VOL. 2 NO. 45 PRELIMINARY UNED ITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1980

May 20, 1980 Tape 1632 EC - 1 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Sinuns) : Order, please ORAL. QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Lea4er of the Opposition. MR. D. JAMIESON: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the hon. the Premier and the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. L. Barry), perhaps the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. J. 0mm) may be able to answer my question. It really is a follow-up to one I had last week and it is now possinle for me to reveal that, as I said at that time, I had had information that the Labrador ore situation was worrisome to some people.

It has subsequently been confirmed that the Scully mine is going to be closed for the entire month, I believe, of August as a measure of cutting back on production, and I understand that that has been worked out with the union and so on. Has the minister or the government either

a) done anything subsequent to my earlier question to discover whether indeed there are any other market fluctuations that we might have to be concerned about, or is the one month close-down in one case all that is likely to happen during the remainder of 1980 - 1981? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. J. DINN: Mr. Speaker, as to what is being done in the Department of Labour and Manpower, we have one person assigned to doing an investigation and also co-ordinating the information that is available in the Premier's office and in the office,of the Minister of Mines and Energy.

I forget the other department that is involved, but we have one person assigned to that and he should have a report for me by next week. MR. D. JAMIESON: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. D. JANIESON: Well, since my original comment, which I carefully worded to ensure that it was not either going to cause concern or anything of the sort, I can now say again that I have had subsequent 4268

May 20, 1980 Tape 1632 SC - 2 MR. D. JANIESON: information which indicates that the market situation is,to say the least, precarious for the next twelve nths or so. And does the one man whom the hon. the minister has assigned to this - is he in touch with whoever is doing it in Mines and Energy and in the Premier's office and has he.anything further to report with regard to the likely possibility of cuthacxs in production let us say within the next six, nine to twelve months? MR. SPEAKER (Simrss): The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. J. DINN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what I said.

He is co-ordinating now with the different departments so that he can have a report for me next week. He is also checking with the mining operations themselves and I believe there is some independent information that is available. I cannot say which department has the information, but we have some independent information that we have gotten somewhere else. He is going to put that in the report for me and I will report to the House next week when I get that compiled and all the information that is available,available. MR. L. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. 269

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1633 EL - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Sirr.ms) : A supplemer.tary, the hon. member for Bonavista North. MR. L. STIRLING: The supplementary again would be to the Minister of Industrial IDevelopment(L. Barry) . But, since the Minister of Manpower is filling in for himr what information did the minister have to forecast that this was coming up? Was the first information that he received when the Leader of the Opposition asked this question in the House? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. J. OINN: Mr. Speaker, no.

We had more or less some spurious reports coming in about different things that were supposedly going to happen earlier this year. I have been talking to the President of the Iron Ore Company of Canada, also with the General Manager of Scully Mines, Mr. Molloy, and we have been in touch with the unions. We are trying to and attempting to gather all the information that we can possibly gather. And, as I say, some of the previous information that i had ,had indicated that in early June and July we would have some close- downs. It did not materialize.

And, of course, once I checked out all the information I found out that it would not actually come to pass. As I say, before the end of this month, I will be having a meeting here in St. John a and efforts are being made now to get everyone together on it to discuss with the President bC. Mr. Muirooney, with the General Manager of Scully Mines, Mr. Molloy, with the union leaders. Here in St. Johns we have a number of things to discuss. One of the items that will be discussed at that point in time will be the prospects for the iron ore companies that are operating in Western Labrador. MR. L.

STIRLING: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): P. final supplementary, the hon. the member for Bonavista North. 4270

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1633 EL - 2 MR. STIRLING: A final supplementary. Can the minister tell us whether in fact he now has the same kind of warning from bc that there is an impending close-down with ICC? MR. SPEA1R (Simins): The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. - MR. J. DINN: Mr. Speaker, the only thing that I am aware of now, right now, with respect to bc is that they are giving some serious consideration to that.

We are trying to - attempting to get some, as I say, as much independnt information together as we possibly can and hopefully be able to report to the House by next week and also to have a meeting with the people involved between now and the end of the nmnth so that we can be more fully briefed on what the prospects are. So, as I say, we are accumulating independent information on our own. We are attempting to arrange the meeting before the end of this rnth with the principals involved and we should have a better and more definitive report for hon. members of the Rouse before the end of this month. 271

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1634 SD - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Sirmns) : The hon. member for Terra Nova followed by the hon. member for LaPoile. MR. T. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, 1 want to ask the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. J. Dinn) a question too and it is re the composition of this Provinces work force preserftly engaged in offshore activities.

And my question is, could the minister indicate to the House when was the last time that he had a study done re the composition of the work force, specifca11y, the numbers involved and just what classification - or the identification by jobs that our people are engaged in on the offshore activities? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. J. DINN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can give the hon. member a complete blow by blow description of how many people are involved in the offshore, offshore-wise. The exact figure right now is something like 359.

I can give him the exact number by area, by job description, well, just about whatever way the hon. member wants them broken down. MR. S. NEAR?: By poi±ticar affiliation. MR. J. DINN: I am not aware of any political affiliation requirement. But, for example, seamen, we have fifty-nine seamen; we have first mates - 12: we have - you know, I have got the whole list for the hon. member and if he wants the information he has just to ask and I will make sure that the hon. member gets it. MR. T. LUSH: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. T.

LUSH: I will thank the minister and hope that he will table that information for all hon. members. Supplementary, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister can again verify that there is one way and one way only for a worker to gain employment with the offshore companies or to get his name on this elusive list or mirage or whatever it is and that is either through direct contact with the office here in St. John's, either through writing or through a worker presenting himself before the powers that be, in order to gain employment with the offshore activities? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minàster of Labour and Manpower.

MR. J. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I will outline here in this House for all hon. members in great detail the procedure that can be used 272

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1634 so - 2 MR. J. DINN: to gain employment in the offshore. I dd it on a half an hour show with CBC last week, I have explained to hon. members opposite individually. One of the things that I can say, Mr. Speaker, is that up to two years ago there was no procedure whereby a person could get jobs in the offshore. Now that our regulations-are in place and accepted by the oil companies and accepted by just about everybody, the procedure that is to be used is that one would fill out a registration form.

That form can be obtained by calling toll free my office, by going into any pos office in the Province, I rderstand, by telephoning, by writing or by coming into the office and getting a registration form, filling that form out so 273 -. .-.- - -.---.-.----- ..------ -,

ay 20, 1980 Tane o. 1635 PM - 1 that we make sure that oil companies do not hire outside people, .qhether they are Philippine or Mexican or of any other nationality whilet we have neople in this Province who are gualified to do that work. So the procadure is fairly simple.

Either get in touch with myself by calling my number in all of the telephone directories, by calling any department, any of my regional offices, by geing into any post office in the Province, by contacting any Canada Manpower office- and the Canada Manpower has conceded to me of this as late as the end of last week that they will endeavour to assist any person looking for a job on the offshore, they will make sure that they get registration forms etcetera- filling out that registration form and sending it in so that they are registered. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I know of cases where people have been hired who were not registered but they had pcoof that they were Newfoundlanders and that they had certain skills and they were registered the next day with my department. So it is a fairly simple process. The process now is fairly straightforward. There was no process whereby a Canadian could be hired up to two years ago. No Canadians had a chance for the jObs and nobody carsd, nobody gave a damn whether they got jobs or not. Right now, Mr. Speaker, there is a procedure and that procedure is looking after and making sure that Newfound landers can be hired.

And as I said, for the hon. members information, there are exactly 359 people working in the offshore today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear,hear MR. I. LtJSH: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. 274

May 20. 1980 Tape No. 1635 ON - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : A final supplementary, the hon. member for Terra Nova. MR.T. LUSH: The minister no dcubt is aware that the Federal Government Manpower centres were established throughout canada and throjiphout this Province on a regional basis to give as large a number of people as possible, on a larger geograchical scale, the opportunity to get jobs. In view of this fact, it would appear that the Provincial Governments policy in this matter is just the reverse or certainly having the reverse effect.

So in view of this tould the minister not concede that this particular procedure of hiring workers for offshore employment is outrageously, blatantly and scandalously discriminatory to workers living outside the Avalon Peninsula? And in view of this would the minister not give some consideration to changing or modifying this procedure to give more people from this Province an equal opportunity at those jobs with the offshore MR. ROBERTS: Well said. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. OINN: Mr.

Speaker, I am delighted to see that finally there is somebody opposite concerned that somebody in Newfoundland at least gets a job in the offshore. we had not noticed that for the past couple of years and, indeed,we have been attacked viciously by hon. members opposite because we have gotten a few jobs in the offshore, we apparently 275

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1636 NM - 1 MR. DINN: were attempting to discriminate some way against some Canadians. And the fact of the matter is that we have 359 Canadians offshore now. Some hon. gentlemen apposite may not have liked that, that is the way they operated for at least ten years when they were drilling offshore. They did ncthing about employment offshore for either Newfoundlanders or Canadians. And now we have one hon. member opposite do a flip flop because we have some successs in getting some jobs for people in the offshore. I am personally delighted that we have 359 offshore, and many more onshore.

And we will continue to work in that same great fashic'n so that this year we should have somewhere between 800 and 1,000 people working in the of fshore. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. SPEAKER (Sirmns) : A new question, the hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. On February 14th., the Deputy Minister of Finance, and Comptroller of the Treasury resigned and/or was fired. We are not sure which. I will try to figure it out from the hon. gentleman's answer to the question I am going to ask him.

Would the hon. gentleman indicate to the House what benefits in the way of severance pay, and moving allowances have been granted to Mr. Fearn, who was Deputy Minister of Finance, in order to move to the Mainland to another job? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. J. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I will have to take notice of that question.

I do not have at hand the details but I will take notice of it and I will take it under advisement, the extent to which the information should be released, because there may well be certain aspects to it that are of a very private nature which would be undesirable to release from that point of view. But I will certainly take it under advisement. MR. NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A spplementary, the hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, we are talking about private money, and the hon. gentleman tells us it is of a confidential naturewhy is it necessary, 276

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1636 MM - 2 MR. NEARY: this is what I want to ask the hon. gentleman, if Mr. Fearn tendered his resignation, why is it necessary for this government to make any commitment at all to Mr. Fearn in order to move him away from here up to the Mainland, or to give him a year's salary, say severance pay,before he leaves? Why is that necessary if he passed in his resignation? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. gentleman mentioned a year's salary. I am not sure what he is referring tn. MR. NEARY: Well, whatever it is. DR.

COLLINS: I certainly did not mention any years salary. MR. NEARY: Whatever it is. DR. COLLINS: The hon. member may be aware that one time when people left their jobs they were given a gold watch or they were given a certificate or whatever, but I do not think that is in the modern idiots. I think when people, after a period of employment now lay down that employment there is some provision made. I would point out - MR. NEARY: After resigning? DR. COLLINS: - that in a particular situation such as did happen in regard to the Deputy Minister of Finance, he did not 277

May 20,1980 Tape No. 1637 AH-1 DR. COLLINS: carry any pension rights with him or not necessarily so. Those would only be transferable if he entered government service, either the provincial or federal, so it is not at all unusual to reach some severance agreement. Any agreement that was made in that respect was based upon long established tradition in the civil service. MR. NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEA1R (Sirrmis): A final supplementarY, the hon.the member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, is the hon. gentleman saying that it is common practice when a public servant in the caliber of Mr.

Fearn, when he resigns, that it is the government policy to give that gentleman, whoever he may be, a substantial amount of severance pay? In this case I hear it is a year's salary which is around 48,000 or $50,000 plus moving allowances. Moving expensesrif you are going to the Mainland, would involve somewhere in the vicinity of $15,000. Is that the policy of this government when somebody resigns, as Mr.

