understand there are twenty-two planners in the branch. Can the minister tell us

exactly how many planners will be laid off as a result of the Budget cut?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, an estimated... planners and

staff, sixteen.

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

Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The urban and rural

planning branch prepares town plans for municipalities around the Province. Even

with the present staff municipalities have to wait two to three years to have

town plans revised and approved. Mr. Minister, how will the work be done now?

Will municipalities be forced to hire planners from outside government, and does

it mean that the full cost of developing the municipal plans will be down loaded

to municipalities in the future?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. REID: Mr. Speaker, just in the last twenty-four hours

the City of Mount Pearl has indicated to me, and publicly, that they want to do

their own assessments. I have tens and tens of communities around the Province

that are asking for the same thing. I also have tens and tens of communities

around the Province that are asking to do their own plans. Whether or not this

government is in a position yet to accommodate any of those communities I'm not

in a position to say.

The costs for planning will be, I suppose - the burden will

be placed upon municipalities around the Province. I can say to the hon. member

that I feel personally that there are a lot of towns around the Province that

can afford to do their own planning. I really can't say much more than that.

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

Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Assessments and the

planning are two different things, I would like to say to the minister, and I

agree, maybe there are a few towns out there who can afford to pay for their own

municipal plans, but I think the majority, especially the smaller towns, cannot.

I would like to ask the minister, is this the beginning of government's plan to

privatize not just Crown corporations but a whole range of services now provided

through government departments? What else is on the block in Municipal and

Provincial Affairs? Is this a part of the great Strategic Economic Plan, getting

rid of your planners?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. REID: The answer to a number of your questions, Mr.

Speaker, is no, but let me say that there are plans, yes. There are plans to

make some drastic changes to my department and to municipalities around this

Province but the changes, as far as I'm concerned I say to my hon. friend, will

be good changes. Regionalization for example, changes that we can introduce to

the government to help municipalities cope with the financial burden that they

have in this Province. I'm hoping with my background and experience, Mr.

Speaker, in the past eight to ten years in municipal politics, I might be able

to do something to help some of these communities that are hard pressed today

because of the economic situation we find ourselves in.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

direct a question to the Minister of Health. Now in the Harbour Breton and the

Connaigre Peninsula area we've seen a significant increase in the population

there since the hospital was first built and in recent years we have seen a

decline by almost one-half of the staff that was at that hospital. Now the

Premier in the 1989 campaign stood on the floor of that hospital and indicated

funding would be forthcoming in the future for a new hospital and the member for

the area has said that for the past five years. The conditions there at that

hospital are totally unacceptable. I ask the minister, why should a female

patient have to die in a corner of a male ward with five other patients because

there is no space in the hospital to allow her to die with dignity in a private

room with her family?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I'm not to sure what the

question was. He sort of rambled around there and the -

MR. E. BYRNE: (Inaudible) hard for you to understand the

question when your doing a crossword puzzle.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I can't hear the minister's reply.

DR. KITCHEN: Are you finished your cackling over there

now or what? Why don't you stop your cackling?

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) crossword puzzle (inaudible).

DR. KITCHEN: Why don't you shut up?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, that's not very nice.

DR. KITCHEN: As far as Harbour Breton is concerned and

the Connaigre Peninsula, there is no doubt that there is a government commitment

to do something about that hospital in due course but as members know, there are

a lot of things we have to do in the health care system, quite a lot of

buildings to be renewed and long-term care particularly. Harbour Breton is in

the lineup but we haven't committed to do anything this year and we have

committed to do it in no particular year but it is in the works and it will be

done in due course.

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

Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I guess

everything will get done in due course. This government should be more

concerned, rather than with public relations and communication, they're

increasing their budget in their department by $266,000 and another $120,000 on

purchase service and there's people dying in waiting lines in hospitals across

this Province. Now I ask the minister: Is he aware that a man who had a heart

attack had to spend a night on a stretcher in that hospital with no heart

monitor because the only heart monitor in the hospital was being used on another

patient in a private room in that hospital?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member knows of any

thing that happened in a hospital, what he should do is let me know about it, I

will investigate it and I will look into that question but what we've been

finding out is that every so often the hon. members opposite raise these points

and when we look into them we find there's really nothing to them. It's just

that they want to be seen and heard, pretend and frighten people in the system.

The hospital system in this Province is a good system. We cannot guarantee that

everybody who goes to a hospital is going to come out well, no one can guarantee

that. Every time something goes wrong the hon. members are up there hovering and

upsetting the people in the Province. If you find something is wrong we will

investigate it and I have a number of investigations that have been concluded

successfully.

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

for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'm up complaining because on February 23 you got a letter

sent to you by an employee of that hospital and the hospital personnel from

nursing staff and everybody there will vouch for these conditions and the member

knows well, and you slough it off. I've kept this letter for the past weeks

hoping everybody there will vouch for these conditions, and the member knows as

well, and you slough it off. I kept this letter for the past weeks hoping there

would be a response and you did nothing and the same thing with Grenfell.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: In the same letter, I am sure you are

aware, that people have to wait in a lineup in freezing conditions to get into

the hospital clinic because there is no room in the outpatients for them to wait

to receive medical service. Now, I ask the minister, when is he going to heed

the advice of people in the health care field and do something about the

desperate state of health care in this Province?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member gets all

exercised. I am hoping he will not have a heart attack here because we do not

have too many physicians. Anything that goes wrong in a hospital is investigated

and is investigated very carefully. We take complaints very seriously, I do, and

I have staff check them out and check them out thoroughly. I do not get up in

the House and make statements about things just to cause public furore. We have

to do these things quite carefully, quietly, and with great care, so I do not

know what the purpose of the member's question is, except to stir the pot. That

seems to be what they have been doing this last few days, stirring up the pot,

rather than addressing or asking decent questions.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have questions for the Minister of Health, too. Will the

minister admit that nine nursing positions at Western Memorial Regional

Hospital, at the hospital and the O'Connell Centre in Corner Brook are about to

be cut, and will the minister explain the justification for these nursing cuts?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I will look at the details of

that. There is no doubt that hospitals have to meet their budget requirements

and sometimes when they go over budget they have to take steps to get back in

budget. It may very well be that is what it was, but I will look at the

particulars of that and see just what happened.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister that my information is that in the next

day or so termination notices are about to be given indicating the elimination

of two nursing positions in obstetrics, two in long-term care at the hospital in

Corner Brook, and four in long-term care at the O'Connell Centre in Corner

Brook, and the other in staff health education. I ask the minister, how can

obstetrics patients and long-term care patients in Corner Brook possibly get

adequate care with nine fewer nursing positions?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, on that particular point the

member is saying that someone was going to be laid off in a couple of days? I do

not know where she is getting her information about people going to be laid off.

Is she going to announce their names here in the House? What is she up to?

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

final supplementary.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Minister of Heath when he is going to make public

the report of the assessment of Western Memorial Regional Hospital that the

Premier personally directed last July? The Premier told people in Western

Newfoundland through CBC radio that the minister would be releasing it to the

public. When will we get that report?

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

DR. KITCHEN: In due course, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has expired.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The Opposition House Leader on a point of

order.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wanted to rise on a point of order during Question Period

but because Question Period is just what it says, I did not want to take the

time of.

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

point of order.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wanted to rise on a point of order during Question Period,

but because Question Period is just what it says, I didn't want to take the time

of members asking question and time of ministers to answer; but I am sure Your

Honour very clearly heard the Minister of Health tell a member on this side to

`shut up'. That is the second occasion in two weeks that we have had a

government minister, a Minister of the Crown - the first case was the Government

House Leader, in a night sitting, telling the Member for Baie Verte -White Bay,

to `sit down and shut up', and today we have the Minister of Health telling

another member to shut up.

I submit to Your Honour that there are times when we get a

little bit heated and excited here, but I think Your Honour should ask the

Minister of Health to withdraw his remark; it is certainly unparliamentary and I

don't think it should be tolerated here. I didn't want to do it during Question

Period so I do it now, and, Your Honour, I make the submission.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health.

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I do withdraw that remark.

MR. SPEAKER: On behalf of hon. members, I would like to

welcome to the public galleries, Mayor Tony Ryan, Councillor Chris Fagan and

Town Clerk, Joanne Boudoin from Port Saunders.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Notices of Motion

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House

resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain

resolutions to the granting of Supplementary Supply to Her Majesty.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce

a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Retail Sales Tax Act".

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Employment and

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: I would like to table the following, Mr.

Speaker, in response to a question asked yesterday by the hon. the Member for

Kilbride, about the elements or components that are being studied with respect

to the Income Supplementation Proposal.

