Volume XL Friday Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Third Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard} Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas Number 43 15 May 1987

The House met at 10:00 a.m . MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, pleas·e! Before calling for Statements by Ministers, there is one matter I would like to deal with. On Tuesday, May 5, I reserved ruling on_ several points of discussion which arose from a point of order relating to parliamentary secretaries, the point of order having been raised by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Simmons). Although I shall refer only to parliamentary secretaries, I include in that title the parliamentary assistant to the Premier as well.

The House agreed unanimously that in future parliamentary secretaries will . be allowed to make statements on behalF of their ministers and may also respond to questions on behalf of. their ministers. There is no need for me to make a ruling on this part~cular matter. However, following this agreement the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, supported by the hon. member for Fogo (Mr.

Tulk), submitted that parliamentary secretaries should no longer be considered private members and as a consequence should be prohibited from sitting on or chairing committees and should not be allowed to present private members' motions. It is not necessary for me to rule on whether a parliamentary secretary is or is not a private member . The legitimacy of certain practices carried out by parliamentary secretaries under the procedures of this House has L2275 May 15, 1987 Vol XL been called into question and it is on those questioned practices upon which I shall rule.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition pointed out that parliamentary secretaries receive a stipend from the department ~ith which they are connected and he suggested that this makes the person a part of the administration. As parliamentary secretaries have now taken an oath or affirmation of office as a mem~er of Cabinet and cannot attend Cabinet meetings as of right and, as they are not privy to all Cabinet documents and materials, I cannot agree that receiving a departmental stipend effectively constitutes a parliamentary secretary as part of the administration .

Our Standing Orders and Beauchesne are silent with regard to parliamentary secretaries sitting on or chairing .committ~es. · Therefore, under our Standing Order No. 1 we must look to, but not necessarily be bound by, the practice in the House of Commons. Under new Standing Orders of the House of Commons, parliamentary secretaries may no longer chair committees as they were allowed to previously but, they may sit on committees except ones which are examining their particular departments. Parliamentary secretaries in the House of Commons may present private members-motions.

My ruling on these matters has taken into account the past practice of this House and the relative sizes of our House and the House of Commons. The practice of this House has been to allow parliamentary secretaries to serve on and chair committees. To No. 43 R2275

disallow this practice would be a disservice to the House and ~o the public as, unlike the Hou~e of Commons, we do not have the luxury of a large number of members from which committee members may be drawn. Therefore, it is my ruling that th~ practice of this House in relation to parliamentary secretaries . serving on and chairing committees is reasonable and should continue. I further rule that, in keeping with the practice of this House and in. concurrence with that of the House of Commons, parliamentary se~retaries should continue to ha~e the privilege of presenting private members motions.

I would like to thank the hon. the Leader of the Opposition for raising these question$ and for his thoughts and suggestions on these important matters. I also thank the rest of the hon. members on both sides of the House who contributed to the debate. · MR. J. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the member for St. John's North. MR. J. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, really it should probably be a point of privilege, but I do not like to over-use that particular parliamentary device and, therefore, I wi 11 content myself with raising a point of order.

I am informed, Mr. last night on CBC-TV the Opposition Speaker, that the Leader of was most uncomplimentary person. I did programme myself, towards your L2276 not see the it is hearsay, May 15, 1987 Vol XL but I think it wo u 1 d be very easy to check and see exactly what was said. It showed, as far as I am told, great disrespect for the Chair .. I think it is a matter that should be looked into further and certainly should be deplored. because the respect for the Chair is the foundation of this House of Assembly. We have seen the Leader of the Opposition tax Your Honour's patience many times in this House.

And, perhaps, it is one thing to do it in the House, but to do it outside of l:he House is utterly disrespectful and shows great contempt for this House, contempt for your person and contempt for your office. I think it is utterly disgt~aceful and should be investigated. MR. SIMMONS: To that point Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: of order, To that point of order, the the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. hon. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) for raising this matter.

Apart from making a fine spe!ech, as usual, and an irrelevant speech, as usual, I thought he was quite interesting this morning. Mr. Speaker, yesterday evening, contrary to what the gentleman has just entered into the record, the! . Leader of the Opposition was not on CBC-TV. I believe what he! is referring to is a third person report in which CBC said that other people said certain things. I was not on in any clip. There was no first person, no voice report at all, I submit to him and to the House. Secondly, I will tell ·the House No. 43 R2276

that yesterday I was part of an interview with a reporter from CBC in which one of the statements I very carefully said, Mr. Speaker, that if I have any criticisms or any comments - I did not say critic isms - if I have any views to express on the subject of the Speaker I shall do so in the House to·Mr. Speaker 1 s face and I refuse to do so otherwise. That was the essential substance of what I said to that reporter. MR. J. CARTER: I must take your word. MR. SIMMONS: No. Mr. Speaker, I would not even want the gentleman to take my word.

I want him instead to reflect on what I just said in light of what he saw last night, because what he saw last night - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) . MR. SIMMONS: ·I had that fear , too , that he saw nothing. AN HON. MEMBER: He probably did not see anything. MR. SIMMONS: I am telling him that what was aired on CBC was not an interview or quoting me in the first person or me a talking head, as we say in the business, it was a third party report in which it said certain things: Mr. So and So said this, and the Opposition did this, and so on and so forth. It was that kind of report.

I cannot take any res~onsibility for that. What I can say is what I said to that reporter - and I do not even have to say that. It was a private conversation at the time - but I am telling you that I said to that reporter if I have - and I did not L2277 ·May 15, 1987 Vol XL use the word criticism - if I have views to express, I think were the words, I _will say so in ·the House, I think I said, face to face to Mr. Speaker. One final point, Mr. Speaker, I have always had the utmost respect for the Chair, I have always had the utmost respect for the institution of Speaker. From time to time - AN HON.

MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. SIMMONS: Oh, there is Guy Fawkes again, Mr . Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, Hear! MR. SIMMONS: Sometimes, Mr. Speaker, I have been known to .express my views, but that is not the point of order here. I have been . known to express my views and if the · uiE:1WS have been unparliamentary, I think I have done the correct thing and tben withdrawn them. But the point is that the institution of Speaker is an institution we must respect.

If I have gotten hot under the collar here sometimes it is because I have seen the institutioo being eroded in this particular Chamber, and that is quite another issue, too. But the issue the gentleman raises may well be a point: of order. that is for Mr. Speaker, to decide, I just wanted the House to know my role in it insofar as there was a role yesterday. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance . No. 43 R2277

DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. I am sure all members of this hon. House are glad that the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has clarified this matter, because I did actually see that report and I agree with the hon. l~ader opposite that he was not shown on the picture, there wa~ no voice clip. But certainly the message came through quoting him. quoting his name in a very. very derogatory fashion towards this House and towards this Chair. Now, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition is suggesting that tha·t­ was not the tenor of his remarks and obviously we a·ccept his word on it.

But that does not get away from the fact that that was a disgraceful public report. reflecting on the· integrity not only of this House but the integrity and the authority of Your Honour. And I would strongly suggest that under -and this is merely a suggestion. It is obviously up to Your Honour to make the decision -the authority you have as Speaker this matter should be investigated further. that the report be reviewed. that the accuracy of the portrayal of that interview as it reflected on this House be investigated in detail and the necessary steps taken.

PREMIER PECKFORD: I am sure the Leader of the Opposition would want that done. DR. COLLINS: I am sure the Leader of the Opposition would want that done and if there is to be further action taken to alleviate and to prevent any further such disgraceful reports about this House, that that appropriate action be taken. I think it is most important. If this is L2278 May 15, 1987 Vol XL allowed to continue, there will be a deteriorating aspect to the public mind on what is going on in this House. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. Barbe. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker.

I think the Minister of Finance takes issue, really, with the particular medium that reported the facts that happened· in this House, and I think he ought to take issue with the .rnedia in question. I also submit to Your Honour that what happE!nS outside this Chamber certainly is not within Your Honour1s jurisdiction. However. if the Minister of Finance wants to take issue with facts that are reported by various media. he ought to approach t'hose media· to find out what exactly happened. We submit, Your Honour, there· is no problem there. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. The Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. ·Speaker. I am forced to comment on this matter, or address the point of order at issue here. We have a public report allegtng certain things that the Leader of the Opposition said about this Chamber and about your· pE!rson and your office. Seeing the Leader of the Opposition did not appear visually, it was not his own dirE!Ct speech or quotes. well, OnE! can only conclude from l:hat that the Leader of the Opposition is No. 43 R22'78

saying he was misquoted, that he was taken· out of context. But what went on the public airwaves last night was a degradation of this institution called the House of Assembly and of the office of Speaker, Mr. Speaker, and · it should be investigated.

Because it is referenced · back to the Le~der of the Opposition and he does not want the people of Newfoundland who listened to that programme last night - the clear impression as a result of that was that there are members of this House, including one of the leaders of this House, who . are · putting down this House and putting down the office of Speaker and surely that has to be cleared up because we cannot have that kind· of information going out to the public and thereby degradating your office, your person, and all of us in the bargain. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: · A final observation· by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: Now that this has escalated into an Armageddon type issue, I ought to make a couple of points. First of all, I share fully the Premier•s concern about the degradation of this institution. That is why I have, on occasion, Mr. Speaker, made some statements in this House that have not found favour with certain corners of the Chamber, but I made them anyway. My difficulty, being an ordinary human being, is that sometimes I say them in unparliamentary ways.

But the concern is very deeply felt that this institution is being badly eroded, that it is ceasing to be a place where a member can come - L22'79 May 15, 1987 Vol XL AN HON. MEMBER: That is not the point though . MR. SIMMONS : Mr. Speaker, it is very much the point. If the Premier is going to pontificate about degradationion, I agree with his concern but I do not agree with his analysis of why it is being degraded or who is degrading it. The gentleman, at five-thirty yesterday afternoon, Mr. Speaker, my friend for Port de Grave (Mr.

Efford), tri•O!d to make a s pee c h and he was j e ere d by thE! gentleman for Harbour Grace (Mr . Young) and the gentleman for Grand Falls (Mr. Simms) consistently. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER :. Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Oh, you do not want to hear this now. I am sorry, Mr. Speaker. I will start saying some more things that everybodoy agrees with and in this way I will have the floor, right? Because as soon as I say something ·that does not· find favour - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. the member wiJ.l speak to the point of order. MR. SIMMONS: The point of order, Mr.

Speaker, and I am responding to the Premier - I did not see you cut him off, but that is conincidence, that is just a coincidence. Degradation in his mouth is okay , but there is something wrong with degradation in my mouth. We are demonstrating right now, Mr. Speaker, why that report ever got aired, because a reporter sat up there, a good No. 43 R2279

reporter, and happening down reported it. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! saw what here and went was and The hon. member will confine his remarks to the point of order. MR. SIMMONS: That is right, Sir, I will. That reporter reported what she saw. That is her sin, she reported what she saw and she reported that the degradation is going on. That was okay as long as we kept it in this Chamber, but now it has . gone out · to the Province. the truth is out, the boys over there are all worked up. Now, Mr. Speaker, that reporter reported what she saw in this Chamber. That is her sin. She did her duty. Now, Mr.

Speaker- SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. FUREY: Protection, ple~se! MR. SIMMONS: I said a couple of things to that reporter which are instructive in terms of what we are trying to establish here, as to whether there is a point of order. The first thing I reported to you a minute ago. The first thing I said - MR. J. CARTER : ·sit down! MR. WARREN: Sit down! MR. FUREY: Order! Order! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! L2280 May 15, 1987 Vol XL MR. FUREY : Ridiculous protection. MR. J. CARTER: (Inaudible). MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! MR.

