• ' ' 1 ' Volume 2 PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND 2nd Session VERBATIM REPORT Thursday, October 25, 1973 SPEAKER; THE HONOURABLE JAMES M. RUSSELL Number 65

October 25, 1973, Tape 1 -- apb The House met at 3:00 p.m. Hr. Speaker in the Chair. HR. SPEAKER: Order! The honourable the Minister of Health. !!ON. A.LROWE (,!INISTER OF !!EALTil): Mr~ Speaker, I would like to ~uke a ministerial statenent, The operation and day to day functioning of the health system in the nrovince is the responsibility of the Deoartment of Health and myself, I am alarmed at this lRtest action of the Lab und X Ray Technologists and technicians in their mass :resignation which is a callous and wanton action which can only be condemned in the strongest terms.

As Minister of Health I have deliberately avoided public sratements on this issue in' order not to aggravate a situation fraught with public. peril and because it is primarily a labour-management problem and was and ie being conducted by experts in that field. Nevertheless I have all summer been watching closely each step of the way and have assisted hospitals and the Hospital Association with all the resources of the Department of Health.

However, the withdrawal of all diagnostic services, including those to emergencies, on the short notice of a few hours~ J;, a lawless act and jeopardizes the health and perhaps even the 11.ves of every man, woman and child in this province, including indeed the wives and families of the technologists and technicians and this occasions me to speak.

It would appear that N~A.P.E. has no control over its membership for in a communication addressed to the negotiating team a few days ago it was specifically stated that emergency services would be provided and it was stated that any hospital unable to cope with the situation could call on N.A.P.E. and further assistance for emergency care would be provided. Indeed, only yesterday a committee with medical personnel and technologists was set up to identify which cases should be classified as emergencies. i.499

October 25, 1973, Tape 1, Page 2 apb N.A.P.f.. has not lived up to nor met this commitment and by totally depriving the province of their services they put at risk the health of each of us. Surely this cannot be the wish nor desire of any of the technologists who must of themselves have some human understanding, some deep sense of responsibility and loyalty, not only to their association but certainly too to the patients they have been trained to serve.

It is 1 of course, possible and right that we should single out for praise and commendation those technologists who have remained at their posts and who will remain at their posts, and indeed, as a survey today shows,there are a number of technologists who have not submitted their resignations. For exnsnple. as at noon today of the thirty-one hospitals in the province some twenty-one hospitals are functioning normally. I would like to take time out to read the list, Mr. Speaker, if I may. No service is withdrawn at the H.C.Boylen Hospital; the Buchana Hospital; the Charles S.Curtis Memorial Hospital at St.

Anthony; The Churchill Falls Hospital, the Happy Valley Hospital; Notre Dame Bay Memorial Hospital, and the Government Cottage Hospitals at Bonavista; Bonne Bay, Botwood; Burgeo; Burin; Come by Chance; Grand Bank; Harbour Breton; Narkland; Old Perlican; Placentia; Sir Thorn.as Roddick; St. Lawrence Hospital; Springdale Hospital and the Dr. Halter Templeman Hospital. The second category - hospitals not operated by government - general services withdrawn by all members of the bargaining unit but they are providing emergency services. The Central Newfoundland Hospital; the Capt.

Jackman Memorial Hospital in Labrador City and the James Paton Memorial Hospital, Gander,and the Carbonear Community Hospital. All Y.-Ray services are functioning as usual with the exception of one technician. Energency laboratory services are being provided in these hospitals I have mentioned. G5il0

October 25, 1973~ Tape 1, Page 3 -- apb Now we come into the other six main provincial referral hospitals where all ereergency services have been withdrawn and the only services are those provided by management and supervisory personnel. These are the St. John's r-:eneral Hospitalj the Grace General Hospital; The Dr. Charles A.Janeway Child Heal th Centre; St. Clare I s 'Hercy Hospital; the Western Hemorial Hospital and the Waterford Hospital where some resignations up to now have been received. This, Mr, Speaker, represents the critical area of the hospito.l situation i.n the province.

The major referral hospitals, the Grace, the General, the Charles Janeway, the St. Clare's, the Western Memorial and the Waterford Hospital. That is the situation as of noon today. Whatever may he the outcome of this infringement of humanitarian principles it does indicate that the government's removal of legislation giving the health workers the right to strike has not been accepted by the union with the responsibility that the concession demands.

In the name of humanity as a doctor and as a Minister of Health, I call upon the technologists to return to their posts and allow the normal process of bargaining to proceed before the crisis worsens and before a single life is lost, Thank you, Mr. Speaker! u501

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 2 NM - 1 HON. E. M. B,OBERTS, Leade]'.'_e_f the Opposition: Mr. Speaker, under the rules of the House we are not allowed to debate a ministerial statement so I shall not attempt to, but I will say simply that I think the minister 1 s statement is the most despicable and provocative statement that I have heard in this House in a long time. The fact remains, Sir, that the government have been dealing in bad faith with ·the x-ray and laboratory technologists. HON. J. C. CROSBIE, Minister of F.i~ That is a lie. "MR. ROBERTS: Mr.

Speaker, the honourable gentleman will either prove that statement or withdraw it under the rules of the House. I have made a statement, Sirt he has called it a lie. I call upon Your Honour to protect, to give the protection every member is afforded by the rules of the House. MR. CROSBIE: Sir, I wish to speak to that point.

What the honourable gentleman says is not true, it is an untruth, it is a nontruth, it is a lie but since the rules of the House require me not to use that expression and since I expect to be speaking later in the afternoon when I will deal with his statement in detail, I will withdraw what I just said. MR. ROBERTS·: Mr. Speaker, I thank the honourable gentleman for his usual gracious withdrawal, another final offer until the Premier pulls the rug out from under him again. As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, the government have been dealing in bad faith with these technologists.

