April 15, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV No. 7

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin today I would like to welcome to the Assembly forty-six

Grade 9 students from St. Kevin's High School in the Goulds; students are

from the districts of Kilbride and Ferryland. They are accompanied by their

teachers, Cathy Adams and Craig Halliday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MERCER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Sunday, March 31, the Corner Brook Royals defeated the Flatrock Flyers in

Game Five of the best of five series by a score of 5 to 4 to win the Herder

Memorial Trophy emblematic of senior hockey supremacy in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MERCER: This was the Royals 10 th Herder win since the

trophy was established in 1935, but only its first since 1988.

Much to the delight of over 500 fans who accompanied the team into St. John's

and after trailing for much of the third period, the Royals', Steve North,

using his great speed and superior stick-handling ability, dismantled the Flyers'

defense and scored the winning goal with only just two minutes and 30 second

left in the game.

While Flatrock pressed for the equalizer in the dying seconds of the third

period, the Royal's magnificent goaltender, Kirk Stoyles, shook off a bad case

of the Flatrock flu and turned aside all comers to preserve the Royal's win.

To show their appreciation to the many loyal fans, the Royals' held a Fan

Appreciation Day on Saturday past that included a three hour autograph and

get-to-know-the-team session at the Corner Brook Plaza.

Fans, young and old alike, turned out in huge numbers and were later led by

the Royals with the coveted Herder Memorial Trophy through the streets of Corner

Brook in one of the largest motorcades ever seen in the city.

Later that night the Royals had a party for its adult fans and sponsors at

the Canada Games Center. As part of the evening's celebrations, team photos

were given to the sponsors and some lucky fans received Royals' jerseys in a

draw that saw individual team members take off their Jersey and give them to the

lucky winners.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MERCER: The party, I was told, continued into the wee hours of the

morning.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. MERCER: All in all, Saturday was a class act by a class team and just

as the Deer Lake Red Wings proved in 2001, the Corner Brook Royals again proved

in 2002 that, in hockey, as in so many other things, the West Coast is indeed

the best coast.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is not much I can add to the comments of the hon. Member for Humber

East, but I certainly join with him in congratulating the Corner Brook Royals. I

find it strange myself, of course, having cheered for the Capitals for many

years and gone into Corner Brook and got pounded from time to time as a player,

a coach, and has an organizer. Then, of course, I used to be an old Detroit Red

Wings fan too, and when Toronto came to the Province I changed my colors from

red to blue. Of course I changed from the Caps to the blue Royals, and I find it

much easier to cheer for a blue team, I must say.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: I join in congratulating the Royals.

On a more serious note, Mr. Speaker, if I could take the remainder of my time

to pay tribute to Mag Davis, a renowned provincial athlete, who passed away last

week. I think the greatest tribute that was paid to Mag - and that is the way I

will refer to her - is that she has been termed by the St. John's media and

indeed, the Newfoundland and Labrador media, as the finest athlete in the

Province, male or female. That is quite a statement. I say that (inaudible) any

indifference to any other athletes around this Province, but Mag was a true

competitor. She played squash, field hockey, ice hockey, softball, soccer and

golf. She played all of them exceptionally well. She played on at least thirty

provincial teams, her family tells me. She was a fierce competitor. Pat Kelly,

at the wake on Friday in Placentia, described her as fierce. For a woman

athlete, that is a great tribute. She was a fierce competitor. When she was

there she came to play, she came to win. I must say, I have the greatest respect

and admiration for her. She competed at the highest levels in all sports. She

was a silver world medalist and also, of course, as an all-star (inaudible) all

around.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. WILLIAMS: If I could just have a moment to conclude?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. WILLIAMS: I did actually say to my daughter Katie, who had the

privilege of competing against her in golf just two seasons ago - she went out

to compete against Mag - I said: Katie, just watch her, just enjoy the moment.

The chance to be on a course, to be on a field, to be on a team, to be anywhere

with Mag Davis is an experience you should truly enjoy and nurture because you

can learn so much from her. She is truly a role model for athletes all around

the Province, and I pay tribute to her today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am honoured to stand and wish Happy Anniversary to Chesley and Muriel Earle

of Shearstown today, April 15, 2002.

Mr. and Mrs. Earle both enjoy good health and enjoy taking

part in many

activities. Mrs. Earle attends church regularly, while Mr. Earle, who is

ninety-two years of age, can be seen every day outside fencing or doing his

regular spring cleanup. A wonderful couple, proud of their past and admired by

all of the community.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me, along with their family and

friends, in wishing Chesley and Muriel Earle a happy 69 th Wedding

Anniversary.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TAYLOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on the evening of March 22, Folk of the Sea performed as part of

the Winterfest celebrations at Harriot Curtis Collegiate in St. Anthony. Folk of

the Sea was formed eight years ago and held its first performance at the St.

John's Arts and Culture Centre, I believe, April 13, 1994. Since then, Folk of

the Sea has played at sold out venues from St. Augustine's High in Plum Point

to the concert venue of the country, Roy Thomson Hall in Toronto. Along the way,

Folk of the Sea has delivered a powerful message, the story of the fishery, and

has proudly displayed our culture, our heritage and our aspirations.

Mr. Speaker, while the message of Folk of the Sea is important, there is a

bigger reason for its continued existence, and today as fishing vessels and

their crews prepare for another season it is one worth noting. The fishing

industry has long been and continues to be recognized as the most dangerous

occupation in Canada. Every year there are more people, per capita, injured and

killed on the job, in the fishery, than in any other occupation. In the late

1980s and early 1990s this Province alone lost on average eleven fishermen to

the sea each year. Today, I believe the average is six per year.

Mr. Speaker, many of us know the names. From the District of Port au Port:

Ricky Fitzpatrick and Richard Denis. From the District of St. Barbe: Curling

Baines and the crew of the Myers III . From my own district: Gerald

and Roy Adey. From Twillingate-Fogo: Gary Troake; and from the District of

Ferryland: Paddy Coady and the crew of the Patrick and Elizabeth. That is

just to name a few.

Mr. Speaker, while you can go to Gloucester, Massachusetts -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the member's time is up.

MR. TAYLOR: By leave.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. TAYLOR: Mr. Speaker, while you can go to Gloucester, Massachusetts,

and find the names of over 300 Newfoundland fishermen on a monument to those who

were lost over the years on Gloucester schooners, you will find no such monument

in this Province to the people who died in pursuit of the industry that has been

our reason for being. That, Mr. Speaker, is a tragedy almost as bad as the loss

of those lives and what, more than anything, now keeps Folk of the Sea going:

the desire to one day see an appropriate monument to those who have lost their

lives in the pursuit of the fishery.

Mr. Speaker, to that end, I would like to acknowledge the members of Folk of

the Sea for their perseverance and to acknowledge and thank Persona

Communications and the Newfoundland and Labrador less than 65 foot shrimp fleet

for the substantial financial contributions they have made to assist in the

establishment of a monument.

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a dangerous occupation, the fishery. Every day

individual vessels handle miles of ropes that can easily take you overboard.

Straining cables and chains are commonplace and there are many cases that many

of us have seen where stabilizers, spars and wheelhouse windows have given out

in heavy seas.

In closing, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask all members to join me in

wishing the fishermen and fisherwomen of this Province a bountiful harvest this

year and offer a word of prayer for their safe return from each and every trip.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay respects to the late John Pike of Harbour

Grace, who died on March 19, 2002 at the age of fifty-eight. Mr. Pike was an

active member of the community in Harbour Grace, serving on the Volunteer Fire

Brigade, the town council, as well as numerous other volunteer services.

Mr. Pike was an avid member of the Fire Brigade which he joined in 1974. He

held the positions of crew chief, secretary, treasurer, assistant chief, and in

1981 he was elected Fire Chief. He held that position until 1986. Mr. Pike was

involved in the running of the Brigade's Hydrant Club and served as treasurer,

secretary, and brigade auditor. At the time of his death, he was serving as

secretary of the board of directors on the Scholarship Committee and as chairman

of the Brigade's "Top of the Ladder Club", a position he held since

the club was formed in 1996.

Mr. Pike was also a dedicated member of the Harbour Grace Town Council and

was first elected in a 1992 by-election and served until September, 2001.

Mr. Pike's expertise in both the Brigade as well as the town council was

utilized by the members of both organizations. His abundant help and advice were

only a phone call away. Having held every executive position in the Brigade, Mr.

Pike was a great source of knowledge and experience and was called upon many

times for guidance. His dedication has been proven many times and is evident in

one of the final requests that donations in his memory be made to the Brigade's

Scholarship Fund.

At the funeral service, Mr. Pike's wife, Betty, and his family were

presented with the Brigade's Ceremonial Helmet and the Last Alarm was tolled

three times as a final farewell to the former Chief.

I ask all Members of the House of Assembly to join me in and pay tribute to

Mr. Pike and also in sending our condolences to his family.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, last week I had a very interesting telephone call from a

constituent of mine who has a nephew serving in the War Against Terrorism over

in Afghanistan. She talked about her nephew as well as the other Canadians and

Newfoundlanders over there taking

part in this wartorn country, and the

dedicated services they are providing to not only Newfoundlanders and Canadians

but to all the world. She talked about soldiers going out and entering caves.

She talked about going out and being out in the desert for weeks at a time. She

talked about the highlight of the soldiers returning to base camp. She talked

about the highlight they would have when mail day arrived.

Apparently, first when this war started, mail would come every week. Now it

comes approximately every two weeks. She asked what we could do, as an Assembly

here, to show some appreciation and to send something to base camp that they

could display and be proud of. She talked about schools from other parts of

Canada sending shoe boxes over. It is a big day when mail arrives, and everybody

shares the goodies that come with it.

She talked about her nephew being there for three months and having three

showers since he has been there. I said: Madam, what did you have in mind? What

do you suggest that we bring forward? She said: Maybe if we had a banner or

something.

Mr. Speaker, what I have decided I would do - and I thank your office for

providing the Newfoundland flag - I ask that every member of this Legislature

sign their name, with their district beneath it, on this Newfoundland flag,

return it to me, and I will make sure that it is returned to the appropriate

people to be hung proudly at base camp over in Afghanistan.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the passing of the Queen Mother on

March 30, in her 101 st year. The Queen Mother was renowned for

carrying out her duties with dignity and with grace. In recent days, many

statements such as "a genuine universal sense of loss" and "one

of the most outstanding women of our time" have been used to try and

capture this phenomenal royal and the effect of her passing. Mr. Speaker, such

statements attest to the respect and admiration that she evoked in all people of

the Commonwealth and, in fact, around the world.