SIMMONS: I said, first of all, if I have views to express I shall do them face to face to the Speaker in the House. I was asked to compare this Speaker with the gentleman from Grand Falls (Mr. Simms), the gentleman from Waterford Kenmount (Mr. Ottenh•:!imer). and some other Speakers and I said. 1 I think it must be well known to everybody in the Chamber and anybody watching the Chamber that I think the conduct of the Chamber is less than perfect . 1 That was the phrase, 11 Less than perfect 11 • That should come as no surprise to anybody in this institution. Beyond that, Mr. Speaker.

I rn<.i~de no particular criticism because any criticism I want to make or any praise I want to give I will give face to face, which is my practice. Mr. Speaker, members of this Chamber, including the member who raised this point of order, would do well to go back and look again and, for his case, look a first time, because he admits now that he has raised a point of order on a matter that took place outside this institution, on a matter that he did not even see first-hand. So it is hearsay evidence he is giving the House.

I invite him to go out and look at the tape to start with. and I would ask the other people to look at the tape and, when they are through getting all upset with me, ask themselvl~S if the real signal that was sent out last night by that CBC . No. 43 R2280

reporter is not just a case of that person doing her job and doing it well and reporting what she saw here. We might not like what she sent out, we might not like the message, but do not make the mistake of shooting the messenger. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! DR. COLLINS: Mr . Speaker, just one last point . MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: There have been a lot of words said and I do not think we should allow those words to confuse the central issue here.

The central issue was that a point of order was raised, that the hon. leader was quoted publ~cly in such a way that it brought dis honour ·on this House. Now, the hon. Leader of the Opposition has stated· ·that that was not an accurate reflection of his remarks and we must accept that. But, in actual f~ct, as the Premier has pointed. out, as the original raiser of the point of order pointed out, the is sue remains that in the public view there is a report which casts tremendous dishonour on this House and it c a n'l'l o t be 1 eft at that , · it must be investigated further. No one is accusing the hon.

Leader of the Opposition, at this point in time, of saying anything untoward. We are saying the report is untoward and it claims that it is based on the hon. Leader of the Opposition•s (Mr. Simmons) remarks which he says •is an inaccurate basis for that report•. Fine, we accept that, but that does not get away from the fact that that report must be L2281 May 15, 1987 Vol XL investigated or it will be left in the public mind that this House is a House of dishonour. MR. SIMMONS: Mr . Speaker, inaccurate, I the report was There you go again. this business of have never said accurate - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member may speak if he wishes, but - MR. SIMMS: You just do not stand up . MR. SPEAKER : - he had not been recognized, and the hon. member has been in the House long enough to know that he should be recognized before he speaks. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the · Opposition . MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from St. John 1 s South (Dr. Collins) has used the term 1 inaccurate • . I carefully stayed clear of the issue, since I am not the CBC producer. I do not report to this House for the accuracy or otherwise of the CBC reports. What I have said is my role in it.

And my role in it I assume is twofold, one, my actions in this Chamber, and I assume that was part --of the reporter 1 s· story I and my comments to her in ·an interview. And I did not have any obligation to do this I because it was a private conversation I but I have given you a couple of indications of what I said to that lady just to show you the tone of where I was coming from in terms of that interview, that I will No. 43 R2281

make my views known in this House, and one of the views, that is already known, is that 'I think the conduct of this Chamber is less than perfect. I Now, those are the two things I said. I do not even know whether I was quoted accurately or not because I was on the telephone at the time the report was on. I saw it, but I did not pay attention. I cannot even say if I was quoted at all, or accurately or inaccurately. I really do not know. I know the report was on. I was in my office with a member of my caucus and I· was on the phone at the time. The TV was on, I saw the picture, and that is all I saw.

Somebody said, That is the report on the Speakership, or something to that effect. So I cannot make any undertaking to the House as to the accuracy of what was in that particular . report. I can only say, from reports I had after from the gentleman sitting. in my office, that, in my· view, my judgment reflected a fair view of the current. degraded state of the institution of Speaker in· this Chamber. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To that point of order, I am going to reserve my ruling on that. I would like to see the tape.

I, of course, accept the explanation of the han. the Leader of the Opposition, but I would like to compare what was said in that particular report last night. 0 0 0 L2282 May 15, 1987 Vol XL MR. EFFORD: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege, the hon. the member for Port de Grave. MR. EFFORD: Mr; Speaker, my point of privilege arises out of the Ministerial Statements read by Minister of Social Service (Mr. Brett) yesterday afternoon and the Late Show yesterday afternoon.

What the han. the Minister of Finance said a few minutes ago about the reputation of the House pf Assembly being brought out in public, I think, is going to be brought out in my point of privilege. Yesterday afternoon when I stood in my place and continuously during question period,, every t:i.rne I got to my feet, Mr: Speaker, I was continuously h1a'c k led · and mocked and had to put up with name calling from the other side. In this House you do not get a chance to put forth any questions you need to ask ministers on the other side. The same thing occurred, Mr.

Speaker, when I was responding to i:he Statement mctde by the Minister of Social SeriJiCE!S. Just as I started responding to the statement, the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands (Mr. Simms) and the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Young), and other· ministers, never gave me, as a member of this -·House, a chance to do what I was sent here to do by the~ people who elected me to this House. I was elected by the people of my district to represent them in the House of Assembly and we do not get the opportunity to do that at any time.

Then, when we ask for protection· from the Chair, the heckling just gets louder and No. 43 R2282

louder. As a member of this House, I need the protection of the Chair to be able to carry out my duties . AN HON. MEMBER : You need protection from yourself. MR. EFFORD: You see, Mr. Speaker, that, again, is 'a prime example. MR . SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon . member is not making a point of privilege. MR. EFFORD: My point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, has to do with exactly what is happening over there now.

When we stind in our places in this House of Assembly during Question Period and in making responses to Ministerial Statements, we do not · get an opportunity to do that in the manner in which we should because of continuous interference from ministers of the Crown and members on the backbenches. Mr . Speaker, I ask for protection from the Chair. That is the point of privilege I am trying to make. MR. SIMMS : Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon . the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. SIMMS : Mr . Speaker, if I may, to the point of privilege. It is not a point of privilege, certainly.

It may be a point that the han. member wishes to raise in the Legislature, and that is fair ball. But, certainly, to use the guise of a point of privilege to L2283 May 15, 198 7 Vol XL raise that matter would not be the appropriate mechanism. If the hon. member was to travel to any other Parliament in the Commonwealth he would see that the British Parliamentary ~ractices are such that they provide for a certain amount of give and take back and forth the House . You cannot have a mute Legislature. I mean, it would be impossible .

That is what the hon . member is suggesting, that when he gets up to spe ·ak, everybody should be mute and quiet. That is not the British Parliamentary s ys teni. The hon. member should perhaps familiarize himself a little bit more with that kind of system, because that is a fact. If it becomes excessive and too intense and all the rest of it, then it is the Chair's responsibility, of course, as Your Honour knows, to ensure that members are given protection.

But to expect that there should not be any give and ta .ke or any comments back and forth, I mean, that is just silliness, because that is not · the way t.he British Parliamentary system works. Mr. Speaker, overriding the point of privilege that the han. member has made is what I consider to be an even more serious factor with respect to what is happening in the Legislature. May I just quote from Beauchesne for han. members. if they would be patient enough, several references to the Speaker as the presiding officer of ~he House of Commons or of this House. MR. SIMMONS : No . MR.

SIMMS: Now, three of four times I listened to the han. Leader of the Opposition make some points. I No. 43 R2283

would like to make could, with respect overriding problem. I consider it to be: a point, if I to what is the This is what Let me just read a few quotes, Mr. Speaker, from paragraph 117 of :.1eauchesne: 11 When t:he Speaker rises to preserve order or to give a ruling he must always be heard in silence. 11 Now, is this the practice in this House? SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. MR.

SIMMS : I suggest not. 11 No member may rise when the Speaker is standing. 11 We frequently see that being overlooked. 11 Reflections upon the character or actions of the Speaker may be punished as breaches of privilege. 11 Does that sound familiar, Mr. Speaker? 11 Confidence in the impartiality of the Speaker is an indispensable condition of the successful working of procedure, and many conventions exist which have as their object, not only to ensure the impartiality of the Speaker but also, to ensure· that his impartiality is generally recognized.

The presiding officer, though entitled on all occasions to be treated with the greatest attention and respect by the individual Members, because the power, dignity, and honour of the House are officially embodied in his person .... 11 Now, Mr. Speaker, I suggest to you the overriding problem in this whole issue is because certain members of this Legislature do not follow what Beauchesne suggests should be followed with respect to respect for the Chair.

And that is something that hon. members who do these sorts of things should be embarrassed about, as far as I arn L2284 May 15, 1987 Vol XL concerned, and that is the point of privilege. MR. FUREY : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. Barbe . MR. FUREY: That is quite a rebuttal, Mr. Speaker, from the minister who did not think there was a point of privilege. Beauchesne,

Section 17 says, ''A genuine question of privilege is a most serious matter and should bE! taken seriously by the House. 11 The member for Port d~~ Graue (Mr. Efford) stood in his place to make a submission to the Chair that when he is speaking in his plaCE! in debate or Question Period he feels that his privileges are being breached. Of course there is give- and thrust in any parliament in Canada, of course there -i s fh e odd he c k 1 i n g and thrust back and forth, but the behavior yesterday, Mr Speaker, I submit, was totally out of whack. I mean, we had people shouting and screaming. I witnessed it myself.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. FUREY : It is starting again . MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. Barbe, would you carry on? MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, this is the earlier point which the minister failed to refer to. I think the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Brett) carne to the House with two statements yesterday, if I am not wrong, fairly lengthy statements, and we No. 43 R2284

were asking for equal time. I think my colleague from Port de Grave had a chance to make two or three points.

We would ask Your ·Honour to look at the transcripts for yesterday to see just exactly how much time and how much space was used up by the Minister of Social Services in both those s ta teme rits and ' compare· it to the actual time given my colleague from Port de Grave, who I submit is allowed 50 per cent of the time that the minister is allocated, and compare it to the time given my good friend, the socialist in the corner, who is allowed 50 per cent of the 50 per cent of the total time committed by the minister. I think, Mr.

Speaker, you will see that there is a clear discrepancy there and unfairness to the han. member for Port de Grave. He just was not given equal time to speak. To the other issue, Mr. SJ;!eaker, yes, there is giue and take in this Chamber and there ought to be give and take in this Chamber, but not when you see behavior like a nest of jackals, because that is the behavior we saw yesterday from that side when my han. colleague tried to speak in the Late Show. MR. SPEAKER : To that point of privilege there is no prima facie case. I think the point made by the hon. member is a good one.

There is an awful lot of interruption from both s ide s when a q u e s t i o.n i s be i n g as kea and when an answer is being given. When a question is being asked, I would ask han. members on both sides to keep reasonable silence. I do not expect everybody to be completely silent on either side. I think that goes both ways, anq I would ask han. members to remember that. L2285 May 15, 1987 Vol XL Statements by Ministers PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr·. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. th .e Premier. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, I am pleased this morning, on behalf of · the Minister of Career Development and Advanced Studies (Mr.

Power) and on behalf of government, to announce the first phase of our programme of creating jobs with the private sector whereby government and the private sector share fifty/fifty in the cost of any new incremental jobs; in o'ther words, any business in the Province can apply under this programme and, if that business is going to create one, two, · three, four, ten or fi ftt::~en or whatever number of jobs over what they had last year in their business, then government will share in the cost of those jobs fifty /fifty with that indus try or that business, and it is open to all businesses in the Province. Mr.