They have been driven to the very unsatisfactory position where today every major hospital in this province is closed effectively. That cannot be tolerated, I am glad the Minister of Health has finally said something. It is the first thing he said all summer other than a pious platitude about sick people in the middle of a strike. I call upon him now, Mr. Speaker, as I have before, to take some measures?to show some leadership. The important thing is that these people are treated justly and that the people of Newfoundland are treated justly. u5u2

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 2 NM - 2 Now the Minister,of Finance, atone wall as he is, has said he will be speaking. I too shall have the pleasure of a few words to the House when he finishes. I shall then go into it in a little greater detail. But let me repeat what I have said, Sir, the government have been dealing in bad faith with these technologists, there have been under the counter assurances made and that is what has caused it.

That is what has caused this absolutely unprecedented situation today and a serious one it is, The medical advice I have had is that the hospitals cannot function in any degree at all without the x-ray and laboratory technologists, and they have quit. They have quit their jobs. They have given them up. J:1!h_ CROSBIE: And you are delighted. MR. ROBERTS: That is what I expect from the Minister of Finance. MR. SP~ Order please! I would like to remind all honourable members that the member speaking does have the right to be heard in silence,and request all honourable members to foll-0w that order. MR.

ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance has said exactly what one would have expected of him and it will be treated with the contempt it deserves. Mr. Speaker, as I said,the Minister of Health has finally made a statement. I hope now he will take some action.

I hope he will go to see the Premier and see if the Premier can bring some sense to the Minister of Finance or perhaps once again we will have to have the hospital boards threatening to close the hospitals, the action that brought them to their senses when the CUPE workers were on strike in Grand Falls and Corner Brook and the NAPE workers were on strike at St. Clare I s. We will come back on it later, Mr. Speaker, and I hope we will have a good hard look at this legislation. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Public Works and Services. HON. J.

ROUSSEAU1 Minister of Public Works and Services: I have a statement: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce the awarding of a contract to Seabord Construction Limited for the construction of an extension to the Waterford Hospital, The contract was awarded o5u3

3 for $4,983,700, The extension w:Ul provide 200 new berb on four levels tc ti'1e existing facility, The services to be e.xtended include rr:n:xinum secur:Jxy, miJJimu-:n security, .adolescent care i day care rehabilitation, active treatnent and associated ser-1lce::. Ward as well as serr,i- private and private accor;:modations will be available, The exterrnion will provide the L1te.st services for treatsent of JT'ental nnd ne.rvous diseases. Construction v.:Ul be steel fra1N2, concrete block and bridt., The project is due for completion in apprn:xinately eighteen months, :-ffi.

J.A, CARTER: 1 lH:f: leave to presrrn the following petition: This petition is presented on behalf of some seventy odd members of the CNR railway here in St, fofm 1 s and the petition reads: - 11 We, the undersigned~ are opposed to the proposed school tax on property by districts, ;:1th the present high price of housing 2nd buildinp lots, hich r::urtr;age rntes nnd 01,micipal taxes, 2.ny further increase in property taxation vould present nn i:r1:.:;ur11;01mtahlc obstacle to prospective and a disaster to present householders :,md ten:mts,

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 3 Pagel - MRI/ "We suggest the following methods of raising the amounts required for schools be explored: (1) an increase in, educational grants from the federal government; (2) a stumpage fee on pulp wood; (3) a fee per barrel on refined oil; (4) a fee per ton on raw materials 11 • Now, Mr. Speaker, some of these suggestions are too complex to go into at this present time and I certainly would not support them all unreservedly. I do not feel competent to debate the merits and demerits of those four proposals because I do not have the relevant legislation at my finger tips.

However, it has become abundantly clear that any proposed school tax put upon the present property taxes in St. John's would be manifestly unfair because of the great difference in treatment of a property holder and a person who pays rent. Now many years ago when this taxing device was first developed I have no doubt that the rents were much low-er and that it was probably six of one and a half dozen of the other. However, it really did not matter.

Now you pay a much higher tax if you are renting than if you are owning and therefore by increasing this type of taxation. which is unfair to start with, naturally the end result is even more unfs The other thing that upsets a great many people is that the school tax is unevenly applied. I was talking a couple of days ago to some workers of one of the larger firms in Bonavista and they tell me that

whereas deduct~ons are made from their salary, civil servants working in the same town are sent a bill, which they may or may not pay,and all of them do not pay. The collection rate is bad. Nw let me say at the very outset and to be perfectly clear, I firmly believe that there should be some form of school taxation. The schools caruiot exist on air, even on hot air. Therefore, I also feel that the expense of schools should be dragged out into the open. In my view- school tax should be a poll tax. It should be low. There should be generous exemptions. I think that the prime value of this ~505

October 25, 1972 Tape no. 3 2 is to drag the costs of education out into the open. Very few people realize that two of the seven per cent S. S. A. that we pay was originally earmarked for education. Now I know you cannot earmark tax money. so much for this and so much for that. It all has to go into the pot I realize. All the same I think that it is high time that the public were aware of the staggering costs that education involves. 1 think, for instance, if such a scheme had been in effect many years ago, many of the expensive mistakes that have been made in the past would have been avoided.

I merely conclude by saying that I feel that I echo the concern of the signatories of this petition, although I do not support all their suggestions. I merely would like to say that any tax however imposed should not only be fair but be seen to be fair. I, therefore, would like to table this petition and refer it to the department to which it relates. u5u6

October 25, 19 73 Tape 4 TB-! HON, GFTIALD OTTENHEIMER: (MINISTER OF EDUCATION): What I 1'as going to say was that the repres~ntation of the Hon. memher of St. John's North, obviously I and the government shall tak'e note of it as we have taken note of various presentations and expressions of view-s durini the statutory period during which the publication of intent is in effect. More than that I can hardly say because that period has not expired. \.ffi. ROBERTS: ~r. Speaker, I would like to say a word or two and give my thanks to the gentleman from St. George's who will get his licks in in a second or two.