Mr. Speaker, the close relationship the Queen Mother had with this Province

deserves to be recognized. In 1939, the then Queen and her husband King George

VI came to the City of St. John's. For the people of the then Dominion of

Newfoundland, this was a monumental visit at the time. In subsequent years, she

visited various parts of the country and said "to be here is to be among

true and lasting friends." Again in 1967, this Province was graced with

another visit from the Queen Mother. Once again, she impacted all those she

encountered in this Province by bringing such a humanness to the monarchy.

Mr. Speaker, one cannot overlook the admiration this royal won from her

subjects during the Second World War when she remained by the King's side in

Buckingham Palace, despite the eminent daily threat of harm from the bombs that

tore through the heart of the City of London.

Mr. Speaker, I'm sure I speak for all of my honourable colleagues in this

Legislature when I say that all people throughout the Commonwealth will fondly

remember the Queen Mother as the royal who touched the hearts of many,

regardless of age, and became known as the monarch of the people. Again, Mr.

Speaker, may I say that we are very saddened by her passing, but I am sure that

her presence will always be felt among members of the Commonwealth, particularly

here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

We would like, on this side of the House, as the Official Opposition, to join

with the Premier in echoing some of the sentiments that he has expressed on

behalf of the Province.

We would like to add this as well, that the Queen Mother, besides being the

Queen Mother, was an extraordinary human being. She held many titles throughout

her life, not all of which I will mention today, but some: Chancellor of the

University of London for over twenty-five years; Colonel-in-Chief of the United

Kingdom overseas regiment; Commander-in-Chief of the Royal Air Force Central

Flying School; and was president or patron of some 350 organizations in her

life. None more significant a title than the one Queen Mom, for it personified,

in our view, what she meant both to the world and indeed the people of Canada

and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Just, I suppose, as Prince Charles was her favorite grandson, so too was

Canada her favorite Nation, as the Premier has already alluded to. Her first

visit, as the Premier said, was in 1939, just before the outbreak of the war,

and she returned again in 1989 on the 50 th anniversary of her first

visit. Throughout her life she made fourteen separate visits to our country.

She came here in 1939, just before the outbreak of the war, as I said, World

War II, a war that she met head on. As we all know, she became a legend in her

own resolve not to leave her home, London, during the most tumultuous blitzkrieg

bombings in world history.

Her ability to connect with the public earned her the title as Queen of the

working class. This was personified in 1987. At the age of ninety-five she pored

her own pint of Guinness in an east ended pub and drank her whiskey neat.

For members of the Royal Canadian Legion, she was a symbol of longevity. She

was as witty as she was passionate at her age and it was a reflection of her own

vitality and her own spirit as part of the human race.

At age ninety-five, Mr. Speaker, she officially opened the Victory for Europe

commemoration - the 50 th anniversary commemoration in London. While

old in age, she remained young at heart. She maintained a passion for horse

racing, loved the sport, and was loved within it. Certainly in Canada, the

Ontario Woodbine Race Track is the official site of the Queen's Plate.

Strength, love of life, indomitable spirit, all of these can be taken from

this very extraordinary and outstanding woman. History will always remember the

Queen Mother, for so much of her life was a history that has come to represent

us all.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to join in recognizing the passing of the Queen Mother, who I

think we would all agree was probably the best loved of all the royals of this

century. Some young people may wonder why she was so well loved, and the

Opposition House Leader mentioned a couple of things that endeared her to the

people, but the thing that struck me the most - and both previous speakers have

mentioned - was her resolve during the Second World War to stay in London and

indeed, her family stay in London in Buckingham Palace during the bombing of

London, particularly the east end.

One of the comments during her funeral and mourning for her that struck me

the most interesting and probably very striking at the time, was during the

bombing of London, where people were dying every night through the bombing - as

I said, particularly the east end - Buckingham Palace itself was in fact bombed.

The Queen Mother's reaction was: I am glad, because now I can look the east

end of London in the face.

I think that really made people think how close she was to the people of

England in particular, and it was a principle reason why the people of England,

the United Kingdom, all the Commonwealth actually, recognized her humanity, her

essential dignity and decency, and loved her for it. Indeed, she had many

honours of course. As a person of royalty she would, but her humanity and her

endearment to the people is what held her in such high regard and such respect.

I think that is something deserving to be recognized by this House, and I am

glad we are doing this here today.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, I rise to commend today all of those who have

been involved in this absolutely, phenomenal weekend which we have just

experienced with JUNOfest. From the opening reception on Friday night, The

Premier's Gala on Saturday, to the televised show on Sunday night, the 2002

Juno Awards have been a tremendous success.

Hosting the 2002 Awards was an exciting opportunity for Newfoundland and

Labrador to show the rest of the country the high calibre musical talent we have

here and to further promote our cultural tourism industry. This was one of the

best attended Juno Awards since its inception in 1970. We have received an

overwhelming response from the media, the nominees, the industry representatives

and, most importantly, from the people of this Province.

Over 1,000 people attended The Premier's Gala and Awards Show. They were

treated to a true Newfoundland and Labrador display of hospitality.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: They were tremendous.

Kim Stockwood and Seamus O'Regan did a magnificent job as hosts and the

performers - Crush, The Fables, The Ennis Sisters and Damhnait Doyle - portrayed

the diversity of this Province's musical talent. I congratulate Mary Sexton

and Rink Rat Productions for producing this wonderful evening.

The highlight of Saturday night's celebrations was the presentation of the

best new country artist award to our own Ennis Sisters.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Congratulations to Maureen, Teresa and Karen. I expect this

is just the beginning of the success they are going to experience nationally and

internationally.

The show last night was fabulous. It was the biggest night in Canadian music

and it was seen in over a million homes across Canada and internationally. We

will be waiting with some great excitement here of what the actual ratings are,

which should come out tonight or tomorrow. Great Big Sea, who led off the show,

brought the house down, brought thousands of people to their feet with their

rousing renditions of traditional Newfoundland music.

Mr. Speaker, the Junos have also provided a unique opportunity for both the

industry and for the people of this Province.

The Music Industry Association of Newfoundland and Labrador did an

outstanding job in organizing a local music extravaganza - JUNOfest 2002 -

Music from the Edge . This was the first time a provincial celebration like

this has been connected with the Junos and sanctioned by the Canadian Academy of

Recording Arts and Sciences. Hopefully, its success will make this an annual

event wherever the Junos are held.

One other unique aspect of it, the Songwriters' Circle, was a highly

successful event and a fitting tribute to the late Roger Skinner. It will

continue to honor his contribution to the music industry in this Province

through the establishment of a scholarship for Newfoundland and Labrador

musicians.

Mr. Speaker, the 2002 Juno Awards weekend is proof that we can provide a

first class entertainment event. I thank all of those who have contributed to

the success of this weekend. From the musicians, to the producers, to the

Canadian Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences and its Board, to the Music

Industry Association of Newfoundland and Labrador, officials in my department,

and of course the many, many volunteers.

It is certainly going to be a challenge for anyone else to match the success

of these Awards. We have raised the bar. What we have achieved here this weekend

will now set the standard for future Juno events.

Mr. Speaker, in conclusion the benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador and its

tourism and cultural industries are many. While there were many visitors to the

Province over the weekend, what we have gained from the exposure in 2002 Juno

will be returned again and again.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I join with the minister in sharing the congratulations to the artists and to

the organizers, and even the fans who were involved last night. It was an

absolutely tremendous evening last night. A huge success. I must say, I was

honoured to even be in the building. For those of us who had an opportunity

afterwards - even to watch it on television, the television production was

extraordinary, the way it showcased the building. For those of us who were

involved in putting that building there in the first place, as part of the

organization of it, it was a night of tremendous pride for those of us who were

there and everybody who watched it. I must say, they did a superb job of

producing it, which is where it showcases all across the country, and that is

where we get our real mileage and our real leverage from a tourism perspective.

So that in itself was tremendous.

I joined with my family in a feeling of great pride when Great Big Sea opened

up with: We'll Rant and We'll Roar . I got the goosebumps that

everybody was charged and everybody around us were coming to their feet. That

was a great moment as well, when the Ennis Sisters came on and were acknowledged

for their award and the applause for them. Again, my pride even swelled more, I

must say. That is only the tip of the iceberg for artists in this Province.

We had an opportunity, of course, to showcase our talent, people like: Barry

Canning, Ron Hynes, Damhnait Doyle, Crush and Bucket Truck; just some of the

performers who had a chance to perform on George Street and at the other venues.

Again, as well, we also saw Kim Stockwood and Seamus O'Regan who were hosts at

the Premier's gala. For those of us who were fortunate to be there and got a

chance to be at the Premier's gala, thoroughly enjoyed that. Hats off to the

remarkable talent that we have. Of course Mary Walsh was Mary Walsh, and she was

wonderful in her own inhibitive way.

One final thing, just on a lighter note, I must say I was delighted to see

Nickelback in the Province for the Junos. Of course, if the Premier and the

Minister of Mines and Energy sign the deal that they want on Voisey's Bay that

will probably be the only time we will ever see nickel back from the bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It was a great weekend for the City of St. John's, and for all of

Newfoundland and Labrador to host the Junos. It was a tremendous opportunity to

let other people see, firsthand, the multi-talented people that we have here; to

allow people to come and visit Newfoundland and Labrador from the music

industry. These are people who have big audiences and big followings. They were

saying very positive things about this Province and telling people to come here

and see for themselves. The TV production was fabulous. It was a first- rate,

first class production. It showed off the new stadium. The whole event, I think,

was a tremendous boost for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The Leader of the Opposition mentioned the Ennis Sisters getting a real round

of applause, and in the background was the Premier, he could be assured of

getting applause if he went on stage with the Ennis Sisters because they were

such a delight to the audience having won the best New Country Artist of the

Year Award, which was a tremendous boost to them and a tremendous recognition

for this Province. I want to congratulate the Music Industry Association for,

themselves, participating fully in hosting the JUNOfest, and particularly -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

By leave, for a second?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: The Music Industry Association did a tremendous job in

showcasing local talent and allowing a lot of people to see acts. The enthusiasm

around this city was tremendous, Mr. Speaker. In fact, it is interesting to note

that more nominees for awards came to St. John's for the Junos than went to

Toronto or Vancouver, which is another indication of what great appeal the

culture and the people of this Province have. We were tremendously pleased and

proud to have a chance to showcase that to the rest of the nation and anybody

else who watched it.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As hon. members are aware, the Commission on the Future of Health Care in

Canada is in the Province today holding public consultations. This morning I had

the privilege to present our Province's submission to Commissioner Roy Romanow

and I want to inform hon. members about that presentation.