Fearn has done - he is going to work with Shawinigan Engineering, I understand, which is a high executive post -that this government will move him to his job, move his family, move his car and give him a year's salary to boot? Nowthat is not bad, Mr. Speaker, for somebody who resigns. Is this the policy of the government? MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Again, Mr. Speaker, the question of a year's salary was mentioned I have no information on that. It is certainly not something that I have stated.

I will only reiterate that the arrangements that were made were quite in keeping with not the traditions of this administration but of long established traditions in regard to the public service. MR.NEARY: No way. then somebody resigned, they resigned and that was it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for St. Mary's-The Capes. 278

May 20,1980 Tape No. 1637 AH-1 MR.HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.Morgan) . I am just wondering if the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.Morgan) has received any representation from lobster fishermen throughout the Province complaining about the severe losses they are experiencing through poachers or stealing of lobsters from their lobster traps? MR.SPEAKER (Sirius): The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR.MORGAN; Mr. Speaker, no I have not.

The only representation that I have been receiving from fishermen, the lobster fishermen in particular, is in connection with the pricing of lobster. There have been no complaints to me in connection with poaching but if any incidents are occuring in the Province I would be glad to hear from the fishermen concerned and take it up with the Fishermen's Union and possibly with the law enrorcement officers. MR. HANCOCK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER: A supplementary. The hon. member for St. Mary's-The Capes. MR. HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I had two calls over the weekend, one was from one fisherman and it was not bad enough that they stole the lobsters from- his traps but they destroyed twenty-five lobster traps in the process. Another fisherman had eighteen pots destroyed. To the amazement of me and to the fishermen there are no fisher.5 officers on patrol over the weekends.Is this indeed true, that there are no fishery's officers on patrol at any weekend or over the weekends when most of those incidents occur? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Wellof course, Mr.

Speaker, the protection of the fisheries and the conservation of the fisheries are strictly in the jurisdiction of the federal authorities and if there is no surveillance carried out of course, it is maybe because of the fact it was a long weekend,But I fail to recognize why the federal authorities would not have conservation people out there or surveillance 4279

May 20, 1980 Tape 138 EC - 1 MR. J. MORGAN: people out on the long weekend in particular. I will gladly refer the representations of the hon. gentleman on to the authorities on the federal level and see why, if there was no surveillance being carried out over the long weekend. MR. 3. HODOER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPZAR (Sizsns) : The hon. the member for Port au Port. MR. J. HODDER1 Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Education.

In light of the feeling across the Province by the teachers, the N.T.A. and French groups, and in view of the fact that the French minority in the Province are shocked by the ministers decision to put French money into the general revenue which was ear- marked for bilingual education, has the minister undertaken to review her decision or has the minister any intention of changing her stand in this particular matter? MR. SPEAKER; The hon. the Minister of Education. MS L. VERGE; Yes, Mr. Speaker. As I stated in this hon.

House last week, the matter, of the bilingual programmes is still under consideration and at a time when a final position is made about the programmes which will be of ferad next year, I will inform the House through a Ministerial Statement. MR. J. H000ER; Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the member for Port au Port. MR. J. HODDER: It was my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that the government had made a decision. Is the minister now saying that she may change the decision?

Because I think it is important for those groups to know whether the mini.s tar is considering changing and putting the money back for the purposes which the federal government gave it to us. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education. MS L. VE: Mr. Speaker, actually, a final decision had never been made. It had been thought that some bilingual programmes would be reduced from what they have been for the past year. But a final decision was not made. The matter is still under consideration and when final decisions are made on the bilingual programmes which will be offered next 4280

May 20, 1980 Tape 1638 EC - 2 MS L. VERGE: year, then the House will be inforud. MR. J. H000ER: Mr. speaker, a final supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): A final supplementary, the hon. the menüer for Port au Port. MR. J. HODOER: I was just wondering f the minister had now checked with her officials or her officials had checked with the other provinces to let her know that the basic assumption on which she put the money into general revenue was an incorrect one, since most provinces do not put the monay into general revenue? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education. MS L. VERGE: Mr.

Speaker, the assumptions which I and the government had been operating under regarding the practices of the other provinces and the attitude of the federal government through the Secretary of State, are accurate and well-founded. I did re-check this situation and found, through the Secretary of State's office in Ottawa, that most of the other provinces have not been using the special bilingual grants for the special prograxixnes* for which the Secretary of State has given them.

The other provinces claim that they use these special grants for French instruction or bilingual prograsms, but for the regular ongoing programns and not for special supplemental additional prograwes. So, clearly, the assumptions which this 281

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1639 EL - 1 MS. L. VERGE: government had been operating under, which I have statea to this House, are accurate and well-founded. MR. SPEAKER (Sirrs) : The hon. the member for St. Bathe. MR. T. BENMmr: Mr. Speaker, my-question is directed to the Minister of Lands and Forests. The district of St. Barbe and that whole area generally seem to be having a bit of a problem with the fishery this year.

And I am wondering if the minister, in view of this, and in view of the fact that a lot of these fishermen will have to pack thetr bags and go to the mainland looking for employment, I wonder if the minsiter would turn on lands that might be available for sawmillers. We have an awful lot of sawLillers in that area with, I think, something like forty or fifty small, portable rigs.. I am wondering if the minister would, at this time, be giving it some attention so that our people do not have to leave and go to the mainland when, indeed,we have so much timber that could be harvested.±n that area? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forests, Re- sources and Lands. MR. C. POWER: Mr. Speaker, I am a little, tiny bit confused.Because the fishery is bad in the general area, you expect us to give more sawmilling licences in the area or to allow more persons to get invol'ved in the lumbering and forestry part of our industry? In that

section of the Province we have a !orest Manaaement Act which takes in certain areas, which allows for a certain annual allowable cut, which allows for a certain number of man years in employment each year to harvest a certain asount of wood. We also have, as the member knows, in that area a SurVeybeinq done and a study being carried out to check and see if we can get a higher , I suppose, labour intensive industry in the Great Northert Peninsula as it relates to our forestry sector. That study has just been completed wlich did not have particularly 282

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1639 EL - 2 MR. C. POWER: favourable returns for that part of the Province. As it relates to the sawuiilling industry, Mr. Speaker, X would be glad to check andsee if the annual allowable cut is being harvested in the area and if it is not, then certainly to encourage sawuiillers to do so. MR. BENNETT: A supplementary, Mr.Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Sins): A supplementary, the hon. the member for St.Barbe. MR. BENNETT: Mr.

Speaker, the reason for relating to fisheries and timber is because our people in that area, when the fishery is bad they have to go, just automatically, to the forest to supplement their income. I am wondering, Mr. Speaker, if indeed the allowable cut in that area at this time is being harvested by the existing Bowater or Lundrigan or the bigger operators and if tndeed there is not a surplus wJiich-I feel there must be quite a surplus of timber that could be avail- able to small sawmillers to give them an extra income after the fisheries being a failure? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Ministerof Forests, Resources and Lands. MR. C. POWER: Mr. Speaker, because of the Forest Manage- ment, Land and Taxation Act which was brought into place by this government in 1974, we have just had a little over a million acres of land reverted to the Crown from Bowater høldings on the Great Northern Peninsula. Certainly, we have been trying to develop, as I just mentioned, a labour intensive industry relating to thcchanical pulp operations in the Great Northern Peninsula. The initial study says that that is not prac- tical nor feasible. Maybe one way to 283 - - -.

May 20, 1900 Tape No. 1640 NM - 1 MR. POWER: make full maximization of that resource in that given area is to again get persons more actively involved in the sawtnilling sector.Andagain,I would be glad to take it under advisement and see if the annual allowable cut is being harvested in that area and I can bring in the answer for the member tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : A final supplementary, the hon. member for St. Barbe. MR. BENNETT: A final supplementary.

In view of the fact that there was a study being done with a view to introducing a thermo- mechanical pulper that would take 50,000 or 60,000 cords of wood per year, so I understand, and in view of the fact that this has been scrapped- and apparently, Mr. Speaker, there was timber enough to justify a study and now the thermo-mechanical is not going ahead - I am wondering if the timber that was being studied cannot be turned over to the small sawmillers so they can make a decent living from the timber, which they have been used to doing down through the years? MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

Minister of Forest Pesources and Lands. MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker, the consultant's report that was done was primarily relating to pulpwood which is not what would be used in a sawmilling operation, so they are two diverse elements of the forestry industry. Again,what we will have to do with the pulp; there is developing in Newfoundland and in the world markets a very decent demand for Newfoundland pulpwood, particularly wood that is of a healthy variety.

Our departent is trying to undertake initiatives with, certainly European countries, to see if we can harvest some of our spruce budworm damaged timber to see if we can get persons involved in the harvesting of pulpwood and the export of that damaged timber which may be of some minor solution to the unemployment problems on that part of the Great Northern Peninsula. 4284

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1640 MM - 2 MR. POWER: Again, Mr. Speaker, the two operations, the sawmilling operations and the pulp operation may not be in total harmony in the area. The annual allowable cut, both for pulpwood and for sawlogs,would be the determining factor and, again,I have taken that question under advisement and I will gladly find out for the member and bring in the answer tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, my question is for the.

Minister of Transrcrtation and Cosmmunications, and seeing I have a short time I will ask a supplementary at the same time. Could the minister advise the House if the Freedom Road from Happey Valley - Goose Bay to Churchill Falls and beyond will be opened up this Summer? And my supplementary woi1d be, can the minister deny or confirm that there will not be any major bridge construction on that road this year? MR. SPEAKER The hon. Minister of Transportation and Communications. MR. BRETT: Mr. Speaker, yes that road, commonly called the Freedom Road is it? MR. WARREN: Yes. MR. BRETT: There is an allocation.

I do not know what It is but it is a fair size allocation. It is possible the maintenance crews are in there now, if not they will be in there real soon, to open it up to put in the culverts and so on. Whether or not there will be any bridges built on that road I could not say. I do not think there will. It is my understanding that the federal government were looking at the designs, or probably working on the design, but I do not think it is far enough advanced to have any actual construction this year. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, my supplementary probably will be the same question. I understand that the Minister of Rural, Agrirultural 285

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1640 NM - 3 MR. WARREN: and Northern Development (Mr. Goudie) did announce some time ago that there would be bridge construction on that road this year. Now, can the minister confirm or deny if construction will go ai -iead this year or not? Will there be any bridge construction on that road this year other than just a few small pipes put in to get the traffic over 4286

May 20, 1980 Tape Ho. 1641 SD - 1 MR. SPEARER (Simms) The hon. the Minister of Transoortation and Comeunications. MR. C. BRETT: I can only repeat what I said just now, that unless the DREE agreement is signed then, you know, certainly there will le no construction of bridges by the provincial government, it is just normal maintenance work which is to install culverts and that sort of thing. MR. SPEP,iR: Order, p1ease The time for Oral Questions has expired. A14SWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN MR. SPEAJR: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy. MR. L. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, in line with the approach that this government has taken to answer no questions, I want to supply an answer to question nurter 11 on the Order Paper. MR. S. NEARY: By whom? MR. SPEAXER: Are there any further answers? P RESENTING PETITIONS MR. SPEARER: The hon. Minister of Education. MS. L. VEE: Yes, ?. Speaker, I have received a petition from the Royal Canadian Legion s Branch 13 in Corner Brook, on the subject of the flag.

The petition is on Legion letterhead and it bears the signatures of 53 residents of the city of Corner Brook and surrounding area including Bay of Islands ,Htber Valley as well as some other communities in the Province. Out of respect for the Royal Canadian Legion and out of a sense of duty to the residents of Rusher East, my district, I wish to read the prayer of this petition.