Speaker, whilst the ones I am going to announce today only amount to 13 jobs, 297 weeks, and $33,000, government•s share of these jobs, this is the first launching· of it. These are the first jobs. Next week we would hope to have two or three announcements an another wav·e, if you want, eight or ten indus tries which have applied and have been approved. We are going to try to expedite the process to ensure that all of the money gets spent and all of the jobs are created as quickly as we can. No. 43 R2285

The businesses now, the projects that have been approved I think are eight, and I just give these out, Mr. Speaker, as some examples of how flexible the programme is: There is 1 job for 16 weeks t0 a business in St. John 1 s, the Carpet Centre; there are 2 jobs for 52 weeks to D.F. Barnes Limited, St. John 1 s; in Terra Nova, Pinedale Farms, a farm, Mr.

Speaker, in rural Newfoundland; Micro-Tech Computer Centre Limited, 1 job for 26 weeks; Atlantic Industrial & Marine Supplies, 2 jobs for 80 . work weeks; Tors Cove, 2 jobs for 3 2 weeks; Blaketown, in the district of Bellevue, Cooper 1 s Fur Farm, another farm - the Opposition is saying we are not interested in agriculture in rural Newfoundland, we are only interested in hydroponics in Mount Pearl, and out of 8 projects here are two are to · farms ·in rural Newfoundland - Fong 1 s- Restaurant in Carbonear· ;nd in Outer Cove Studio 2.

There are only 13 jobs but they are 13 brand new jobs, incremental over what these businesses had on last year. And my point in raising it, even though it is a small number of jobs and a small amount of money to this point, there is $5 million in the programme. The applications are coming in fairly fast and furiously now, from all over Newfoundland, and what we are going to try to do is, on a very timely basis two or three times a .. weeks, get the money out, get the jobs approved so that we can go on with what we started to do earlier this year. Corning after me, Mr.

Speaker, this morning will be the Minister responsible for parks and the Minister . of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development with other jobs that L2286 May 15, 1987 Uol XL are being created. Up to now, on departmental jobs there are 1, 122 plus the 13 in the private sector, which will be up into the hundreds in a week or two, plus the new lots of jobs that the other ministers will be announcing this morning. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Lead1~r of t:he Opposition. MR.

SIMMONS: It is always a delight to even get the Premier on his feet to talk about jobs, even eleven jops, if it is in the five to ten statement, or thirteen jobs, as in the twenty to eleven statement, and the thing keeps changing. It goes to show the mad pac.e! of this job creation effort by this government. It is an ongoing thing . They can not E! v ·e n k e e p their statements up to date, a job here and a job there. We would have a few more, Mr. Speaker, if the · few measly, stingy, underfunded programmes were administered fairly. But even in this sheet, Mr. Speaker, you can see the unfairness.

I happen to know, by being a party to it, that even the dispensing of the appl_ications was manipulated so that people in certain areas actually had proposals submitted before the applications went out to certain other districts, before they even reached the desks. MR. FUREY : Some of them had them without even looking for them. SOME HON. MEMBERS: ,No. 43 R2286

Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS: Mr . Speaker, I am telling you that in order to hand deliver, .you have to have them in hand. MR. DOYLE : (Inaudible). SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS : Now, Mr. Speaker, if I were the Minister of Municipal Affairs, whose head is wanted by every self-respecting councillor in Newfoundland - MR. SIMMS : That is irrelevant. MR. SIMMONS: Irrelevant but factual. -Mr. Speaker, i make an appeal to them to . just . get off the politics. I mean, what an obsession it must be, what a tremendous weight it must be to think every single s·econd of the day survival, survival.

How will I survive the day? I will manipulate a few applications here, I will do this, I will go in and I will scream my head off in the House of Assembly and see if I can put some peopl~ off stride who were sent here to represent the people. What a terrible, terrible existence to day and night, every wak-.ing hour, be preoccupied by political survival! Mr. Speaker, the poll of last week really got to them. I. feel for my friend from Conception Bay South (Mr.

Butt) who is gone in that poll; the gentleman beside him who is gone in that poll, gone completely; the lady from Corner Brook; the gentleman from the L2287 May 15, 198 7 Vol XL other side, the Bay of Islands, gone in that particular poll. I understand all this. We all have our crosses to bear. But I appeal to these people MR. TOBIN : What about Fortune - Hermitage? MR. SIMMONS: What would you know about Fortune - Hermitage? What would you know, period? You know how to move that mouth, boy, if you only had a brain above it to help you move it . MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) some job. MR. SIMMONS: Come on now .

Give us some more of that! MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: No, Mr. Speaker; do no~ stifle his wit. · MR. SPEAKER : Order, ple!as e! MR. SIMMS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker . MR. SIMMONS: He is saying order, by the way. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order. MR. SIMMS: He is saying order to you, by the way . Mr. Speaker, we are all interestE!d in the hon. member's rhetoric hE !re this morning, yet he has had nothing to say about the statement . He is talking about this fellow and that fellow being gone in the polls, which has No. 43 R2287

nothing to do with the statement. Perhaps the han. member would be able to confine his remarks to the relevant information in the Premier1s statement.-Mr. Speaker, that is what the purpose of response is all about, it is not for debate. MR: SPEAKER: To that point of order, at times it: is difficult for the Chair to know if the response is exactly to the Ministerial Statement. The han. member1s time has now elapsed. MR. LONG: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for St. John 1 s East. MR. LONG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. FUREY: He is not finished yet. MR. SPEAKER: The han. member1s time has elapsed. MR.

SIMMONS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the han. the Leader of the .Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: In fairness, Mr. Speaker, I believe it is being demonstrated now why this House is having some difficulty functioning. --I sat down, Mr. Speaker, because a point of order was being entertained by the Chair. The point of order was being dispensed with and, in the normal course of events, either the speaker who had been interrupted would be recognized or, at least as a courtesy, would be informed that his time had L2288 May 15, 1987 Vol XL expired.

N.ai ther of those things happened at the time, Mr. Speaker, I submit to you, and then another speaker was recognized without my being informed why another speaker was being recognized. If my time had expired, as I subsequently learned, that is fair ball. But, Mr. Speaker, if we cannot E!Ven go by the few rules we have left: ·in this Chamber, it is going to be increasingly difficult to do anything in this particular Cl1amber. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, order. MR. SPEAKER: to that point of To that point of orde!r, the han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, the han. the Leader of the Opposition had a designated time to r.~spond to the statement and· he was on· his feet for sufficient time to do that. Now, he engaged in so many irrelevancies that it was necessary to raise a point of order. That was his own doing that brought that about and, as is well know, points of order do come out of the time that is alloted to members opposite who respond to statements.

Now, if they engage in irrelevancies tha.t cause a point of order to be raised, well, they bring it on their own head, and it has to be donE! within the length of time that the ~ules allow for dealing with that particular statement. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the han. member1s time had elapsed. Actually, the han. member1s time had elapsed before the point of order had arisen. No. 43 R2288

The hon. the member for St. John 1 s East. MR. LONG : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to try and return the debate to the matter at hand, which is the statement read by the PrE!mier, arid say that we of this party welcome the efforts of this government to support job creation in the business sector, in particular, but we have a concern about the exclusion of non-profit institutions in being able to access this programme.

There is a problem in this Province with restraint in health, education and human services, where people are hurting from high unemployment, hurting from the social ills that come about as a result of· economic difficulties, and government should be looking at making job creation programmes available in the community to help institutions, non-profit ·and public institutions, and putting people to work to take care of Dur people who are hurting. Beyond that, Mr.

Speaker, we would say that for the Premier to come in and count up thirteen jobs, eleven of which are in PC districts, is a rather feeble attempt that we are going to see week in and week out; the government coming in and in a tedious way counting the jobs that they are creating, short-term, make-work jobs, not long-term meaningful jobs, to try and add up to the 40,000 jobs this government promised to create. It is going to become a rather tedious exercise, but we will respond to it in a productive fashion as it is presented to us. DR. COLLINS : L2289 May 15, 1987 Vol XL Mr. Speaker, a point of order . MR .

SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: I think it is necessary to bring this up ; it rna y be · j u s t a misunderstanding on the hon. member 1 s part. This particular programme is for the private sector. There are ·other programmes for the public sector. This is for the private sector, p-r-i-v-a-t-e. This is where one matches the salaries in the private sector. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! There is no point of order. MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Spaeker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. MR. MATTHEWS : Mr.

Speaker, this morning additional initiatives department . it is my pleasure to announce six jobs creation involving my Five of these entail improvements to provincial parks. In total, the Parks Division of my department ·will spend $95,913 to create 21 jobs in these five projects. An amount of $13,097 will be spent at Otter Bay to create three jobs; $26,200 will see six jobs created at Blow ME! Down and Bottle! Cove; $21,237 will result in five jobs at Chesseman; $22,336 will result in four jobs at Indian River and Baie VErte Group camp grounds and No. 43 R2289

an expenditure of $13,043 will create three jobs at Holyrood Pond and Point La Haye. In addition to these five provincial park improvements, Mr. Speaker, an expenditure of $17,036 wi 11 r e s u 1 t i n four j o b s at the Salmonier Nature Park, which is administered by the Wildlife Division of my department. All these significant various benefitting alike. projects will involve improvements to these parks, consequently residents and tourists In total, these six initiatives will involve an expenditure of $112,949 in the creation of twenty-five jobs. These bring to 225, Mr.

Speaker - I would like to repeat, 22 5 - the total number of jobs created this Spring and Summer in improvements _ to our extensive and diversified parks system. I would like to go on record as saying these 225 jobs, which are Provincial Job Creation projects, are in addition to the regular park employees; we have approximately 500 in total. This year, of course, the total expenditure through our Job Creation Programme, Mr. Speaker, will now total $1,015,000 for 225 new jobs. I think, Mr.

Speaker, this is very ind-icative of this government 1 s commitment to our parks system and to significant job creation in areas of · long-term value to the community. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. K. AYLWARD : Mr. Speaker. L2290 May 15, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Stephenville . MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I thank you and I thank the minister for giving me a copy of his statement ear1ier. We welcome any initiative or any announcement that will see the creation of jobs in tl-)e ProvincE! and we look forward to seeing rnany more initiatives, but do we have some concerns.

As I was reading through the statement, Mr. Speaker, I was agreeing with most of it, until I came to the last line, 1 This is indicative of th·.i.s government 1 s commitment to our parks system and to significant job creation in areas of long-term value to the community. 1 One of the concerns I have is how these people are going to be hired for these jobs.

I am sure they are going to be hired -fairly, as everybody else in . the public service is hired, and I am sure .the minister is going to make sure that they are and that he will bring to the House the system of how they are going to do that, and that they are not going to have to have PC club cards to get into the little club of 225 jobs. Hopefully that will not be the case, and I am sure the minister will clarify it. Mr. Speaker, in reading over thE! statement I can see that everything is coming up roses and that have not will be no more.

Forty-four per cent youth unemployment in the Province and the minister is coming in with this announcement, and with bravado he talks about the good job they are doing. Well, I suggest to you, Mr. ~)peaker, and to the minister and his administration, that they are not No. 43 R2290

doing a good job, that it is a catastrophe out there in the Province with youth unemployment and that he should be coming in with a lot more announcements to take care of it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LONG: Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John 1 s East. MR. LONG : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We also welcome this statement from the minister inasmuch as it does represent some economic activity.

We do not understand why the minister did not have this prepared when he made an earlier statement, a couple of w"eeks ago, about job creafion for· the parks this Summer - I guess some jobs were saved to have a timely announcement before the long holiday weekend. We would have appreciated it if the minister could have given us some information about what kinds of jobs these are: What are they doing in the parks? What is the programme for upgrading facilities in the parks? People will be asking questions about that this weekend, as the park season opens.