This lists the twelve items into which the work groups have

been assigned to do further research, and I am sure if, after the hon. member or

members have had a look at it, there are further questions in the days ahead, I

would certainly attempt to answer them.

Petitions

AN HON. MEMBER: Mr. Speaker.

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

on his feet first.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to present a number of petitions from people around

the Province, from the Northern Peninsula, Woody Point, Roddickton, Englee area,

the Grand Falls - Windsor, Carbonear, Victoria, Salmon Cove, St. John's, Hearts

Delight, various parts of the Province, and all of these petitioners are opposed

to the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. They say, Mr. Speaker,

that the privatization and sale of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro has not been

proven to be in the best interests of the citizens of the Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, that remains to be true despite the

attempts of the Premier to divert the issue from the merits of the privatization

of Hydro, by talking about another piece of legislation and talking about

another giveaway that took place some time ago. These people are interested in

the Hydro privatization and the merits of that arrangement, that proposal to get

rid of the people's interest in Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, and to give

that interest to private investors, most of whom will be from outside of this

Province, some of whom will be from inside the Province.

Those investors will be offered a very good price, usually,

Mr. Speaker, in privatizations, 10 per cent to 15 per cent below the actual

market value of the shares, to encourage people to buy, that's the standard;

they will be offered these shares at a very good price and these new

shareholders would be guaranteed a return on investment by the Public Utilities

Board of some 13 per cent perhaps 14 per cent, depending on what experts they

can get to tell the Public Utilities Board what they would require.

They will say what they can require and the Public Utilities

Board generally goes along with these experts who are called to say what the

rate of return ought to be, and this money, instead of in the case of

Newfoundland investors, perhaps instead of going into other ventures that might

create jobs will end up in shares in Newfoundland, the New Hydro corporation

soaking up investment capital and also getting us into a situation where perhaps

there would be a loss of other jobs, as has happened in Nova Scotia. Some 400

jobs were lost there when the Nova Scotia Power Corporation was privatized. And

that happened, Mr. Speaker, as a result of privatization.

PREMIER WELLS: What about New Brunswick?

MR. HARRIS: Now, the Premier asks, what about New

Brunswick? Well, we know that across the country there has been a loss in demand

for hydroelectric resources in those provinces that have access to grids.

Ontario, for example, has had a very significant decrease in the demand for

power in Ontario; so has Quebec, and this has certainly cost a loss of jobs

there.

PREMIER WELLS: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: And these are Crown corporations - I agree

with the Premier - and Crown corporations have to be able to respond to the

variations of the marketplace. When you don't have to produce power, I guess you

don't need people to produce it.

That is not what happened in Nova Scotia. The same amount of

power is being produced in Nova Scotia, and they have lost jobs. They are

producing power out of coal. They are producing the same amount of power, but

they are producing power out of coal.

So, Mr. Speaker, we are going to see, predictably, a dramatic

decrease in employment as a result of the privatization, but also a consequent

on the investment that might otherwise have gone into creating jobs, small

business investment, risk investment, venture capital, which is going to be

soaked up by people buying shares.

Instead of setting up a business, instead of going into some

enterprise that is going to create jobs, people are being invited by the Premier

of this Province to put all of their money in Hydro shares. Don't bother to

invest in our future. Don't bother to create new jobs. Put your money in Hydro.

We will give you a guaranteed return on investment.

That is what is happening here, and the Premier has failed to

answer the objections to Hydro so he is seeking to divert attention away from it

by suggesting that somehow or other this private utility might have a better

crack at breaking into the availability of Churchill Falls power.

Mr. Speaker, I don't think we should listen to that, and we

should ask for the true facts and merits.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to rise to pass a

couple of comments on what the hon. the Member for St. John's East presented to

the general public about the privatization of Hydro.

This is another reason why the general public of this

Province is getting the wrong information about the principle of privatization.

First of all, you start from the very premise that government should not be

involved in business. That is the principle of privatization. That's where I am

coming from, as a person who was involved in private business all my life, so

nobody, from either side of the House is going to argue with that principle.

MR. HARRIS: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: I agree.

MR. SIMMS: That at least is a very bad (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: I understand that, but that is not being said

in all the arguments put forth by the Opposition or by the Member for St. John's

East.

MR. TOBIN: That Mrs. from Spaniard's Bay (inaudible) this

morning.

MR. EFFORD: Well, I guess what I am going to have to

worry about in the next election, from that Mrs. who called in from Bay Roberts,

or wherever, is that my majority will be reduced from 3,617 to 3,616 - so that's

a big worry there!

Mr. Speaker, we have to look at, first of all, what isn't

being said, that Hydro owes $1.2 billion. Now the Member for St. John's East

just said when the shares go on the market people will invest all of their money

into the shares, and people from outside the Province will buy shares in Hydro -

that will be - and all of the money will go outside of the Province instead of

staying in the Province.

Now, I want to make this point, Mr. Speaker, because a lot of

people are not being told this: the interest being paid out annually on the $1.2

billion amounts to $147 million per year.

MR. SIMMS: You're not paying it.

MR. EFFORD: Hold on now. The ratepayers - I am a

ratepayer, yes, I'm paying it.

MR. SIMMS: The government is not paying it. They haven't

paid a cent of interest in thirty years.

MR. EFFORD: I ask the Leader of the Opposition: Who is

the government if it is not the people of this Province? Who is the government?

The ratepayers of this Province pay into Hydro and Newfoundland Light and Power

for the cost of electricity.

MR. SIMMS: They will pay more under your bill.

MR. EFFORD: Now, one hundred and forty-seven million

dollars a year - that is the reason why, Mr. Speaker, the Opposition -

MR. SIMMS: You accuse us of passing on false information

- you are doing precisely the same thing.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, could you protect me from the

mad Opposition?

MR. SIMMS: (Inaudible) apologize.

MR. EFFORD: One hundred and forty-seven million dollars

on a $1.2 billion loan guarantee goes out of this Province into the bankers,

whether it be Germany, Switzerland, the United States, Japan - $147 million

every year. If Hydro could say: We are going to pay off that loan and it is

going to be gone forever, it would take 167 years to pay off that loan at the

rate they are paying. Now, where is the money going, into the pockets of

Newfoundlanders or into the pockets of the world bankers?

The hon. the Member for St. John's East never mentioned that

amount at all.

MR. MURPHY: Never mentioned anything.

MR. EFFORD: Never mentioned anything - never mentioned

the fact that government will receive $200, $300, $400 or $500 million, whatever

they receive from the shares sold on the market, the government shares, so that

they will not have to borrow this year, and they will not pay interest on that

amount of money forever. That is another $25 million, $30 million, $35 million.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: Oh yes. We are just as wrong about this now

as we were wrong when we told you that you shouldn't build a cucumber farm. We

are just as wrong now about that.

AN HON. MEMBER: And that's your only defence.

MR. EFFORD: No, it is not the only defence. It is good,

wise management of the money of the people of this Province, Mr. Speaker. The

Member for St. John's East is giving out misleading information and the correct

information is not going out there.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: No, you are as wrong as you were when you

thought they were giving this Province a good deal on the Upper Churchill,

that's how wrong you are.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: This side of the House - and I've stated

here, as you sat in your seat - that we are committed to privatization of

industries that are out there not serving a public interest. The only one on

record that we have taken a stand as being opposed to is Newfoundland Hydro.

That is our record on privatization. I believe strongly in it. If your finances

and arguments that you are using on this debt are that weak, it is good you got

out of private business and you are now here in this House of Assembly.

You have stated 166 years - you should be listening. That is

the mathematics the Member for St. John's South used before.

MR. SIMMS: That's right. It is wrong.

MR. SULLIVAN: It is new to me - maybe the Minister of

Finance could correct me. If there are 166 years remaining on the outstanding

debts of Hydro - two thousand and sixteen.

MR. MURPHY: That is what it would take to buy it now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: The Member for St. John's South doesn't

realize that when you have a mortgage or a debt, during the initial years when

the debt is higher you pay an increasingly greater amount as interest and a

smaller amount as principle, and in the last years the debt is almost entirely

going to principle. Now, it is going to debt. And that is on a mortgage - he

doesn't understand that. Let me tell you the mathematics he used. He said, we

have retired 17 per cent in thirty years almost. So six times that, six times

thirty, is 180 years to retire the rest. I mean, if that type of mathematics is

used here, no wonder -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: - no wonder this government is bringing

deficits each year over and above the targets that they set. That is what is

wrong. The bonds are being held at two thousand, sixteen - ask the Minister of

Finance - at varying per cents.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I will answer that, too. I answered that

for you another night. I will tell you again. Because the bonds are held in

Swiss francs and Japanese yen, it is costing the ratepayers of this Province,

depending on the valuation of the dollar at the time of transaction, anywhere

from a low side of $90 million for the currency difference up to possibly $100

million a year. That is going to be amortized by New Hydro over the next twenty

or thirty or even forty years -

AN HON. MEMBER: See you, `John'!