We,tho undersigned, strongly protest the exclusion of the Union Jack as an integral part of the proposed provincial flag and we hereby petition the members of the House of Assembly to reject the proposed flag in its present form and proceed with all speed to reactivate the Plag Committee with a enlarged representation including one senior official of the provincial Command of the Royal Canadian Legion 287

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1641 SD - 2 MS. L. VERGE: and one or more others associated with the history and culture of Newfoundland and Labrador.' I wish to lay this petition on the Table of this hon. House. MR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEA1R (Simms): The hon. member-for LaPoile. MR. S. NEAPY: Mr. Speaker, I notice that the hon. minister, the member for Number East (MS. L. Verge) who presented the petition, did not say whether or not she supported this petition. MR. R. )ORES: Hear, hear. MR. S. NEARY: My understanding, Sir, is that in - MR. L. THOMS: Maybe she is not supporting it. MR. S.

NEARY: -keeping with the traditions of this House, and presenting petitions in this hon. House, you can not stand in your place and present a petition to the House unless you support it. MR. R. I43ORES:. That is right. MR. S. NEARY: And the hon. minister did not say whether she was supporting the petition so I can only assme that the hon. minister is being very weak-kneed about this matter. Mr. Spe eke r, the fact of the matter is that time is running out on this matter of a new provincial flag.

Ha', 20. 1080 Tare No. 1E42 OW - 1 HR. S. NEARY: The rovernoerit are trvina to ret the measure through the House as ruickly 55 possible to head off petitions and the like being brouoht in on the floor of this House. The whole t'ninq is not being handled in a very democratic way, Hr. .Speaker. We saw an example the other day where the government refused to allow a representative of the Royal Canadian Legion to come in on the floor of the House to address this hon. House. And I ask, Your Honour, what is the rush? Wh" rush the thing? If the government thinks this flag is ooing to grow on people - :.

SpEAK:P,(Sirms): Irder, please I think the hon.meinhsr is beginning to drift into the area of debate. He should contain his remarks to the prayer of the petition and the number of signatures attached thereto. The hon. nember for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: Well, I wculd submit, Your Honour, that if the government were not so hell bent on ramming this flag down the throats of Newfoundlanders and getting this bill passed so quickly, that there would be more petitions like the one the hon. minister just brought in. The unfortunate part about it is that time is running out and that is exactly what the government wants.

I am glad to see today a tremendous representation of the Royal Canadian Legion in the public galleries especially the Ladies Auxiliary. This is the peoples' House, they have every right to be here and I hope today that these people will see for themselves who is prepared to stand up and be counted in this hon. House. We have a debate going on with a bill introduced by the hon. the Premier - 4289

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1642 OW - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Simme) Order, 1ease The hon. member is beginning to debate I would ask him to confine his remarks to the Petition as presented by the Minister of Education lMs. Verge) the prayer of the petition and-the number of sifl- natures attached thereto. I do not wish to keep inter- rupting the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Meary) MR. S. NEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, it is awfully disappointinq that the minister sn far has been unable to persuade the Premier, who brought the bill into the House, to speak in the debate.

The minister, herself, has not spoken in this debate and any number of govern- ment members, twelve or fourteen government members, including a large number of ministers, have not spoken in this debate. I do not know whether they are waiting, :4r. Speaker, for us to run out of speakers and then put UP a whole raft of them at the end but that seems to be their strategy. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please Again the hon. member is not confining himself to the remarks in the petition. MR. S. WEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I support the petition.

I support the Prayer of the petition and that is more than I can say that the hon. minister who presented the petition to the House did. MR. E . ROBERTS: Well said. SOME HOW. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR._SPEAKER: Any further metitions? 4290

ay 20, 1980 Tape No. 1642 DW - 3 ORDEPS OF THE DAY Second readinc o5 a bill entitled, "Ar. Act To Adopt A Flaq For The Province". (Bill No. 44) 1R. SPAKEP (Simms) On the amendment, the hon. member for Trinity - Bay de Verde. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR.F. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, havina said that I would vote against the main motion, would like to speak in suPport of the amendment now to out, as the phrase goes, 'The six month hoist' on this particular bill to give the psoole of this Province more time to have a close look at it to basically fullfil the sixth condition set down by the committee itself.

But, Sir, in speaking to it I would like to say that I am deeply saddened and shocked and depressed and probably somewhat embarrassed over what has happened in the last four or five days because this debate, when it first started off, was indeed a very good debate. But, Sir, something very, very stranae happened during the course of this particular debate. At the beginning we had hon. members getting up one for one, one from each side of the House of Assembly speaking freely for or against this particular desian.

For the first one, two, three, four days we had hon. members standing up one for one, one from the Ooposition and one from the government side standing up and soeakinq their own mind, indicating whether they would vote for or against. In fact, during the first four days, Mr. Sneaker, we had eleven members from the government speak and elven members from the Opposition side speak to the particular motion, the flan bill. 4291

tay 20 1030 Tape No. 1642 4 And we had members on this side vote against it, or say they were going to vote against itand e had monhers saying they were aoing to vote for it. ?7e had hon. semberson the other side saying they were goino to vote for it and hen members sayina they were ooing to vote against it. 4292

May 20, 1980 Tape 1643 E C - MR. F. ROWE: But, Sir, something very, very strange happened around the fifth day. We had eleven members from each side speaking tit for tat, so to speak, good logical, sometimes emotional but sensible, straightforward debate. Then on the fifth day, Sir, something very peculiar happened - mystifying, strange, I. would say alnst sinster, because what happened, as hon. members from this side continued to speak, hon. members opposite went mute, refused to speak.

As a matter of fact, in the ensuing two or three days, we had two members - two only - from the opposite side speak on the flag debate and thirteen members from this side speak on the debate. Now, Mr. Speaker, you have to ask yourself the basic question, Why did the government suddenly go mute? Why did they Suddenly shut up? Why did they suddenly cease to speak opposite? Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not know ihat notives - I can only draw certain conclusions.

Either hon. members opposite wish to wear dawn the Opposition side or wear down the non-supporters of the flag and then come on heavy with the supporters of the flag at a later date - that is one conclusion an hon. member can draw.

A second conclusion is that the supporters opposite did not have the intestinal fortitude, did not have the courage to get up and speak for or against the flag, did not want to get up in this debate and say what they thougnt or what their constituents thought, did not have the courage to get up and speak; or, Sir, the third conclusion one can draw is that hon. members opposite, under the direction of the Premier, wanted to get this debate over with as quickly as possible, ram this flag down the throats of the Newfoundland people and the Labradorian people without a full-fledged debate - get it over with, ram it down the people's throats.

Those are the only three possibilities, that I can identify, for the government not getting up to speak. And might I add, Mr. Speaker, that this bill is in the name - "An Act To Adopt A Flag For The Province" in the name of hon. A. Brian Peckford, Premier. It was introduced by another minister. The Premier of this Province has yet to speak on that flag. There were four occasions, Mr. Speaker, in which the Premier was pushed into a forced debate situation. We Sat here and waited for an hon. member opposite to rise

May 20, 1980 Tape 1643 EC - 2 MR. F. ROWE: after we had spoker. and the minister who introduced the flag rose in his place to speak on four different occasions and if he had spoken we would have had a situation where the debate would have been closed it would have gone to the vote and the Premier of this Province, in whose name this bill stands, has yet to identify and omeak in support of the flag which he indicates that he supports. Ar. Speaker, what has happened to the Premier? Has he chickened cut? Has he no courage? Does he have any principle?

Can he not get up and defend what I consider to be the indefensible in defend-na this particular design? tr. Speaker, I am sickened and depressed and embarrassed,as a member of this douse of Assembly, that the very gentlemanin whose name this bill stands,has refused to speak in support of the bill and has obviously put the clamps on his own members over there not to speak. Either they are waiting for hon. members who are against this bill to have their say and cone in with a flood of speakers in support of the bill afterwards or they do not have the courage to speak in support of or against the bill, or, Mr.

Speaker, the last one that I mentioned, they want just simply to ran this flag down the throats of the Newfoundland people with the least possible debate, so that hon. members opposite can go Out to their constituents and say, 'I did not vote for or against the resolution,' 4294

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1644 AN-i MR.F.ROWE: because they have not got the courage to do so, Sir. MR. BENNETT: it is only foolish to speak to them. MR.F.ROWE: Now, 4r. Speaker, if the Premier of this Province and hon. members have any courage, any respect for their constituents, any respect for this House of Assembly, I would submit that they should all get up and be counted. It is a free vote but unfortunately members opposite have politicized this particular debate now to a point where it is a partisan debate. It is no longer a non-partisan debate. Mr. Speaker, to my mind this flag is already dead.

It has been buried, Not physically, Mr. Speaker, the flag still stands physically. We still have it before us, we still have it hung up down there in the lobby of the Confederation Building. Physically,I suppose you can say it is still alive but, Mr. Speaker, psychologically, morally, this flag has been buried, it is dead, it is finished, it is complately unacceptable and it has not fulfilled the last condition set down by the Conmlittee itself in that it is not widely acceptable by the majority of the people of this Province.

And from what I hear, Sir, from my reading, from the representations that I have had, from the reading of the media, from what I hear on the media, from what I hear in personal conversations the majority of the people are against this particular design. It is as simple as that. So psychologically it is dead, morally it is dead, it is dead as far as the hearts and the souls of the Newfoundland people are concerned, it is dead and buried as far as the emotions of the people are concerned. The flag is finished and, Mr.

Speaker, the last thing that I want to see in this Province is a situation where we are going, to fly in this Province a provincial flag which for all intents and purposes is psychologically, morally, emotionally dead, buried, zonked out. That is the last thing that I want to see in this particular Province. Now, Mr. Speaker, if I had any inclination, if I had any inclination in this world, which I might say that I had right at the beginning, because I wanted to see a distinctive flag for this Province - nobody more than 25

May 20,1980 Tape Mo. 1644 AH-2 MR.F.ROWE: myself, nobody more than myself, just as much but nobody more than myself, wanted to see a distinctive flag for this Province.And I right add, Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Legion, who are probably the best organized and the most vociferous group as far as this flag is concerned, are not against a distinctive provincial flag. Let us set that to rest right from the beginning. The Canadian Legion want a distinctive flag for this Province. The Canadian Legion do not, if I understand them correctly, do not want the Union Jack as the distinctive provincial flag.

The Canadian Legion do not want the Union Jack as the flag for this Province. MR. STAGG: Are you sure of that? MR.F.ROWE: Yes, I am Dositive. And, Mr. Speaker, they do want a distinctive flag but they want to see some meaningful reflection of the Union Jack or of the Coumionwealth within that particular flag. And, Mr. Speaker, if you can see the meaningful symbolism of the Union Jack in this flag I can only say, Sir, that you are some sort of an artistic, abstract genius.

And I wonld-further submit that any hon. members of this House who can sell this flag to the people of Mewfoundland should be hired by the Chzysler Corporation right, immediately. It is as simple as that. MR. STIRLING: That is what happened (inaudible) .They are the same people. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) Order, please MR. F.ROWE: Now, Mr.