The submission focused on the themes that increased federal funding and

seamless health care are necessary to sustain the health care system in Canada.

We are currently spending forty-five cents of every provincial program dollar

on health care, and growth of this share would only serve to constrain other

important government programs. The Canada Health and Social Transfer, CHST,

which is intended to support social programs, remains considerably below funding

levels that existed under the previous transfer arrangements. Our submission

calls upon the federal government to restore the CHST support, removing the

ceiling on equalization payments, and restore the ten province average

equalization standard.

The Province's submission also suggested that national goals for population

health would be useful. Mr. Speaker, one of the fundamental goals of the health

system should be to improve the wellness of the population, particularly the

need to reduce the risk factors such as smoking, inactivity, and unhealthy

eating, which contribute to chronic disease.

The Province also supports a co-ordinated, interdisciplinary approach to

primary health care. We need to reform our system so that it takes into account

all aspects of a person's health and builds a seamless system. A major part of

this reform will be to continue to build teams of professionals who work

together in an interdisciplinary environment so that people are no longer

receiving fragmented services.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador cannot take sole

responsibility for change in the health care system. Co-operation and support is

needed from the federal government, particularly in the area of increased

funding. We are calling upon the federal government to work in partnership with

the provinces and territories to ensure a sustainable health system in the

future.

Mr. Speaker, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is committed to

building on our current strengths to create a better health and community

services system for the future. Later this spring, I will unveil a Strategic

Health Plan for our Province. This plan will put into action the commitment of

government to provide quality health and community services to improve the

health and well-being of individuals, families and communities.

A copy of the Province's submission to the Commission is available on

government's Web site.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister: Thank you for giving me a copy of your statement in

advance. I would also like to say to the minister, that we obviously support any

dollars of health care funding that they slashed from this Province's transfer

when they established the Canada Health and Social Transfer.

We believe it is critical to move back to needs based transfers, instead of

population based transfers that discriminate against this Province because of

our dispersed and aging population. We believe in reinforcing the national

standards currently in the Canada Health Act that have been allowed to fall by

the wayside to the detriment of the people in this Province. We also believe the

provincial government has a lot to answer for when it comes to the management of

the money it does receive.

Number one: Where is the comprehensive provincial health care plan? We have

been waiting for thirteen years, and this -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: - Administration is still operating on a crisis-to-crisis

band-aid approach. Why did the government proceed with deinstitutionalization

without ensuring that community based care was in place to pick up the slack?

Why do we have people waiting in expensive hospital beds because a lack of

government -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member doesn't have leave.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, we do have serious difficulties in this Province with health care,

particularly because of funding and the lack of federal funding. In fact, what

has happened, Mr. Speaker, is that federal funding has been reduced by

successive Tory and Liberal governments in Ottawa, hand in hand with the

development of a rate argument for privatization. Mr. Speaker, we do need more

federal funding, we do need a national pharmacare program, and we need a

national home care program for the benefit of the people of this Province. What

we need from this government is a commitment to fight for that and to fight

against privatization, and to make sure that we don't introduce user fees in

this Province that are going to be detrimental to our citizens. These are the

kinds of commitments we need from this government that we have yet to get.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am certain that all members of this honourable House are aware

that on April 2, the arbitration Tribunal handed down its final aware with

respect to the Newfoundland and Labrador/Nova Scotia Offshore Boundary Dispute

Arbitration. I rise today to thank our team for their tremendous work on this

file and to thank members of this House for their encouragement and support

during the proceedings.

Mr. Speaker, this government stood firm on behalf of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: The Nova Scotia line was not a fair line to this Province

and we rejected any suggestion that it was binding on us. We demanded a line to

which we were entitled: a line determined in accordance with international

maritime boundary law.

A strong team of professionals was assembled from within government and the

private sector to prepare and argue our case. Led by Professor Donald McRae, our

team represented this Province effectively and honourably. I know I speak for

all members in conveying congratulations to our team for a job well done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, this Province presented a strong and

compelling case. This is reflected by the Tribunal's decision; almost 70 per

cent of all of the area in dispute between the two provinces was awarded to

Newfoundland and Labrador. Our challenge is now to move beyond this dispute and

open this area to exploration on both sides of the line. I am truly hopeful that

both provinces will be the recipients of new discoveries and developments.

Mr. Speaker, this government is taking the necessary steps to encourage new

exploration. This year, an increased focus will be placed on area such as the

Laurentian Sub-basin in our promotional activities. We have also been working

with the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board, C-NOPB, to prepare for

negotiations to convert old federal exploration permits to exploration licences

in this area. These negotiations will commence shortly and we are confident that

this will facilitate substantial exploration activity in the years ahead.

Industry interest is also shifting from the Jeanne d'Arc Basin to deeper water

parcels in the Flemish Pass and South Whale Basin. It is hoped that these new

areas will yield new discoveries capable of development.

Mr. Speaker, this government will continue to work hard to grow our offshore

oil and gas industry for the benefit of all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We certainly join with the minister in expressing our pleasure with the

decision, and we congratulate the team led by Professor Donald McRae as a result

of the finding by the arbitration Tribunal; but we have to state, though, while

it is encouraging that Newfoundland and Labrador has been given approximately 70

per cent of the area in dispute, in time only geology will determine if our side

of the Sub-basin is rich in oil and gas reserves. Furthermore, the onus is on

the government to market our share of the Laurentian Sub-basin to the oil

companies and to ensure that we are fully prepared to reap maximum benefits from

the exploration and development of the resources in this area. We hope that

government has had the wisdom during this lengthy process, during this lengthy

dispute, to lay the groundwork to bring maximum benefits from petroleum

development in this area to Newfoundland and Labrador. Therefore, the question

that must be asked by members on this side of the House and indeed by the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador is: Are we ready? Are we ready for the great

opportunity that this decision has now presented to us?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, rise to congratulate the team that led the fight for this Province

in achieving the share of offshore that we deserve. I think it is important now

to encourage new development, now that the boundary dispute has been settled. It

also shows, Mr. Speaker, I think, the need to continue to fight over the

equalization system that is in place between this Province and Ottawa; because

all of these reserves, when they are developed, the potential for this Province

will not be realized until that is a much fairer system than it is today. We

have to be able to achieve, Mr. Speaker, the type of benefit in our offshore oil

and gas such as Alberta receives, Alaska, and other places that are benefitting

from their oil and gas reserves.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to advise hon.

members that on March 28, Husky Energy and Petro-Canada sanctioned this Province's

third offshore petroleum project known as White Rose.

Mr. Speaker, this project will provide numerous benefits to the people of the

Province. Over its ten to fifteen year life, it is expected to generate over

1,000 jobs, $500 million in royalties, and a $6.8 billion increase in the

Province's GDP.

The project proponents have committed to ensuring that 80 per cent of all

production phase employment will occur in this Province. Also, 80 per cent of

the development phase work that can reasonably be completed in this Province is

expected to take place in Newfoundland and Labrador. Provincial participation in

the strategically important areas of project management and engineering, as well

as topsides fabrication and installation, will be impressive. We will play a

substantially greater role in these critical areas than we did going into the

Terra Nova Project. This is in keeping with our goal of building stronger local

capabilities in the offshore industry with each successive project.

Mr. Speaker, government expects that the White Rose project will also

increase the demand for local supplies and services, creating new benefits and

opportunities for our business community. Our skilled workers will continue

strengthening their abilities, creating more opportunities for attracting future

work to the Province, and new infrastructure needed to attract and encourage new

development in the Province will be constructed and utilized.

This is also a very positive announcement for the Marystown Shipyard. As most

of you now know, Peter Kiewit and Sons have recently taken over ownership of the

yard. Also, Aker Maritime Kiewit, a joint venture between Peter Kiewit and Sons

and Aker Maritime of Norway, has been awarded the topsides fabrication contract

for the White Rose project. This means that the shipyard at Marystown will play

a major role in the White Rose project and new life will be injected into that

facility. The shipyard will be responsible for more than 60 per cent of the

total topsides fabrication work. This is expected to generate direct employment

at peak times of 500 to 600 workers at the Marystown facility over the next few

years. Additional topsides work will occur in other centres outside of

Marystown. St. John's will play an important role in topsides fabrication and

we are hopeful that Bull Arm will also be utilized. Across these facilities,

over 80 per cent of the Project's total topsides work will occur right here in

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, I am confident that the future of our petroleum industry holds

great promise for new exploration, discovery and development. I look forward to

the fourth quarter of 2005 when we will mark first oil from Newfoundland and

Labrador's third producing oil field - The White Rose Project.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We note that the proponents have made commitments to a high level of the work

being done in this Province if it is feasible to do so. We hope, and members on

this side, that the companies, government, and the fabrication industry commit

their very best efforts to capturing work for Newfoundland and Labrador and

ensuring that we realize the full potential of this energy development.

Mr. Speaker, the objective of capturing a large majority of the benefits from

an offshore development for Newfoundland and Labrador is nothing new. We had

similar assurances when Hibernia and Terra Nova were announced, but when we got

around to the details of the contracts on these projects a lot of the work that

we anticipated would be done here, and that we were capable of doing here, Mr.

Speaker, was not done here. So we have to be mindful of that. We have to ensure

that, once again, we truly reap the benefits of what this particular industry

means to us.