MR. SULLIVAN: - at a cost that ratepayers of this

Province - and don't run away and hide! Ask the Minister of Finance these

figures if you wish. He will confirm them, or maybe he is ashamed to say. Maybe

he is told not to release these.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: I've challenged the Member for St. John's

South, and the Premier, and the minister, and anybody over there, I will debate

the figures and the costs of this, and they are afraid that the public are going

to find out the real truth, and the real truth is the $160 million to $200

million a year on rate payers in this Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: I am speaking. You will have your time. The

member will have his time. You had your time last night.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: You had your time at Holiday Inn two weeks

ago, and you will have your time again. Your time will come, and let's hope the

numbers will add up right then.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: That's right. That's the type of

mathematics you are dealing with.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Oh, you're good. I will debate that in a

public forum with you any day whatsoever. You set the time and place and I will

be there waiting. I won't have my constituents begging for two weeks in the

public airwaves to come out to a meeting. I won't do that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I had my meeting in Petty Harbour, and we

had a packed hall in Ferryland, standing room, with CBC there when we had the

meeting. I don't run away from meetings. I talk from fifty to seventy

constituents every day, and still we have lots -

AN HON. MEMBER: Tory meetings.

MR. SULLIVAN: They are not Tory meetings. They are public

meetings. Maybe they are. They were almost all Tories the last time in my

district; maybe they are all Tory meetings.

The actual fact is that the members on that side of the House

have been muzzled for so long -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SULLIVAN: By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! No leave.

Before recognizing the hon. member -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before recognizing the hon. member I would like to welcome to

the public galleries Mayor Winston Woodford of the Town of Triton in Green Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. A. SNOW: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to rise and speak to a

petition presented to me by twenty-one people from the district of Menihek.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. SNOW: This is part of the continuation of the list

of petitioners who - I was hoping the hon. Member for St. John's South would

stay for one moment -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: I am presenting this petition on behalf of

residents of Western Labrador who are very concerned about some of the remarks

the Premier made while he was responding to a petition that I presented in this

House a few days ago.

The Premier isn't here now. He is undoubtedly outside doing

some other business within the building, I am sure. I am not sure he is within

earshot, but now that the hon. Member for St. John's South is the Premier's

Parliamentary Secretary, I was hoping he would stay within the Chamber and

listen to some of the queries the people have, and he can bring back these

answers, I would hope.

I won't get involved in the mud wrestling whatsoever. I

merely want to get involved in answers to some of the questions that the

residents of Western Labrador want answered.

Mr. Speaker, in the petition that I presented I talked about

the concerns that the people in Western Labrador have over the rates that are

going to be charged, specifically in Labrador. The Premier has suggested, in a

media conference, or at least through media coverage, that it was going to be

approximately a 20 per cent to 30 per cent increase that has nothing to do with

privatization in Labrador because of, as he suggests, something that was caused

to happen. In other words, I think it has something to do with the PDD, that

this government caused to happen, by the way. The $30 million subsidy that used

to be paid out of tax dollars is now going to be paid by rate payers rather than

taxpayers.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier suggested that the rates in Labrador

are going to go up 20 per cent to 30 per cent - this is in media coverage - but

in response to my petition what the Premier said, and I quote: Most residences

of Labrador West average out to about fifteen mils in cost. In Goose Bay it is

thirty mils, and in the Island portion of the Province he refers -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Pardon? In the Island portion of the

Province he refers to seventy-five.

Mr. Speaker, what the people in Labrador have a direct

concern about, they've been told - they've heard news reports of the Premier

saying it's going to be 30 per cent. If we use the figures that he says in

responding to my presentation of petition here, it may possibly - what they

think may be occurring, Mr. Speaker, might be 30 per cent this year. Is it going

to be 30 per cent and continuing until they get to the 30 mils in Goose Bay or

is it going to go all the way to the 75 mils?

MR. BAKER: We don't know.

MR. A. SNOW: Now, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance

says they don't know but undoubtedly they would have a pretty good idea of what

the rates would be, they undoubtedly understand what the public utilities will

be using as a criteria to establish the rates, Mr. Speaker. Are they going to be

suggesting to the Public Utility Board that the rates charged would be equal

throughout the Province? In that case, Mr. Speaker, the people of Western

Labrador will face a 500 per cent increase. That's what they could be facing and

that's what they are afraid of, Mr. Speaker, a tremendous increase.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I'm hoping that the Parliamentary Secretary

to the Premier will relay my questions and the people who are residents of

Western Labrador want those answers because they are concerned. I don't believe

that the people of Western Labrador should face these tremendous increases. Mr.

Speaker, they expect a certain increase over and above but they don't want this

huge, tremendous gouging of them because this would be tremendously unfair to

them.

DR. KITCHEN: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest to the Minister

of Health instead of interrupting my petition that he would continue doing his

crossword puzzle, at least he might get that right. At least he might get that

right because he's done nothing else right since he's been minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. KITCHEN: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: Pardon?

The Minister of Health is asking me why should the people of

Labrador City and Wabush not pay 500 per cent more, is that what he's asking?

DR. KITCHEN: Pay the same as we pay in St. John's. Why

should they get a subsidy by everybody else? Can you answer that?

AN HON. MEMBER: My god!

MR. A. SNOW: Now, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health is

suggesting that the people of Western Labrador should pay the same rate. So he's

suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that the people of Western Labrador should pay the same

rate as they pay in St. John's. That's a 500 per cent increase, Mr. Speaker,

that's what he's suggesting. Now should he also suggest that they pay the

$2,000, no subsidy, for an air fare for ambulance care to come down to the

Health Science Complex, is that what he's suggesting?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. SNOW: Because I asked him that question two weeks

ago and he hasn't got back to me yet.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. A. SNOW: Now maybe he hasn't finished his book of

crossword puzzles but at least return some answers!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, by leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. A. SNOW: I'm so surprised.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member does not have leave.

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I know I'm speaking to the petition and I

support the petition presented by my colleague from Menihek with his concerns

from people of his district - but as the debate goes on with regard to the

privatization bill, it gets more and more frightening, Mr. Speaker, when I hear

members opposite talk about the pros and cons of this particular piece of

legislation. Make no wonder, Mr. Speaker, that the people of this Province are

so concerned, make no wonder. Members get up - like a minister of the Crown

today, got up and contradicted what the Member for St. John's East said and

given some of the figures that he said, based on 160-odd years, make no wonder,

Mr. Speaker, that the people of this Province are asking questions, saying why

and how and how come? Make no wonder, make little wonder, those are the people

who are making up budgets, those are the people who were supposed to be

explaining to the back-benchers exactly what's included in the document

pertaining to the privatization of Hydro.

Mr. Speaker, one member shot back and said, `it's good

business.' This is not business, Mr. Speaker, this is a monopoly. This is a cash

cow. This has nothing to do with business. Where's the competition after this?

There's absolutely none. You could take someone out of Kindergarten and put them

in there with a good board of directors and that company will bring in all kinds

of profits, Mr. Speaker, within hours. I said it before, Mr. Speaker, once the

shares go on the market anybody in this Province who buy's them can turn them

over half-an-hour after for two or three dollars. Anywhere from two or three

dollars, from that up they can turn them over and make all kinds of profits

because like I said, it's a cash cow, it's a monopoly, it's a license to print

money, it is, for another word you want to put on it, it is a mint, Mr. Speaker.

I say members opposite are not digging a hole; they are digging a glory hole.

The Member for Windsor - Buchans should know, that is for sure, what a glory

hole is.

The great democrat who just a couple of years ago went around

this country speaking to every premier and the Prime Minister of this country

and telling everybody in this country about Meech Lake. How nothing should be

done behind closed doors, how it should be out in the open. How the Prime

Minister and his staff did this and did that. The people in this country were -

he was, I suppose, next to being canonized. But there is only so high you can go

when you plant and plan and work and put and base the principle of your

administration on one person. What happens when that credibility starts to come

down?

The administration suffers because everybody behind fell in

line. All that is left to do for members opposite is drink the Kool-Aid. It is

ridiculous what is happening in this Province today. Everywhere you go, no

matter who you talk to, and yet the Premier won't listen. The Premier just won't

listen. Members are always talking about polls. This is one time I think they

should take a poll. I say they have taken the poll and the poll shows them.

There are not too many papers waving over there now, 85/10, or 96. I will tell

members opposite that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are like elephants. They

have memories like elephants. They are going to remember this day, this infamous

day come next week when this particular piece of legislation is passed. They

will remember.