Speaker, I was about to say that if I had any inclination whatsoever to vote for this flag,which I had a tinge of when it was first introduced because I wanted a distinctive flag,so much, I was kind of turned off by the design,which I explained in my first speech, but the greatest insult of all. Sir, was the fact that the Premier of this Province refused to have a representative of the Canadian Legion come before the this House and make what I have read and what I would call a very eloquent speech. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, heart 296

May 20,i.980 Tape No. 1644 MR.F.ROWE: Mr. Speaker, why are we here today in this dornocratic system? Mhy do we have the privilege and the right to sit down here and debate every single issue that we wish to debate? Why are we here? 8ecause we are elected in a free, open election. And why do we have free, open elections? 4297

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1645 EL - 1 MR. F. ROWE: Why do we have a Western, democratic method of society or government in this Province , in the other Provinces in Canada and, indeed. throughout the Commonwealth? Because, Sir, of the men and women who went through two world wars and subsequent wars-afterwards. Sir, the Throne Speech, the Throne Speech in this House of Assembly, in other Houses of Assembly throughout Canada, in the House of Commons in Ottawa the Throne Speech is read provincially by His Honour the Lieutenant- Governor, the representative of the Queen of the Empire.

The Throne Speech in the House of Conons is read by the Governor-General, the representative of the Queen, the Empire. The very reason we sit here is because of the efforts of the people who have gone into two world wars and subsequent wars to give us what we have here today. And the grossest insult that I have ever seen was the day when the Premier, in answer to a question from my friend from Grand Bank(L. Thoms) said that, no, we cannot let the Canadian Legion in here and started to compare the Canadian Legion to everything but the dog-catchers association in New- found.land. MR.R. MOORES: Hear, hear. MR.

ROWE: I would submit, Mr. Speaker, that the Canadian Legion represents something very, very special in this Province. Verv,very deep - MR. THOMS: Throughout the world. MR. F. ROWE: - very, very deep -and throughout the world, 'hroughout the world-and contrary to what some hon. -not hon. members -contrary to what some people have said during the hearings, the Canadian Legion think morethan just about war. What an insult 4298

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1645 EL - 2 MR. F. ROWE: for a member to come before the Flag Committee and suggest the Canadian Legion can think of nothing but war. They probably cannot forget the war, Mr. Speaker, because they lost so many relatives and so many friends as did a lot of hon. members in this House. They probably cannot forget the war but that is not all they think about. They have made a great contribution to our society in peacetime and during wartime and I think it was the grossest kind of an insult to bar the Canadian Legion from coming into this hon.

House and presenting what I call - when I read it - what I would consider to be one of the most eloquent andat times, exrotional speeches that I have ever had the privilege to read. MR. R. ORES: Hear, hear. MR. F. )WE: And it is an absolute shame that the Canadian Legion were not given that particular privilege. They do not have the right but they were not given that privilege and I found that to be very disturbincl.And if I ever had a tinge of support for this flag,that was the day it ended... M. sTIRI.xNc Right on. MR.

ROWE: -when these gentlemen, representing ladies and gentlemen, children of both sexes were barred the right to speak in this hon. House. We can have Dalton Camp in here but we cannot have the Canadian Legion. It is incomprehensible, Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand it. MR. STIRLING Arrogant, ignorant. MR. F. ROWE: Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to take issue with the hon. member from St. Johns North (J.Carter) , the Chairman for the Flag Committee. I understand that he is q*ted publicly as saying that my friend and colleague from Grand Bank (L.

Thoms) was wh,L, cZ into shape by the whip and by the Leader of the Opposition when he- MR. MOROAN: Shame, shame. 299

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1645 EL - 3 MR. STIRLING: He never said that: Oh,he never said that. MR. ROWE: When he changed his mind and voted for this particular aminendment. Now Mr. Speaker, MR. CARTER: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. ROWE: I might have known - a very sensitive gentleman, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : A point of order, the hon. the member for St. Johns North MR. J. CARTER: i do not object to the hon. gentleman boring us but I do object to untruths and that is just not correct. MR. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, obviously there is a difference of opinion - MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order? MR.

ROWE: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. I heard reports of the particular newscast, Mr. Speaker, and obviously there is a difference of opinion between two hon. gentlemen. The hon. gentle- man from St. Johns North (J. Carter) does not want repeated or interpreted what he,in fact,had said or is quoted as saying on radio. I submit it is just simply a difference of opinion between two hon. gentlemen.snd for him to get up and say it is an untruth is paramount to calling - a liar and I submit that would be a question of pr.vilege. MR.

SPEAKER: To the point of order, I would rule that there is no point of order but the hon. member for - AN HON. MEMBER: Bear, hear. MR. SPEAKER: - St. John's North took the opportunity to explain remarks that were attributed to him. The hon. member for Trinity - Bay de Verde. MR. ROWE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. gentleman for St. John's North, Mr. Speaker, that I have known the 4300

May 20, 1980 Tape Jo. 1645 EL - 4 MR. ROWE: meber from Graxid sank (L. Thorns) through university days and through my working years and that takes 4301

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1646 SD - 1. MR. F. ROWE. some - I will not disclose the years, Mr. Speaker, because it will probably disclose our age - but for quite a number of years and he is one of the most independent-minded individuals that I have ever seen, Mr. Speaker, and nobody is going to twist the arm or strong-arm of the hon. member for Grand Bank (Mr. L. Thoms). There have been hon. members, after he made a speech, coming dewn in the elevator and coming into the coIon room and saying, 'What have you done to 'Lee'? Who has been putting the whip to him Who is twisting his arm?" And all that sort of thing. Mr.

Speaker, we have been debating this flag motion for a number of days now - MR. F. 1)WE: - and the hon. member got up and he said he was going to vote in support of this flag. He sat down and he listened to debate, and, in the course of the debate, Mr. Speaker, either the content of the debate or the method or procedure of the debate,changed his mind. MR. L. STIRLING: Right on. MR. F. )WE: Mow, what are we here, Mr. Speaker, for. What are we debating for? If we are debating just for the sake of debate, we might as well not have debate.

If we have got our minds closed and made up before we enter into debate, why not just bring in a bill, say uestion everybody gets up and they are counted. The whole purpose of debate is to hear different points of view and,presunably, if some people are clever enough, are enotienal enough, axe rational enough, make enough common sense, they may, in fact, change some people's minds one way or the ether. That is the whole purpose of debate.

Now, in the case of the hon. member for Grand Bank, he listened, studied, sized up the situation after three or four days of debate and got up in the House of Assembly, and because of the procedure and the methodology and the content of the debate, he got up and simply changed his mind because of debate. That is the purpose of the House of Assembly. So chase, Mr. Speaker, to those who indicate that the hon. member for Grand Bank was whipped into shape - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. 4302

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1646 SD - 2 MR. F. R)WE: - was strong armed, was arm twisted into voting against this particular flag. Hogwash I Let us see how many other hon. members will change their minds on this side at the end of the debate.' Maybe all of them, maybe none of them, but,Mr. Speaker, do not have the motives - - MR. L. STIRLING: (inaudible) as happened over there. MR. F. 1)WE: of the hon. member for Grand Bank (Mr. L. Thorns) questioned in that particular fashion. - Now, Mr. Speaker, I can see why the member, for Grand Bank changed his mind. MR. L. STIRLING: Of course. MR. R. MOOREd: Everyone can. MR. F.

IDWE: The hon. the Premier said publicly in this House that he wanted to speak on the flag debate- net a word. As I indicated earlier, on four separate occasions he was forced to speak or we tried to force him to speak. The minister who started the debate got up to close the debates If the Premier did not speak then he would have been wiped. The Premier did not get up and hon. members on this side jteped up and we continued on with the debate. He has had unlimited opportunities to speak to this debate. Has he spoken, Mr. Speaker? SOME HON • MBERS: No. MR. F. 1)WE: Not a word, Mr.

Speaker, except that he obviously has his members whipped into shape on the other side. Mr. Speaker, this administration is being perceived more and more, hour by hour, day by day, week by week, month by month not as a Premier who is standing up fighting for Newfoundland, the administration that standing up and fighting for Newfoundland. At the beginning that was the perception of this administration and the Premier but the real perception is starting to come through now, Mr. Speaker, this is government by confrontation. Mr. Speaker, I may appear to be wandering off course but I am coming back to make my point.

It is not necessarily in chronological order but, first of all, Mr. Speaker, we saw the Premier in head-on confrontation with Ottawa over offshore oil and gas • no negotiations, confrontations through 'tV's press releases, radio releases, eawspaper releases. Then we see confrontation with Ottawa over the fisheries. 303

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1646 SD - 3 MR. J. HODDER; Separatist Premier. MR. F. RCWE: - Than we see confrontation with Nova Scotia over the Northern cod stocks. Then we see confrontations with this administration 4304

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1647 NM - 1 MR. F. ROWE: with the councils in this Province, with the Local Government Act. We see confrontations with this adminstratiori with Quebec when there is a referendum going on, of all times. MR. L. STIRLING: shocking SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. F. ROWE: We saw confrontations, Mr. Speaker, of this adinistration, this Premier, with his own Federal Prime Minister when he was a Prime Minister, Joe Clark, a confrontation on the front of the Confederation Building steps during an election campaign. What in the name of heavens would happen, Mr.

Speaker, if there was not an election campaign? They would probably be rising at dawn for a duel. MR. G. WARREN; - No flag (inaudible) MR. F. ROWE: And our own local Minister of Fisheries, Mr. James McGrath, when he was Minister of Fisheries - MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : Order, please The hon. member is getting away from the amendment. MR. F. ROWE: Yes, I am coming - that was the last point, Mr. Speaker. MR.L. STIRLING; The symbolism. MR. F. ROWE: The symbolism - my symbolism, Mr. Speaker, my symbolism is not near as complex as what is in this particular flag. Now, Mr. Speaker, confrontation - MR. L.

STIRLING: Shafti Golden shafti MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, confrontation after confrontation after confrontation, the last one that I was about to mention was with Mr. McGrath who was then Minister of Fisheries. Now, Mr. Spaker, we got the situation where we have open confrontation btwean the people of this Province and the Premier himself,and the administration which he represents. MR. STIRLING: Very symbolic. 305

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1647 NM - 2 MR. F. ROWE: Now,why do I say that, Mr. Speaker? Because if you look at the fifth condition, and I do not know how many times we have got to repeat this in the House, the fifth condition set down by the Flag Consuittee was-the following conditions must be met, the last widely acceptable. Now, Mr. Speaker, there has been nothing since this flag has been ahown that indicates that this flag is even close to being widely acceptable to the people of this Province. MR. R. MOORES: That is right. MR. F. ROWE: So we have another confrontation now, Mr.

Speaker, between the Premier, the administration and the people of this Province. I simply ask where is it going to end? MR. F. STAGG: I have heard from five people. MR. F. ROWE: Now, Mr. Speaker, may I simply close and I - MR. L. THOMS: It is not fiva people who would talk to you MR. F ROWE: - by saying this. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : Order, please The hon. member for Trinity-Bay de Verde. MR. F. ROWE: May I simply say this, I cannot comprehend, it is a complete mystery to me, it is even sinister to me that hon. members have ceased to speak.

In the last fifteen speakers we have had two opposite speak, thirteen on this side speak. The Premier, in whose name this bill stands, has not spoken. MR. L. STIRLING Not even in the House. MR. F. ROWE: The Premier has said he is going to speak. He has not Spoken. The Premier was forced on four occasions to speak, he did not speak. The question is is he going to speak? Why are members opposite silenced? Why are they not speaking? AN HON. MEMBER: The Premier said it before. MR. F. ROWE: Why are they not speaking? They have every opportunity to speak after every hon. member opposites here. MR.

STAGG: (inaudible) frivolous amendment (inaudible) speak. 4306

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1647 NM - 3 MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, every time the hon. member for Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) opens his mouth he represents the greatest case for euthanasia that I have ever seen. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. F. ROWE: Now, Mr. Speaker,, the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary), seconded by the hon. member for the Strait of Belle Isle (Mr. Roberts), has moved a motion which I intend to support, which basically says, give the people of this Province some breathing space, some time to look at tiis particular flag design and size it up and indicate whether, in fact,it is widely acceptable.