With respect to Marystown, Mr. Speaker, we have to realize that this

particular project could indeed have a very short lifespan. We have to do more

to ensure that the Marystown Shipyard is much more than just one project. In

other words, Mr. Speaker, much more than project specific, a start/stop facility

like Bull Arm. The government of this Province has to put in place a major

shipbuilding and ferry construction strategy that promises a long life and

stability to the Marystown Shipyard and the Burin Peninsula. What that

translates into, Mr. Speaker, is truly what is in the best interest -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: - for all of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to start by saying that we, too, are pleased to see that the

Marystown Shipyard will be utilized in this endeavour. We all know the history

of the Marystown Shipyard and the troubles that have been happening in that area

during the past number of years. It is great to see that they will receive some

work.

Mr. Speaker, I also note in the second paragraph of the Minister's

Statement, he talks about the Province receiving $500 million in royalties. He

does not say how much of that will actually remain in the Province after the

clawback provisions of the equalization formula is applied; how much of that

will remain in the Province to benefit the people here.

Also, Mr. Speaker, in the final paragraph the minister states that the

industry holds great promise for new exploration, discovery and development.

What is glaringly omitted, Mr. Speaker, is that there is no statement by this

government or by this minister that talks about vigorously pursuing -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. COLLINS: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. COLLINS: There is no omission or any statement by the minister, Mr.

Speaker, to the fact that this government is vigorously pursuing any secondary

development of these industries which, of course, is for the real benefit and

where the real jobs are for the people of the Province. Until that happens, Mr.

Speaker, we may have resources of oil and gas, but we do not have an oil and gas

industry.

Thank you.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance,

in her 2002 Budget, indicated: "...our deficit target can be achieved with

no cuts in social programs, no major public sector layoffs or wage

rollbacks..."

Mr. Speaker, according to announcements made since the Budget was brought

down it appears that more than 1,000 jobs stand to be eliminated; more than 200

teaching jobs will be cut, some 300 full-time equivalent public service

positions will go as a result of the 5 per cent reduction in government salary

budgets, and as well, recently about 500 reductions in health care have been

recommended by the HAY Report.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier if he considers the elimination of 1,000 jobs

to be minor?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A couple of weeks ago, when we brought down the Budget, we put forward a

fiscal plan that we can live within this year. We identified many areas that we

know are challenges. We all recognize in the current world we live in, based on

what happened in the economy of the country and internationally, we put forward

a plan that we believe is achievable. We also have recognized - for example, in

education, following the Sparkes-Williams report, there were recommendations to

take over 400 teachers out. We did not do that. We left those teachers in the

system.

Mr. Speaker, we also acknowledge, and we live the reality that you cannot be

all things to all people, but you have to do what is right. You have to put

forward a fiscal plan which you can live by. This year our government put

forward a wage increase for our public sector employees that showed the

greatest, general economic increase across the country because we believe they

deserve it and they need it. We stand by that.

Every budget has a fiscal plan. Our plan is there for all to see. What we are

doing now, with respect to the health care, with the analysis, this has been

talked about for many months. The record will show -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: - that we have increased our health budget by over 46

per cent over the last seven years. We are not cutting the system, we are living

within those increases.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance and the Premier made it very clear to the people of

this Province and the Members of this Legislature that there would be no

significant layoffs in this Province. It was very clear, unequivocally clear.

Mr. Speaker, the loss of 1,000 paycheques in a Province that has lost 55,000

people over the last five years is very bad news for the people of the Province

and indeed, the people of rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The impact of those

job losses will be absolutely devastating. Could the Premier please confirm that

a significant number of these job losses - in fact, I think 160 of 208 teaching

positions - will occur in rural Newfoundland and Labrador and will further

threaten the survival of our rural communities?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, one thing is becoming increasingly clear.

It is very easy to criticize when you do not have to assume responsibility for

delivering the services to the people of our Province.

Mr. Speaker, we put forward a fiscal plan. We recognize that we have to live

within a fiscal plan and yes, Mr. Speaker, we did implement a 5 per cent and 8

per cent reduction with respect to travel and operating. We also said that we

did not want people in our public sector to be laid off if their jobs were

considered urgent and critical to the delivery of public services.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to teachers, the plan for teachers is not my plan,

it is not the Minister of Education's plan, it is not the Premier's plan, it

is not the government's plan; it is the plan that was put forward by the

Sparkes-Williams report that was done in consultation -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It was done, Mr. Speaker, in consultation-

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) responsibility for it.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We assume full responsibility, Mr. Speaker. Let there be

no mistake, this government assumes full responsibility; but what we are saying,

Mr. Speaker, is that it is not the plan we devised as a government. It was a

plan devised by the Sparkes-Williams consultation group in consultation with the

school boards.

What the members opposite want to portray is that we have taken way too many

teachers out of the system. What we have done is followed the report this year,

acknowledging that over 200 teachers more are still left in the system, Mr.

Speaker. We all acknowledge, and members opposite would acknowledge, that there

is a declining student population.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: What we are doing, Mr. Speaker, is following those

recommendations that have been done at an arm's length perspective.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Anybody but us. This government continues to blame it on anybody but

themselves.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: (Inaudible), health boards, school boards.... God help the

new Commissioner of the Terms of Unions; I suppose they are going to blame all

those problems on whoever gets appointed for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Once again, the Premier is in the spring doldrums. He is

not interested enough to answer any questions about rural Newfoundland and

Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, using a very conservative multiplier, it is safe to assume that

one job in the public sector creates another two jobs elsewhere. Therefore,

total job losses associated with this budget would be in excess of 3,000 job

losses.

Can the Premier please tell this Legislature if he considers that to be

striking the balance, as indicated by the Minister of Finance, or is it just one

more broken promise by your government, Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I do recognize that we did a terrific job of striking the balance in the

budget, and it has been recognized in Newfoundland and Labrador by those people

who take a realistic look at these matters.

What is interesting today, Mr. Speaker, in the line of questioning, is again

that the Leader of the Opposition is showing his total consistency with being

inconsistent. Mr. Speaker, on the day of the Budget he criticized the fact that

our deficit was too big, that we were spending money we did not have. The line

of questioning today, Mr. Speaker, is this: that he suggests - erroneously, by

the way, totally in error about these particular layoffs because they do not

exist other than directly in teaching, Mr. Speaker.

The whole point, Mr. Speaker, is this: they are now suggesting, if you use

their math, the line of questioning is that we should be putting an extra $10

million or $11 million into the budget to leave the teachers in the system. So,

the deficit that was already too big on Budget day, if they were the government,

the suggestion is that they would make the deficit even bigger, Mr. Speaker.

That is the inconsistency of the argument.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador know exactly where we stand. They

always have the benefit of knowing what our plan is, in detail. They have no

idea, on any one day, what the Opposition stands for.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

PREMIER GRIMES: Because one day we are spending too much, and the next

day, a day like today, we are not spending enough, and they want more money

spent to have more teachers, to have more money spent on top of the extra

funding we have put into health care and to not do the reductions of 5 per cent

and 8 per cent -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

PREMIER GRIMES: - that we are doing in the public service with no layoffs

attached to it, Mr. Speaker. We would like to know what their real position is.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will tell you what we are doing, Premier. We are doing our job over here to

the best of our ability.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WILLIAMS: What you should do next year is look for the Oscars,

because you have better actors over there than we have anywhere in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: Now that I have your interest, and now that you are

interested in rural Newfoundland, why don't you explain to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador why you haven't bothered to permanently fill the

position -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WILLIAMS: - vacated by the Deputy Premier, who has flown the coop,

the Minister of Industry, Trade and Rural Development? Why haven't you put a

permanent -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I remind hon. members that questions ought to be directed towards the

Chair.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. WILLIAMS: My question for the Premier, Mr. Speaker, is: Why haven't

you filled that position permanently? Is it because you lack the talent in your

caucus or on your backbench? Is that why, Premier? Or is it because you lack

commitment -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, I remind the hon. member that the questions ought to be directed to

members of the Government through the Chair.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. WILLIAMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, my question for the Premier is: Would the Premier explain why he

has failed to fill that position permanently? Is it because his caucus and his

backbench lacks the talent to fill that position, or is it because he and his

government lack commitment to the people of rural Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, the line of questioning demonstrates, for the people of the Province,

perfectly again the inconsistency of the Opposition.

The Member for St. John's Centre, I think it is -

MS J.M. AYLWARD: No, that's me.

AN HON. MEMBER: East.

PREMIER GRIMES: St. John's East.

The Member for St. John's East, who was the spokesperson on all issues

while the Leader of the Opposition was vacationing and resting during Easter,

which he deserved and was the right thing to do, made the comment on behalf of

the Opposition that we should not be filling half the positions over here

because the Cabinet is too big. I take it, Mr. Speaker, that is the position of

the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER GRIMES: So, again, we do not know today - the people of the

Province do no know today - whether the Official Opposition thinks the Cabinet

is too big or the Cabinet is too small. We have a Cabinet of this size today for

a particular reason. We will always explain to the people of the Province what

our choices are, because we do make it clear. We do not have one person say one

thing on one day, and then somebody jump up the next day and say the exact

opposite, because it leads to total confusion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Mines and Energy.

Last week, the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board deferred its

offshore land sale for the year 2002, and this somewhat troubling decision has

raised many questions in the industry. Many people are simply asking, why? What

is government doing in response to C-NOPB's decision last week, or is it

simply prepared to sit on its hands and not question this significant decision

in any way?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In answer to the question, it is not a case of not questioning the actions of

C-NOPB. As a matter of fact, C-NOPB conferred with both myself, as Minister of

Mines and Energy for the Province, and the federal minister - we both concurred

that this year, given the results of land sales in the last couple of years, and

given the consolidation that is taking place in the industry because of

corporate mergers, et cetera, and given the fact that the plays now seem to be,

and the companies seem generally to be more interested in deep water plays and

deep water drilling, given the fact that there was a low-level of expression of

interest in land sales in shallow water areas last year, and we anticipated the

same this year, we thought it would be prudent to agree with the C-NOPB that

they would do this year as they have done in 1992 and 1994 when there were, in

those years prior to that, low land sales, to not have a sale this year, to

allow some of the consolidation in the industry to go forward, to allow them to

pursue the deep water drilling activities that they have planned; and also, in

anticipation of a very favorable ruling that we got on the boundary dispute, -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: - to allow time for C-NOPB, along with government -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: - to deal with the conversion of permits that were under

federal licensure to exploration permits under provincial C-NOPB licensure as a

result of the very favorable decision we got in the Laurentian Basin area. This

year will be a very, very significant and active year in terms of land issues -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister to now take his seat.