More than that, we would appreciate· it if _ the minister might take a cue from the Premier 1 s table which he presented, in which he outlined the number of work weeks that would be involved with these jobs. Short-term, six to eight or ten week jobs, is not meaningful job creation programmes. · It represents, again, a part of what L2291 May 15, 1987 Vol XL is clearly going to become a tedious effort of counting jobs, jobs that might be good for the parks but not necessarily good for our people because they are not long-term, meaningful work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Developme11t . Minister and of Rural, Northern MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased today, to inform hon. members that Cabinet has approved eleven new projects which will create forty-seven new jobs in the Province at a total cost to government of $252,000. The projects include construction and resource management support to the Province 1 s agricultural industry and resource development projects sponsored through the Rural Development Associations. These new projects, Mr.

Speaker, are specifically aimed at providing assistance to the resource sectors in rural areas of the Province. That is where the job creation activity is most needed, Mr. Speaker, and that is where my department is aiming its priorities. The projects include land clearing to support community pastures, blueberry land development, study of fuel peat, hayland development, a tree nursery - I would 1 ike to deviate a little from the statement - which is a very good project of two development associations which got together on creating a tree nursery to supply No. 43 R2291

some seedlings for the Silviculture programme in this Province -bakery construction, which is another project I am rather delighted to get approved, which will help the Bell Island Co-op create the bakery they have been working on for several years. These approved projects are tonsistent with government.'s job creation priority which was announced in the latest Throne Speech. Mr. Speaker, these projects are in addition to the eighty new projects which I announced a couple of weeks ago,. which create~ 349 jobs at a cost of $1,397,722.

The projects will be administered through the Department of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development in consultation with the Department of Career Development and Advanced Studies. .. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Leader of ·the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: the absence of my Naskaupi (Mr. like to respond Mr. Speaker, in colleague for Kelland), I would to the statement. . AN HON. MEMBER:. He will not be back. MR. SIMMONS: He will be back as soon as he works on the nurses' situation, which the gentleman for Torngat (Mr. Warren) has not said a peep about yet.

L2292 May 15, 1987 Vol XL MR. WARREN: (Inaudible) doing a good job. MR. MATTHEWS: He will not be back on that side. MR. SIMMONS: No, he will be back on that side, after the election. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is a key - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: The order, Mr. Speaker, impresses me, Sir. MR. WARREN: I am worried that he · :L s not he!re, because - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Who can but ~e impressed by ·the absolute order in this Chambe!r at all times? Mr.

Speaker, the key phrase in thE! minister's statement is 'this is consistent with the government's job priority.' On that, Mr. Speaker, - AN HON. MEMBER: Read thge statement and see what he said . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: I understood, Mr. Speaker, the minister said that these No. 43 R2292

announcements or are consistent government's priority. Is he that now? MR . R. AYLWARD : No . MR . SIMMONS: No? MR. R. AYLWARD : those projects with the job-creation denying he said The statement will tell you what I said. AN HON. MEMBER: Read the statement. MR. SIMMONS: The statement has not reached here yet, that is the problem . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I would left ·to silence. ask han. members on the please keep a reasonable SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

SIMMONS: The most significant statement in this ministerial statement is, 'this is consistent with the government's job-creation priority', and it is. It is very consistent, because government's job priority on a list of ten is number eleven. And this statement reflects that priority, reflects it very well. It is another nothing statement. It bandies around the word rural, rural, rural. Why will they not get the message that the people of rural Newfoundland have abandoned this crowd because they abandoned rural L2293 May 15, 1987 'Vol XL Newfoundland before? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

SIMMONS : All they had to do was watch the television last night to see that the Rural Development Association in Bay d' Espoir is not exactly in love with a minister who wants to control everything in Bay d'Espoir, the development. He t.uill find that the erstwhile love affair between him and the Rural Development Council has soured somewhat when they find out whE!re he is really coming from. So, if I were him , I would use the word rural, rural, rural much less frequently.

The less he can drat.u attention to it, the better for his own survival: I would suggest that he go get the name of his department changed so l:he word 1 rural' does not appear there, because it certainly does not appear in the priority of his activities from day to day. This statement, Mr. Speaker, is another insult to rural Newfoundland, another insult to the thousands of people out there walking around without jobs. AN HON . MEMBER : And so are you. " SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! MR. WARREN: You are wasting your talents. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.

FUREY: Name him, Mr. Speaker! Name him! No. 43 R2293

MR. SIMMONS: It is early Friday morning, Mr. Speaker. These guys have blood pressure problems. Why should I aggrevate them? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LONG: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for St. John • s East. MR. LONG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On behalf of this party I would not say that this statement represents an insult to people in rural Newfoundland. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LONG: .People who are trying to put a bakery together over on Bell Island will appreciate the efforts the minister is making; he is giving them some assistance.

What I would say people in rural Newfoundland have seen recently as an insult is the money that the government is going to be putting into the Sprung greenhouse project, out in the minister's own district, the $2.5 million that is being ·given to this company from away.. The minister today has $220,000 to give to a number of projects across the Province. We have questions about where that money is coming from.

It is unclear whether the $2.5 million is in the minister's estimates for his department or whether it is new money that is going to be taken away from prodjects such as these, that are on the minister's L2294 May 15, 1987 Vol XL desk, and that question remains to be answered. I would further say, llllr.

Speaker, that we would appreciate on this side if, when ministers continue to come in to make these ad hoc announcements wee:; to t.ueek, day to day about what they are doing with passing around jobs, if we could have a consistent formula to look at -where the jobs are going; what the duration is; what the nature of the programme is -so we can have some sense of tracking and we do not have to wait for propaganda, full page ads in thE! newspapers, to try to make sense of what programmes it is that government is referring to.

So I will put that as a suggestion to all ministers for when they come forward with these announcements. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! At this stage I would like to wel-come to the galleries,· forty-five Level I students from Vaters Collegiate in St. John's with their teachers, Mr. Rick Canning a~d Mr. Keith Collins. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: I would also like to welcome thirty Grade X students from Mobil Central High School in the Ferryland district accompanied by their teachers, Mr. Gibbons and Miss Dunaway. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Oral Questions No. 43 R2294

MR. GILBERT: Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The han. the member for Burg eo - Bay d 1 Espoir. MR. GILBERT: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development (Mr. R. Aylward). I am sure that the minister is aware that the salient point of the House Royal . Commission on Unemployment was to create work in rural Newfoundland.

In this spirit, is it true that you and your government have decided to withdraw support for the aquaculture prog ·rarnrne · in Bay d 1 Espoir - after giving commitments of full support to the people of Bay d 1 Espoir - an industry that could have created 150 jobs in rural Newfoundland? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD : Minister and of Rural, Northern No, Mr. Speaker. It is not true that we are withdrawing support from the aquaculture industry in Newfoundland. We have invested $2 million in the Bay d 1 Espoir hatchery to date.

We know we have to invest probably at least as much as that, and we see a future for more hatcheries in the Bay d 1 Espoir area, Mr. Speaker, and greater development. That is what the . commitment of this · government is, Mr. Speaker. MR. GILBERT: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: L2295 May 15, 1987 Uol XL The hon. the member For Burgeo - Bay d 1 Espoir, a supplementary. ·MR. GILBERT: The minister was quoted as saying they 1 have invested 1 , but you encouraged the people of Bay d 1 Espoir to form companiE!S, to get involved in salmon growing, with your department 1 s commitment of financial support.

Is it true that unless the Bay d 1 Espoir Development Association bows to the wishes of this gouernmE!nt, gives control of the salmon hatchery, which was 90 per cent federally funded, to your government, your government is refusing to support the aquaculture industry in Bay d 1 Espoir? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD ·: Minister and of Rural, Northern Mr. Speaker, just to correct one thing, the last $1 million to the! Bay d 1 Espoir hatchery was 100 per cent provincially funded, Mr. Speaker .· SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. R.

AYLWARD: There are federal funds invested in the hatchery in job creation programmes, no doubt, Mr. SpeakE!r, but most of the capital money to create, to build, to give thE! resource, to put it in place, came from the provincial government, Mr. Speaker, and without that, none of it would happen down there. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the actual fact of No. 4-3 R2295

the matter is that the provincial government would like the owners of the Bay d1Espoir hatchery to continue to live by an agreement which we had in 1985 to provide a certain number of people to a Board of Directors. That is the actual fact of what government is requesting, just continue to agree to'the letter that we had in 1985, and allow the Board of Directors to operate as it has been for the past two years, Mr. Speaker. The reason for it, Mr.

Speaker, is beca~se government knows we have to put in much more money down. there to continue the development of the salmon industry and the aquaculture industry in this Province. MR. GILBERT: A supplementary,. Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the member for Burgeo -Bay d1Espoir. MR. GILBERT: The actual _ building of ·the hatchery I believe was 90 per cent federally funded~ My question is: Is it also true that not only have the people of Bay d1Espoir to give your government control of the salmon hatchery, but to also commit 60 per cent of the smolt produced by this hatchery to National Sea?

If this is so, how could you expect the industry to grow in Bay d1Espoir and create 150 jobs in rural Newfoundland? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural, Northern Mr. Speaker, for a successful businessman in this Province to make a statement like that is ridiculous. Mr. Speaker, if you L2296 May 15, 1987 Vol XL have a business in Bay d 1 Espoir, a hatchery, a separate business, and you can guarantee right today that 60 per cent of its production will be purchased, that is better than most industries in this Province can do, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. R. AYLWARD: A guaranteed income of almost $600,000 a year, right today to be signed if it is necessary, Mr. Speaker, is one business decision, and that is not a big problem. This is not only a Bay d 1 Espoir hatchery, by the way. This hatchery, and maybe another down there, will supply salrnon smol t to Green Bay, the St. Mary 1 s Bay area, and several other parts of our Province. To bring othE!r people on, what we know we have to do, and what we have told the Development Association . we will do, is increase the capacity of the hatchery. There is a joint proposal there now, Mr.

Speaker, presented to the people in Bay d1Espoir, between the co~operative, made up of the businesspeople in Bay d1Espoir, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, through my departmE!nt and the Department of Fisheries, and National Sea, a well-known fish company in this Province, to do a two cycle grow out so that we can work out any possible technical problems that we are going to have.

There has not been a proven product produced from scientifically proven smolt at this time -we do not know what kind of smolt would be the best strain to develop -and we have hot had a two cycle grow out so that we know what we c~re going to market and how much the market is going to bear of our product, Mr. Speaker. This is the plan for the No. 43 R2296

next two cycles. fhis proposal has been given to the Bay d 1 Espoir people, Mr. Speaker. That is not all of the proposal, because this joint venture, which the co-op and its members will be involved in, means there is potential to compare a bigger operation, such as National Sea, with some smaller operations to see which type would work better and, if the smaller ones work better, we will go that way, Mr. Speaker. We have guaranteed the co-op $264,000 cash up front to get their own people in business along with National Sea and their joint venture with · National Sea. SOME HON. MEMBERS: He~r, hear! MR.

GILBERT: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The .han. the member for Burg eo - Bay d'Espoir. MR. GILBERT: It is interesting that the minis ·ter could get up and ramble on like that in answer to the question.

You give no help to a proven industry like aquaculture, that ·has been proven over thousands of years - there is no problem at all in the development of that industry, it is not experimental - but, all of a sudden, your government, despite the advice of all the experts across Canada, with all the experts across Canada saying not to get involved in hydroponics, the government immediately commits $18 million to an industry like that. Why can they not put the money into Bay d'Espoir? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Agricultural Minister and L2297 May 15, 1987 of Rural, Northern Vol XL Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr.