Because that is one of the fundamental and most basic conditions set down by the Flag Committee. Now,if the Premier had any Sense, he does not even have to be brave, if he had any common sense whatsoever, Mr. Speaker - MR. G. WARREN: Which he has not got. MR. F. ROWE: - he would have hon. members opposite, and hon. members on this side - he cannot control hon. members on this side, but hon. members on this side who have voted for the flag, they would also vote for this amendment simply to give the people of this Province time to have a good look at this flag.

May I once again repeat how can the Committee, themselves, have any comprehension whether this flag was universally acceptable, or widely acceptable, or even partially acceptable, to the people of this Province,when it was not shown before it was tabled before the House, and then the bill was brought in immediately? So, Mr.

Speaker, I simply appeal to the members, during this free vote, appeal to the members to vote for this motion in order to give the people of this Province the opportunity to size up this flag and determine whether they really like it or not, because I do not want to be placed in the position of having,, been a member of this House of Assembly that passed a flag that for all intents and purposes was physchologically buried, morally dead, emotionally drained and not fit to fly because it had been torn to pieces even before it had had a chance to fly in this Province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 4307

May 20, 1980 Tape 1648 BC - 1 SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear) R. SPEAKER (Butt) : The hon. the President of the Council. MR. W. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I just want to say a few words because I want to be able to make a few observations concerning this particular antendxnent. I do not propose to speak for nearly as long as the hon. the member for Trinity - Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) and perhaps not with his great eloquence and incisive attack on the bill. But, Mr. Speaker, let me say this - because I want to put forth what I consider to be the reasoned approach to this particular amendment.

First of all, I have no intention of repeating the arguments that were made during the mai.n debate on this motion. The main debate on this motion was for second reading of this bill to adopt the flag, and as everyone knows, the nature of the design of the flag itself.

And contrary to what the hon. member opposite has indicated, there have been speakers on this side of the House putting forth very forcibly their own individual views on this which is going to be ultimately a vote not of government against Opposition, hopefully, but certainly a free vote of the members having heard all of the arguments that have been presented over the last - this flag has now been unfurled and the Committee has given its report for over three weeks. Certainly, the members of this House have had ample opportunity to hear and weigh and assess the views that have been given, Mr.

Speaker, by constituents and persons not constituents, to read letters to the paper and what have you. So I have no intention whatsoever, as tempted as I may be, to repeat the words and the arguments that were given at the time when I, myself ,made an address to the House when the Canadian Legion were here the first day. I would simply point out that it was resolved over seven months ago by this House to establish a committee to have a distinctive flag. And that particular resolution was endorsed unanimously by this House.

A Committee met and the Committee came back-and what was then unheard of in the annals of this House - came back with the unanimous recommendation as to the design to be adopted. MR. L. STIRLING: (Inaudible). MR. W. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to attempt to 4308

May 20, 1980 Tape 1648 EC - 2 MR. W. MARSHALL: compete in any size, shape or form with the hon. the rember for Bonavista :orth (Mr. L. 3tirling) . I have the floor and I wish to speak without interruption from the hon. 'neinber. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : Order, please) The hon. the President of the Council wishes to be heard in silence. MR. N. MARSHALL: Now, Mr.

Speaker, as I say, it has been over three weeks ago that this flag has been unfurled and members have had an opportunity to assess and consider the remarks and views of people giving both the pros and the cons, so I am not going to repeat those arguments today. The only thing I am going to address myself to for a few moments is the present motion which is before this House, and this notion is to the effect that the bill not be read or adopted now, but be adopted in six months time. Now that is the first question that tne House will have to consider, and members will then vote on that.

If it is carried it is not to be considered for six months if it is not carried then we get on to the main motion as to whether or not we will adopt the flag as presented in the bill itself. Mr. Speaker, that particular motion which we have - MR. S. NEAPE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A ooint of order, the hon. the member for LaPoile. MR. S • NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman who is now on his feet speaking said that the amendment was that this bill not now be read a second time, but it be adopted six months hence. That is incorrect. Mr.

Speaker, the motion - I have it here in front of me; I was the one who moved it - says that the bill be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months hence MR. MARSHALL: Yes. MR. S. NEABY: Not adopted but read six months from now. 309

May 20, 1980 MR. N. MARSHALL: Soeaker. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) President of the Cour.cil. Tape No. 1649 JW - 1 To the point of order. Mr. To the point order, the hon. MR. N. MARSHALL: Nell. Mr. Speaker, if it is oing to be read in six in Dnths tine—when you read a bill it is a resolution of the House that the bill be read and when the bill is read it then passes second readir'.. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order - MR. N. MARSHALL: Now, let me just qet to the MR. S. MINDSOR: There is no point of order. There is no point of order. MR. L. STIRLING: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. member for Bonavista North. MR. L. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, I think there is a valid point of order because the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) should know better than to attempt to try to make this into something that it is not. The Government House Leader knows that there are very few forms that the Opposition can use in order to get something deferred or defeated when you have a govern- ment majority.

And he knows that the intent on this side is not to have that bill adopted and he knows that fully. ut he has persisted in saying to the press that this was the intent and the point of order by the hon. member for Lapoile (Mr. Neary) is one of the few desperate efforts that we have on this side in order to delay or dispose of it. We have no intention to adopt it and he knows the difference. 4310

May 20, 1980 Tape Mo. 1649 DW - 2 MR. W. MARSHALL: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. ?4RSPEKER (Butt): To the point of order, the hon. President of the Council. MR. W. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, it is a pretty desperate point, is an attempt to interfere with theit debate. It is not a point of order, it is a point of debate, maybebut it is certainly not a point of order. And if the hon. gentlemen wish to pursue it they can pursue in the debate. MP.. SPEAKER: To the point of order. There is no point of order but merely a difference of opinion. The hon. President of the Council. MR. W. MARSHALL: Now, Mr.

Speaker, the motion is then that it not be read now but it be read six months from that day. Okay? AON. MEMBER: Now you got it right.You finally aot it riqht. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Same toing. MR. W. MARSHALL: So it is exactly the same thing, Mr. Speaker. In six months time, then, this bill will be read. These oeoole who have attacked the bill so savagely and said it is not acceotable under any circumstances, at any clime, or at any time, now brino in an amendment and the amendment says it be read in six months time.

So they are either doing it for the Purpose—you know, they are inconsistent with their motion, number one, or else they are doing it to defer it indefinitely, either one of the two options. But just let me deal with both of them. I suggest that seven months ago it was resolved unanimously by this House and it was implicit in the motion, that there be a distinctive flag for this Province. The committee has brought in a 311

May 20, 1930 Tape No. 1649 - 3 HR.N._NARSHALL recommendation, a bill has been brouaht before the House and I see, really, no actual moint in delavinc the matter any further than it has been delayed now. Three weeks have gone by, seven months have gone by, reoresentations have come, members have seen the representations, they have heard the representations, they have weighed the representations and they have assessed them and in accordance with the principles of representa- tive government,they are quite competent in a free vote now to assess them. I do not see any point in this beino delayed any further.

Now, the other noint is to defer - maybe they will bring it in to attsmot to defer the matter so that it can be deferred indefinitely. But if they want to defer it indefinitely, Hr. Speaker, I suggest that this 'House can resolve this after the amendment has been disposed of one way or the other. And the only way in which to defer it, if it were the wish of the House in the free vote,is to vote it down. There seems to be no point whatsoever, Mr.

Speaker, to this particular resolution because it is only a resolution,really,in effect,.which is an attempt to have, if you wish, a second kick at the cat, to try to get it turned down on the basis of an amendment and do the same thing that the House can address itself to in the event that the motion is defeated and we go on to the main motion itself. So it amounts to one and exactLy the same thinq.I suspect that from what the hon. members opposite sayone or tvo of them anyway, have the idea that the purpose of the amendment is to defer it indefinitely.

Well, if that is so the deferring of it indefinitely can occur, I would submit, and most appropriately occur when it is resolved, as I say, in the free vote on the main motion itself. 4312 -.-- - --- -

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1649 DW - 4 MR. W. MARSHALL: But let it not be forgotten, Mr. Speaker, when all is said and done, that despite the very emotional statements that have come from some members opposite to the effect that this flag should not fly in Newfoundland, it is unacceptable und9r any occasion,, that we are considering a motion,coming from some of them over there and supported by some of these very gentlemen, to the effect that it he read in six months time. Well, if it is not good for Newfoundland now, in their own oginion,what makes it good for it in six months timee 431 3

May 20, 1980 Tape 1650 EC - 1 SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. W. MARSHALL: So, Mr. Speaker, that is the way I feel myself towards the axriendsient. I think we should dispose of the amendment as soon as feasible and possible and we will then proceed to the free vote, both on the amendment and on the bill itself. Remarks have been - MR. L. STIRLING: Free vote (inaudible) MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : Order, please MR. W. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I have no intention or interest in trying to debate or contest with the hon. the member for Bonavista North (Mr. L. Stirling). Now, Mr.

Speaker, there have been certain Coirments made, not only by the member for Trinity - Bay de Verde (Nr.F.Rowe) but by other members with respect to the Premier. First of all, let me inform the House that the Premier today is in Springdale for the funeral of a very close friend of his who diea over the holidays, Mr. Ford Ralph, and after that he is due to go to Ottawa for a meeting with the National Press Gallery in accordance with the plans tonight for an assessment of whatever occurs on the referendum vote.

The Premier had every intention of speaking in this debate, and as a matter of fact, he is disappcinted that he has not. - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. W. MARSHALL: But let the hon. members opposite, Mr. Speaker - MR. L.TIING A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please A point of order, the hon. the member for Bonavista North. . L. Just to get things correct, Mr.

Speaker, there would have been no objection on this side if the President of the Council had introduced the Workers' 'Compensation - the reason we are debating the flag is that he decides what is being debated, and to apologize for the Premier for not being here for the vote today is a completely - well, I cannot use that word. .Outside the Mouse you can use that word, but in the House I have to refer to the hon. gentleman in an honourable manner 31

May 20, 1980 Tape 1650 EC - 2 MR. L. STIRLING: no matter whether that is true or not. But it should be clear, and we had better get it clear for the record that the decision to go ahead with this - MR. L. tARRY: A point of privilege, Hr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : A point of privilege, the hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy. MR. L. BARRY: The member opposite is abusing the privileges of this House. He is rising on a spurious point of order, an improper point of order. It is not a point of order, it is an attempt to debate, to interrupt the presentation of the House Leader, the President of the Council (Mr.

W. Marshall) and, Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the hon. cember be cut off right there. He will have his opportunity in denate - MR. S. NEAR?: You are turning her into a dictatorship. MR. L. BARRY: No, Mr. Speaker, have the rules of this House followed, the rules which were established, democratic rules, Mr. Speaker, which is what desocracy is all about. SOMEHOW. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! The hon. minister. MR. L. BARRY: If the hon. member wants to turn it into a bear pit, let him just try, Mr. Speaker.

But there are people in this Province who want this House of Assembly run according to the rules of democracy and not according to the bear pit rules that they want to draw up from day to day. SOME dON. MMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. L. THOMS: Mr. Speaker, to the point of privilege. ME. SPEAKER: To the point of privilege, the hon. the member for Grand Bank. MR. L • THOMS: Mr. Speaker, you know, if what I have just heard raises a point of privilege, it is unbelievable. The very people, Mr.

Speaker, who preserved the parliamentary tradition in this country and every country in the free world have been the Canadian Legion, an organization that the hon. members on the other side of the House refused 4315

May 20, 1980 Tape 1650 EC - 3 MR.L. THOMS: and insulted by not permitting them into this House to have their say on this important piece of legislation. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear a. L. rio&s Do not talk to me about parliamentary traditions with an attitude such as that. MR. L. STIRLING: To that point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Butt) To the point of privilege, the hon. the member for Bonavista North. MR. L. STIRLING: As the member for Mount Scio (Mr. L.