I am glad that the minister is taking this attitude and that he will take this into account. I am glad also to note that he has not termed these representations ludicrous as one of his colleagues did in a singularly unfortunate phrase. I am glad to know he will be giving them due consideration, I hope and I feel,knowing the honourable gentleman, that these representations, Sir, will be given the same sort of consirleration that have been given to the representations from the St.

John's Board of Trade, a group with whom I do not have a political love affair hut a group whom I feel should be taken seriously and not have their well~.thouRht.,out brief described as ludicrous and utterly unacceptable. I am glad the minister at least, for one on that side, is open-minded. HR. A. DUNPHY: ~fr, Speaker, I ask leave to present a petition on behalf of the residents of St, Theresa's, .lournois P.rook and Flat Bay in my district, the District of St. George's.

The prayer of the petition asks that all concerned in government give consideration to the matter of paving, upgrading and putting the road in such condition as to relieve the heavy burdens this brings on the residents to maintain their vehicles, including trucks. The road is used extensively by the people of Flat Bay, going to and from work and the bussing of the school children, etc. I do not know how familiar members of the House are with the Flat Bay Area out on the West Coast of my district. Perhaps, Mr.

Speaker, you would permit me to dwell just a little on it under the circumstances which they have suffered over the past twenty odd years, Hopefully, when you hear a few facts in regards to these roads that exist i;5iJ7

October 25, 1973 Tape 4 IB-2 here today, then we can get something done about it. These are the people, if I may say, that have been just about forgotten by governments in this country. They were the last to receive electricity. It is only in the last number of years that electricity has come there. Through the efforts of this member and the telephone companies~ we have finally got telephones in there this year. Now the roads have been a case of neglect. I do not know how familiar my f;overnment is with bad rna<ls but maybe, if I may take the House's time, you will let me inform you what a had road is.

The roads which I am referring to are ln the Flat Bay Area. When it is warm or dry or when the sun is shining, it is an area where you cannot breath~ with the dust, where you cannot see. When it is wet it is almost impossihle to navigate through the potholes, the mudholes and the water. In winter time you cannot get through at all, as most of the time they are blocked. They are not receiving the service nor the maintenance they should, So I am asking the ~inister in his Department of Transportation and Communications to give this consideration th1.s year, give these neople upgraded roads and pavement.

I think it is hi~h time. It has been neglected long enoug'r, because after all, when this new government went into office eighteen months ago,! for one was hoping that by offering myself to work for my district that these things could be done. Government always encouraged me to think this way. 1 think this policy still exists. I would like to see the proof come spring with the initiation of this project going ahead, That is paving and upgrading in the Flat Bay Area. }tr, Speaker, I ask that these petitions which I have to present with the signatures of over 300 names of people in the Flat Bay, St.

Theresa 1 s to Journois Brook Area will be placed upon the table and sent to the department to which they relate.

October 25, 1973 Tape 5 PK-1 NR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Bell !~land. MR. S. A. NEARY: I support the petition presented by the member for St. Georges on behalf of his constituents in the St. Theresa's-Flat Bay Area in the District of St. George's. I would gather from the introductory remarks made by the honourable member, Mr. Speaker, that this is another unfulfilled promise made by the Tory Administration in the last two provincial general elections. I have a suggestion for the honourable member for St. George's,Mr. Speaker.

This is given in all sincerity and good faith,as a postive suggestion, Sir, that if the member is unable to get the kind hearted Minister of Transportation and Conununications,who is always most co-operative, if he is unable to get him to upgrade and pave these roads, Sir, that he do the same as his seating companion did, the member for Port au Port. in the rental dispute in the District of Port au Port, that he threaten to resign. AN HON. MEMBER: It works every time. MR. NEARY: It works every time, Mr. Speaker, the honourable member for Port au Port got action. If the honourable member for St.

George.' 5 wi,:q do the same thing I am sure that that is the only way he will get action, because this crowd have no intentions, Mr. Speaker, of - AN HON. MEMBER: On a point of order. MR. NEARY: this honourable crowd - AN HON. ME."IBER: On a point of order, Mr. Spe~ker. MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. STAGG: Mr. Speaker, the honourable member for Bell Island well knows that debate is not allowed on a petition. He has certainly meandered into a far field from the point that was brought up by the member for St. George's. MR. ROBERTS: On the point of order, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to welcome the gentleman from Port au Port and to know he has not resigned and to say that the honourable member for Bell Island is not debating he is merely offering a helpful hint to the gentleman for St. George's as to how to go about getting the prayer of this petition, granted • In saying all he said, Mr. Speaker 1 it was not a debate) was if the honourable gentleman for St. o5il9

October 25, 1973 Tape 5 George ts does not get the prayer of this petition granted, all he has to do is threaten to resign and the government will do it for him. We put that forward as a helpful thing. It is not debate. A very helpful thing. The gentleman for Port au Port showed that it worked. MR. SPEAKER: I am not prepared to say if the honourable member for Bell Island was entering into a debate on the petition but,I think he can be a little more relevant to the prayer of the petition. MR. NEARY: Thank you I Mr. Speaker. I see Your Honour is just as keen as ever.