If they don't there is one member here who will remind them

come a few years down the road. There is one member opposite who will be able to

answer for that. He doesn't even have to fill out his nomination papers. He is

re-elected already. Because he stood up for his constituents. I look around the

front benches of this Administration and I look at what members are going to run

in the next election. The next election, I say to members in the back benches,

be careful. Do your homework and I can assure you that you will speak up for

your constituents and not for what the Premier and some of his front benchers

are saying.

Based on the facts, the Member for Ferryland, his figures -

and he has -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I stand today and

present a petition on behalf of fifty-four people of the District of St. Mary's

- The Capes. I will read the prayer of the petition.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

in parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents of the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ask for the House of Assembly to accept

the following prayer:

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to stop immediately the privatization of Newfoundland

Hydro and hold a referendum to ask the people of the Province their views as to

whether Newfoundland Hydro should be privatized or remain a Crown corporation,

as in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, I'm glad to stand today and present this

petition on behalf of another group of individuals from the district. The

petitions are coming in hand over fist every day. I have plenty more here to

follow if the time comes. The people of the Province would like to have a

referendum on this important piece of legislation. They've been asking for a

referendum now for the past week or ten days or so. It seems like the request is

falling on deaf ears. The Premier has gone on provincial television and on open

line shows trying to defend his position on this. I say that there is an old

saying that you can fool some of the people some of the time and some of the

people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time. I

think that the jig is up this time round and that people are starting to take

this to heart. They have found out that the Premier doesn't walk on water, that

he can sink, and this may be his last walk.

It is very important that the people of the Province have a

say. I will refer to what the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation

spoke on earlier when he talked about the people - `the people are the

government'. Yes, the people are the government, but the problem is, Mr.

Speaker, the people are not having an opportunity to have their say on this

issue. It is only over the past couple of days that the Premier has gone out

trying to defend this piece of legislation, trying to defend his actions, I

should say, more than anything else, in trying to push this piece of legislation

through the House, and trying to defend the actions of members opposite as they

try to ignore the people in their districts who are coming forward asking

questions on this.

I go back to another saying, an old one, `What a tangled web

we weave when first we practice to deceive.' I guess that falls on a lot of ears

on the other side of the House. That includes the Member for St. John's South

also, who heard it loud and clear last night, but it seems it went in one ear

and out the other, and that is all we can do about that.

I take exception sometimes to some comments, I suppose you

shouldn't, but I take exception to comments that are thrown back and forth, such

as those made by the Member for St. John's South and by the Premier, himself,

who talked today about what happened in the 1960s and how members on this side

of the House had a

part in that. Well, my dear man, I couldn't have had a

part

in it, because I was five years old when the Premier and the Minister of Justice

gave away the Upper Churchill - I was only five years old, so why would he blame

me for having any

part in that? He is here now, twenty-five years later, giving

away the Lower Churchill and everything that goes with that, and I won't be able

to be blamed for this one either, thanks be to God, I say to members opposite.

It is a privilege for this government to be able to govern

this Province and represent the people, not a right, a privilege, and as far as

I am concerned, they are doing an injustice to the people of this Province by

not giving them a chance. Several times we heard `Sprung' being shouted out

across the House. Again, I wasn't here then. I am not saying who is right or

wrong, but I was not here then. This deal you are putting down now will be fifty

Sprungs, this deal you are trying to push through now. We will pay for it

forever and ever, and generations after us will pay for it forever and ever.

I want to touch on a few of the issues that are in the bill,

itself and, more importantly, the rural subsidy that is going to be phased out

by December 1999 and which will affect my district which is 100 per cent rural.

This subsidy that we receive now, when that is taken away, as far as I am

concerned and from what I can gather, the rates in rural Newfoundland will

possibly double and in some places triple because of the subsidy being phased

out. I think this is wrong. I think we are being forced again and this is a

whole new resettlement game, resettlement all over again. People won't be able

to afford to live in rural Newfoundland, and they are being penalized because

they chose to live in rural Newfoundland. I think that is wrong.

We talk about the advertising campaign that is being put on

by Newfoundland Hydro and the government at a cost of $100,000, that only gives

one side of the story, Mr. Speaker. Why not go out and have public hearings so

we can debate this issue and have both sides of the story, instead of

advertising, sending out brochures, and doing radio ads that only give one side

of the story, the government side, as they push forward what they are trying to

say. I talked before about the water rights of the Province. It seems that most

people are concerned about the water rights.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to respond to the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes. The typical stuff we have heard in this House ever since this debate, not

debate really because members opposite have taken up so much time with

filibustering. If they are so right, what they should do is debate the bill, as

I said before.

I want to tell the member that I had a public meeting on this

issue last night, unlike a lot of other members opposite. It was an extremely

interesting meeting about Hydro. As a matter of fact, we had a show of hands. We

had ninety-eight people at the meeting. There are 10,800 voters in St. John's

South and we had ninety-eight people at the meeting, and among the ninety-eight

people there, we had Mr. Malone, who is a very sincere gentleman. He speaks from

his heart and I respect what he says - I don't agree with him but I respect what

he says. Of course, we had the most arrogant, ignorant, buffoonish, politician

in the history of this Province shouting and bawling.

MS. VERGE: Who was that?

MR. MURPHY: Deputy Mayor Andy Wells, the buffoon of all

buffoons. And I say to you, Mr. Speaker, I told him last night the same as I

will tell members of this House, that Andy Wells did exactly, last night, what

he did a few years ago when he was on the PU board shooting off his big face,

that cost the taxpayers of this Province $1.5 million. Now, that is in direct

costs, I didn't get into the other costs that sent them down to Texas for twelve

weeks that cost the taxpayers over $21,000 to learn the economics associated

with PUB.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. MURPHY: That's what the taxpayers of this Province -

that's what he charged them, not counting his salary.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. MURPHY: Twenty-one thousand dollars. And I can go on

and on but I didn't last night. But I tell you, now I have the figures and I

will tell this to the members opposite or any other member, who is supporting

Mr. Wells and getting Mr. Wells information - false information I might add, and

his foolish information, because all Andy Wells is, is a buffoon who has cost

the taxpayers in this Province millions of dollars, millions of dollars, and

look at the rate increases when he was the consumer rep on Public Utilities, I

tell the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

I had a public meeting and they had a show of hands last

night, with all of that crowd who travel around, and there were sixty-two people

against the privatization of Hydro, counting the people who all members know,

the `Bas' crowd, and all the rest of them, waving their hands and jumping. And,

you know, thirty-two people there were in favour of privatization.

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Yes, and I know the residents of St. John's

South, and I say to the hon. the Member for Humber East, it was a 50-50 show at

the best, so I don't need to be lectured by anybody opposite about what the

people of this Province are saying, and not day-by-day, not hour-by-hour, but

minute-by-minute, they are understanding why this government are doing what we

are doing.

AN HON. MEMBER: Andy is going to be the next leader.

MR. MURPHY: Andy could be the next leader, then the

people of this Province will really have something on their hands. I challenged

him last night to run against me in St. John's South. Do you know what his

response was? Nothing, zip, and when he asked me: `Why didn't you attend the

meeting, I told him why I didn't attend, it was because I was at a Marine

Atlantic meeting trying to defend thirty-five direct jobs for the residents of

my district and 150 indirect jobs in St. John's. That's what I was up to, and I

need a buffoon like that to tell me where I should and shouldn't be?

Like the rest of you, I have listened, I have faced the

residents of St. John's South and I will continue to do it and I stand my record

in representing them against any member in this House, any member, including the

Member for Burin - Placentia West, who is now on the coat-tails of the Minister

of Industry Trade and Technology, and would have had nothing only for this

minister, nothing.

So, Mr. Speaker, I say to you: I have heard enough rhetoric,

I have heard enough foolishness and it is time for us to get on with this bill

and do what needs to be done on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, put this bill through the House so we can get the industrial

development that's needed -

MR. FUREY: Tell them about the (inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: The Minister of Industry Trade and Technology

says: tell them about the $100 million and the great flour explosion up in the

Straits. No, I don't want to repeat that, I said it before. I don't know if the

people of Newfoundland know it or understand it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) explosion.

MR. MURPHY: Well, I mean, when Premier Moores went out

and bought twenty-five bags of Cream of the West; now, he could have bought

Robin Hood, but Robin Hood was a little cheaper, so he wanted to have the best

flour, but that's for another day -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MURPHY: - and I will remind the public about that.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

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

Once again, Mr. Speaker, we are presenting petitions on Hydro

and the Member for St. John's South, whose record, for the constituents of St.