Barry) knows much better than anybody else, to raise a point of privilege takes precedence over everything else and he could not wait to get into the legitimate debate on the ooint of order, so he rushed in to interrupt my point of order by bringing up a point of privilege in which there is absolutely no point of privilege, and I would like to suggest that Your Honour rule so that we can get back to my completing the point of order. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of privilege, there is no point of privilege. The hon. the minister took the opportunity to make a brief explanation of the way he sees the House run.

The hon. the member for Bonavista North on a final point of order. MR. L. STIRLING: Yes, on that point of order to which I was speaking. The whole basis of having the Speaker in control of this House is to make sure that we do follow the rules.

One of the rules is that the government sets the order of business, and the order of business set today was not set by this side, it was set by that side, and I am suggesting that it is coming close to- not misleading this side, because we know the difference, but certainly giving the impression to the public that the Premier is not here and he would certainly be here to vote on this debate. He can withdraw it right now and let us proceed with some 431 6

May 20,1980 Tape No. 1651 MR. STIRLING: other piece of business, by the leave of this side,we would certainly not want to vote without the Premier being here. Xnd that is the point of order, Mr. Chairman, that the order of business was set by the President of the Council. MR.OTTENHEIMER: To the point odorder. MR.SPBAXER (Butt): To the point of order. The hon. the Minister of Justice. MR.

OTIENHEIMER: Mr.Speaker, I would submit that if one were to do research to endeavour to find and identify and locate and hold up for everybody to examine a specious point of order that the hon. gentleman would have so done and I suggest that the introduction of specious points of order almost inevitably leads tc a deterioration of the debate and decorum of the House and would hope, Mr. Speaker, that a ruling can be given on it now and then hon.members may continue.

They may differ with one another in debate as much as they wish but specious points of order usually have the effect of deteriorating the debate and the atmosphere of the House. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. SPEAKER: I rule there is no point of order. And I also would like to point out at this particular time that on ocCas3.on hon.members on both sides of the House, I feel, are guilty of interrupting hon. trømbers speaking on what is not even close to a valid point of order. I think there are people on both sides who are guilty of this and I would ask them to refrain. The hon. the President of the Council.

MR. MARSHALL: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to reiterate again,before I WS Cut off, that the Premier will speak on matter of the flag, the Premier will give his feelings on the matter of the flag but,as I say, inadvertently, Mr. Speaker, he is unable to be here today because of the death of a very close personal friend in Springdale.p..1d if the hon. members wish to make a capital case of that 4Sl 7

May 20,1980 Tape No. 1651 AH-2 MR. MARSHALL: I cannot help it. But there is no doubt about the fact that the Premier, as I say, will make his views known. And this happens to be also,I would Point out to the House,a free vote, a completely free vote,and despite the way in which things may appear to the hon. gentlemen there opposite, and I will refrain from making any adjective observations as to their approach and their impressions, for which I care not one whit, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that this is a free vote and there are enough people in this House today to speak as to the House's will.

As to other people in the House, there have been references made from time to time with respect to members on this sides Some members may wish to speak, some members may wish to vote but the present motion that we have before the Chair is one which I suggest, Mr. Speaker, is not one which is really - that it is fruitful in the circumstances to speak on unless one has already spoken in the main motion - this is the only way you can speak, that it is better to speak and address yourself to the main motion because after all the Purpose of the amendment and the question on the main motion are really one and the same.

So if certain members wish to speak, there may be certain meirers who do not wish to speak, they just may wish to cast their vote. So, Mr. Speaker, that is the situation and that is my view, my own view with respect to the six month hoist amendment and I only make this statement because I think it is important that the other side, with respect to the six month hoist, be put,and that the arguments made by the other side not be oreeted with silence. That is the situation, Mr. Speaker.

I realize that this is an issue that is of a great deal of concern to a lot of people and it certainly should he a "'atter of a great deal of concern.

I know that all members have weighed the arguments of everybody the Canadian Legion and other organizations, with a great deal of concern and with a great deal of respect and eventually, having weighed these we will then get with the vote • As I say without derogating in any way the importance of this particular measure,I wonder though sometimes when one sees the reaction, if one compares the reaction to the adoption of a flag with such other basic issues, equally basic, mind you, as the flag, the flag as I say is not one of any lesser importance but 4318

May 20,1980 Tape No. 1651 AH-3 MR. MARSHALL: such issues as ownership of the offshore resources, or incursion into our Northern cod stocks, the taking of our electrical resources and I wonder, Mr. Speaker, that if it were greeted not only - SOME HON.MEMBEP.S: Oh, oh MR. SPEAR (Siams): Order, pleaseH MR. MARSHALL: - here by certain members opposite but you might even say by certain people in the public with 4319

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1652 NM - 1 MR. MARSHALL: even the same degree of concern and indepth consideration that I think we would economically and in every other way in this Province probably have a much more healthy society. But, Mr. Speaker, having said that I will - MR. L. THOMS: 4hy do you not sit 4own and be done with it. MR. MARSHALL: I am dealing with the amendment on this, the six month hoist. I repeat again, I see no point in voting for a six month hoist. Number one, if you are against the bill why would you want it read six months time?

And number two, when you are for the bill you are going to be for the bill today as you would be six months time. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. SPEAKER (Sinons) : The hon. member for Port au Port. MR. NODDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. NODDER: - this is a free vote that was first - MR. L. THOMS: Orr this side it is. On this side. MR.NODDER: . I think the idea of a free vote was first brought to the House by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Jamieson) , and because it is a free vote, and only because it is a free vote, I have decided that I will follow my conscience in this matter and that while I am going to vote for the flag I am also going to Vote against the amendment. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I hate getting - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NODDER: - I do hate, Mr. Speaker - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NODDER: - getting applause from the other side. Mr. Speaker, I feel that enough has been said on the issne. Ana I think that everything has been said on the issue, that can possibly be said on it, has been said.

And I believe that it is time that this House got down to other business. I believe that the flag is a good one. I saw it long before any other members, or most of the members of this House and I 32O

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1652 GH - 2 MR. HODDER: had quite a bit of time to think about it before that, because from my point of view, I suppose, I have been living with the flag, along with the other seven members of the Coxmnittee for, perhaps, six months, not with that particular design but wrestling with the idea of bringing a new flag in which alternately would unify the Province. The flag is a good one in my estimation, and I do not believe that we could have ever come up with a flag that was going to suit everyone in the Province.

I do not think we could have come up with a flag that could ever, suit 50 per cent of the people in the Province, because, as I said when I spoke here the last time, as we went around the Province,' - each group and each town that we 'iisited,or the Committee visited, that everyone seemed to have his own design, his own preferences. We had some weird and wild and wonderful flags presented to us; we had some beautiful flags presented to us, but there was no consensus, Mr. Speaker. Now, the Flag Committee deliberated on this flag in a very quiet atmosphere. There was no pressure from anyone.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, the only pressure on the Flag Committee as we travelled the Province was "What are you doing?", going around the Province trying to determine a new flag for the Province when we have problems like unemployment and this and that. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, but the Flag Committee, the six of us, were all from different backgrounds. Most of the members on the Flag Committee on the other side of the House, and there were four of them over there, I did not even know them by name when we first got on the Conittee, I was not sure which was which.

I had not met them before, I had met one or two of them before, I had never socialized with them. The members on this side of the House I knew a bit better, but, basically, we all came from different areas. We were not close friends and we did not go into the Committee with any fixed ideas. When we did start out as a committee, no one was thinking about the flag at all. As a matter of fact, the big issue, if we remember back six month's time, was the offshore oil find and the speculation around the Province was about Hibernia. That is what was taking the 4321

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1652 GH-3 MR. NODDER: reoples attention at that particular time. When we travelled the Province, there was not a lot of interest, not even in St. John's. There were three distinct groups of people who made representstins to the Committee in St. Johns, but outside of St. John's there was not a lot of interest. Most people 4322

May 20, 1980 Tape Mo. 1653 EL - 1 MR. J. HODDER: Said,Why the Flag Committee? Why not unemployment? I remember the meeting which I attended in Port aux Basques where the President of the Union was an old friend of mine, I suppose, a person I have known for quite a long time, was quite force- ful. He caine in and he said-you know, he was quite upset, with lay- offs at the CNR and things like, that we should even be thinking about a flag.

The President of the PC Association in my district attacked me publicly on two or three of the media by the fact that I was travelling around the Province paying attention to the flag and not paying attention to my district, which was not quite true but nevertheless, it goes to show what the feeling was and most members, I think, on the Committee would argue that we had to keep de- fanding our existence when we started to travel the Province. Now, we went to the media and we asked for some help for the Flag Committee and they gave us a big send-off. They cooperated in every way.

The press gallery upstairs gave us every bit of help that we asked for and as we travelled the Province notices were in papers, the media were quite cooperative across the Province. Mow, I did not go to every area in the Province but I went to quite a few and I attended those meetings where the most briefs were put before the Committee. But it was not until we unveiled the flag here in the legislature that interest started to uunt. Sidenly everyone had a design. After it was presented, I did a private poll on both sides of the House. Sort of wandered across and saw what people were thinking over there.

How do you like the design? Of course, I would. I was one of the persons who brought it in. I did the same on this side of the House. And at that particular time, I had the distinct feeling, and without speaking - a lot of members did not say one way or the other. They saw the flag. Some thought it 323

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 165 3 EL - 2 MR. J. MODDER: was not bad, this, that and the other thing, but a lot of nembers did not have any feelings on it. But then came the criticisms of the flag. Some members did private polls, both provincial and federal. There were people who had their secretaries on the phone and back came the opinions. After that, the Legion, the Monarchist group, the Pink, White and Green started to campaign which was their right. But, now we are in the third week of the debate and I think that basically everything that can possibly, be said has been said.

But we knew as a committee that there wou.ld be criticism. But yet,when I see the Daily News poll of this nvriing, I see that it is three to one, it was half and half or two to one on Friday7 today it is three to one, I do not consider that to be a vote against the Flag. I do not think that in any way, shape, or form because when you look at the flag, that every- why, you know, when a person is against the flag, for what reason? I mean, it i.s not enough to say you are against the flag. If you are going to do a proper survey you have got to do a survey which determines the reasons they are against the flag.

Some people are against the flag because it is not the Pink, White and Green. Some people are against the flag because it is not the Union Jack. Some people are against the flag because the Union Jack is not in it in some way. There are other people who are against the flag because they do not like the design which the majority of members, I suppose, here have put their vote on-, the fact that they did not like the design. But there are a great number of reasons which only emphasizes to me, Mr.

Speaker, that whatever flag we brought in would have the same type of poll, would have the same type of reaction in the Province. It did not matter. But, let us look at the flag, the flag issue at the present time. Mr. Speaker, no religious group in this Prov- ince have come out against it. Now, I think that says something because 4324

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1653 EL - 3 MR. J. HODDER: in our past, religion has been pitted against religion on issues like this but not one religious group in the Province. I know there are many clerics in theProvince and many religious groups where people have their own opinions for or against but not one has come out against it. - MR. L. STIRLING: Would that have affected (inaudible) MR. HODDER: No sports group have come out against the flag. No service club in the Province has come out against the flag that I sin aware of. No municipality, which is our second level of government.,has come out against the flag.