Smnmer months have made him sharper than ever, I cer- PK-2 tainly concur with your ruling, Mr. Speaker, but I do want to say, in all sincerity, Sir, that I hope, I sincerely hope that the people down in the Flat Bay Area will not have to be dragged off to jail as they were in Carmanville for trying to get their 1-. .,ads upgraded and paved down in the District of Fogo. I hope, Sir. that - A'.N HON. MEMBER: They got them paved finally. MR. NEARY: They finally got them paved but not what they wanted. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. NR. NEARY: Well it will not take long. But, Hr.

Speaker, I do hope that the prayer of this petition will be granted. I doubt if the government will have time to do it this year, Sir, because all the paving equipment is dow't'l in the District of Hermitage at the present time. If the honourable the Premier does not soon call the by-election down there, Sir, it will be there until the snow comes on the ground. So I would not hold my breath if I were the honourable member for St. George's. waiting to get it done this year. But I do hope, Sir, that this is one promise that this crowd will keep. MR. ROBERTS : Well, well supported. MR.

SPEAKER: Are there any other petitions? HON. W. G. DAV.TE (Minister of Provincial Affairs and Environment): Mr. Speaker~ ?·ffi. SPEAKER: The Honourable Minister of Provincial Affairs. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. DAWE: I am sorry he was not. MR. ROBERTS: I am sorry he was. u510

October 25, 1973 Tape 5 PK - 3 MR. DAWE: The honourable member was looking the wrong way. MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. DAWE: The honourable member should be looking this way instead of that way. Mr. Speaker, I wish to present a petition from the residents of Fowler's Road in Chamberlains. These people are looking now for the extension of Fowler's Road from its present terminus to the Trane-Canada Highway. with upgrading and if possible, paving.

Last year in this honourable House we presented a petition from other residents of Fowler's Road which was followed through by the Honourable Minister of Highways and which subsequently saw the upgrading and paving of that road. Some years ago I personally recall that the former Premier promised us that this road would be upgraded and extended to the Trans-Canada Highway and would be an access road to the Conception Bay Highway. This was never followed through.

As a matter of fact, a bridge,which was at that time existing and which was serving its purpose and the purpose of the travelling public who desire to use the road, has since deteriorated and fallen into the river and is now inaccessible • That happened about four years ago ,and it was never reconstructed. So the people in this area have been prevented from using this access to the Trans-Canada Highway.

This petition proposes that the Department, Transportation and Conmnmications,upgrade the road, reconstruct the bridge and make an access to the Trans-Canada Highway for the convenience of people who work in the area and who would find it more convenient to use such a road and the Trans-Canada Highway ae a means of expediting their travelling to and from work. Mr. Speaker, I wish this petition to be presented to the department which it concerns. &511

October 25~ 1973 Page l - MRW MR. E.W. WINSOR: Mr~ Speaker, I beg to present a petition on behalf of 440 voters in the Joe Batt's Arm, Tilting Area of Fogo District. The prayer of the petition is for the upgrading and paving of the roads around Tilting and Joe Batt's Arm - the prayer is that the road be upgraded and paved in the Tilting~ Joe Battfs Arm Area. The roads are in a terrible, deplorable condition and the petitioners say that the only solution is for the upgrading and paving.

Mr~ Speaker, in supporting this petition, I recall in 1971 or 1972 there was work do~e on the upgrading and some paving done on the roads on Fogo Island. It is a great pity, Mr. Speaker, that a continuation of the upgrading and paving of other roads on Fogo Island was not carried out while the equipment, machinery and the contractor were there. There is sufficient crushed stone on the island and every day or every week now it is becoming less and less. I am afraid that if the government do not see fit within the next year to upgrade and pave that road, then they will have to go ahead and crush more stone.

I ask the Hon. Minister of Communications and Transportation to give this petition a very sympathetic consideration. Perhaps his name will get just as well known on Fogo Island as it is around Carmanville. Mr. Speaker, I ask that this petition be tabled and referred to the department to which it relates. MR. F. B. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition on behalf of the citizens of Bartlett's Harbour in St. Barbe North.

Sir, the prayer of the petition is that the Bartlett's Harbour Development Committee construct a one hundred foot long by five foot high wooden dam across the outlet from a water supply called 11 Big Pond" in that particular community; and that the intake of the presently existing

October 25, 1973 Tape no~ 6 2 community water line be relocated to a more suitable location in the lake and that a pump house be built and an electric pump and pressure tank be installed and that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador be requested to provide the financial assistance to carry out this particular project~ The estimated cost of the project is just about $10,000. Now, Sir, there is a long report from the Barlett's Harbour Development Committee that has been sent along to me in association with this particular petition. The Hon.

Minister of Fisheries has a copy of that report and obviously it would take too long a period of time to go through that particular report now but it is a very well prepared report. The essence of it is this;- Under the previous administration a community water supply was begun or initiated under the Department of Community and Social Development and upon the election of the present administration the continuation or the completion of that particular water line was stopped.

Consequently, there are a number of homes in the particular Community of Bartlett's Harbour who are still without water and there are t:wo herring plants or two herring processing facilities in Bartlett 1 s Harbour that have been closed up by the ,Federal Fisheries Authorities because of the fact they do not have an adequate water supply coming t~ these two plants for the purposes of processing the herring~ Conse.quently there are at the present time sixty to eighty fishermen who are unemployed during the fall herring fishery in Bartlett's Harbour and there are thirty to forty women of that particular community who would ordinarily be employed in the two herring plants in Bartlett;f s Harbour.

Sir, I brought this to the attention of the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to see if 0513

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 6 3 ti7ey could get. together ar;d work out some sort of a plan to straighter. up this problem ir. time for the fall fishery and nothing has been done, Sir, I contacted the President of the Salt Fish Corporation to see whether something could be done to assist, with respect to getting water to these plants,nnd notice was too short for the Salt Fish Corporation to do anything about it this year.