MR. MATTHEWS: - with respect to C-NOPB and ourselves.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister, in the context of

recent disturbing decisions in the industry - and I am referring specifically to

Exxon Mobil's decision to seek a transfer of its existing offshore licences

and, secondly, Chevron's decision to discontinue ongoing activity respecting

the Hebron-Ben Nevis project - in the context of those decisions, wouldn't it

have been better, Mr. Minister, to show a sense of promise and optimism and have

the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board not defer but, in fact, offer a

land sale that would show the optimism that this particular industry needs at

this time?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I guess it is a matter of perspective in terms

of how you look at things in life. The hon. member, the critic, chooses to view

a couple of decisions that were recently taken as being very negative and very

dismal with respect to the offshore, but we happen to take the view that we have

had some very, very good days in terms of offshore announcements recently.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: We acknowledge that the standing down of the Hebron-Ben

Nevis project was not something that we welcomed. We said that quite clearly. I

expressed my disappointment. I have been talking regularly recently with respect

to the fact that we need to get refocused on the whole issue of additional

exploration in the offshore. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, we also acknowledge

that there is a third major project worth $2.35 billion in investment going

forward since this House last met. We acknowledge that we have achieved about

80-odd per cent of the Laurentian Basin under our management for jurisdictional

purposes with respect to the offshore. We acknowledge, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: I'm sorry?

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. minister to conclude his answer.

MR. MATTHEWS: I will conclude my answer.

We acknowledge, Mr. Speaker, what is good that is happening in the Province.

The startup of the Marystown Shipyard tied to the offshore activity is another

positive announcement. The hon. member can focus on what is not happening, we

choose to focus on what is happening and work on the problems and the challenges

in areas (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Members ought to wait until they are recognized by the Chair, otherwise

Hansard will not be able to record what the member is asking.

A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We acknowledge much of what the minister has just said and we said as much in

terms of our response to the ministerial statement, but we must also recognize

what has happened with respect to the decision by Exxon Mobile and the decision

concerning Chevron. C-NOPB, Mr. Speaker, has used very vague and uncertain

descriptions of its reason for this deferral. For example, officials of C-NOPB

are quoted as saying: we think that our offshore area is going through a period

of transition. They also say, Mr. Speaker, the industry itself is in a period of

transition. Is such a weak declaration and explanation, I ask the minister,

satisfactory to him? Will government tell the people of the Province why a

deferral at this time is truly taking place?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I am more than happy to tell the people of the

Province why -as best we can tell and judge with respect to working with the

industry - there has been a diminished interest in land sales in shallow water

areas such as the Jeanne d'Arc Basin. It is based, number one, Mr. Speaker,

and premised on the proposition that most of the major discoveries is predicted

to have already taken place in the Jeanne d'Arc Basin. It is based on the fact

that the companies are now focusing more in deep water plays. It is based on the

fact that while over the last fifteen years we have had some very successful

land sales, there have been some years - I think it was 1991 and 1993 - where we

have had some very low land sales.

Mr. Speaker, the land sales issue is an activity that goes forward year over

year, or is deferred year over year, based on the expressed level of interest by

the industry in them having access to land sale options in a particular year. At

this particular point, the level of interest being expressed by the oil

companies in the areas that are yet unexplored was at a level where we deemed

it, and we agreed with C-NOPB's analysis, actually, that it would be better to

defer this year to allow the industry consolidation to take place, and to await

the ruling of the boundary dispute -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to take his seat.

MR. MATTHEWS: - which we are very delighted was favourable to us and

which will spur significant new development exploration-wise.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of

Education. Mr. Speaker, wall-to-wall concerts this Juno weekend certainly

demonstrated to Canada, as a Nation, and certainly the Canadian Music Industry,

that the talent pool in this Province is second to none. But I ask, Mr. Speaker:

How many of the talented musicians were turned on to music by their teachers in

the schools? Susan Knight, renowned Director of the Newfoundland and Labrador

Symphony Youth Choir says that is where she got her start. How many young

athletes, how many young artists, got their start in school as well?

Mr. Speaker, I say it is impossible to remove 208 teachers from our school

system this year without seriously impacting programs, especially specialist

programs like music, art and physical education.

Can the minister, I say, Mr. Speaker, tell how many music teachers, how many

phys. ed. teachers, how many art teachers, are lost as a result of the minister's

decision to take 208 teachers out of the classrooms of this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the member opposite knows full well that we have

left 218 teachers in the system -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: - at a cost of $13 million to the taxpayers of this Province.

Clearly, if we were to follow the formula spelled out in the Sparkes-Williams

Report, Mr. Speaker, we would, in fact, see many more teachers removed from the

system. This government made a conscious decision not to remove that number of

teachers, because we recognize that we want to ensure we have as many programs

as possible, the best quality educational system in the country.

Mr. Speaker, for the information of the members opposite, we, in fact, have

the best pupil-teacher ratio in the country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: In fact, Mr. Speaker, if you look at our numbers, we have

thirteen point four students for every one teacher, compared with sixteen for

every one across the country. Mr. Speaker, we are very proud of our record of

education in this Province and the commitment that we have given to ensure that

we take care of the students in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again I say to the minister, I am talking

about programing and the lost of programing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Let me be more specific, Mr. Speaker. The Avalon East

School Director, Mr. Shortall, recently said his board would have to make

serious adjustments throughout the district, even going so far as cancelling

advanced placement math, in order to accommodate the loss of forty-one teachers.

Now, the minister knows, Mr. Speaker, that our students' math performance on

the last standard Achievement Indicators Program test declined since 1997.

So, I ask the minister: Are we facing even more decline in critical math

skills as a result of the minister's decision to take out 208 teachers?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: On the contrary, Mr. Speaker. In fact, we are doing everything

we can to enhance our mathematical skills for our students.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: In fact, Mr. Speaker, we have introduced a new math curriculum

because we recognize that we have had some problems with our math in this

Province. In fact, the testing that the member refers to is testing that was

done on the previous curriculum, not the new, improved and enhanced math

curriculum that we have introduced in our Province.

Mr. Speaker, let me say again that it is not the intention of this government

to do anything to reduce programs that our students are getting in our school

system. On the contrary, Mr. Speaker. It is our intention to enhance those

programs and we continue to do that on a daily basis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Health and Community Services who

presented to the Romanow Commission this morning. During his presentation he

said that government is skeptical about user fees for things like doctor visits

and emergency room visits because it will likely result in discouraging people

who cannot afford the services to get the help they need. He also said that

government would consider privatization of some publicly funded hospital

services such as diagnostic testing.

My question to the minister is this: is he considering privatization of our

health care system? Is he skeptical about it or is he opposed to it, Mr.

Speaker, which the vast majority of the people of this Province are opposed to

the privatization of our health care system?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I commend the hon. member for having the interest to be at the hearings this

morning. Important hearings they are, as they certainly are an important move

towards trying to address and redress some of the major health concerns in this

Province, and indeed in this country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. SMITH: To the issue that the hon. member raises, in terms of the

diagnostic services, he will recall if he looked at - the reference in the

presentation was, in fact, based on information that was gleaned from the forums

that were held by my predecessor throughout the Province. This is one of the

issues that was pursued by stakeholders who participated in that. They were

asked to respond to a number of issues related to health care and the delivery

of health care services in this Province. The reference in that is indeed, to

that.

Also, if the hon. member would be fair in terms of quoting from the

presentation, it was certainly clear in my presentation to the Commissioner,

that at this point in time, in this Province, the support, the direction of this

government - and that has been reinforced by the people of the Province - is to

a health care system that is fully funded and supported by the public purse, and

certainly, in terms of the private health care, as the hon. member is trying to

suggest, is not a route that we are prepared to go.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr .Speaker.

That is the very problem.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: He said in his presentation this morning that, at the current

time the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is opposed to the private

purchase of medically necessary services.

My question to the minister is this: Is this a temporary position that the

government holds, or is it committed to fighting for a full publicly-funded

health care system and not go down the road of user fees and privatization that

has happened in other provinces with other governments?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, the hon. member is, in my opinion, playing games with a very serious

issue. When we are speaking through this House -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SMITH: - to the people of this Province who are sitting at home today

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is willing to tolerate interruptions at particular times, but

members are now beginning to interrupt constantly and continuously and ignoring

the Chair when he calls order, so I am asking hon. members to please respect the

order and the decorum in this House.

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, getting back to the issue that the hon. member has raised, I think it

is a very important issue. I think it is very important that the record be set

straight. The hon. member, in my opinion, is suggesting that this government and

this minister is somehow communicating to the people of the Province that we do

not have the commitment to sustain and make sure that health care is available

to all the citizens of the Province. That was not the message that was conveyed

by this minister in the report that was presented to the Commissioner this

morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: I am surprised, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member would rise

in his place this afternoon and suggest that he is saying to me: Well, you said

at this point in time....

Mr. Speaker, I or any minister can only deal with the reality as we find it

today. If the hon. member is asking me -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SMITH: - to look twenty, thirty, forty years out and see what the

landscape is going to be or what the situation is going to be, and prognosticate

or make predictions on the basis of what or what may not be -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. SMITH: - that is the not the situation. The issue at hand here, as

was demonstrated today, is that we are committed to publicly-funded health care

in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Time for one quick question.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, my question today is for the newly appointed

acting economic czar of rural Newfoundland and Labrador, the Minister of Justice

and acting Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. An important question.

In documents obtained from his department, it is clear that this government's

use of consultants is both flagrant, is without guidance, is without merit, and

I would like to ask him today: Could he table, for this House, a set of criteria

or guidelines on how his department and his government, and his Premier, choose

consultants. Why is it, in choosing such consultants, that public tenders are

not offered? And, could he table the contracts for those consultants that they

have already hired, and what they actually do, either for the government or for

the people of the Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and Attorney General.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr .Speaker.