The unions,and this Province is filled with unions7 I have not heard one union leader who has made a stand on the flag. The development associations in the districts have not come out against the flag. The teachers, the school boards, the interest groups, the professional groups, the Chambers of Cosmerce, the Status of Women, 325

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1654 SD - 1 MR. J. HODDER: you know, all of those groups and I think I have covered a great majority, have not ccme out against this flag, not a word. There are some groups that did ccme out against the flag and again I want to emphasize they had every right to do so. But we did come up with a distinctive flag, Nobody can ever say we did not come up with a distinctive flag. SOME HON. MEMBERS; Hear, hear. MR. J.

NODDER: And because it is distinctive most people, at first glance, just will not use it, you know, do not warm up with it becanse for that very reason, that most people' s ideas about a flag are - you know, everyone has his own flag in his mind and everyone has the type of design. If this issue had never come, I could go to every member of the House and say, 'What would you like for a flag?' and I am quite sure that we would not find one design alike.

But we came up with a flag which an awful lot of people say they do not like at the moments I'am not sure, and the general impression I am getting more and more and I was back to my district this weekend, I was to a function, an army cadet function, where there were Legion people there apd military people and the flag issue is just not an issue. The message I got was, get off this9 you know, if you are going to get the flag, if it is going to be brought in, bring it in and do it quickly and, you know, get down to talking about the things we want you to talk about. But I think that, Mr.

Speaker, the very fact, it might be a bit of reverse logic, but the very fact that the flag has not been accepted by a lot of people, by the people who are most interested in it and all for different reasons, I think that means that it has more of a chance of becoming a unifying symbols down the road. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the yellow bolt, the arrow, the shaft, whatever it has been called here in the House, that is where the criticism has sort of come most, that has been the focal point for the criticism of this flag and people have said, you know, put a Coat of Arms there and we will accept the flag and all that Sort of thing. And I ssetimes, and I am thinking out loud now and you should not do that when you are speaking but I sometimes wonder if that golden shaft, that 326

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1654 SD - 2 MR. J. HODDER: bolt which looks to our future and there is no doubt about it, which looks to a bright future may not intimidate people, because the flag does look to the future. It is based on the past but it looks to the future. And I wonder sometimes if that does not intimidate people somewhat because, you know, if we are going to have a brigbt future we are going to have to work very hard for it.

And when we look at our past there are a lot of things we would like to change but that in graphic form says to people in this Province that there is our future forward and if we are going to have a bright future we are going to have to work for it. And I do not think that a bright future can be given us either by. offshore oil or anything else. I think the challenges facing Newfoundland now are great ones but if we work for it, and that flag symbolizes it, if we work for it then I am quite sure that dowfl the road that flag could become a very integral part and a very unifying force in this Province. Mr.

Speaker, - I just want to make a few more comments before I sit down. There have been criticisms about the way the Committee operated. Mr. Speaker, the Committee never had any intention of all members going to all parts of the Province at any one time. All members, I think, were to the biggest meetings where most submissions were. I went to, I suppose, about one-third of the meetings, other members went to another third, you know, but generally there were two or three, three or four of the members at those meetings which were taped and where the designs were all filed and I have seen them all, seen the tapes. Mr.

Speaker, we were listening to saying We did have meetings. At rne of the meetings that I know of were any of the members absent. The meetings were where the crucial ecisiond were made. It was wintertime, we did get around the Province, we did get to every geographical area in the Province and then finally, knowing that we were a Committee and I think that the phrase that a casl is a horse designed by Committee was felt by all of the Committee members and we went to Chris Pratt. And I think it was right that we went to chris Pratt because he had, first of all, shown an interest in the flag.

He had offered his services. Not only that but he is a painter an artist 327

May 20, 1980 Tape 1655 SC - 1 MR. J. HODDER: of great renown in this Province. Some member here the other day talked about the stages which an artist goes through, and how Mr. Pratt's paintings at one time had been of one type - the -cat is the one that was mentioned. But if you look at some of the artists paintings now they are very futuristic and, you know, I feel if we had gone to other artists - I looked at David Blackwood's submissions and I think that they are more in the past than i, the future. MR. L. STIRLING: That was after the Cosinittee report - nake that clear. MR. J.

HODDER: That was after the Committee report, yes. t was after the Committee report, but he had been invited to submit. But whether or not he had them there before I could not have accepted them. If we want to talk about David Blackwood's art, I like it. He is my favourite artist, bu his reputation was made on the seal hunt and on past Newfoundland history. Very many of his paintings look back to the 1930s. I think that we selected the correct artjgt when we selected Qiris Pratt.

The people we spoke to across the Province and the people who spoke out against the flag, and the people who have spoken out against the flag here, most have given their reasons. They did not like the design. There is no Union Jack. There is a variety of different things that people want in there that they feel would be a unifying symbol. But, Mr. Speaker, there was no way this Committee could come up with a flag that would please all Newfoundlanders.

No flag that this Committee could have brought in would have done anything but bring controversy, and I do not think any flag could be brought into this Province - if we put it off for six months then we will have failed again. I suppose that I stake my reputation on the fact that in the future we will look at it as our flag. And I think in six months time after it is flown at the federal/provincial conference, after it is flown down at Marystown or wherever it is this Summer, 328

May 20, 1980 Tape 1655 EC -. 2 MR. J. H0DDER after it is flown - in Toronto, I believe, there is some sort of a get-together of sports people this Summer. I do not think it will take very long before people will start to realize this is our flag. And I would say the vast majority of Newfoundlanders on this particular issue have no opinion at all. They are willing to accept it. The vast majority who do not speak, the silent majority, are willing to accept that flag once it flies. Mr.

Speaker, I only have one other thing to say and it is one thing of great disappointment to me and I have to differ with the non, the House Leader on the other side (Mr. W. Marshall) MR. G. WARREN; Right on Right on MR. J.HODDER: The House Leader said - and I quite understand - that the Premier is at a funeral. Well, that is fine, and I understand why he is not here today and we are going to vote on the flag. But, Mr. Speaker, the Premier had his opportunity to speak on the flag. MR. G. WARREN: Right on) Right on) MR. J.

HODDER: And I am very, very surprised that with the power that the Premier has and by the very nature of the fact that the government does set the business of this House, that it could not have been arranged so that the Premier spoke on this particular issue. Because, Mr. Speaker, I am going to say one thing now and I am going to say it very emphatically, that if the Premier does not speak on this flag, he has no right to ever take credit in the future for the flag. He could have spoken before. £ would have expected him to lead of f the debate.

If I remember correctly - I do not know if the hon. the House Leader-but very early in the debate, he made his views known as to what the flag should be and the fact that he was not voting for it. But I have never seen this sort of thing happen in the House before where a bill - and as my friend and colleague from Trinity - Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) brought up,

an act to - I have lost my flag - but anyhow,'An act To Adopt A Flag For The Province" brought under the name of the hon. Brian Peckford, that first of all, the Minister of Tourism (Mr. R. Dawe) brought in the flag, that the Minister of Tourism, it seems, will close the debate, and we are inthe third week 329

May 20, 1980 Tape 1655 SC - 3 MR. J. HODDSR: and that the Premier has not spoken on the flag. You know, Mr. Speaker, I am starting to think that the flag is more mine than his, because I have said more to support the flag in this House than he has. And I have to say, Mr. Speaker, again, and re—emphasize that, if he does not stand up and support in verbal form this flag, I do not think he has the right to take the credit for it in the future. - I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, as well, that I had no objection - before I finish I would like to say this - that I had no objection to the 4330

May 20, 1980 Tape Mo. 1656 lB-i MR. HODDER: Canadian Legion coming before the bar of this House and speaking. MR. NEARY: Hear, heart MR. HODDER: I will not comment on the reasons why or speculate on the reasons why on the other side. But I do feel outside of the fact of the comments that I just made, I feel the flag is a good one. I feel that it will last. I feel that the design will grow on us and I know that has been said over and over again until we are almost sick of hearing it. But nevertheless,I feel that the Committee did do its job.

I think we did do it well, that it will be a unifying symbol and that some day all members or the majority of the members of this House, will be glad that this flag came in if indeed the vote is for the flag. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. SPEAKER (SINMS): The hon. member for St. John's Center. DR. MCNICHOLAS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I support completely the view of the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall). The suggestion opposite that we put of f debate for another six months to my mind is for the birds.

If hon. members on either side cannot make up their minds after three weeks of intensive debate I do not think they are going to be any better off in six months time. I have already stated my views on the flag. I am against it and I intend to vote against it but I am going to vote against the amendment. I think the amendment is only just a maneuver on the part of the hon. members opposite to expand on what they have already stated.thd, incidentally, it is an opportunity for the hon. member for Grand Bank (Mr. Thoms) to change his mind. MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Ready.

MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that Bill No. 44, "An Act To Adopt A Flag For The province', be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months hence. Those in favour say 'Aye'. Contrary, 'Nay'. I declare the motion lost. AN HON. MEMBER; Divide. MR. SPEAKER: Division. Call in the members. 331

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1657 lB-i DIVISION: MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS) : Order, please Motion is that Bill No. 44, 'An Act To Adopt A Flag For The Province', be not now read a second time but that it be read a second time this day six months hence. Those in favour of the motion please rise: The hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Jamieson) ;Mr. Fredrick Rowe; Mr. Lush; Mr. Roberts; Mr. Neary; Mr. William Rowe; Mr. Thorns; Mr. White; Mr. Tulk; Mr. Moores; Mr. Stirling; Mr. Hollett; Mr. Warren; Mr. Bennett; Mr. Hancock. MR. SPEAKER: Those against the motion please rise: SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, ohl. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please The hon. Minister of Mines and Energy and Industrial Development (Mr. Barry); the hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands (Mr. Power); the hon. Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan); the hon. Minister of Social Services (Mr. Mickey); the hon. Minister of Consumer Affairs and the Environment (Mrs. Newhook); the hon. Minister of Tourism, Recreation and Culture (Mr. Dawe); the hon. Minister of t.aur and Manpower (Mr. Dinn); the hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing (Mr. Windsor); the hon. Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins); the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer); the hon.

President of the Council (Mr. Marshall); the hon. Minister of Transportation and Communication (Mr. Brett); the hon. Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development (Mr. Goudie); the hon. Minister of Education (Ms. Verge); the hon. Minister of Health (Mr. House); Mr. Andrews; Mr. Walsh; Mr. Butt; Mr. Rideout; Mr. Stagg; Mr. Collins; Mr. Barrett; Mr. Carter; Mr. Doyle; Mr. Patterson; st'. "ward; Mr. Woodrow; Dr. McNicholas; Mr. Baird; Mr. Nodder. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please Fifteen in favour, thirty against. I declare the motion lost. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: 332

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1657 IB-2 MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS): Speaking on the main motion, the hon. member for Burgeo-Bay d'Espoir. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, heart MR. ANDREWS: Mr. Speaker, I have only a few words to say to probably satisfy some hon. members on the other side who indicated that people over here were afraid to stand up and speak. We just stood up and voted. I have indicated already to the HouseS through a point of privilege when I was misquoted in the Evening Telegram,how I will vote on this flag and I will support the main motion.

There is probably no need for all of us to speak on the motion if we indicate how we are going to vote. There are many other serious pieces of business that this House could well occupy itself with. But I will say a couple of things. One is that I think there could not be any more democratic method by which a flag could be possibly selected. The Flag Committee was unanimous. It was unanimous, I say. It brought in something which I consider to be a reasonable design for a flag. If I was going to 4333

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1658 GM-i MR. P,NDREWS: design a flag or pick a flag, probably I would have picked another design, but I do not think that is the point, I do not think that is the point. I can remember very vaguely when Mr. Pearson brought in his Maple Leaf design flag, there was some debate about that. As a matter of fact, the House of Parliament in Ottawa debated that issue almost all Summer, and a lot of people in Canada were very upset about the point - MR. F. ROWE: Which one? MR. ANDREWS: The Maple Leaf - which one - MR. THOMS: (Inaudible) the first one (inaudible) MR.