John's South, is not the debate or the question here, today. The question is the

sale, the privatization of Hydro. That is the motion, it is not the member's

record. And I don't suggest for one minute that his record is tarnished in any

way, with regard to how hard he works for the people of St. John's South, but

let us get to the issue of this debate, let's get to the issue of the petition

here.

The member opposite said that he held a public meeting unlike

many members opposite here. Now, let me put on the record, Mr. Speaker, that it

is this side of the House that began public meetings, it is this side of the

House that has put pressure on government to explain in detail what the merits

of this privatization sale is and let me, for the record, Mr. Speaker, say, we

had, on March 10, a meeting in Grand Falls - Windsor, on March 11, a meeting in

Baie Verte, on Sunday, March 13, a meeting in St. Mary's - The Capes, on Sunday,

March 13, a meeting in Placentia; on Sunday, March 13, in the districts of

Kilbride and Ferryland, a meeting in Petty Harbour and on Monday, March 14, a

meeting in Labrador City and tonight, March 24, a meeting in Bonavista South. So

don't stand, member, and tell this side of the House that you are the only one

holding meetings. This is the side of the House that started public debate and

has brought to the conscious level of people in this Province what exactly is

happening.

AN HON. MEMBER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order, the hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. MURPHY: Perhaps the hon. member would tell me how

many public meetings they had on Sprung.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I will speak to the petition

again.

In terms of the details, the financial aspects, of what this

deal will do, let me use the Premier's own figures so members opposite might

understand: the cost to ratepayers, let me list them for you: Debt premiums and

costs related to the portion of Hydro's debt that will be paid off from the

proceeds of the sale of New Hydro, $20 million to $30 million; fees and

commissions paid by New Hydro on the issue and sale of shares, $15 million to

$20 million; foreign currency exchange losses as a result on Old Hydro's debt,

$90 million to $100 million; part of the unfunded pension liabilities that will

go to New Hydro, $25 million to $30 million.

In addition to that, compensation to persons who are deprived

of their interest in land, expropriation, $5 million; the cost of purchasing,

servicing and managing the investments in New Hydro for defeasion, $10 million

to $15 million; and all other costs related to the sale or purchase of Old Hydro

to New Hydro. There is no number on that, Mr. Speaker, because we do not know

it. These privatization expenses will cost the people of this Province between

$165 million and $200 million a year.

Now let's look at the cost to taxpayers. What are the real

costs to taxpayers? I remind members opposite that these are the Premier's

figures that he announced to the media: $15 million rate adjustment fund; $10

million a year in debt guarantee; $30 million to $40 million a year from federal

transfers under the Public Utilities Income Tax Transfer Act; and another $30

million to $40 million contributed directly by the Province to the new pension

plan.

Mr. Speaker, these are the costs that the government has

failed to bring out to the public. These are the costs, not voodoo economics,

not Calvert mathematics, sound mathematics, the Premier's and the governments

own figures, but they have not - repeatedly they have not - debated this issue

in public where we have asked them to debate it. They were shamed into holding

public meetings. The Premier was shamed into getting on provincial television

and saying: I urged the members of my Cabinet, and I urged the members of my

caucus, not to talk about the real issue and the real purpose of this

legislation.

Mr. Speaker, there is no new investment as a result of this

sale. There will be no new jobs as a result of this sale. There will be no new

technology, or technology transfer, as a result of this sale. That is what this

issue is all about, and the government has failed miserably in putting out the

real facts and information to the people of this Province, and that is

something, I can assure them, that the people of this Province will not forget.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. E. BYRNE: And they will be held accountable, as past

governments have been held accountable, for other like issues.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. BAKER: Order No. 2, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order No. 2.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

Supply on the resolution and Bill No. 7, and a Bill Respecting the Granting of

Main Supply to Her Majesty, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

MR. CHAIRMAN (Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I notice with interest that the Minister of Finance called

Order No. 2, Interim Supply. Mr. Chairman, we all know what order number one is:

You are not allowed to speak.

MR. SULLIVAN: Gag order, gag order.

MR. TOBIN: Gag order. Not allowed to speak. Order number

one is from the Lord, Mr. Chairman, to all the members opposite.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The emperor.

MR. TOBIN: The emperor. Mr. Chairman, I would like to

have the opportunity to speak in this debate today as it relates to interim

supply. I don't know what is taking place in this Province but I can tell you

one thing, that what this government is doing is unacceptable.

MR. FLIGHT: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: Pardon?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I want to do one at a time

because I wouldn't want to confuse the minister. There are a couple of things I

want to -

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, will the Minister for St. John's

South forget about Andy Wells? He looks like he can't relax. Every time he opens

his mouth he looks around. It is like Andy is up there watching over him. You

are being manipulated, man, forget him. Now he thinks Andy is running against

him, so every time he gets up now it will be Andy. He will lose everything if he

gets totally sidetracked by worrying about who is going to be running against

him, I would say to the Member for St. John's South. It is evident today how

worried you are because every time you open your mouth -

MR. W. MATTHEWS: If he would speak for his constituents

it wouldn't matter who runs against him.

MR. TOBIN: That is right.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: But the way he is, he should be worried.

MR. TOBIN: That is right. If you speak for your -

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible) dragged out thirty-two out of

10,000 who supported him on Hydro.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I want to today - here is the

member, he said I didn't have a big turnout. It wasn't a great big turnout.

Sixty-two people voted against it, thirty-two voted for it, and I'm going to go

with the thirty-two who voted for it. That is how I am going to represent my

constituents. That is what he said.

MR. CHAIRMAN (Snow): Order, please! Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: The Member for St. John's South -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: - is on record as saying -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: - sixty-plus -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

I remind the hon. member we are discussing the resolution on

interim supply.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Chairman, and we are discussing

interim supply in fine fashion, I can assure you that. We are discussing interim

supply and the finances of this Province. When sixty people turn to a member and

say: Don't sell Hydro, and thirty say to their member: Sell it, and he says: I

am going to represent the majority, I'm going with the thirty. That is Calvert

mathematics. Is that what he calls it Calvert mathematics?

AN HON. MEMBER: Tors Cove.

MR. TOBIN: Or Tors Cove mathematics. Mr. Chairman, I

happened to get a copy today of the local newspaper. I have to look at it.

Council's budget. I'm glad the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs is

here. The council's budget this year. Burin brought down their budget. I would

like particularly for the minister to listen to this: Burin town council has

opted to cut administration cost by $30,000 in this year's budget in its attempt

to combat the rising expenses and lower revenues. Council will also reduce

convention costs, travel costs, public relations. Pension reductions due to lay

offs will save $2,000, and election expenses. Mayor Jerry Appleby termed this

year's budget the toughest in his twenty years in office.

MR. EFFORD: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: Just listen for a minute, now, Mr. Chairman.

The breaks however were not without consequences as he placed an additional

$26,000 - Council lost about $50,000 on FPI taxes this year. Revenue generation

from utilities decreased by $7,000 with the 2.5 ceiling on gross revenues.

This is interesting. Burin town council. Fifty thousand they

lost with FPI taxes. Utility decrease, the act that was brought in by the

previous minister, reduced them by $7,000. Operating grants were decreased by

$15,000 to the town of Burin. Federal grants by $1,000, miscellaneous revenue by

$7,000, and the debt charges increased by $53,000 because of paving and

upgrading of water lines and sanitary costs that went up by $52,000.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) a book?

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, there are two things, I say to

the minister. Today I seen him in the newspaper holding up a picture - now I

don't know what is on the picture but the last time I seen him holding up a

picture in the newspaper is when he kissed the pig.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, as a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, the pig

looked good.

MR. SULLIVAN: He couldn't recognize who was with the pig.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Now, Mr. Chairman, I don't know if that's

right or not but the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation heard what

the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs just said.

Mr. Chairman, as it relates to the finances of this Province,

Mr. Chairman, this government has brought municipalities and everyone else to

their knees. They downloaded, Mr. Chairman, and now the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation the other day in the Budget said it's going to

accelerate the passing over of transportation roads to municipalities. I'd like

to know how the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs feels about that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, when I sit down. I only have two minutes

left.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like for the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs to tell me what he thinks about the Department of Works,

Services and Transportation unloading the transportation roads on the various

municipalities throughout the Province? I'd like for the Minister of -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, I will. Mr. Chairman, I can announce it

today. I'm that sure that there's a certain road in my district going to be

paved, I could announce it today but I won't, Mr. Chairman, it is not my place,

it's the place of the minister. I can also tell the minister - and I hope he's

listening - that I will not announce it because it's not my place and I will not

tell what containers he had in his office, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, I'm not telling. I will never tell, Mr.