Speaker, we have pumped money, and we will continue to pump money into Bay d 1 Espoir to create a successful aquaculture industry in that area. Mr. Speaker, we haVE! given to the Co-op, the Hatchery Corporation, and the Development Association, in writing, what we want to do down there. I mean, it is not that we are or are not going to do it. We have commitments to develop an aquaculture industry in Bay d'Espoir. We are not trying to back away from that. All we want to do is have all parties live up to an agreement that we had. I mean, if this agreement is so bad, why was it not so bad in 1985?

That is what I do not understand, that all of ·the sudden it is a ridiculous agreement, but it was not in 1985. It has be_en working for two y ears , s o I do not k now why it could not continue, Mr. Speaker. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Leader of the Opposition . MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. The Premier and the House will be aware that we in the official Opposition have advocated that the retail sales tax ought to be reduced. It is at the highest level of any provincial jurisdiction in Canada.

It has gone up several points since the Premier and his administration took office. MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) of points. No. 43 R2297

MR. SIMMONS: If he would hear the question, Mr. Speaker! I know he would like to sit there and tell you what to do, but he is not going to tell me what to do. MR. SPEAKER: Order,-please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, if the member would hear the sentence! It is that the Premier and several of his colleagues, since they, either as Premier or other capacities, have­ been in government, since 1972, the sales tax has gone up several points. PREMIER PECKFORD: We will change that. We - MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I have not finished my sentence.

If he is-proud of i:he number of points it has gone up since he is in office, he can address that particular issue if he would like. PREMIER PECKFORD: I am not fussy about it. MR. SIMMONS: Are you? Not particularly. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMS: Hurry up! Ask the question. MR. SIMMONS: Well, we have the questions. have not got the answers. up, Len, boy. You child, poor, little, pathetic child, up! Shut up! Shut up! Just up for a change. You Shut you shut shut L2298 May lS, 1987 Uol XL MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Give it up! Give it up! Give it. up, boy. AN HON.

MEMBER: You are starting to lose your cool. MR. TOBIN: Throw a bucket of water over him. MR .. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, our approach is different this morning. We do not intend to continue the farce of this House. Unless we get protection, we are not: even going to ask ·the questions. We need protection. Now, Mr. Speaker, the retail sales tax is at the highest level _in all of· Canada, thanks to-this administration. We have been saying for a long time that that is having a debilitating affect on the economy. Now, we have Mr.

John 01 De a, the President of the Board of Trade, who said publicly that people are going outside the Province to make purchi~ses so they do not have to pay that particular tax, because of its very high level. That in itself is having an effect on the economy. I ask the Premier, in the light of considerable weight of evidence that this 12 per cent sales tax is ·indeed counterproductive, would he agree to ~ndertake an review of it with a view to decreasing it? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we have already taken No. 43 R2298

a number of reviews. When your current account deficit goes from $42 million in one year to $172 million in another year and the Leader of the Opposition gets up in the budget debate and condemns the government for its high deficits, then goes on to condemn the government for not spending enough on health care and on transportation, the Leader of the Opposition cannot have it both ways. We cannot have h~ss money coming in and do more. That is impossible, Mr. Speak er.

We increased our health budget this­ year by $39 million, we have increased the ambulance road service by 200 per cent in the last eight years, we have to continue to expand in . other programmes - education, transportation, job creation and so on - so we cannot at this point in time look at reducing it. We can only look at stabilizing our revenue generation, which we have done, by not increasing taxes any higher than they are . They are too high, but if people want the present services and rnore services around the Province today everybody is wanting the government to spend more money then obviously, Mr.

Speaker, we cannot look at reducing the taxes because there are demands out there. The only place that the money can come from is through revenue. Mr . Speaker, we have reviewed the tax regime many, many times. What we are .trying to do now is to get around it by doing a 50/50 deal with the private sector to create jobs. Some 1122 jobs that have been created through the fishery, forestry , rural development and parks, with close to another 100 or SO jobs today 1 and there will be hundreds and hundreds next week and the next week.

This is the way we hope to get around our deficit problem, by L2299 May 15, 1987 Vol XL stimulating the economy more, which will generate more revenue . But we are not going to be foolish and stupid enough to think that we can deliver the demands that the people of Newfoundland legitimately have by reducing taxes, thereby reducing our revenue and, therefore, having less to meet those demands. MR. J. CARTER: The Leader of the Opposition does not pay any taxes . MR . SPEAKER : The han. the Leader of the Opposition . MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, a wonderful speech.

The Premier .gives as his defence the high deficit, from $42 million to $172 million, but I wonder who caused that? · Are we being blamed for that now, Mr Speaker? The Premier is like the child who went out and bopped off his parents and then pleaded for mercy on the grounds that he was an orphan. Mr. Speaker, the high deficit is that Premier's problem . He created the problem. Nobody forced him to do the expensive renovations on his office, which makes up part of the deficit. Nobody forced him to - MR . SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Did I say something somebody did not like? MR. SIMMS : Yes . It question.

MR. SPEAKER : is a supplementary Would the han. the member please pose his question? No. 43 R2299

MR. SIMMONS; Mr. Speaker, of course the deficit is high. SOME HON. MEMBERS; Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER; Order, please! I wonder would han. members on my left would please allow the question to be asked? MR. SIMMONS : Of course the deficit is high, Mr. Speaker, and the Premier must take the full responsibility for that, but that is not the particularly the question I asked him. Let me put it a little differently, so we do not ask the same question the same way and get the gentleman from Grand Falls (Mr. Simms) all excited.

The gentleman who is the President of the Board of Trade has made a very direct allegation and, in the process, a suggestion that he feels would help the economy. Is the · Premier telling the House that he rejects that particular suggestion as not being of worth? The Premier will be aware, if he wants to talk about deficits, that the highest paid Cabinet of any provincial juris diction in Canada - just the salaries of those guys, and their perks and the press secretaries - would contribute something to his deficits.

So if he wants to look for ways to trim the deficit we can give him some suggestions on that point. But the question is; Is he rejecting outright a suggestion from Mr. 0 1 Dea that would have the effect I submit, of stimulating the economy? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier . L2300 May 15, 1987 Vol XL . PREMIER PECKFORD : Mr . Speaker, first of all the Leader of the Opposition cannot have it both ways. He wants to criticize as if renovations or whatever contributed in an enormous way to the deficit even while the Leader of the Opposition is looking for more space now from the Minister of Public Works (Mr.

Young) and the Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS : What? PREMIER PECKFORD: He wants more office space, yet:. he turns around and gElts up and starts attacking the government on office space. Now how can the Leader of the Opposition have any credibility in talking about renovations or office space? By the way, I did not increase my office ·space, it is the same as when the first premier took over here when this building was built. It is the same ~quare footage that has always been there . MR. SIMMONS: That is not true. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, that is true. MR. SIMMONS: You took next door .

PREMIER PECKFORD: No, that is the Cabinet Room. You are talking about the office space. The Leader of t:he Opposition has a request in looking for more space For his office, and yet he is criticizing us for a balloon deficit because of extra office space. Now how can the Leader of the Opposition have any credibility in asking that kind of a question? No. 43 R2300

It is crazy. The Opposition has to together. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Leader of get his A final supplementary. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: the act Mr. Speaker, first of all, if the Premier insists on introducing irrelevancies and the Chair permits them, would the Chair permit the following irrelevancy? The Chair in its wisdom, in its capacity as administrator of the House, ·gave the Opposition an extra staff person and a half in the last month or so.

My letter to the Speaker, which I understood was a p.rivate communication, aske·d if he would acknowledge the fact that there was now an extra body and a half down there and could he help me accommodate that situation. That is Premier Speaker. the extra is talking SOME HON. MEMBERS: Way to go! MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: space .about, the Mr. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to hear the Premier 1 s .. reasons, I would like to hear the Premier 1 s rationale as to how he can say he took the Cabinet Room on the eighth floor, forced the press out of the tenth floor, and yet does not have more space for himself on L2301 May 15, 1987 Vol XL the eighth floorj fantasy, boy! Come for a change. Stop talking down to earth AN HON. MEMBER : (Inaudible) record. MR. SIMMONS: Now, Guy, just cool it .. Speaker, the question is - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. He is a nice guy, Mr. Speaker. He is a nice guy. I know him we11.

I do not know what he is so worked up about . He is a nice guy . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS : You are a hice guy, too. MR. MATTHEWS: . -get away with it, buddy. MR. SIMMONS: Oh. MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! I would ask the hon. members to my 1 eft to p 1 e as e a 11 ow q u e s t i o n s to be put. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! It is impossible to ca1nry on Question Period if there is a continuous, concerted effort to interrupt and, unfortunately, I am coming to that canclusion. No. 43 R2301

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I understand the nice guys are all upset, but the question to the Premier is this. Mr. 01Dea has suggested, and has also ex pres sed concern, and we share that concern, that the 12 per cent sales tax is not only too high, but is spread over too broad a range of commodities. Can the Premier indicate to. the House whether or not there is some hope. for these people out there who have just about everything taxed now and, of course, in tandem with the federal government they want to tax chocolate bars, candy bars and everything.

The whole sales tax issue is becoming· much more onerous. And I would ask the Premier does he see any wisdom in that suggestion of Mr. 01-Dea? And has he any thoughts that he might address that situation? PREMIER PECKF.ORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: · Mr. Speaker, obviously the Leader of the Opposition is not reading the material that is being put out by the government, the budget and so on. The Minister of Finance announced in the budget that we are investigating a stock option1s plan, for example.

We announced in the budget that the development corporation was going to get substantially more funds for equity participation with businesses, that we starting a youth entrepreneur programme, that we had a venture capital programme going. These are the measures that we are using, plus our 50/50 L2302 May 15, 1987 Vol XL cost sharing of new jobs tJJit:h the private sector, plus our park job creation, plus our fishery job creation. We also give an exemption of retail sales tax for new equipment that is put into industries around the Province. On new equipment that is bought we give a retail sales.

We have a loan guarantee programme which has guaranteed loans to twenty-five to thirty fish businesses around thE! Province, we have a Farm Loan Board with a subsidized interest rate, we have a Rural DevelopmE!nt Authority with subsidiZE!d intE!rest rates, we have a Fisheries Loan Board, Mr. Speaker, and we haVE! a bounty system, all of which cover all the various sectors of the economy, not one secto1r -not just fisheries, but fisheries and farming, and for anybody buying new equipment there are retail sales tax exemptions.

So we aJ~e doing a lot; the venture capital progPamme, the equity programme, the youth entrepreneur' programme 1 and our job creation through the various department, plus the 50/50 I and a three year tax holiday for small corporations. Now, Mr. Speaker, if you list up all of those initiatives I they ar·e fairly substantial in trying to do exactly what the Leader of the Opposition wants done and what Mr. 01Dea is taking about. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the rnr::~rnber for Twillingate. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health (Dr.

Twomey) and it concerns one of the recommendations in the Provincial Bed Study Report which was tabled No. 43 R2302

in this House some weeks ago. The report in question, Mr. Speaker, recommends that there not be a chronic care facility provided for the people of Twillingate district, but inste,ad that the existing hospital, the Notre Dame Bay Memorial Hospital, be reduced, and that the pediatric ward, for example, be discontinued and that the intensive care facility in that hospital be downgraded to a two bed unit. I wonder would the minister, Mr. Speaker, tell the House if in fact it is his intention to implement that · recommendation? DR. TWOMEY : Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. DR.

TWOMEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . When I made a Ministerial Statement in this House a number of weeks ago I clearly outlined a policy of th~ Department of Health and _of the government in dealing with that bed study. I think I put it clearly and succintly, that the Department of Health had used the bed study as a guide for the future, not as a blueprint that we were going to use it for the benefit of all people in Newfoundland, and for the benefit of the health care system. I think in a subsequent question I said that nothing was carved in stone .