They are hopi~g to be able to do something about it during the coming winter, Sir, I also contacted the Minister of Rural Development and the minister did promise to send a fieldman i-::ito the Core:n.ttnity of Barlett' s Harbour to assess the situation there. I am ~ot aware .as t:o whether or uot the Heldman has arrived yet but I have no reason to doubt the minister's word.

Sir, the important thing is di.at there are approximately eighty fishermen and forty ladies i~ the Community of Barlett's Harbour who are basically without employment this time of the year 1 with a good herring fall fishery going on, who would otherwise be employed if this water system had to he extended to the herring plant as requested over a month ago~ Sir, 1 beg the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to get together and try and rectify this despicable situation as quickly as possible so that these good people can salvage something out of the fall fishery, Sir. Hr.

Speaker, I ask that this petition be placed on the table of the House and referred to the department to which it relates. i,514

October 25, 1973 IB-1 REPORTS OF STANDING AND SELECT COMMITTEES: HON. T.A. HICKMAN: (MINISTER OF JUSTICE): Mr. Speaker, I table the report of the Royal Commission to Enquire into the Magistracy of Newfoundland and Labrador as presented by Mr. Jeffery L. Steele, Q.C. This report was delivered to all honourable members and the press and the public a couple of weeks ago and I simply do this for the records. NCYrICE OF MOTIONS: 'HR. J,A. CARTER: (St .. John's North): To move:

WHEREAS labour disputes abound in our Province, in spite of established procedures for resolving such disputes, and

WHEREAS it appears that there have been grave inconveniences caused to uninvolved th:1.rd parties by such disputes, and WHE~EAS we are in an inflationary situation where satisfactory settlements cannot long remain so, THEREFORE HE IT RESOLVED that a Committee of this Legislature be set up to enquire into the possibility and/or desirability of setting up a branch of the judiciary to be known as a labour court which would have the power to hear and settle labour disputes of all kinds both individual and communal and which would be ao constituted as to build up a tradition of confidence and trust "With both labour and management; and BE IT FUnTHER RESOLVED that such a committee b~ required to hold public hearings at convenient locations across this Province to hear and qccess the views of concerned individuals and groups.

MR. SPEAKER: I shall accept the honourable member's resolution under advisement and rule on it later. ANSI/ERS TO QUESTIONS: HON. J. ROUSSEAU (MINISTER OF MANPOIIER AND INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND PUBLIC WORKS AND SERVICES): I have the answers to questions number 215 and 216 ·8nd 217, 285} 286, 288, 363,373, 374t 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 380, 381, 382, 383, 393, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399 and 400. ORDERS OF THE DAY: MR. ROBERTS: ~r. Speaker, I beg leave, Sir, to move the adjournment of the House under Standing Order 23. I move that the House do now adjourn &515

October 25, 1971 Tave 7 for the purpose of d:i.scusstny a definite nmtter of urgent publtc importance. Perhaps 1f one of the pages could step along, Sir, I have a tJritten statement for Your Honour. Namely, that the House deplores the failure of the minhitry to honour the nromise made by the Premier that a hy-elect:icn he called it: the Pistrict of Hermitage which has been without representation since l"'-'nrch 29~ 1973 in sufficient ti.me to return .1 n:er;;ber 1~efon: thi.s sitting; of the !louse of i\sse.mhly, FON. F,D, MOORES: (PREMTFH): Mr.

Spealucr, v:tth all due respect, the emergency wh1.ch the Lew:icr of the f111posit1cn now puts on hy-eJections certainJv was not ohvimw during hts years :in government, !-TfL ROBERTS: Nay I ask under Phnt '\ubicon of the rules the Pre.Mier or anybody else ::is alloved to comnent until Your Honour h:1s mnrle ;i ruling on whether thif; matter is in order or mav be debated. 10 the Premier not suh_Ject to the rule,; in th:ls Pouse, Sir, 0r dee'" he not know them? MR.

SPE.AKEF: Order p1ea,,e, r feel that vhile this is of great interest to the general public ;md n.U ;:;embers Df this honourable !louse, with regards to a by-clectirm, :ln the District of !-!e:rmitage, I fee] thnt it is not of such inportancc. to warrant 2djournment to debate sarre at this time. i,m. ""iOORES: Regarding. thnt subject, 'fr, :1penker 1 which I am ntn-i tmBb1e to speak on due to the rulin/t hv Your Honour, l would assume and would hnpe that the opposition w0uld nsk :1 rrnestion so thnt it can he answered. properly. "'IR. NEARY: T have a question for the Fon. the Premier.

Let us see hov proper1 v he can answer tb:is one. Because of the conflicting statese.nts made by various ministers in the government com:erning the disposal of Canadian Javelin shwres. f,!1 ~ 172 shares - ¾J'R, SPEAKER: Order please. 1 feel that the Pon. member for Bell Island is mnk::i.ng a state::nent and his question should h~ more nrccisc. MR. 'MOORES: On a point of m::rler. As this r,articular matter is now :in the courts, the judicial courts, :ur. Speaker, I do not think it is the ~516

October 25, 1973 Tape 7 IB-3 husiness of this House. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order, in what matter is it now before the courts? That matter before the courts, Sir, is an application by the government for permission or making Canadian Javelin transfer the shares. That has nothing to do with the matter which my honourable friend is referring to. MR. NEARY: No, Mr. Speaker, what I want to ask the Premier is if in fact the shares have been sold, what price where they sold for and is the money deposited in the public treasury? MR. MOORES: As the Hon.

Minister of Finance is in charge of the disposal of stocks held by the government, I would ask him to respond to that question, Mr. Speaker. HON. J.C. CROSBIE: (MINISTER OF FINANCE): Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to see that the hon. gentleman has such a keen interest in the subject. There should be a written question. Just to try to ease his mind a little~ the shares that he mentioned as owned by the government in Canadian Javelin Limited were disposed of in July or August of this year and arrangements were made for their sale. They were sold by the government's fiscal agents, Burns Brothers and Denton Limited.