I have only been there a very short time, but with regard to the information

requested, by all means, whatever the guidelines are that the department uses

for hiring consultants, I would be more than happy to table those here. This

government, true to form, its mantra is openness and accountability. Anything

that can be, shall be tabled in this House, as requested.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I give notice of two motions, both of which are

related. One depends on the other, actually. It is setting up the Estimates

Committees and naming the members to those committees. Mr. Speaker, I give

notice and ask leave that the following Heads of Expenditure -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, if hon. members wish to converse across the House, I suggest that they

do it outside the Chamber. The Chair has recognized the hon. the Government

House Leader and he should be the only member speaking in the House now.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I give notice and by leave move that the following

Heads of Expenditure be referred to the Government Services Committee: Municipal

and Provincial Affairs; Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation;

Environment; Works, Services and Transportation; Finance; Public Service

Commission; Government Services and Lands. And, that the following Heads of

Expenditure be referred to the Resource Committee: Fisheries and Aquaculture;

Forest Resources and Agrifoods; Mines and Energy; Tourism, Culture and

Recreation; Industry, Trade and Rural Development; Labrador & Aboriginal

Affairs. And, that the following Heads of Expenditure be referred to the Social

Services Committee; Education; Youth Services and Post-Secondary Education;

Human Resources and Employment; Labour; Health and Community Services; and

Justice.

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

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, to the related motion, I give notice and by leave

move that the following committees be composed of the following members:

Government Services Committee: the hon. the Member for Carbonear- Harbour

Grace; the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis; the hon. the Member for Humber

East; the hon. the Member for Bay of Islands; the hon. the Member for

Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair; the hon. the Member for Labrador West; and the

hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

The Resource Committee: the hon. the Member for Conception Bay East &

Bell Island; the hon. the Member for The Straits & White Bay North; the hon.

the Member for Burin-Placentia West; the hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale;

the hon. the Member for Port de Grave; the hon. the Member for St. John's

South; and, the hon. the Member for Carbonear- Harbour Grace.

Finally, the Social Services Committee: the hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair; the hon. the Member for Placentia & St. Mary's; the hon. the

Member for Harbour Main -Whitbourne; the hon. the Member for Trinity North; the

hon. the Member for Burin-Placentia West; the hon. the Member for Port de Grave;

and, finally, the hon. the Member for Humber East.

MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question?

You have heard the motions.

All those in favour, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay.

Motions carried.

Petitions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present yet another petition which I received today. As a

matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I spoke to the Mayor of Nippers Harbour just a few

hours ago. She said she is sick and tired of sending petitions to this House of

Assembly because of a gravel road that she sees still, in the year 2002,

seventeen kilometers of gravel road leading to their community.

Mr. Speaker, she writes a couple of interesting points also. That community

has been, in the past, and has a history of being, a prosperous fishing

community. Some nine longliners are still down there and some thirty-one small

boats still using that facility, that harbour there. She says throughout her

petition about how they feel that they have contributed to this Province and

deserve at least some attention to it.

When you think about it, Mr. Speaker, besides the gravel road and the safety

measures and so on, she really stressed again this morning the fact that the

school children still get up at 7:00 a.m. and take this seventeen kilometers of

gravel road again. At the same time, then they go on to the La Scie Highway,

which is one of the oldest and worst-conditioned roads in the Province. So they

are hit by both: the gravel road, which is deplorable, and at the same time they

go on to the La Scie Highway, which is probably worse again. So, they have been

hit twice. To ride on those buses with those school children, which I have done,

just to experience it, there is no wonder that children do not feel like going

to school in the morning when they have to face that every single morning. I

wonder how many Members of this House of Assembly would like to face that every

morning, Mr. Speaker. I do not think very many.

The fact is this: The roads in this Province over the years, especially over

the last decade, are now, I believe, out of control. We have still over 900

kilometers of gravel road, as the minister knows, not counting the gravel roads

still in Labrador - that is just on the Island portion - 900 kilometers of

gravel road; and, further to that, still another 1,500 kilometers at least -

these are at least, conservative numbers - of pavement in this Province that is

twenty-five years or over.

Again, the minister stands up this year, and he knows as well as anybody else

that the demand for road work in this Province has gotten out of control. As one

person described it in the district: It is like a bad credit card that has just

gotten out of control. For the last five or six years - I will even go back

further, Mr. Speaker - there has been an average of some $16 million to $20

million of money by this government spent on provincial roads around this

Province. A lot of people get confused by it some years when the government puts

out their budget and talks about $100 million. Well, the truth is, Mr. Speaker,

a lot of that is Roads for Rail money doing work on the Trans-Canada main trunk

roads. The truth is that this government has put somewhere in the area of $18

million to $20 million in provincial roads money in this Province for the last

five or six years, and maybe even longer; I have not gone back that far. At the

same time, we still see a community that has being giving to this Province,

trying to take care of themselves, and still going over those potholes. On top

of all that, the mayor this morning tells me that she phoned the depot to just

have the road graded and the people at the depot, the minister's own employees

out there trying to do the best they can, Mr. Speaker, told her that it was no

good to go over it because it is no good to even grade the roads anymore. It is

not even worth sending a grader over there. How far it has gone when it comes to

gravel roads in this Province.

Tomorrow, I have another petition here from another area of the Province in

Jackson's Cove and Harry's Harbour. The same situation, gravel roads. Then I

go talking to people who use the La Scie Highway, twenty-five or twenty-six year

old pavement that is deplorable. As a matter of fact, the word used lately is

impassable.

I have been out to the minister's district just a few days ago.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just to conclude.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. SHELLEY: There is a lot of work that needs to be done. A long-term

plan is needed, Mr. Speaker. It is no good every year stepping up to the plate

at the last minute to see who is going to scramble the most for the last few

dollars. The truth is, Mr. Speaker, the idea is to have a long-term plan so we

can really address the problems of roads in this Province, which is not being

done by this Administration.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition to present today on behalf of residents of Labrador West.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in

Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned residents...

WHEREAS the Labrador Transportation Initiative Fund was set up with $347.6

million from the federal government for transportation in Labrador; and

WHEREAS this Fund requires that money in the Fund be used for the maintenance

of marine and ferry services to Labrador, construction of the Trans-Labrador

Highway, and other initiatives related to transportation in Labrador; and

WHEREAS the Liberal government announced in its 2002 Budget that $97 million

would be taken out of this Fund and added to the general revenues of the

Province to be used for purposes outside this Act.

We, the undersigned petitioners, believe that the raiding of the Labrador

Transportation Initiative Fund is a gross violation of the purposes of the Fund

and a breach of trust with the people of Labrador and hereby petition the House

of Assembly to direct the government to immediately reverse this decision and

that the money in this Fund be spent solely on transportation initiatives within

Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the roads in Labrador are in continuous need of upgrading. To

take the money from this Fund and spend it for purposes other than outlined in

the Fund itself is irresponsible of this government and should not be allowed.

Mr. Speaker, if you drive the roads in Labrador, all of them are gravel roads

with the exception of the streets within the communities. A

section of pavement

from the Quebec border - I say to members opposite, if they want to stand up and

talk on this subject, they will have ample opportunity to do so during the

Budget debate. Right now I would appreciate it if they would give me the

opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to say what I have to say on behalf of the people I

represent.

Mr. Speaker, the

section of paved highway from the Quebec border to the towns

of Labrador West is in a state of disrepair. It is heavy construction and heavy

traffic that uses that highway and there are ruts in it that make it dangerous

for the public when they are driving to and from the nearby Town of Fermont. In

addition, Mr. Speaker, all other roads are gravel, and this time of the year in

particular need a fair amount of money spent on them to keep them up to par, to

any kind of condition that will allow you to drive without doing serious damage

to your vehicle and making it indeed unsafe to drive at all.

I have been on sections of that road during the Easter break, Mr. Speaker,

and I can tell you that the sections of road that I have driven in the last week

or two certainly need a lot of work done right now. It needs grading

continuously and, as the government pointed out by taking this money - $97

million - all we get in return is a promise that work will be done six years

after the EIS study is completed.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certain that I will have -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Chair would like to remind hon. members that before presenting

petitions to the House, the petition ought to be cleared with the Table Officers

in the House. I understand that has not been done. There is no way that I can

judge whether or not the petition is in order unless some of the people at the

Table have had an opportunity to see it. So if members are not going to

cooperate in this respect, then if a point of order is raised the Chair will

rule the petition out of order.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition. The petition reads:

To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative session

convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland;

WHEREAS the roads in the areas of Jamestown and Winter Brook are in very poor

condition and are in desperate need of paving;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of Newfoundland to pave

approximately 1 kilometre of road in Jamestown and approximately 6 kilometres of

road leading to and including part of the community of Winter Brook, as in duty

bound your petitioners will every pray.

Mr. Speaker, over this past two weeks with the thawing and with some of the

wet weather that we have had, I have had numerous calls from people living in

Winter Brook complaining about the conditions of the dirt road that leads to

their community. Back in 1995, this particular road was upgraded and made ready

for paving. Up until the present day - and at that time, I might add, the people

in Winter Brook were led to believe, and promised, that this particular

section

of road would be paved the following year.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Government House Leader is trying to get my

attention across the floor. I know that he is familiar with this

section of road

because this

section of road was at one time in the district that he

represented, the District of Terra Nova. It is a

section of road where people

have been putting forward their plea since I have represented them in 1996.

Since I live in close proximity to the communities of Winter Brook and

Jamestown, I talk to people there on a regular basis. I know what their needs

are and I know that the first desire that those people have right now is to have

that particular road paved. They are not coming forward here. Nobody has ever

asked me for any other services. Nobody asked me to provide street lights in

Jamestown or Winter Brook. Nobody has come forward and said that we need a sewer

system or we need a water system put in those communities. Mr. Speaker, their

pleas to government, their pleas to me, have always been one item: Give us a

decent road to travel over.

We are living in the twenty-first Century and there are not a lot of places,

I say to people opposite, that do not have the luxury - I suppose I can call it

a luxury - and do not have the convenience of being able to open their windows

in the summertime. They do not have the convenience of being able to hang their

clothes on the line, which is a common thing around Newfoundland and Labrador.

The people in Winter Brook and Jamestown have never been able to do that unless

government came forward and put some kind of a solution of calcium chloride on

the road, which then is tracked in over their floors, over their houses and

causes another problem. The people in Winter Brook and Jamestown have been

unanimous in asking government, and asking the minister, to be included this

year in a capital works program to have the main road leading to their

communities paved.

Mr. Speaker, I would say that it would probably be the cheapest pavement that

we could lay this year on this Island. The road has been upgraded. The road has

been made ready for paving, but because it has been since 1995 that this

particular road was upgraded, now we find that the class A material that was put

on the road to give it the kind of -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: - top that it needed, is now out in the ditch or plowed

away because of the continuous operation of looking after the roads.