Furthermore, I can give the member the assurance that. before any change is made in any health care facility across this Provine e there wi 11 be close liaison with the boards, with the administration, and with all the health care personnel who are responsible for the running of these institutions. L2303 May .lS, 1987 Uol XL I can assure the member now that we have not contemplated reducing the beds at this time. We have not contemplated closing the intensive care center or the intensive coronary care center. Thank you, Mr. Speaker . MR. W. CARTER : A supplementary, Mr . Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A supplementary, the member for Twi~lingate. MR. W. CARTER : hon. the I thank the minister for his reply and his assurance, if I understood him correctly, that no such actton would be taken without prior and due consideration. That being the case, Mr. Speake'r, in view of the fact that in the Orsborn Royal Commission report on health costs, there was a recommendation that there be a chronic care facility provided in Twillingate district - in fact, it was number three on the list. Will the minister now tell the House, Mr.

Speaker, if, in fact, that recommendation will be followed, or will they bypass that recommendation by accepting thE! one in the latest report, that a facility of that n·ature not bEl provided in Twillingate district? MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of Health. DR. TWOMEY: Mr. Speaker, you are talking about tKe Royal Commission Report on hospital and health care services . In that report, if you review it, you will find a very definite statement. Our recommendation is that we would employ the services of someone knowledgeable in the No. 4-3 R2303

distribution of health care beds in this Province. The government did that. That bed study has been published. You are aware of its contents. They are the ones that have met around the Province, as I have told thi.s House. They have not met with everyone, but they have travelled extensively. Their conclusion was that there could be about 350 beds closed over a period of time. I think the period of time was between now and 1990. Again I gave the affirmation that_ we were using it as a guideline.

I am not sure when I make this statement, but I did not think that the Royal Commission on Hospital and Nursing Home Services did make a recommendation for Twillingate. I am not quite sure but I think it did not. The government has decided that during the nex£ three years therB will be a moratorium in granting money for the erection of buildings. That is the policy of this government at this particular time. We are not putting a chronic health care center in Twillingate at the present time. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker; MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: hon. the Mr.

Speaker, I want to ask the Premier a question. The provincial bed study which was just alluded to, which cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars, which was made public a year after it was given to Cabinet, recommended that the St. Lawrence Cottage Hospital should cease to provide :in-patient care L2304 May 15, 1987 Vol XL when the new hospital in Salt Pond opens, and it said th~~ same thing about the Grand Bank Cottage Hospital. The Orsborn Royal Commission Report rE!Comrnended that these two hospitals close as well. So let me ask the Premier, when will these two cottage hospitals close on the Burin Peninsula?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we commission studies from time to time and we look at these studies and, as the Minister of Health has said, they become the guidelines, they do no l: become the blueprint. Suddenly government does not relinquish its right to govern based on a report, and every single sentence and word in a report become government policy. It is a guide!. It is to get more advice from people ~ho are qualified in the field. We have made a basic decision as· it. .relates to St.

Lawrence and Grand Bank and the Salt Pond facilit.y, and it was announced by the government some time ago. So there is no plan at the present moment to close down these facilities. In the case of St. LaL~rence, as I told the hon. member fol~ Bellevue a number of weeks ago, it is a particular circumstance which is much different than many others. T hi s fa c i 1 it y , as I u n d e r s i: a ·n d i t , was given to the people of St.

Lawrence by the Americans -you have got to look at the circumstance -as a memorial because of the problems that they have had down there over the years when the old mine was going and so on. If you just do a broad brush of the Province and say numbers of people and beds, you will do a No. 43 R2304

whole bunch of things to the Province, you would close half the Province down. But if you look at the circumstance of St. Lawrence, where it was a memorial given by the Americans, one , that makes it a lot different than other facilities around the Province. Two, you have a mine being reactivated down there and a mill operation for the first time, plus a fish plant .

There is, in our view, in consultation with the local people, some legitimate arguments for the continuation of that facility at its present level . because we have to watch and see what happens in the mines and so on and the accident rates, and the same thing with the fish plant. So after we get these broad recommendations from various commissions and so on, then we just do not, holus-bolus, swallow it. We look at the local conditions in the area -and take into conS"ideration some of the cortcerns that ~he local people have, given the history of the facility, and so on .

It' is on the basis of that that we make up our minds, and we have made up our minds as it relates to the facilities there. MR. CALLAN : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, Mr . Speaker . MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, the Premier talks about the economy on the Burin Peninsula, talks about the St. Lawrence mine, the prospects for it and so on . Now that same bed study, that same report, said about Come By Chance, 1 The Come By Chance Hospital should cease to provide in-patient care when the new hospital · opens in Clarenville. 1 In other words , it L230S May lS, 1987 Vol XL should close. That was done.

But, Mr. Speaker, we have a good economy in Come By Chance area . With almost 600 people at the Come By Chance refinery, with over 1)00 people at _the fish plant in Arnold 1 s Cove, not to mention the hundreds of others in the area served by what used to · be the cottage hospital, let me ask when does the Premier and his administration intend - and with the prospects of course of concrete platforms at Adam 1 s Head - to upgrade the medical facility at Come By Chance to at least a sixteen hour clinic and possibly a twenty-four hour clinic? To ·be consistent, when are you going 1~o do it? MR .

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we have answered that over and over, many, many times, for the hon. member. MR. SIMMONS: Not satisfactorily . PREMIER PECKFORD : Well , that is just too bad if it 'is not to his satisfaction. I am not here to satisfy the member for Bellevue. I am here to lead a government, to try to do as much as I can for all parts of this Province . I am not here to be dictated to by the hon . member for Bellevue, and certainiy not by the temporary Leader of the Opposition. That is for sure, Mr. Speaker. I do not intend to.

I find it passing strange that the hon. member will use Come By Chance as a reason for upgrading health facilities in the area when he wants the refinery closed down, and condemns it every time he gets a chance. No. 43 R230S

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Port de Graue. MR. EFFORD: My question is to the Minister of Social Services. Yesterday, in the House of Assembly, the minister announced the creation of 338 jobs in his department for this Summer. I would like to ask the minister why, at the same time that he is creating 338 jobs, is he cutting back on thirty-five jobs within the regional offices? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services. MR. BRETT: Mr.

Speaker, since 1979 -1980, the staff of the Department of Social Services has been increased by 52 per cent. The reduction of thirty-five was the number that was on over and above the complement, and it should make no difference to the work load, Mr. Speaker, or the services that will be provided to the people. MR. EFFORD: A ·supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: This will have to be a final supplementary. The hon. the member for Port de Graue. MR. EFFORD: . Mr. Speaker, the number of people L2306 May 15, 1987 Vol XL depending on social assistance is the same this year as last year.

Would the minister explain why he hired on those thirty--five peoplE! to take care of the case loads by the social workers and sees fit to lay them off in 1987 when the same number of people are dE:~pendant on social services? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services. MR. BRETT: These thirty-five were not necessarily hired last year. Mr. Speaker, over a period of -time we exceeded the complE!rne,nt, thE! number that we were supposed to have. As the Premier has pointed out this morning, we do have a deficit of $172 million this year, and, Mr.

Speaker, our department as well as the rest has to stay in line. That is one department. As I have said many times in this House, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Social Services -is probably the only department thai: in l:he last number of years has never received a cut in programmes. There has never been a freeze on staff or anything else. As a matter of fact, every year we have continued to increase the amount of money that is available for different programmes, and br·ouqht in new programmes. So this thirty-five cut back in staff is just a normal thing, Mr. Speaker. We are' over-staffed ba'sically.

That is ·what it boils down to. - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has elapsed. MR. CALLAN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. No. 43 1~2 306

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, a couple of minutes ago, here in the Legislature, the Premier indicated that I had indicated, myself, here in this Legislature, on several occasions, I think he said, that I did not want the Come By Chance refinery opened and that I have suggested that it should be closed down. Now, Mr. Speaker, all I have ever said in this Legislature regarding · Come By Chance is that the Premier should stop trying to take credit for it. It fell into his lap.

I am the happiest person in this Province and in the district of Bellevue to see it open with nearly 600 jobs. If the Premier, any of his cronies or any of his staff can find any indication anywhere where I have indicated or said in any way, shape or form that I do not want · the Come By Chance oil refinery opened I then I will ·resign my seat and then he can have another by-election and go out to Come By Chance and promise that the hospital will never close as long as he is Premier, as he did in 1981. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker .

MR : SPEAKER: The han. the Premier to the point of order. PREMIER PECKFORD: Obviously that is order. It is a not a point of difference of hon. members. out the han. to abuse the opinion between two Just let me point member is trying L2307 May 15, 1987 Vol XL procedures of the House under a point of order to make another speech. Everybody in Newfoundland knows that the hon. member and his party, over the last number of months, have been frowning upon the development that has happened.

We went out and encouraged an investor to come to this Province, got the investor to come to this Province with no money from the provincial government and we have 520 pE!oplE! working out in his area. I know the hon. member is upset with that. I also know that, as a result, the last poll that was done showed the han. member wou1d lose his seat if an election was called today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I arn. prepared to rule. There is no point of order. The han. member took the opportunity of explaining his point of viE!W. There is a difference of opinion. Orders of the Day DR.

COLLINS: Motion 10. Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice to introduce a bill, 11

An Act To Amend The Corporations Act, 11 carried. (Bill No. 38) On motion, Bill No. 38 first time, ordered read time on tomorrow. DR. COLLINS: Motion 11. read a a second Motion, the hon. the Minis tE!r of No. 43 R2307

Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development to introduce a bill, 11An Act To Amend The Department Of Rural, Agricultural And Northern Development Act, 11 carried. (Bill No. 3 7) On motion, Bill No. 37 first time, ordered read ti~e on tomorrow. DR. COLLINS: Motion 12. read a a second Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill, 11An Act To Amend The Public Service· (Pensions) Act And The Uniformed Services Pensions Act, 11 carried. (Bill No. 40) On motion, first time, on tomorrow. DR. COLLINS: Order 3 MR. SPEAKER: Bill No. 40 read a ordered read a second Order 3, the Concurrence Motion.

The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I want to comment for a few minutes on a word which the hon. the Minister of Finance gave some prominence to when he brought in his most recent budget. He brought in the word 'slippage'. Mr. Speaker. Being from outport Newfoundland, I sort of thought that slippage might be something like wharfage and it probably had something to do with a place that you would haul a boat up or that you would tie a boat up. Or it might have had something to do with dunnage, the various pieces of lumber you use when you - L2308 May 15, 1987 Vol XL MR.

PATTERSON: What about garbage? MR. DECKER: load a ship with pulpwood or lumber or as the hon. member so rightly says, it might have had to do something with garbage, which might be a little closer to what the han. gentleman was trying to talk about. But he used the word slippage, Mr. Speaker, to refer to what happened in his budget, to show what happened to our economy whE!re it slipped from $40 million -not to $4-0 million and $500,000, not even to $41 million, but he had the audacity, he had the gall to get up in this House and say, 'We experienced a little bit of slippage over last year.

We anticipated that we would have a deficit in the _operating account, the account we use to pay our -light bill and buy our groceries and the day to day op1erating, ' he expected that we would have a little bit of a deficit of around $40 million, but from the time that that prediction uJas made and all the accounts were in and all the bills had arrived and it was all summed up, we discovered there was a little bit of slippage, Mr. Speaker. It slipped, llllr. SpeakE!r, not to $41 million but to $175 million, slippage, Mr. Speaker. DR. COLLINS: No, that is not right. MR.