The actual share certificates representing the shares - I think there are two share certificates - were presented to the transfer agent of C~nadian Javelin Limited, Canada Permanent. Canada Permanent refused to transfer the shares becau.se they were directed by Canadian Javelin Limited not to transfer them. Canadian Javelin Limited alleging that they could not be sold. Consequent up~n that the government took action in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland against Canadian Javelin Limited and Canada Permanent Trust Company, the transfer agent.

The pleadings have now been closed and the trial date has been set for November 26, I think it is. It is in that week. So, the monies received from the sales of the shares are still being held in trust until the matter of the litigation is concluded. Until the matter of the litigation is concluded there is no more information I can give them on that aspect of the matter. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question. The honourable &517

October 25, 1973 Tape 7 IR-4 minister did not state what pri.ce the government received. 1 do not lrnov whether he wants notice of that question. 1 am sure he has the information right in his heBd, "lr, Speaker, because this is a hot, red­ hot issue with the minister. '-m, CP.DSBT.E: ~r. Speaker, this is not a red-hot issue, it is not even n warm issue. I cannot reDemher. The shares, :•1r. Speaker, were sold over a period of seven to ten days so that the market woulll not he disturhed, the market price of these shares would not be disturbed.

I assure the hon. p,entleman that the r:1arket price of the Canadian Javelin shares was not disturbed while the government shares were sold. I think the average pr1 ce is about tuelve dol lnrs a share. 1 would have to - if the honourable gentlennn wants to put down a question in writing, th-en of course T can get exact details. There are various shares sold at various times with the prices vee.rinr a littJe bit each time. The nverep.,e is around twelve dollars that. I am going s tric.t1y hy memory. in some cases more than FR. NEARY: I thank the nini ster for the -tnformation, ~•r. Speaker.

I wou}d certain -welcome. his invitation to put down a few questions. I do have n few that I want to ;::,sk ab cwt thii:; matter. N0'-4, Sir, I have tvo or three other (Juestions.

October 25, 1973, Tape 8, Page 1 -- apb I want to direct a question to the Minister of Transportation and Communications. Would the minister indicate to the House if the experiment on the Bell Island-Portugal Cove Ferry Service sponsored by the provincial government was successful or unsuccessful? I want to know what yardstick the minister used to gauge whether or not these extra trips which were paid for by the province were successful, why they were not continued and how much did the experiment cost the taxpayers of this province? MR.

SPEAKER: I feel that the honourable member1 s question is one that requires a reasonably lengthy answer and as such could be placed on the Order Paper. HR. NEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could direct a question to the Minister of Social Services , the minister responsible for gassin~. ~.J .NERPIIY (MINISTER 01:_ ~ SERVICES): Smiling 11 Ed." MR. NF..ARY :_ Will the minister inform the House what steps the department have taken to alleviate suffering and hardships of some forty families who are being evicted in the City of St. John's during the month of October?

Have accommodations or shelter been found for these families? If so would the ffl1nister tell the House if his department rented accommodations or is purchasing the houses that are being offered for sale by the Newfoundland Rental Agency? HR. MURPHY: 1 would have liked to have notice of that question, Sir. I know the great concern of the honourable member. That was evidenced during his term in the same department. If I could get notice I would .•. ~EARY: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, we are not going to get very much information here today. Perhaps the minister 1 s batting average could be a little better on this one.

The Minister of Social Services again, Sir. Will the minister inform the House if a special diet for Donna LeDrew has been verified by a medical doctor? i.519

October 25, 1973 i Tape 8, Pnge 2 -- apb Tt so would the minister state whether assistance has been ;;ra.nteJ in full to provide this special diet? I an just n 1:i ttlc bit surprised by the former ':.inister. He has brought this cnse out in the open again, If he wn:nts to bring a dell over~ he can go over with his ,::r:n.nrndc.s next week, I vill sny this; t:c went through all the processes as set up under my department. The case has been s2.ttsfoctorily disposEd of nnd :my information the member wants is avullnble in my department.

I will give it to him as a very solicitous member b1,.1t 1 afral<l th:tt we do not basically make public all the facts pcri::ainb;:_ to the clients of our department. i'iR. NElHtY: flr. Speai<cr, ynu talk about arrop:ance. The minister knovs and everybody cl,;e not sr-1tisfactorily .. , Order plc0,se! the province knous that situation is Gnkr please! I am sure the honournhle menber for Bell IsL:rnd is aware that ,.,hen he rises to ask a question he. should not enter l.nto <leb0te but merely ask his f1Uestions.

Mr, Speaker. an well aware of the rules of this House but you cannot he]p it when you nre provoked with that kind of an nnswer unmercifully provoked, Sir . Mr, Spc.nkc.r, I woul.d like to direct another question to the. Finister of Socio.l Services, that great, kind, charitable individual. :--m. r-mn.PHY: !-'.R. NEA.R Y: Thank you.

Will the pinistcr, Sir~ tell the House what policy, azd this question ue have asked on three or: four previous occasions, will the minister inform the menbe:rs of the House, the elected representatives of the pcoplc,uh0t the policy of his government is going tn be. in January when the family o.llowanc.es are increased to twenty dollars per child per month? Will socfol assistance be -ceduced? Or will the. twenty dollars per month be treated as ~5211

October 25, 1973, Tape 8, Page 3 -- apb allowable income? MR. MURPHY: I will tell you January 1. MR. NEARY: There is another example of arrogance, Mr. Speaker. I am going to give up on the honourable Minister of Social Services and I will put a question to the honourable,(ignorant and stupid Minister of Social Services) I will put a question to the Premier, Sir. HR. SPEAKER: Order please! Order please: I am sure that the honourable member for Bell Island is aware that the word ignorant is considered to be basically unparliamentary and I would ask him to withdraw his statement or rephrase. }fR.