Mr. Speaker, I understand my time has lapsed here but I put in the plea to

the minister, again, to include this

section of road when he brings forward his

capital budget in the coming weeks.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, Motion 5, the hon. the Minister of Environment to

ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act Respecting The Control And

Management Of Water Resources In The Province, Bill 4.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Environment to introduce a bill, "An

Act Respecting The Control And Management Of Water Resources In The

Province," carried. (Bill 4)

On motion, Bill 4 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. LUSH: Motion 1, Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Finance and

President of Treasury Board, to move "That This House Approves in General

the Budgetary Policy of the Government." I know that a lot of hon. members

want to speak in favour of that motion.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly thank members on both sides of the House for that warm applause.

I am not so confident, I say, Mr. Speaker, that I can agree with the Government

House Leader, that we are going to approve in general the budgetary policy of

this government. I can assure you the policies of this government have not been

one that creates much excitement, I might tell you, on this side of the House,

certainly from an endorsement perspective, I might add.

While it took about an hour and six minutes to read this by the minister on

Budget Day, it probably took endless hours to put in the political word and try

to put the cosmetics to make it sound like they were giving us a good document

for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I did not know where we were living, Mr. Speaker. I thought

we were in Alberta, where we just eliminated the debt in Alberta; when we talked

about a glowing economy, outstripped this country in economic growth. I did not

know what the minister was going to do with all the surplus revenue she was

taking in. Then she tells us: there is a $93 million deficit; but she did not

tell us the real truth. Now the real truth will come out in late November of

this year when the public accounts will be tabled in this House. We will find

out what the real truth is. She stood in this House last year and told us the

budget was only going to be just over a $30 million deficit and came back this

year and had $63 million after failing to take into consideration another $300

million or $400 million. Just to look at it on the surface, Mr. Speaker, just a

few aspects of that budget.

The budget that the minister read in this House, putting forth the government's

proposal in the fiscal manner for this year, showed that there is going to be an

operating deficit, she indicated, of $93 million; but the minister did not tell

the real truth, did not tell the real story. The real story is in the public

accounts and the Auditor General's Report. That is the story that will tell us

that this government over the last four years, excluding this past immediate

year, ran up a debt of $1 billion. In this fiscal year we will see what the debt

is after the public accounts come out. I am predicting it is going to be another

$500 million put on top of that debt.

Can you imagine, this government has put us $1.5 billion in debt over the

last five years. So much so that the second highest payments that we make in

this Province now is paying interest on that debt. Hundreds and hundreds of

millions of dollars a year we are paying out to pay the debt. We pay more out to

pay on the debt than we pay in every other single government department, except

the Department of Health and Community Services. If we had those hundreds of

millions of dollars - in that five period it is in the billions, that we spent

on servicing the debt; a debt that is allowed to escalate and get out of

control. We are told what a fantastic economy you have, how great our Province

is. We stand up and try to tell the real truth, that it is not as great as this

government is telling us. They say we are fear mongers, we are negative, and we

are putting forward - they call us what? Nattering nabobs of negativity,

basically. They try to say we are because we try to tell the truth of what is

happening in the budget.

If you look at the $93 million - just look on the surface. Lets not look at

the cruel method of accounting even. Lets look on the surface at just a few big

items that this government falsified or put forward in a wrong perspective in

this budget. The Labrador Transportation Initiative - a fund set aside - they

took $97 million of that and put it into the revenue category of our Province.

We received that as a revenue from the federal government back in 1998; we

received that from the federal government.

MR. MANNING: What did Roger Grimes say about that?

MR. SULLIVAN: I will get to that, I say to my colleague from Placentia

& St. Mary's. I will get to those particular aspects a little later, but

they took $97 million - that we have now received it twice. We double count it,

we are counting it again.

On top of that $97 million, put that on top of the $93 million that is

showing, we have a $190 million deficit just on these items. Then let us look a

little further. Let's look at what we are doing with deferred revenues, for

example. There are $51.7 million that this government is taking in deferred

revenues. What does that mean? That means it is money we had last year and

should have gone on the books of last year, but they said: oh no, we won't use

that because our financial position will look good, it will show a surplus on

operating. We will keep this and put it into next year; $51.7 million of that.

That is manipulation, and the Auditor General identified it as such,

manipulating to get whatever result you want with the finances of our Province.

The minister used another term on it here, that I will get to in due course.

If you look at that $51.7 million in deferred revenue, revenue that was in

last year's Budget that they are counting this year, that came primarily from

the Sinking Funds. Now, there is $28.7 million of that which was in Sinking

Funds. They had the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation; they budgeted

last year for $10 million and they did not take it. They are taking it this

year. They have taken the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation, another $10 million,

and in GIPCO, the Gull Island Power Company under Newfoundland, we say in

Labrador Hydro, another $3 million. You add these up and you will $51.7 million.

Put that on top of the $190 million I talked about and we are up to $241.7

million. Put on top of that, the money we took out of Newfoundland and Labrador

Hydro, dividends, this year's budget, we are looking at $44 million worth of

dividends we are taking out off Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, and we are

taking another $14 million in guarantee fees, for $58 million. Put them all

together and what do we have? Three hundred million dollars. Three hundred

million dollars should be the operating deficit, not the actual real deficit.

That is going to be more like $500 million.

Mr. Speaker, we are not getting a true picture. This Budget is a false

budget. It is a document written for political purposes and to put forth a

political goal, not to represent truly the financial affairs of this Province.

We have been advocating in our party that we should be presented with the facts.

Whether they are good or whether they are bad, the people of the Province should

be told the actual truth and given the proper figures. If this government has

not done it, I can guarantee you, if this side of the House comes into power, it

will be done immediately. We will be going through an accrual system of

accounting. We will be getting the full picture, and we will be seeing it

exactly as it is, because the people of this Province do not need to be given

the cosmetics, the flashy stuff that is not true, and not given the actual

figures that are there. Usually the Budget, with all the flare, comes out with

all areas, the cosmetics, to make it sound good, and we will get the true

picture in late November or early December when we see the public accounts; much

less fanfare, much less visibility, and that is when we will get the real truth.

The truth should be on Budget Day. The truth should be here in this House of

Assembly, Mr. Speaker, and the people of the Province have and deserve a right

to know.

When you look at revenues, where is our Province going in terms of revenues?

Just look at one item of revenue I just want to touch on briefly, the payroll

tax. Now, the payroll tax is a tax called the health and post-secondary

education tax. It came in as a tax - health and post-secondary education.

Right now, do you realize that governments are now paying 53 per cent of the

payroll tax and our Province pays 42 per cent itself? Forty-two per cent of what

we take in, in payroll tax, we pay it ourselves. We take it in and pass it out.

In other words, payroll tax would be 58 per cent less, a 58 per cent difference,

only 58 per cent of what it is now, we are paying ourselves and spending

ourselves. That is an in and out item. It does not register. The federal

government is paying another 9 per cent, and municipalities 2 per cent. So,

levels of governments are paying 53 per cent of the payroll tax. Businesses pay

47 per cent.

When you look at the Budget here and see what the payroll tax is, and what we

contributed here, we look at the payroll tax here as being 84.5 You look at 47

per cent of that and we are talking about only $40 million is coming from

businesses. Should we have it anyway? We have always been a strong opponent of

payroll tax. Don't you think, if we were not collecting that, that our economy

would not be hamstrung by an anti-job tax?

When you put a tax on jobs, that is what it is; it is a tax on jobs. The more

jobs you create, the more you pay. Isn't that the wrong way to promote jobs

and growth in our economy? Shouldn't you give a reward probably? Maybe we

should reward people for creating jobs. Maybe we should be rewarding businesses

for showing the initiative to expand its company, to increase its payroll, to go

out and grow in the market, not penalize them for doing so.

Maybe the time has come. The time has long come, I say, Mr. Speaker, to look

at getting rid of a very negative tax that is frustrating business and

frustrating economic growth here in our Province. One, by the way, that our

Province pays half of that itself. Can you imagine? We tax ourselves $40 million

a year. We pay it to ourselves then we pay it out, an in and out item.

Municipalities in our Province pay another couple of per cent of that. When

you look at it overall we have seen, basically, no increase this year in

provincial revenues due to growth in the economy. When the economy grows - the

minister stood and boasted about the tremendous growth we are facing in the

economy of Newfoundland and Labrador. Tremendous growth she has indicated; but,

when you increase growth it creates jobs. We are being told that the employment

level is at its highest in our history. There are more people employed today in

Newfoundland and Labrador than ever before. What does that tell you? That tells

you there should be an increase in personal income. There should be an increase

in real disposable income when you get an increase in jobs and increased growth

in the economy.

I am just going to get to that in a second. I am going to look a little

closer at that, and why we are not getting that, and look at comparisons to what

it used to be.

Use provincial revenues, for example. Shouldn't we get more provincial

revenues if our economy is so robust? Let's look at what we got last year.

Last year we took in, they are indicating, $2,223,398,000 we took in last year

in provincial sources of revenue in our Province. What are we proposing to take

in this year? If you count the Labrador Transportation Initiative, which we

already have in a fund, we are not taking that in so we cannot count that, do

not count that, and we are taking in $2,176,420,000 we are taking in this year

in provincial source revenues. How much is that? That is $57 million less we are

taking in, in revenues this year from provincial sources, than we took in last

year. In other words, our Province - those are figures that are here in this

Budget, taken right from this Budget as produced - we are taking in $57 million

less dollars in provincial sources of revenues this year.

Can you tell me, in a growing economy with the highest job numbers we have

ever had, when growth and economy increases personal income because more jobs,

more income, there should be more taxes paid. You should have more real

disposable income on that. Why isn't there more provincial revenue? Why are we

seeing a decrease of $57 million budgeted in provincial revenues?

MR. NOEL: (Inaudible) taxes.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, I am getting to that.

Last year in provincial taxes we took in - I say to the Minister of

Government Services and Lands, the minister who said: taxes. Income tax last

year brought us in $612 million. This year we are proposing $611 million. Yes, a

loss of $1 million in an economy that is growing; tremendous economic growth,

leading the country in GDP growth. You have to realize you can lead in GDP

growth, but real GDP growth, not nominal growth. Nominal growth means nothing if

the jobs are not staying in our Province, if they are going to the Eastern

Seaboard.