Chairman, but the minister happened to show it to myself and a delegation from a

council, I say one day, and the delegation recognized the containers.

MS. VERGE: Oh, did that contain liquids?

MR. TOBIN: No, they didn't. No, no, it was nothing like

that. It certainly didn't contain liquids, I say to the Member for Humber East.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to know how the minister feels

about - why is transportation trying to unload the responsibilities onto

municipalities in this Province? Why is the budget cut to $20 million for

provincial government roads, when the last year that we were in government it

was $48 million, I say to the minister? Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Finance is

better then the former minister but there's a lot of improvement needed.

Mr. Chairman, the other night I attended a meeting in my

district regarding the Burin Peninsula Health Care Board. A meeting, Mr.

Chairman, where people from one end of the Burin Peninsula, from Fortune -

Hermitage, Grand Bank and Burin - Placentia West were present and they made it

quite clear that they don't want the minister to make the decisions that he's

making. They were upset to the extent that the president of the Joint Councils

got up and called the Minister of Health a liar on the radio, Mr. Chairman, in

the papers. The Minister of Health doesn't care to listen.

AN HON. MEMBER: He's not awake yet. He's puzzled I think.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, when I'm speaking to the

Minister of Health I expect his attention because I'm dealing with an issue that

is very important to my constituents.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, thank you very much. I'm glad to

have a chance to participate in this debate about interim supply.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The Chair didn't see the hon. minister standing. I've

recognized the hon. Member for Humber East but if the hon. member wishes to give

leave to the hon. Minister of -

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, if the minister is going to reply

to some of the points, some of the very hard hitting and important points made

by my colleague the Member for Burin - Placentia West then I have no hesitation

in giving leave. Since some of my colleagues seem to be dubious about the

member's motives perhaps I will just keep going, since I have been recognized.

Chairperson, many people who read the story on the front page

of The Evening Telegram yesterday were quite alarmed to see the large

amounts of money this government has been spending on various economic advisory

groups. People are not seeing any results for the considerable outlay of public

funds on economic advisors. People are feeling the negative effects of cutbacks

in health and education, and are at a loss to understand the government's

setting of priorities in spending.

I would like the attention of the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology, since he is the only minister present with responsibility for

this area, and I would appreciate if the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology would explain the justification for the government over the last year

or so, and on into the next year according to the Budget for 1994-'95, in having

an Economic Recovery Commission and an Advisory Committee on the Economy. What

are those groups contributing? Why are there two?

Government seems to have a fixation on consolidation and

merger and amalgamation. Why the array of economic advisory groups, councils,

divisions, et cetera? The Evening Telegram lists the Economic Recovery

Commission, the Advisory Commission on the Economy, the Economic and Social

Policy Division, the Strategic Economic Initiatives Division, the Resource

Policy Analysis and Planning Division, the Economic Research and Analysis

Division, the Regional Development Program Division, the Resource Programs

Division. Why do we have all those different divisions and commissions? Isn't

there considerable room to consolidate, and perhaps by bringing the few economic

brains together, getting a better output, and either transferring some of the

savings to more productive uses in education and health, or using the savings to

bring down the deficit. Why do we have all those advisory groups and divisions?

I would be quite willing to pause here and allow the minister

to give a response.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology.

MR. FUREY: I thank the hon. member for her question.

I can say: Stay tuned; we are going to look at these things,

and that is part of the process that we talked about in the Budget. We are going

to look at all of these agencies. In fact, we have asked the new President of

Enterprise Newfoundland to look at his agency and his new responsibilities to

see, in fact, if we can rationalize and restructure some of that.

I should point out to the hon. member that every agency that

she talked about, every single one, was there when we inherited the government

in 1989, with one exception - the Economic Recovery Commission.

I just ask her to stay tuned and be patient. There are some

things in the works and there are some restructuring propositions on the table

we are considering.

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

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, in an appendix to the Budget

speech document there is an indication that the government, during the 1994-'95

fiscal year, will be conducting a major review of Arts and Culture Centres and

provincially operated community recreational facilities. That is listed in

highlights of the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, but since Arts

and Culture Centres fall within the responsibility of the Minister of Tourism

and Culture, and since I understand the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology is now the Acting Minister of Tourism and Culture as well, I would

like to ask him about the major review of Arts and Culture Centres indicated in

the Budget speech document. What is the purpose of that major review? Who is

going to be doing the review? Will it be done by public servants, or will it be

done by people outside of the public service and the government? What will be

the terms of reference for the study?

What is the intended time frame, so I am asking: purpose,

personnel, people, terms of reference and time frame, and before the minister

rises just so that he will have the complete set of questions on this topic.

Since the Strategic Economic Plan, the much heralded Strategic Economic Plan,

contains a stark action item, indicating an intention to transfer administration

and control of Arts and Cultures Centres to appropriate local or community

agencies, is the government now rethinking that approach, and is the government

prepared to consider continuing to own and operate Arts and Culture Centres

depending on the outcome of the major review to be done in 94-95?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology.

MR. FUREY: Indecision? He called a point of order when he

should have called Division, that's what you are talking about.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) decision (inaudible).

MR. FUREY: It wasn't indecision, it was a difference of

opinion between an hon. member and the Speaker at the time, as I recall.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Speaker was right.

MS. VERGE: The Speaker is always right.

MR. FUREY: The Speaker is always right.

The government has talked about in the past, moving to divest

of Arts and Culture Centres. They cost a lot of money, the revenue streams that

come in in no way cover the costs of these centres so we decided to take a look

at it and see what kinds of things we could do with them. We have set about a

series of discussions - I should tell the hon. member there is no study; don't

be misinformed, I don't know where you are getting the idea that there would be

a study, it's a review I think is what you referred to.

MS. VERGE: It's a major review.

MR. FUREY: A major review, that's not a study. Let me

tell you what's going to happen -

MS. VERGE: The (inaudible) indicated in the Budget

documents.

MR. FUREY: That's right, it is not a study. We are moving

to divest of the Arts and Culture Centres. The former Minister of Tourism and

Culture, the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island started that process as far as

I can recall by initiating discussions with the councils at Stephenville and at

Gander. I should tell the hon. Member for Humber East that I also had a meeting

the other night in Corner Brook in her own riding with the Mayor and some people

from the City of Corner Brook and I told them they ought to start looking at the

Arts and Culture Centre in Corner Brook to see whether in fact the city is

interested in acquiring that property as well. Did the member hear what I just

said?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: I will repeat it. I had some discussions with

the Mayor and people in Corner Brook the other night, Mayor Pollet and the town

manager I believe was there and the senior -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. FUREY: The city manager, sorry, I represent a number

of towns, I apologize, and the Economic Development senior person, Mrs. Pye, and

I told them to start thinking about the Arts and Culture Centre and that

facility in Corner Brook and they ought to start looking at ways that they might

want to acquire - You heard what I said?

Now I should tell you we have had one proposal back. The

former minister and his officials have done some work and a formal proposition

has come to us now from the Town of Stephenville, and I think something just

came yesterday from the Town of Gander.

MS. VERGE: Stephenville has been in for years.

MR. FUREY: No, no, it hasn't -

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. WALSH: No, no, not the town. The town had initiated

(inaudible).

MR. FUREY: The town itself had put forward a proposition

I should tell the member to acquire this facility and that proposition is now

being studied, so when you say a study, there is no study. Now I have assigned

senior people from the department, I will tell the hon. member, to continue with

these discussions. We hope to deal with Stephenville first, Gander second then I

hope to move to Corner Brook, possibly St. John's and then perhaps Labrador.

Does that answer your questions?

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible) Grand Falls.

MR. FUREY: Well, Grand Falls yes, wherever there is an

Arts and Culture Centre. There was a second point to your -

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

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, I now have the actual document.

The Budget '94 document, the Budget Speech document, the Appendix, Page 7,

Municipal and Provincial Affairs, at the bottom of the page, states, "Funding

has been provided for the continuation of provincially operated community sports

facilities and Arts and Culture Centres around the Province. There will be a

major review conducted on the operation and use of these facilities in 1994-95."

I asked about the major review, I asked about the purpose of the major review,

the people who would be carrying out the review, whether they would be public

servants or people outside of government, I asked about the terms of reference

for the major review, and I asked about the time frame for the major review.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology.