NEARY: Sir, ignorant in the sense that the minister is ignorant of the facts. My understanding is that this is perfectly in order in this House and that is the context in which I made the remark. Now, Mr. Speaker, seeing that I cannot get any information from the minister I will try the honourable the Premier. He has been making public statements recently about the social assistance and perhaps the Premier will indicate to this House when his promised announcement on increases on social assistance will be forthcoming.

Will the Premier indicate to .the House whether these increases will be in time for Christmas when they are ••• }ffi. ROBERTS: On a point of privilege. I hate to interrupt but there has been a cameraman outside taking pictures, Your Honour, and we do have a rule as I understand it. I recognized the cameraman. Re has just left ... lffi. !IDRPHY: (Inaudible) HR. ROBERTS: Look, would Gas'em please, shut up! Mr. Speaker, I do raise on a point of privilege, Sir. There was a cameraman outside and the rafts of police we have have not protected us. He is taking pictures. I have no objection to it.

I am quite willing to consent c.521

Ocotber 25, 1973, Tape 8, Page 4 -- apb for our side but there is a rule that cameras cannot be allowed in the chamber,as Your Honour has told us many times, unless permission is granted. ER. SPEAKER: The honourable Leader of the Opposition is correct. It has been a general rule that no pictures are allowed without the consent of all parties in this honourable House and I will ask one of the constables to do a check and just remind whoever the cameraman is that he is not supposed to take pictures without permission, The honourable member for Bell Island. ~ARY: !Ir.

Speakcr 1 in view of the fact that the honourable Preraier on a number of occasions has promised increases in social assistance allowances. I think in the last public statement that the honourable Premier made he said that it would become effective October 15 1 I believe it wns, or was it September 151 There was a specified date. Now I want to ask the Premier when these increases will be forthcoming. Will they be paid in time for Christmas? Will they be retroactive to the date th.at the Premier made his original public statement? !.!_ON. F.Jl.,_MOORES (PREHIER): Hr.

Speaker, just to clarify the ignorance of the member for Bell Island and knowledge as he mentioned it previously. When I did make the statement it was that we would hope to be in a position about mid-October to clarify a new social policy, That has not been done. lt will be done hopefully within the next couple of weeks, The social policy progrnmme of the government is not one of an increase of so much in fuel allowance or any of the other specifics, it is a total,overall, new social development policy which will affect all degrees of need for those in need. It is a major change in policy, "Mr. Speaker.

Hopefully it will be announced in the next couple of weeks. It hopefully will be in effect before January 1. HR. SPEAKER: The honourable menber for St, Barbe North.

October 25,1973, Tape 8, Page 5 -- apb MR. F.B.ROWE: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the government school board transportation policy was the sole cause of indebtedness incurred by the school boards in meeting transportation costs can the Minister of Education ... MR. SPEAKER: Order please! Order please! I am sure that the honourable member for St. Barbe North is aware that he should ask a question not prefaced by a statement. MR.

F.B.ROWE: I will abide by your ruling but I was simply giving the Minister of Education something to go on with respect to the question which I was about to state, Sir, when you stood up there, Can the honourable the Minister of Education explain why the government will not pay one hundred percent of the deficits incurred by the school boards in meeting the transportation costs instead of the fifty-fifty shared-cost agreement that the minister stated in the past week? HON. G.R. OTTENHEil!ER: Mr. Speaker, the government is not i;523

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 9 h'H - 1 HR.

OTTENHEIMER, acting in the manner outlined by the honourable member because it is the government's policy as anncunced a couple of days ap,o that for this present year for school boards incurring a deficit, there will be an option open to them, either of making up that deficit, the fifty split between the Provincial Government, and the school board or that the public treasury will pay ninety-five per cent of the total authorized transportation cost, whichever is to the henefit of the school board and the reason that there is the option is that while for most sch0ol boards the fifty-fifty split is preferable• for a couple the ninety-five per cent payment through public treasury of the total authorized transportation cost is more advantageouG.

MR. F. ROWE: Supplementnry question, what does the minister mean exactly by the authorized transportation costs? Is t~at according to the formula? HR. OTTE..~HEIMER: Lee;itimate transportation costs as defined in the statute and the regulntions. the bona fide transportation costs for which the government assumes financial responsibility. 1n other words, not any and all transportation costs which were never covered - the authorized, the legal ones, the ones covered by statute and regulations. MR. F. ROHE: ~·1r. Speaker, I am kind of confused here, a supplementary question.

Would not the government assume full responsibility for authorized transportation costs anyway? Q!TENHEIMER: Under the present formula. no. The whole thing has had an evolution. First there was the ninety - ten, under the previous administration, then shortly before the election it was one hundred per cent and then another formula had been introduced. There wilJ be a new one next year. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Fogo. I:!!h. E. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, may l direct a question to the honourable the Premier?

Would the Premier care to inform the House what discussions took place between himself and the honourable Jack Davis. the Minister of Environment ,this morning? Was it a friendly get together or discussions pertaining to the fisheries? i:.524

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 9 NM - 2 HON. F. D. MOORES (PREMIER): Mr. Speaker, just as a point of general information which is really what the member is asking I think and rather than slub over the honourable gentleman's question, I will try to do the best I can. Mr. Davis is having a public meeting this afternoon,as the member is well aware. The discussion primarily was around the management of the Continental Shelf, Canada's position.and Canada•s position as outlined by Mr. Davis is acceptable to the provincial government. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Labrador North. MR. M. WOOD!{~ Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the honourable Minister of Mines and Energy. I would like to ask the minister what part will the new company that is being fitted up by Dr. Stu Peters. a company called the North Power Company, play in the development of the Lower Churchill, the hydro potential on the Lower Churchill? I would also like to ask what place are we now in the negotiations of that development with the BRINCO Organization? I would also like to ask the minister if he can inform the House what part this province will play in financing that development? MR.