DECKER: It is not right, is hon. the Minister that what the of Finance than $175 says? Was it less million? DR. COLLINS: That was planned (inaudible). No. 43 R2308

MR. DECKER : I see. It was planned. So it was not really slippage. It was premeditated. Is this what the hon. Minister of Finance is saying that it was premeditated slippage? ~ow, Mr. Speaker, we have another slant on this innocent word which was. slipped into the estimates this year, slippage now we understand was premeditated slippage. Mr . Speaker, whether it is premeditated or whether it is accidental is totally irrelevant. The fact of the matter is it is a dis grace, it is an absolute, total disgrace when we go from an estimated $40 million deficit to $175 million. It is not slippage, Mr.

Speaker, it is a disgrace. It is an absolute disgrace. But an even bigger disgrace is the hon. minister's attempt . to deal with the slippage. Does he say that we are now going to put Newfoundlanders back to -work, all 40 1 000 1 50 1 000 1 60 1 000 1 70 1 000 1 80,000? If I were to say 80,000 unemployed, nobody would contradict me, because nobody knows how many people are ·unemployed in this Province.

Did he say, 'One way we are going to deal with this $170 million deficit is to put Newfoundlanders back to work in the primary industries, in the fishery, in the mines, in the lumber woods, so that. we can create n·ew dollars?' Did he say we are going to do that? No, Mr. Speaker. Did he say that we are going to go to the bond market and try to raise that $170 million? Probably it wo u 1 d have been a use 1 e s s exercise, Mr. Speaker. What he said he would do was he was going to throw his hands in the air and say to Ottawa, 'This is your L2309 May 15, 1987 Vol XL problem.

We are the fellows who put this Province in the mess it is in. We are the people who caused this $170 million, which I understand now was a premeditate slippage. But, Mr. Ottawa we are not going to take any action to get us out of this mess. We are going . to throw this back into your hands. 1 The Premier you know was not far off when he said we are back in the 1930s again, because there is definitely a similarity in what the minister 'voluntarily', and I put voluntarily in quotation marks, Mr. Speaker, because I am not sure if it was voluntary. I see a similarity between what thE! Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) is voluntarily doing and what Brit a in did with us in the 1 9 3 0 s involuntarily. It was not voluntary on our part. There is indeed a very close · similarity because in the 1930s the responsibility for governing this colony was taken a~ay from us. We had gotten ourselves into difficulty and we could not pay our foreign debt . Great Britain took over, Mr. Speaker. In the process, we were under a dictatorship. Now maybe it was a benevolent dictatorship, but nevertheless it was a di eta tors hip. That di eta tors hip lasted until 1949 .

I have talked to people of my father's ~ and grandfather's generation who describe to me the days of the Commission of Government. It was utterly useless to write to the Commission and complain because you had a problem with a wharf or because you had a problem with a road or because there was a problem with social services . It was totally useless because that Commission No. 43 R2309

did not have to answer to the electorate. There was no electorate. They were appointed. They ran it the same way that you would run a big company. Mr. Speaker, in fairness, it worked. It worked if you consider the debt was paid off. I unqerstand ourselves and Poland were the only two nations on earth who paid off their war debt from the First World War. It worked. England herself did not pay off her • s but it worked . But at what price? At what cost? It divorced us from all knowledge of governing · ourse;tves. We were years and years without elected representatives. I would suggest, Mr.

Speaker, that there were people in the Province who did not even know what we were getting into when the question was put in 1949 as to whether or not we wanted to come back and to become Responsible or wanted to go into some sort ~f an economic relation with the States or if we wanted to enter into Confederation with Canada. We have been so long without having run our own affairs, I would suggest we did not know fully what we were getting into. So when the Premier talks about similarity to the 1930s, there is indeed a similarity, but the actors have changed this time.

This time instead of the Mother · Country, Great Britain I with all of the paternalism that that phas~ suggests, we have now the paternalism of Ottawa. The hon. the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) has abrogated his responsibility. He has given up his responsibility. He has shrugged it off his shoulders and said I • Here Ottawa, we have once again gotten ourselves in a mess. L2310 May 15, 1987 Vol XL Will you take the responsibility and will you bail us out?' Now this is what happened. This is the way he is going to deal with this slippage, as he calls it. This premediated slippage, he now tells us.

We are going to say to Ottawa it is no longer our responsibility. We are not going to try to do anything about it but we are going to ask you to do something about it. This is the situation we are in. I see a similarity there between 1933 and what the hon . the Minister of Finance is saying. But, Mr. Speaker, when Great Britain took 1nesponsibility for our affairs i n 1 9 3 3 , i t was at a tremendous cost. It IAJas at a tremendous price . to the people of this nation, as we were, this colony, as we were, at the time .

I would suggest, Sir, if we refuse to take responsibili ty for our actions that government, I ·will not even say •we•, Mr. Speaker, because we on this side of the House are' not re,sponsi.ble for it. We have to bear the consequences like every other Newfoundlander. We are the ones who are going to have to relinquish our birthright, but it is nothing only the responsibility of an administration which is more interested in getting ele,cted and re-elected and grasping for pou.Jer than they are in governing, Mr. Speaker.

So, .... whr:.'!n I say that the responsibility of governing has been relinquished, I have to put the blame squarely where it belongs, and that is in the lap of that administration, which, fortunately, we see the last dying days of, which fortunately is going to soon be thrown out of power. No. 43 R2310

I hope, Mr. Speaker, that the Premier, when he postures about calling an election in September, is right because I am not sure this Province can last another year with the kind of shirking of responsibility that we see from this Minister of Finance. In· 1933 circumstances forced us to relinquish our right to govern ourselves and to carry on our own affairs. The action of the recent budget has relinquished our right to carry on our own affairs. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. member 1 s time is up . MR. DECKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of Finance .

DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I do have to rise briefly just to make sure that the hon. member 1 s last few remarks are not left on the record unchallenged, and therefore might get into the public perception as being the main thrust of the budget. I do not know if the han. member has not read the budget speech in detail, and the documents with ·it, or whether he has not got a good understanding of it or whether he has let time befog his mind. It was only a little while ago but, nevertheless, he might have let time befog his mind and he has just forgotten all about it, or some other less worthy intent. Anyway, Mr.

Speaker, if we take L2311 May 15, 1987 Vol XL what the hon . member just said, if that is a reflection of the thinking of the Liberal Party, their thinking is that we, Newfoundlanders, must be content the way the Terms of Union, our relationship in Confederation, is going. They are saying that: thE! budget was wrong in trying .to establish a new relationship with the federal government in terms of support for the provincial government here and in terms of developing our economy here. He says it was wrong to do that. It was an abrogation . It should not have been the path we followed.

Now, that must ne~essarily mean that he is content, and the Liberal Party is content with the way Confederation is going . Well, I can tell the hon . member we are not content. We do not think it is going well enough in our regard and we have laid out the facts why we think that. It is not that we are being hard to get along wi-th. It is not that WE! like fighting with anyone . It is not that we feel it is all righ t for us to have a le sser deal in Confederation than everybody else, because in some way or other we are lesser beings in Newfoundland. We are saying we are Canadians.

We have been Canadians for thirty-eight years. When we joined Canada we expected certain things out of Confederation. The people in Central Canada expectE!d .... this Province to get -certain things out of Confederation. We are now pointing out that thirty-eight years later, that has not come about. Now, if the Liberal Party is c on tent wi t h that , I wo u 1 d s u g g E! s t that is their problem . They have something to answer to the No. 4.3 R2311

electorate about. If they say, it is okay for Newfoundlanders to be only about a 60 per cent level of the average Canadian in terms of employment, in terms of income, in terms of public services, in terms of any number of things, it is· okay for Newfoundlanders to be at this 1 eve 1 , it is pres u rna b 1 y beGause the Liberal Party does not think Newfoundlanders deserve anything more. Now, we do not agree with that. We take serious objection to that line of thou-ght.

We say that as Canadians, despite all the· difficulties in the Canadian economy and any other thing you want to thi~k about, we have right to our fair chance at the opportunities and the growth in this country, and we are not getting it. Now, what do we propose to do about that? We went· to the ·federal government on certain general things. We say what we have · in this Province is equivalent to a tight money policy. There is just not enough money in our economy to allow us to grow, to allow our businesses to expand. They are limping along. MR. BARRY: Reduce your taxes. DR.

COLLINS: The hon. member says, 1 Reduce your taxes. 1 Now, Mr. Speaker, what do we use taxes for? We use ·taxes by and large to put in essential services and essential infrastructure without which a modern economy cannot function. I can reduce taxes by 50 per cent if I decide no more roads, if I decide no more support to the various sectors of our economy, if I decide no more welfare payments, L2312 May 15, 1987 Vol XL if I decide no more schooling and all these sorts of things.

The hon. member opposite says, 1WE!ll, you can find great amounts of money in cutting down on the bit of travel and so on and so forth. 1 That is so ridiculous that it is beneath the intellig~nce of the member opposite so he is mer~~ly rilaking a political statement. I mean, that is not an intellig1?.nt remark. That is in actual fact a stupid remark. That is clearly a moronic remark. So I will not E!ngage in conversation on that any longer. Now, the point. is that we have got a problem in this Pr·ovince, thE!

Liberal Party wi 11 not face up to it, we are facing up to it and WE! have faced up to it and we are not grabbing Ottawa by the1 throat and s a y in g , 1 P 1 e as e fa c' e u p to it . 1 Now, what response are we getting? Fortunately, we have an admin.istration in Ottawa now that is not_ doubly deaf tJJh:ich was a situation that we were faced with for so many years, certainly since 1972, doubly deaf.

You went up to Ottawa and first of all you could hardly get anyone t.o pay any attention to you and secondly when they did they came up with all these sorts of glib remarks, like 1We support Newfoundland, 1 and then they tried to take away our resources. On the one hand they say, 1The resources must be developed for the benefit of Newfoundlanders; 1 and then .th~e~y came away and tried to takE! them away from us, to cut· us out, to not let us have anything to do with it, to spread thl~oug hou t the rest of Canada, our local resources.

It is like going to Manitoba and saying, 1lllle want half your wheat, we are going to take it away from you. It is your natural resource, we know th?t, No. 43 R2312

but we are going to take it away from you. • Now, Mr. Speaker, that is one thing we have said and we have got the sensitive hearing, fortunately, from our present administration in Ottawa. We have said, . 1 Now look, we just do not want your sympathetic hearing. That is good enough as a first step, but we want you to go beyond that and we have certain specific things that you got to pay attention to. You have got to put more money into regional development. You just cannot say, well, regional development is the same as industrial development. • It is not.

If you put all of your money industrial development, it flows through the populous, well developed parts of the country and the less populous, less developed parts of country do not ge~ a very big share of it because most of the industrial activity is up there. 1 So we say you cannot do that, you got to change your mind, you got to back to the other way and largely put your money into regional development and the most needy areas get the biggest crack at that pot. Now that is what we said to them in general terms, in semi-specific terms.

We even went more specific than that and I will not go into all the detai 1 s but I will, one e again, entphasize the most glaring aspect of that. We said to them, • Do you spend money on defense in Canada? • The answer is obviously yes. •oo you spend it equally a eros s the provinces? • The answer is obviously no.

We say, • Do you spend it very unequally across the provinces? • The answer they have to give us is, 1 Yes, we spend it extremely unequally across the L2313 May 15, 19 8 7 Vo,l XL Province to the extent that on a per capita basis in Nova Scotia, for instance • - and I am not saying this against Nova Scotia, I wish Nova Scotia had more, I am not concerned about impoverishing them, that is not my concern at all, let them have $5,000 per capita for all I care - but I am saying, 1 Is it not a bit inequitable that you spend $1,000 approximately per capita in defense expendit~re in Nova Scotia and you spend $50 per capita on defense · expenditure in Newfoundland and Labrador?