ANDREWS: - which Maple Leaf -right. But even the last Maple Leaf, there were a lot of people upset about it. People said it was going to divide the nation. There are people saying that this flag is going to divide the Province. I object to that - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. ?NDREWS: - Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: (Siinms) Order, pleaser MR. ANDREWS: If we go along those lines or those lines of thinking we could have, as many hon. members have already said, 600,000 flags. I do not think there is any other possible way we can get a flag. We want a flag.

I think Newfoundlanders are unanimous in that regard, except for some groups of people who want to retain the Union Jack. However, I think most Newfoundlanders want their own flag. The hon. member for the district of Trinity-Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) calls this a confrontation issue by the government.

I do not think it is an issue of confrontation, I think it is an issue where the government and government members and one member on the other side here - one member on this side is going to vote against the flag - it is an issue where I think all hon. membrs are standing strong to the point that we want a new flag. Whether or not we all agree with the individual design of the flag, the arrow should be removed, the Union Jack should be in the corner, there should be, maybe, even a Maple Leaf in it, I do not think that is the point. I will say this flag, as with the Maple Leaf, Mr.

Speaker, will not divide the country, it will unite Newfoundland again. I am voting for the main motion. 4334

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1658 GH-2 MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) Order, please! Before I recognize the hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower, 1 would like to welcome to the gallery today on behalf of hon. members the former member of this hon. House who represented, I think, the then district of Labrador North, Mr. Mel Woodward. SOME HON. MENBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. STIRLING: (Inaudible). MR. SPEAKER: Order, p1eae! The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I could not let this debate go by without saying a few words - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

DINN: - on the flag. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. DINN: There are many other very important pieces of legislation that I want to see go through this House of Assembly, not the least of which is

an act to amend the Workers' Compensation Act so that we can get all the fIshermen in this Province covered by Workers' Compensation, I think that is very important. The hen, member for Bonavista North (Mr. Stirling) who continues to interrupt every speaker who stands in this House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker, is over there now interrupting me and I would ask protection of the Chair - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! - - MR. DINN: And, in fact, if he continues to interrupt, be named and chucked out of the House where he should be, because he cannot seem to control himself.

He continually attempts to destroy the decorum of this House and I, therefore, ask for protection of the Chair so that I can speak on this very important flag issue - AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. minister is - MR. ROBERTS: Point of order. MR. SPEAKER: Point of order, the hon. member for the Strait of Belle Isle. 4335

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1658 GH-3 MR. ROBERTS: I just want to say that I think the hon. gentleman's request is well taken, Sir, and I hope Your Honour will extend the hon. minister all the protection he needs, which is a great deal, and I also want to say, Sir, that the minister earlier asked if we would consent to give Private Members' Day tomorrow to discuss the Workers' Compensation bill. He ought to learn he is not going to get very far the way he is going at it now, Sir. I think his point was well made. SDME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hearl MR.

SPEAKER: (Sintirts) With respect to the point of order, there are obviously occasions when a certain amount of give and take is acceptable to the House. When a member requests the right to be heard in silence, it is a right that he has and the Chair will have to try to enforce that right. I will remind hon. members that I have the responsibility of enforcing those rules, but the members also have the responsibility of adhering to the rules and I would ask them to do so. The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. 336

May 20, 1960 Tape No. 1659 PA - 1 MR.J. DINN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Now, first of all, Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate all the members of the Coronittee, the member for St. Johns North (J. Carter, Port au Port (J. Hoddir), Menihek (P. Walsh), I(ilbride (R. Aylward) , Eagle River E. Riscock), Grand Bank (L Thorns), and Fortune - Hermitage (0. Stewart. I think they did a pretty fair job in :omlng up with a design for a new flag. I think they listened all around the Province.

And whilst not all of the members of the eommittee attended all the meetings in all areas of the Provincethey were there to listen to the people and as long as they had one or two members there I think that was sufficient,they got the views, they taped them and they understood basically what the people wanted.

They then, since they did not have the wherewithal themselves, decided to get a very well known Newfcundland artist to put together the thoughts of what most of the people who attended and made requests to the Committee,put it together in a flag design and they came up with a pretty fair design in my opinion. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have received requests from constitutents of mine, telephone calls and letters, indicating one way or the other how they felt about this particular design and I want to inform the hon. House about what I think of this particular design. Well,I like the design. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear MA. J. DINN: I like the design because it has, for me in it,what I would like to see in a flag. I did not know what I wanted in • flag, certainly when the Flag Committee started out, If I were to draw • design I do not know, I probably would not come up with this particular design but having the design put on a flag and put in front of me it is one that I like. It is destintive, it is something that can mean whatever we want it to mean. As to whether the Maple Leaf represents me or represents Newfoundland or represents how I feel, the Maple Leaf Flag is the Flag of Canada.

And whilst maybe I did not like it right off,I like it now. I think it is a fair flag of this country. IL; He really did not like it.right off. 4337

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1659 RA - 2 MR. J. DINN: And this flag this particular design I liked riqht off - MR. STIRLING: - oh. MR. J. DINN: —straight out, not qaestion about it. I liked everything about the flag.The fact that in the heart - MR. L. THOMS: liked the flag. MR. J. DINN: The fact that in the heart of the flag - the hon. member for Grand Bank (L. Thorns) is now interupting.

He stood up here and went out with six other members of this House on a Flag Conmiittee and came up with a design that was unanisoug and then came in here in the House and flip-flopped and he had his two speeches on the flag Mr.Speaker, and now, he does not want me to have my few words MR. L. moMs: (Inaudible) 4338 -----_-,.--- ----_---.-

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1660 lB-i MR. DINN: in this House of Assembly. Well, Mr. Speaker, I asked for protection frc'- t Thir and I still request that protection. MR. THOMS: (Inaudible). MR. SPEAKER (SIMNS): Order, p1ease MR. DINN: And I ask the hon. member for Grand Bank (Mr. Thorns) to sit and listen whilst I have my few minutes in this debate. Now, Mr. Speaker, the flag is a distinctive design. As I said it can represent what we want it to represent. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. DINN: It can represent pretty well anything that anyone wants it to represent. AN HON. MEMBER: Right. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. DINN: If somebody wants to see the Union Jack in that flag they can see the Union Jack in that flag. If somebody wants to see Newfoundland and Labrador,as represented by triangles1 they can see it. For those who do not want to see it they will not see it, Mr. Speaker. There is none as blind as those who will not. And, Mr. Speaker - MR. MORGAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (BUTT): A point of order. The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORG?.N: Mr.

Speaker, I have been sitting here in the House of Assembly for the last number of days listening without any interruptions at all in this Flag Debate. Right now we have a minister speaking in the Flag Debate and he is continually being interrupted by the Opposition. I would ask, Mr. Speaker, that the members who want to speak in this Flag Oebate be listened to in silence. We have listened to the other members of the Opposition speaking and we have listened in silence without objections and I would ask the same courtesy. MR. STIRLING: To that point of order. MR.

SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. member for Bonavista Worth. 4339

May 20, 1980 Tape Mo. 1660 15-2 MR. STIRLING: Yes, Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. In professional football there is a penalty given if the team tries to draw the other teen offside. And the same sort of thing happens in the House. These people are experts at leading the Opposition into making a comment and they are expert at attacking, say, the member for Grand Bank (Mr. Thorns). And they are just as much out of order by encouraging you to get into the debate and then when they do not like it they cry for the protection of the Chair. So, Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order here. MR.

SPEAKER (BUTr): There is obviously no point of order but I would like to point out to all hon. members that it is any member's privilege to be heard insilence. The hon. Minister of Manpower and Labour. MR. DINN: Now, Mr. Speaker, can I understand what the Legion would like? I think I can. The Monarchists, the Loyal Orange Lodge, they all have their little something that they would like to see in the flag. I can understand the hon. member for St. John's Center (Dr. McNicholas). The Editor of the Daily News made his representations to the Flag Cornmitee, i can understand what he would like to see.

Ray Guy has his thought, he wants a white flag with a partridge in the center. MR. POWER: - A partridgeberry. MR. DINN: A partridgeberry in the center. I can understand, I think, what he is trying to say. But what I wanted was when the Flag Committee was sent Out and it was unanimous here in this House, that we should have a distinctive flag. Now if this was a majority report that caine back I would say, 'Well,maybe there is something wrong. But we had all of the members of the Committee. Now not all of the iiembers of the Committee agree now.

We have one member who says that he does not agree for whatever reason. He does not agree because somebody is trying to push it through the House. Well, Mr. Speaker, this Flag Debate, not this particular one, but the flag debate has been 4340

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1660 18-3 MR. DINN: going on in this House for a long time and I think it is time that members on both sides of the House stood up one way or the other and are counted as to where they stand with respect to this design. Not six months hence but now. Now, Mr. Speaker, one would like to think that you could please everyone in the Province on any particular issue. I would certainly like to think that the Canadian Legion can accept this flag. 31

May 20, 1980 Tape No. 1661 SD - 1 .IR. G. FLIGHTt They cannot. They cannot. MR. J. DINN: The hon. member opposite is interrupting, Mr. Speaker, but I would like to think - MR. SPEA1R (Butt) : Order, please MR. J. DINN: - that the Canadian Legion would become accustomed to this flag. Now, maybe they can not, maybe that is something that is not possible. I think that it is possible. I think that as they are becoming accustomed to the Canadian flag that they can and will become ascustomed to this particular flac.aut whether they do or whether they do not I intend to vote for this flag because I like this flag.

AN HON. MEMBER: To hell with (inaudible) MR. J. DINN: No, not to hell with the Canadian Legion or anyone else The fact of the matter is, for the hon. member's infornation, I am a member of Branch 56. They may kick me out but the fact of the matter is that I am and that not 100 per cent of all the members;of all the people in the Legion are against this flag. - SOME HON. MEMBE: Hear, hear. MB. J. DINN: - that I happen to know - MR. L. STIRLING: Name names, name names. MR. J.

DINN: I am like the hon. member opposit., you know, I do not have to name names • I am standing up as myself, the member for Pleasantville - AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear. MB. J. DINN: - and I am going to state my position and vote the way I feel I should vote on this particular issue. I will not get in the House of Assembly and name names for any reason. It is net necessary. But I have letters in my possession • the hon. member can see them on a confidential basis if he wishes, for and against this flag. -- MR. L. STIRLING: How many do you have for? MR. J.

DINN: The hon. member can com over and have a look at them, I ant not interested nor am I going to allow the hon. member to detract from the few words that I have to say. 4342

May 20, 1980 Tape Ne. 1661 SD - 2 MR. J. DINN: Now, Mr. Speaker, the thing that bothers me about this debate is this, that we have had in this House on Private Members& Day han. members opposite stand up and say, 'Let us set up a Select Committee to have a look at the fisheries, let us set up a Select Committee to have a look at the transportation system, the education system.' The hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. S. Neary) wanted to set up a Select Committee to examine into all aspects of the offshore. Well, Mr. Speaker, the latest thing that we have done is set up a Select Committee on the flag. AN HON.

MEMBER: Right. MR. J. DINN: The Select Committee goes Out, spends several months at it, comes back, presents their report to the House and what happens? Hon. members opposite get up almost en masse - MR. L. THOMS: It is a free vote. M.R. J. DINN: - and say that they do not like it. MR. L. TROMS: (inaudible) your right (inaudible) SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. J. DINN: The hon • rembr from Grand Bank (Mr. L. Thorns) ..who - MR. SPEXER (Butt):