Answer this: How can we have the most prosperous economy ever, the greatest

growth - when growth produces more disposable income, more personal income, why

are we are taking in less income tax? Why are we taking in $57 million less

dollars in revenue in our Province this year if we are not taking any more tax

cuts? By the way, we have increased tobacco tax $14.5 million. We would have

taken in $14.5 million - if we did not have the tobacco tax increase - and add

that on to $57 million. We would be $71.5 million less in revenue this year than

last year. Answer that. Can anybody out there give us the economic sense or

rationale, why we are growing in the economy and we are not getting the revenues

associated with it? I will tell you why; because the growth in GDP is a nominal

GDP growth. It is not a growth that is putting the jobs in our Province. Most of

the growth there last year, the year before last - most of the increase in

growth, not the growth. Most of the increase in GDP growth came from oil

revenues of which do not create extra jobs in our Province. The jobs are created

whether - if you had to be processing jobs here in our Province, you get - the

economic rents on this are staying in our Province and therefore you are getting

the jobs created here in our Province.

The minister even said here in the Budget, on page two: "For 2002,

employment is expected to reach a new record high and the unemployment rate

could decline further, possibly to its lowest level since 1989. This will

contribute to higher personal income and real disposable income. For the first

time retail sales are expected to surpass $5 billion." Why then, minister,

are all of these figures going up and provincial revenue is $71.5 million - if

you leave out the tobacco tax increase? Count the tobacco tax, $57 million less.

There is an answer for that, the economy is not growing in real growth. We are

getting nominal growth.

The jobs from our oil are going to the Eastern Seaboard and other parts of

this country. They are not going here in our Province. We are not being the

major beneficiaries of the Atlantic Accord. We are not the recipients of our

resources, and we are not benefitting a fraction of the federal government. It

is estimated that the federal government benefits ten times more on offshore oil

than we are going to benefit; ten times the benefit. You look at a comparison of

$269 million to our Province for about $2.35 billion federal. It is crazy. It is

outrageous that we cannot even claim one-tenth of what the federal government

claims on resources from our Province in their benefits and in their clawback on

equalization. It is not proper, I say, Mr. Speaker. It is not right.

When you look at GDP growth - it is a very interesting thing when you look at

GDP growth. I want to make reference to a comparison between GDP growth and

personal income in our Province. Let's compare our Province - let's go back

to the 1980s in our Province and look at where our GDP was, right up to the

present time, and what our personal disposable income was in our Province. This

is taken at 1997 prices - so we can make a comparison based on 1997 prices. In

1981, for example, when our GDP was $8 billion, our personal disposable income

then was at about $6,800. There was a fair comparison right through into the

1980s. In the mid-1980s, right into the late 1980s, we saw a very consistent

comparison or graph between our Gross Domestic Product and our personal

disposable income. We went through the early 1990s - we got into 1995. In the

mid-1990s we saw a fair parallel. As GDP went up, personal disposable income

went up accordingly, until we got into the mid-1990s. What happened then? We

seen something tremendous happen, something very negative for our Province. For

example, in 1992, about $8,400 was the personal disposable income. If you look

at in total billions - let's look at the total - we had about $8.4 billion in

total personal disposable income in our Province in the early 1990s, when the

GDP was just over $10 billion. In other words, it was 80-some per cent, the

personal disposable income of the GDP.

Let's look at 1995 as an example; personal disposable income was about

eight point five and the GDP rose up to eleven, which dropped to less than 80

per cent of GDP. Where are we today? Let's look at 2000. GDP has reached

almost $13 billion and personal disposable income was still at eighty-five,

eighty-six; eight point five, eight point six. In other words, it was only

60-some per cent of our GDP. What does that tell you? It means, in fact, our

personal disposable income did not go down. In fact, in 1989, when this

government came to power, our personal disposable income was about $8.3 billion.

Today it is about $8.6 billion. There has been no change in the personal

disposable income in our Province in the last thirteen years. We have seen GDP

grow from that time, from the time they came to power, from about 10.2 up to in

the 14 range. So, we have seen a 40 per cent increase in GDP, but we have seen

no increase in thirteen years in personal disposable income.

Now, what does that tell us? That tells us our policies are failing, they are

not creating jobs and employment in our Province, they are not putting money in

the pockets of consumers, they are not putting money into our economy, and we

are getting a false sense of growth by a lot of jobs that are low paying jobs.

They are close to minimum wage jobs. The economy is growing and the value of the

export of our goods and services has increased. Why? It increased because we are

exporting commodities at a high value but we are not creating the jobs back

here.

Look at the fishery, as an example. When the groundfishery constituted a

significant part of our Province, at a lower market price, a very high number of

people worked and a lot of jobs, a lot of income paid, a lot of revenues in our

Province, and so on. Today we are dealing with only half as many plant workers

in our Province over the last decade, half as many. Many of these out there can't

get enough to qualify for EI, basically. The average plant worker in

Newfoundland and Labrador, over the last year, made $5,500 working and another

$5,500 on EI; $11,000.

We have spread our resources so thin, now nobody can survive. We are

spreading poverty. The Member for The Straits & White Bay North said, we are

spreading poverty. That is what has happened. People cannot qualify. It is going

to be worse this year in many areas. We have taken twenty-some thousand workers,

and it is down to eleven, and we don't have labour intensive types of

products, as the groundfish was. That has been one part of the problem, the

discrepancy between GDP and the personal disposable income.

There are other areas. Look at the jobs that were created in the forestry, at

the manufacturing level, and look at what is happening now -

MR. REID: Any more room for crab licences?.

MR. SULLIVAN: Any more room? The Minister of Fisheries is asking me for

advice now on crab licences. You should have asked your predecessor. I would say

to him, he should have asked his predecessor. John Effort, a former Minister of

Fisheries, will go down in history in this Province as the worse Fisheries

Minister we have ever seen in the history of this Province, I can tell you that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I can tell you, the clock has been set back twenty years in

the fishing industry of this Province, and we will have a job to come out of it.

The minister knows full well what I am talking about, basically, in terms of the

industry. You might profess to be a prophet out in the land, but history will

show. People out there in the short term, you consider to be great, but what you

do, your actions, determine your place in history along the way. That is why I

have said - and it might be an unpopular statement, and I will make another one.

That is why Brian Mulroney, by other offices was hated, but when you look at

policies and various things he will go down in history as one of the better

Prime Ministers in our country for advancing the economic agenda of our country,

even though it was not popular at the time and no one wanted to associate with

him. It was almost devastated, the party just about got wiped out. The same

thing will be said of John Efford, I can tell you. The complete opposite will be

said. That is because, when decisions are politically motivated they are not

necessarily the best decisions.

Enough said on that for the moment. I am going to stay on my train of thought

of the financial aspect. I will get to other areas a little later on.

It is a shame what is happening. It is a shame to see a personal disposable

income move from 80-some per cent of Gross Domestic Product, now to see that it

is only about 60-some per cent. That is not a sign of a prosperous province.

That is far from a sign of a prosperous province, I might add. When you look at

some areas - for example, what contributes to our Gross Domestic Product here in

our Province? Gross Domestic Product isn't everything. There is nominal

growth. You must have real growth. That is what counts. We have the service

producing industries, for example. Oil, people might think. Oil only contributes

a very small portion, a single-digit portion, to the GDP of our Province, when

the biggest factor in it, 70-some per cent of it, the service-producing

industries are important. Very important. They produce over 70-some per cent

toward the GDP of our Province.

The primary industries, for example, about 20 per cent almost, in the 20 per

cent range, like agriculture, fishing, being very significant, mining, oil and

gas, are in that 20-some per cent. They are the main part of that 20-some per

cent in contributing to the GDP. They are the main part of it. It is becoming

more significant, an increased

part in the future, and we give credit for that,

but unless the jobs from that growth are creating spinoffs in our Province, not

on the Eastern Seaboard of the United States, not in the central part of this

country, we are not the beneficiaries. We are sending people out of here to go

to work in areas of this country and elsewhere, that we created the raw

materials to create the jobs. That is having a negative effect not only on the

taxes we will be paying in our Province but on equalization and numerous other

effects, in Canada Health and Social Transfers, and in any particular federal

transfers because they have now become per capita based.

GDP is a pretty relative term, a pretty simple term. I mean, you just take

the price of something by the quantity you have and that is what you have as the

GDP. It is easy to take quantity: How many tons of newsprint? What is the price

per ton? How much barrels of oil? What is the price per barrel of oil? The

nominal GDP can go up. It might increase, but you might be getting no increased

benefit. What benefit, for instance - let's use an example. If we are taking

150,000 barrels a day out of Hibernia, and we have out on that platform, at one

time, about 160 people, eighty one shift, eighty the next shift, and we are

taking 150 barrels out there with the same number of people, and now we take out

200,000 barrels with the same number of people, we haven't created any more

jobs. We have increased GDP. We have increased the value of our sales. We have

taken the barrels at the price and produced more barrels at a higher price but

we have no more jobs created by doing that, or very little. A little more

traffic to move it out of there, a minimal increase in jobs.

That is why we were very concerned and we wanted to look at the specifics,

when we increased the production levels of barrels out of there, because if we

are going to drain the pond a little earlier now, we have all these lost jobs in

the process that would have been there longer if it was at a slower production

level. Our Province said: Well, we are going to get some money, revenues back

quicker. But, revenues we get back and benefits we get back, if they are getting

clawed back federally, what is the benefit? You have to look at what is the best

long-lasting impact and the bottom line in our Province in place of jobs and

revenues for us to be able to sustain and operate ourselves as a Province.

Economic activity could be occurring. Generally if there is increases in

production from this activity it increases GDP, but if it is not creating more

jobs, it is not producing more impacts. In other words if the rent follows out

of the Province the real GDP is not going up, and that is the most telling tale.

The real GDP is important, not the nominal. You can do 200,000 barrels a day

with the same number of workers out there, with 120 on the rig, or you can do

150 with 120 on it and they get the same wage, the same amount of money, the

same income taxes coming in, the same shopping to do on that money, the same

amount of retail sales and that, and what do we get? By increasing it, we get to

the break even faster. We get a quicker return, basica