MR. FUREY: I tell the hon. member that sits with my

colleague the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs in his capacity

looking after sports in the Province. Essentially what we are talking about are

swimming pools that are attached to these centres but if you separate that out

it is our responsibility to divest of the centres from the Arts and Culture

Centres perspective. We hope to have Stephenville concluded very shortly. We

hope to continue our discussions over the next thirty days or so with Gander,

and finish that. Then we hope to move on to the next ones, the next ones being

Corner Brook, which I have just alerted the Mayor and the city to, I would like

them to start thinking about a proposition to take this over. In some cases they

will be able to do it. In some cases we will be able to accept their proposals

and in other cases there may be modifications. The time frame for takeover - I

think in one of the propositions there is a three year descending subsidy and at

the end it is a cut-off and they would acquire it. That is in one proposal and I

am not sure what the substance of the second proposal is because I have not read

it.

MR. REID: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: All of them, the minister tells me, the

proposition is take over now with declining subsidies.

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

MS. VERGE: It is an extremely alarming move. I had hoped

that with some thought and care government would have realized that

municipalities and community groups will not be able to sustain Arts and Culture

Centres. Provincial government subsidization is absolutely essential for ongoing

operation of Arts and Culture Centres.

Chairperson, I have nothing against decentralization of

administration and control, or even ownership of Arts and Culture Centres. In

fact I favour that approach. I agree with the rationale put forward in the

O'Flaherty Arts Policy Committee Report which the government has now had for

four years, but any decentralized operation can succeed only with ongoing

provincial government subsidization. Now, if the provincial government is going

to withdraw provincial funding over three years, if it is the intention as just

stated by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology to withdraw provincial

funding over three years we will not have any Arts and Culture Centres left in

the Province. Municipalities or local committees will be saddled with white

elephants and they may linger as bingo halls but it will not be very long before

the buildings will be boarded up, white elephants. Chairperson, this is

extremely alarming.

Now, as for Corner Brook the minister's approach to the mayor

comes as news. That has not been made known to the people in Corner Brook. The

minister just said it in the House of Assembly, but I can assure the minister

that there will be a great number of citizens and organizations in Corner Brook

who will be very upset at the notion that the minister is intending to saddle

the City of Corner Brook with an Arts and Culture Centre and expect the

municipal government to pick up the $300,000 or $400,000 annual net operating

cost that is required. Chairperson, I stand to be corrected on that figure. It

may apply only to the arts portion of the building and not the swimming pool

portion of the building.

As I said before, decentralization, I think, could have many

advantages and for many years now I have advocated decentralization using a

model similar to what we have for community colleges or hospitals for that

matter. Surely the government must see that the same as for education and

health, a decentralized administration, or a group of volunteers serving on a

committee cannot carry on the use of Arts and Culture Centres without provincial

government subsidization, and substantial provincial subsidization.

With the required provincial government support, a

decentralized committee or commission, I believe, could make much more effective

and productive use of those facilities and could boost box office revenue if

built into the decentralized model is an incentive to improve attendance and box

office receipts, then I think we will all see the benefits, but if the minister

and his colleagues are intent on withdrawing provincial government subsidization

over three years, then I am afraid by the time of the much heralded 500th.

Anniversary of John Cabot's landing in this Province we won't have any Arts and

Culture Centres.

Then they are talking about building a grand $30 million arts

complex in St. John's, so we will have a white elephant Arts and Culture Centres

in St. John's, assuming there is not a double standard, which I very much

suspect, there will be a white elephant Arts and Culture Centre over here on

Prince Philip Drive in St. John's. There will be another one in Gander, a third

in Grand Falls, a fourth in Corner Brook, a fifth in Stephenville, and a sixth

in Labrador City, while we are going to have a new $30 million arts complex in

St. John's. That's ludicrous. If we can't afford to continue ongoing provincial

government subsidization of the six Arts and Culture Centres we have, how can we

possibly talk about building a $30 million arts complex in downtown St. John's?

It's ludicrous.

Here we are, talking about this grand, expensive, new

downtown St. John's arts complex. We are talking about a mega-million dollar

civic centre for St. John's, a multimillion civic centre for Corner Brook, yet

we are going to withdraw provincial government subsidization for the six Arts

and Culture Centres, five of which Premier Smallwood put in this Province in the

late sixties and early seventies, and the sixth of which the Peckford

administration put in Labrador City in the 1980's.

This is absolutely amazing, and what is really upsetting

about it is that there have been responsible groups in Stephenville and in

Gander who have been trying to deal with this government on a sensible basis for

years now. In the case of Stephenville, the first approach was made by the

Stephenville festival about five years ago to try to negotiate a mutually

beneficial arrangement for local or regional control, but surely the minister

opposite must realize that Arts and Culture Centres will not survive unless

there is ongoing provincial government subsidization.

Now the minister seems to want to add something to this

debate. I hope he has just realized that what he said a few minutes ago was

wrong and now indicates a definite intention to provide the necessary provincial

government subsidization.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

Before recognizing the hon. minister, I just want to, on

behalf of all hon. members, welcome to the gallery twenty-one graduating

students from Lumsden School Complex in Lumsden, in the district of Bonavista

North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Chairman, I know that the hon. member has

a great passion for the arts, as do I. I think she is being a little alarmist,

though, in some of her comments, but that's okay. She is paid to be alarmist.

In June, 1992, if the hon. member would bear with me, the

plan that was released, the Strategic Economic Plan, she wasn't asleep; she has

read it. She has studied it, I am sure. There is nothing new in what we are

attempting to do.

Action item 71: Transfer administration and control of the

Arts and Culture Centres to appropriate regional or community organizations.

MS. VERGE: Not with withdrawing provincial subsidization.

MR. FUREY: Hear me out, now.

In here we are talking about a review. Are there community

organizations out there that can use these facilities better? I taught theatre

in high school. I can tell you, it was very difficult for me to get young people

into the Arts and Culture Centre in Stephenville. It was really difficult.

MS. VERGE: It is worse now.

MR. FUREY: Well it may well be worse, but I can tell you

it had nothing to do with politics. It had nothing to do with political parties.

It had everything to do with the rule books, the rules that they were organized

under, and the cost to operate these centres. It was very difficult, and I can

tell you we paid every time, in Stephenville Crossing where I taught, every time

our theatre group went there we paid. We were good enough that we generated

enough revenues to pay all our bills and look after everything, but we were

lucky; we were one of the fortunate ones.

These centres should be opened and really used by community

groups all over the Province. They shouldn't be just these elite little centres

that are closed off. Now they have opened up over the years; I will admit that,

but all we are saying here is that if the opportunity is there for community

organizations, councils, towns, cities, or whomever, to take these over, and

they can do it and show that it is feasible, and that they can do it and show

that they can break even or make money, that is great. We would like to see that

done.

The Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island explains to me that

even in the proposals from Stephenville and elsewhere we, through the cultural

affairs division, will still be tenants. We will pay whenever we bring in events

from -

AN HON. MEMBER: Winnipeg Ballet.

MR. FUREY: The Winnipeg Ballet, or wherever, to use these

facilities. We will be tenants then. We will be paying into that community that

owns that facility. So don't be alarmed by that kind of thing.

There is a very interesting proposal on the table now from

Stephenville. One came in in a very preliminary fashion - I gave it a cursory

look - a couple of days ago from Gander. Are these proposals the right way to

go? We would like to look at them and see whether in fact they are good

proposals. It's just in line with the Strategic Economic Plan which is two years

old. Action item 71. Now we are giving life to it in the Budget, that is all we

are doing.

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

MS. VERGE: Chairperson, the Strategic Economic Plan is

really just a political manifesto. There is a major

section of that document

devoted to economic opportunities in the arts and culture. I commend the authors

of the report for recognizing the economic value of the arts.

There is no supporting rationale for action item whatever it

is about the government divesting itself of Arts and Culture Centres, but

nevertheless, as I've explained before, that is an approach that I personally

support, because not only do I see interest among arts groups and community

organizations in cooperating in the running of Arts and Culture Centres, not

only do I not know about ideas for improving access to the Arts and Culture

Centres and better use of them and higher box office receipts, but I am aware of

the approaches that the Stephenville Festival and the town of Stephenville, and

not as aware, but somewhat aware, of the approach of the town of Gander in

response to an overture of the Member for Gander.

What disturbs me is the notion that the government is

intending to down load these cultural centres on municipalities or local

organizations and withdraw provincial support in three years; if transfer to

regional authorities is done properly, and an adequate level of provincial

government subsidization is maintained, I think we can all enjoy benefits from a

new administrative arrangement. But members opposite are kidding themselves if

they think that any council or local board of volunteers can make up for the $5

million annual operating deficit for Arts and Culture Centres. More than half of

that is attributable to the St. John's Arts and Culture Centre, which is by far

the largest and the highest staffed in the Province. The annual net operating

deficit of the other Centres averages $400,000 or $500,000.