Is that not a little bit too inequitable and, if it is, are WE! asking for something very unreasonable? Have we declared that we are outside the Canadian community? Have we said we do not want defense expenditures?• Now I am talking about the majority of sensible Newfoundlanders. There is a certain ·small sort of kooky click who say, ·•No, no, no defense expenditures in Newfoundland, I do not care whether they are for national defense or local defense or defense of the Arctic or playing our

part in our international obligations. I do not want that. • That kooky bunch that says, •No, no, no, no defense. I do not care if it is economic spinoff, no defense spending in Newfoundland. • Of course, I am referring to our friends in the NDP. These are the kooky fringe bunch in our political spectrum these days. We really do not have to pay too much attention to them. We have to counter their arguments, but we certainly cannot allow oursleves to be deflected from our ·main responsibility. So, we are saying location, because No. 43 becausE! of our of our obvious R2313

value to Canada in defence terms on the Eastern ramparts of the nation, sort of with a purview and a view over the Atlantic routes, between the Old World and the New World, because of our proximity to the whole Eastern Arctic, and, there are restricted channels .coming from the Arctic which pass by. our ·shore which are very important to defend and to have clearly . established Canadian sovereignty over, I am talking about off the Labrador and so on.

We are saying because of all these things, but more than that, because of the underutilized, defense infrastructure in this Province, the defense installations that we inherited from the Second World War, and obviously also because it would be beneficial to us economically - MR. SPEAKER (Greening): . Order, please! The minister1s time is up. DR. COLLINS: 'han. -we are saying direct more money in our case. If I can have just a minute, if I may, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER: By leave. DR. COLLINS: That, we think, is a defensible message to Ottawa. We are not going to get it handed to us on a plate.

We have to keep after them because they have many other concerns and we are a distance from Ottawa. We are not going to get it tomorrow. We cannot go up with one document and expect our next budget will show all these great things that we asked for. It is going be a persistent battle. It is going to take L2314 May 15, 1987 Vol XL sometime to turn around that thirty-eight years where we have not had a good deal. But we wi 11 do it , if we do a chi e IJ e a c E! r t a in consensus. I am not saying a total agreement and the absence of partisan argument about this. We have to be realistic, we are ~Joing to get that.

I think we havE~ to achiE!Ve a provincial consensus that we all say, 1 Yes, things havE~ to change. Yes, they have to change marketedly, and yes, we are agrE!ed upon the main areas that thE! change should take place in. 1 So, Mr. Speaker, I think that I do have to counter and take out of the record at least along with the hon. member for the Strait of Belle Isle1s account of things, I have to put in my own account of things speaking on behalf of the government. MR: DECKER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR. DECKER: Mr.

Speaker, I have a few words to r~ply to the hon. minister, but before I do that, I am sure the minister does not realize what he is saying when he refers to the voters of St. John 1 s East as being the kookie fringe. I would ask the minister · to gua1nd what he says. The hon. membe!r might be! a part of the kookie fringe, but I did not put the hon. member there, nor did the Minister of Finance put them there, but the voters of St. John1s did and you· have to take your words under advisement. Mr. Speaker, the hon. minister now puts a third face on the reason No. 43 R2314

for this slippage. The first time I heard him use the word • slippage 1 it was almost as if it was an accident, it went from $4-0 million to $180 million, and it is ?till going, Mr. Speaker, and God only knows where it is going to be before this session of the House is out, before 1:00 o•clock today. God only knows how far that slippage is going to have gone because we are on a slippery slope, Mr. Speaker, and we are slipping farther and farther into debt . Every minute we are slipping farther! But the first rea s on for it was it was an accident. It just happened. It was something that was not planned.

The han. minister gets up in this House a few minutes ago and says, •rt was premediated, it was planned, it was a planned slippage, it was, • I do not know, I just forget the words . he used now, but certainly 1 it was premediated. 1 Now, Mr. Speaker, when he get-s up and answers the little bit of constructive criticism which I gave, he throws another 1 ight on it. Why now did we have this slippage, this premeditated slippage, this $180 million which is probably $200 million but the time I finish speaking? Why? Because he wants to get Ottawa•s attention.

Now, here is finance, here is economics, the han. gentleman should be the head of an economics department in one of the .... universities. You put a province into debt $180 million because you want to catch the attention of Ottawa? Now, Mr. Speaker, come on. Come on. MR. BARRY : Is that the same group that promised to co-operate and consult? L2315 May 15, 198 7 Vol XL MR. DECKER : Come on, Mr. Speaker, I mean how stupid does the minister think Newfoundlanders are? How stupid does he think Canadians are? More importantly, how stupid or how deaf does he think the bond markets are?

You put a province into slippage, premeditated slippage by $180 million, and the figure is still rising, · because you want to catch Ottawa's attention. You want them to take notice of us. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! DR. COLLINS : What would you like to see cut out of it? Come on, tell us what you would cut out. MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, $.180 million becaUSE! he wants Ottawa to take notice. I can suggest fifty schemes which · would cost an awful lot less money, Mr. Speaker, which would cost an awful lot less money.

I would suggest he take the House of Assembly and let us go up to Ottawa, silly, but not as expensive as $180 million. One hundred and eighty million dollars to get Ottawa to take notice. · Mr. Speaker, the reason it is only $180 million is because we have a government in Ottawa who listens. That is why it is only going to cost us $180 million. God Lord, are we not fortunate that we do not have a Liberal Government in Ottawa?

Are we not fortunate that we do not have an NDP Government in Ottawa because he would have had to spend maybe $1 billion, he would have had to take $1 bi Ilion slippage to get Ottawa to notice us. Because, presumably, other political parties would not have No . 4-3 R2315

had this same caring, this same concern, this same listening to Newfoundland as the present administration in Ottawa, which the hon. minister helped put there by the way. We all remember his cr•Jsade for prosperity, do we not? We all remember the bus going across Newfoundland. We all remember the Prime Minister who was not afraid to inflict prosperity on Newfoundland. We all remember that hon. Minister of Finance was one of the main, prime movers in putting that government in Ottawa and now, to get their . attention, he has to put this Province into slippage, to use his own words, into a slippage of $180 million.

I would humbly suggest, Mr. Speaker, that maybe, it is just quite possible, that this co-operation, this listening Mr. Mulroney, this co-opera-ting Mr. Mulroney, this Tory blue Mr. Mulro~ey, I would suggest, with all humility, maybe Mr. Speaker, there is just something wrong with the Prime Minister 1 s ears. Maybe he is just not listening, if we have to put our Province $200 million into debt in our current account just to catch his attention. Now, Mr. Speaker, let us not be so silly. Let the Minister of Finance not talk such nonsense. That is not economics.

That is Tom foolery, that is not politics, that is posturing, Mr. Speaker, that is nonsense. Let us let the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins), when I sit down, get up and explain himself. Just on the odd chance that the media might pick up what the han. member said, I will sit down anytime he wants me to so he can get up and clarify. Surely he does not want Hansard to s how i t . I wi 11 e v en go a 1 on g - L2316 May 15, 1987 Vol XL if the people in Hansard are prepared - I will even go along with him withdrawing his remarks.

What a silly excuse for a $180 million slippage because he wanted to get the attention of Ottawa. He also said, Mr. Speaker, that he wanted to change Confederation. What he wants to see in Confederation is ten Balkan states . What he wants to s e e in Confederation will never be any good to Newfoundland whatsoever because, if we are going to have ten Balkan states, Mr. Speaker, we are going to have two strong Balkan states and we are going to have six very, very poor Blakan states and we, Mr.

Speaker, are going to be number six in the six; So let the minister be advised, when he talks about changing Confederation, when he talks about changing - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. DECKER: Could you keep those cuckoos quiet, Mr. Speaker? Could you keep these cuckoo clocks quiet, Mr. Speaker? They come out, Mr. Speaker, and they are just like the bird in the cuckoo _clock. They are so used to nodding every time · the Premier gets up and says something that when a fellow is trying to make a good speech in this House they begin cuckoo, cuckoo to try and keep him down. Mr.

Speaker, is there some way there could be a bit of protection? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Could we have some silence while the hon. member is making a speech? No. 43 R2316

MR. DECKER : Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr. Speaker, the hon. Minister of Finance wants to change Confederation. It is foolishness the hon. member is talking about, changing Confederation so that we would have ten separate states. He wants to break up Confederation . If he were to take away the central government in Ottawa~ this is what the member 1 s party has been trying to do, decentralize the nation. There is no gain whatsoever. Why do we not realize it? There is no gain for Newfoundland unless we have a strong central government. What other reason is there to have transfer payments?

What other reason is there to have schemes such as DREE? There is no other r~ason unless yo~ have .a strong central . g·overnrnent, Mr. Speaker. I would hope that the government in St. John 1 s is just as concerned about St. Anthony as it is about St. John 1 s. That is because we have a provincial government and the role of government is to be concer~ed for the weaker regions of the Province. That is how it is supposed to be in theory and that is how it will be soon when we move across the uJay. That is the provincial government.

Ottawa, as a central government, has to be just as concerned with Newfoundland as it is with Ontario. That is the way it used to be when we had sanity in Ottawa. We have had two and a half years of insanity, we have had two and a half of years oF the cuckoo 1 s nest, as my colleague points out here, but that is just a temporary abrasion, that is just a temporary blimp which will soon pass away as the polls have showed. L2317 May 15, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! The hon. member 1 s time is up . MR. DECKER: Thank you. MR. WARREN : Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the member for Torngat Mountains .

MR. WARREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker . I want to say a few words on the concurrence debate also, Mr. Speaker . I believe I should begin by mentioning the big project in the Mount Pearl - Kilbride area, the project that will save thousands and thousands of dollars for the consumers of ' this Province. Howe v e r , i n s pea k i n g abo u t t hi s I want to say one thing about an embarrassing situation that happened a couple of days ago to a private business person in the Province. This private business person came to my office and asked me to do what I could to assist the man in his endeavours.

He left my office quite satisfied with the responses that he got from me and with the intervention I was going to do on his behalf. Mr. Speaker, around twenty minutes to three he was accompanied by another business person in this Province who asked AN HON. MEMBER : Two o 1 c1ock. MR. WARREN: Okay, two o 1 clock - who asked No . 4-3 R231'7

him to come to a friend of his in the Confederation Building and see if they could get some more information. This young businessman, an entrepreneur, agreed to go along and they were supposed to meet with the membe"' for St. Barbe (Mr. Furey). MR: MATTHEWS: Where was he? MR. WARREN: Now, Mr. Speaker, whtch there is nothing wrong with that whatsoever because I think anybody should . haVE! the opportunity to meet with anybody t:hey desire, but when the walked into the Opposition Office, not only ·was the member for St. Barbe there, but also he had five other colleagues there.

They got him there in an embarrassing situation and then they came to the House and embarrassed the gentleman again. It almost caused the gentleman to lose a business. That is what the Opposition done to this gentleman a few days ago. Now, Mr. Speaker, it was an irresponsible moue by the member for St. Barbe and his cronies that he had sitting around the table with him. Now, Mr. Speaker, for that hon. gentleman from St. Barbe to do such a terrible disservice to a very promising young entrepreneur in this Province was disgusting, it was most disgusting. MR. MATTHEWS: He should resign. MR. WARREN: Mr.

Speaker, I believe the hon. at least hang his think, yes, I gentleman should head in -shame. I understand what the hon. member is after and I am also most interested in the absence of one the most decent, honourable L2318 May 15, 1987 Vol XL gentlemen on the other side, the absence of the hon. member for Nas kaupi (Mr. Kelland). The member for Naskaupi has not bE!en here now going on nineteen days including t:he weekend.

Now, I understand, I do not know what is happening, but I know this -much: In conversation with most reliable people the hon. gentleman is most reluctant to come back in this House as long as . the present Leader of the Opposition is acting the way he is acting. The hon. gentleman for Naskau