Yes, the Stephenville group's council, Stephenville Festival

and so on, can do a better job of running the Stephenville Arts and Culture

Centre than the provincial government, but not if they don't have provincial

government subsidization at the level that it is now being provided. The

Stephenville Arts and Culture Centre thrives when the Stephenville Festival is

on in the summer, and it is the Festival personnel who run the box office,

despite a recent attempt for that successful arrangement to be scuttled with a

more expensive government staff.

The Stephenville Festival is now going into its sixteenth

season. It has survived against all kinds of obstacles put in its way by the

provincial government, past and present administrations. The volunteers who make

up the Stephenville Festival board and the few staff they have have done a

magnificent job of mounting a festival year after year attracting visitors and

tourists from far outside Newfoundland and Labrador.

The notion that that facility will be turned over to a group

in Stephenville, the council or some other group, and cut loose from provincial

government subsidization, is very frightening. There is no way the Festival

would be able to continue there, or other performances take place there.

Basically the building would have to be turned over to another and more

lucrative use, such as gambling, or it would have to be boarded up the way other

buildings on the Harmon Complex are boarded up.

Now, Chairperson, to think that the government might give up

on the Stephenville Arts and Culture Centre or the Corner Brook Arts and Culture

Centre and then go into a $30 million grand arts complex in St. John's, I mean

who's going to pay for the annual operating costs of that? The government

couldn't even pay for the rent for the museum at Murray Premises last year. Has

the government thought this through? To me it seems ludicrous. So when I read

that there was going to be a major review during 1994-95 of the operation and

use of Arts and Culture Centres I thought, well thank goodness, at least the

approach announced by the previous minister of a three year phase-out of

provincial government subsidization is being rethought. So I say to the new

acting minister, the former minister, it's high time that there was a major

review done. It's high time that the government heeded the recommendations of

its own arts policy committee which it's had now for four years. It's high time

the government took seriously what artists and arts organizations are saying and

it's past due time that the government made a responsible, productive approach

to overtures that have been made for five years or more by the Stephenville

Festival for improved administration and use of the Stephenville Arts and

Culture Centre.

Now, Chairperson, I hope the Member for Stephenville is going

to participate in this debate because I know the Member for Stephenville has

been a supporter of the Stephenville Festival and the Stephenville Arts and

Culture Centre. Even though the Member for Stephenville might grudgingly go

along with the Premier's crazy scheme for privatizing Hydro, I can't imagine

that the member would participate in a government decision to cut loose a

Stephenville Centre and withdraw provincial government subsidization because I

think the Member for Stephenville appreciates the value of the Stephenville

Festival and the necessity for the festival to have the Arts and Culture Centre

facility.

Now the Stephenville Festival does have alternatives, there

are some other facilities in Stephenville but not nearly as good or appropriate.

Then there are people in other places who are eyeing the Stephenville Festival

but that festival was created and built in Stephenville and I'd like to see it

stay in Stephenville but that'll be possible on a proper basis only if the

provincial government provides adequate support both for the continued operation

of the Arts and Culture Centre and for the festival itself. Now the festival has

had to endure knock after knock, last year a major cut in it's meagre government

grant, despite the fact that the much touted Strategic Economic Plan

specifically identifies tourism and culture as among the very few growth

opportunities for our Province and despite the fact that the Strategic Economic

Plan in the same section, points to the Stephenville Festival.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Before I recognize the hon. member - it is

4:00 p.m. and I'll read the questions for the motion for adjournment at 4:30

p.m.

The first question is, I'm not satisfied with the answer to

the question to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations concerning the

ISP: The hon. Member for Kilbride.

I'm not satisfied with the answer to my question to the

Minister of Health concerning nursing cuts at Western Memorial Hospital, Corner

Brook, and the report of the assessment of the hospital the Premier directed

last July: The hon. Member for Humber East.

I'm not satisfied with the answer to my question to the

Minister of Health concerning Harbour Breton Hospital: The Member for Ferryland

and the Opposition party whip.

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

MR. REID: I know my hon. colleague from Stephenville

wants to have an opportunity to answer some of the questions and -

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: Well, you wouldn't give me the courtesy a few

minutes ago to get up and answer some of the questions that were thrown at me by

your colleagues, so you sit there and you listen to me now and listen to the

hon. Member for Stephenville.

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).

MR. REID: Let me begin, Mr. Chairman, by saying that my

hon. female colleague across the floor tends to confuse me. She stood in this

House no more than half-an-hour ago and ridiculed the government and the

Minister of Health. She accused him of laying off eight nurses in Corner Brook.

MS. VERGE: Nine.

MR. REID: Nine, and she has the audacity to stand in this

House and complain now about the possibility of not being able to fund Arts and

Culture Centres. My dear, you have your priorities sort of mixed up as far as I

am concerned; you have your priorities sort of mixed up.

I ask you, the hon. member, why should the residents of

Carbonear who don't have an Arts and Culture Centre, or the people living in

Lumsden or the people living in St. Anthony, have to pay for an Arts and Culture

Centre in Corner Brook, St. John's, Gander, I don't care where it is, from

taxpayers dollars? Why should I, as the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs have to stand in this House on a daily basis and be ridiculed, and

ministers before me, and I will go back to when you were a minister, and be

ridiculed because governments have no other choice but to cut funding to certain

programs?

Why should we, as the administrators of this Province, have

to listen sometimes to the tripe that comes from people who as far as I am

concerned have no consideration other than a political consideration, when they

stand in the House like you did and complain about nine nurses being laid off in

Corner Brook and half-an-hour after, get up and ridicule the minister because we

are not going to keep the Corner Brook Arts and Culture Centre. Well I don't

know what my government's policy is on Arts and Culture Centres, but as far as I

am concerned, I am more interested in keeping hospital beds open and nurses

working and teachers working than I am in Arts and Culture Centres.

Mr. Chairman, I find it sort of amusing because in the last

eight months I have had the honour of opening three stadiums in this Province.

There was one in Port au Choix, one in Harbour Breton and one in Wesleyville,

and, do you know how they are operated? Let me tell the hon. members how they

are operated. They are operated by funds created in the communities that they

serve. The operating costs of the Harbour Breton stadium is borne by the people

who live in Harbour Breton and in the area, and I have no problems with that,

none whatsoever.

The people of Wesleyville and that area down there, put their

money on the table every year so that they can operate a stadium for the use of

the children who are in the area and for the adults as well.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Lumsden.

MR. REID: Lumsden uses it, the member tells me - and you

are paying for it but we helped you to put it there, but you, you parents are

paying for it on a regular basis; so I ask the question, but let me go beyond

that. I was in Stephenville, I have been in Stephenville two or three times this

year and the Mayor and the council, on a number of occasions have said to me:

Mr. Reid, we think that we can run the Arts and Culture Centre in Stephenville

more economically than you can, as a government, and we want to try it. What's

wrong with letting them try it? More power to them, pat them on the back and

say: Thank God, we have communities around this Province who are able to stand

on their own two feet and say: we don't need all that much from government, we

can do it alone; and congratulate Wesleyville and the Harbour Bretons and the

Port au Choixs of this Province, congratulate them.

There is no Arts and Culture Centre, I will guarantee you in

Wesleyville. There is no Arts and Culture Centre in Salmon Cove, Perry's Cove or

Kingston. There would have been one in Carbonear, if hon. members on that side

had their way back in 1988 that would have been a burden on the taxpayers of

Carbonear and the whole area.

Mr. Chairman, I want to react to some of the comments that my

hon. friend from Burin - Peninsula West made a few minutes ago when he was up

talking about Burin, and it has to do with the bill basically, because it has to

do with the finances of the Province in general, and I say to my hon. colleague

from Burin - Placentia West, he should be thankful that he has a Burin in his

district because Burin pays its own way. The Burin Town Council has been paying

its own way for years, they are still not up to $328 a household, which means

that every cent it gets in water and sewerage and every cent it gets in - right,

Mr. Hodder? Every cent it gets in water and sewerage, every cent it gets in

roads, anything it wants it has to pay 100 per cent for. Thank God that there

are still a few communities around the Province in that situation.

Now only is it in that situation by paying its share, and

paying, I guess, more than its share, places in my district and in your

districts and around the Province that are finding it hard, at least it is

putting a few dollars into the coffers of the provincial government so that we

can dish out a few dollars to help a few communities around the Province.

I'm assuming, Mr. Chairman, that the hon. member is against a

St. John's arts centre. I don't know much about the St. John's art centre other

than the fact of what I've read in the paper and I've heard, and so I'm assuming

she is against it. Can I ask her also - I'm not going to give her the chance to

get up now and say yes or no, but later on maybe, tomorrow or another day, she

might be able to tell me. I'm assuming she is also against the Corner Brook 1999

Winter Games. B