SPEAKER: The hono4rable Minister of Mines and Energy. HON. L. B~.R!,Y, Minister of Mines and Energy: With respect to the North Power Company, that company to my knowledge has no commitment or agreement or contract with govemment relating to the Lower Churchill and the honourable member's question could more properly be directed to the members of that corporation. MR.

BARRY: As far as the negotiation with BRINCO concerning the development of the Lower Churchill is concerned, this is presently in abeyance pending the report of the consultants on this feasibility study which is presently underway and which study we hope to have completed by the end of December. With respect to the Provincial Government financing of the Lower Churchill development, this question cannot be answered until the feasibility study has been received, but if I could say one thing c,525

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 9 NM - 3 in clarification of the first question; the North Power Corporntion, one of the memberr; who is now, according to the newspaper reports. a shareholder or has some connection with this company, Doctor Peters. haB been sitting in, not at all times but at times on the management cormnittee meetings of this feasibiiity study hecause certain - AN HON. MPmF:R: Conflict of interest. MR. BARRY: There is no conflict of interest, Possible purchases of power were brought to the attention of the province thr:ough this gentleman I s mediation or intervention. !'ffi.

WOODWARD: A question to the Premier - MR. ROBERTS: No, not yet, the Premier is quite right, not yet, 'JR. SPEAKER: Order please! "1R. HOQ_DVARD: A question to the Premier, Mr. Speaker, seeing that 1 did not get the answer that I was looking for from the honourable Minister of Mines and Energy: The Premier stated, at a luncheon meeting held on October 23, that the North Power Company controlled by John Shaheen is putting the government in contact with trig.½er industries, (1 guess it is) interested in using power fro::; the Lower Churchill. Could the Premier tell the House what the cost of such u service is?

This is the involvement that 1 was looking for, r,.m. ~OORES: ~1r. Speaker, at. the present time we have no commitments for any industries, nor any formula agreed to between the r,overnment or any other third party. That cannnt be answered because the knowledge is not available. At which tlme it is relevant or is a fact it will be made know to the pub.lie and to this Bouse. However, ~lr.

Speaker, 1 would like to say in further clarification of what is being said about the Lower Churchill power, as the honourable gentleman knows Zinder Deshmont arc doing a feasibility study to see the cost to bring that power to the province and 1 can assure the honourable opposition and the people, but particularly in this case, Mr. Speaker 1 the opposition, that it is not the intention of the government to give away the power as was the case in the past. lf we develop it, it will come to the province for the people. i,526

October 25 1 1973 Tape No. 9 NM - 4 MR. WM. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, arising out of some informtion given by the Minister of Mines and Energy, may I put a question to the Premier? Would the Premier inform the House whether Dr. Stu Peters has done any consulting work for pay for the government since his resignation or otherwise since his resignation some months ago? MR. MOORES: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Bonavista North. MR. P. THOMS: Mr. Speaker• I would like to direct a question to the honourable Premier.

Did the Premier inform this House if he has received a letter from the Chairman of the Community of St. Brendan's pertaining to the fuel storage facilities? If so, have the government made any plans to date? MR. MOORES: Mr. Speaker, my office did receive representation from St. Brendan's in this regard. We have written Irving Oil and asked them if they would consider certain measures and we are awaiting their reply. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Twillingate. MR. G. GILLETT: Hr. Speaker, ~y I direct a _question to the honourable Minister of Transportation and Communication'?

Does he has a definite date for the completion of the causeway linking New World Island to Twillingate Island? Dates have been given but does he have a definite date now.please? HON. T. HICKEY: November 10, Mr. Speaker, is the present date for completion. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable member for Labrador North. MR. WOODWARD: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Hon.

Minister of Transportation and Communications, In the light that the Federal Department of DREE have expressed their willingness to help finance a bridge across the Northwest River in my district, could the minister inform the House if the province will go along with the DREE suggestion? i..527

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 10 Page 1 HON, T, P. HICKEY (Minister of Transportation and CommunicatJ,2ns}_:s Mr. Speaker, if the honourable gentleman has some communication from the Hon. Mr. Jamieson, giving a commitment of the federal government's involvement, then I would like to see it. Mr. Rompkey made a public statement about four days ago saying something sim.ilar,that there had been a commitment~ I have communication from Mr.

Jamieson of their desire and willingness to have a survey, nothing more than that and nothing further; certainly far from a commitment from the federal government to get involved f i.nancially. The onlv thing l can say t.o my honourable friend is that we have done a survey already. We are most anxious and willing to do a further studv and provide Mr. Jamieson with the infor:nat.io::i that he requests. This must not be misconstrued as a go-ahead for this project because 1 do not read it as such and there is no firm commitment.

MR, WOODWARD: Sir, will the province go along with the request of DREE to do a studv and will it be done this year? HR, HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, I have .Just said that we are most willing and anxious to do so but this is not ar. indication that the project is going to go ahead becausP. we do not know what the financial arrangement is and we have no commitment from the federal government. MR, F. B. ROWE: Mr.

Speaker~ I would like to direct a question to the Hon. the Premier~ C;;, October 23, the Hon* the Premier stated publicly that the loan progrPmrne. for the students at the university would be kept up as long as is necessary. Sir, l was wondering if the Premier could indicate what he means by this and does this mean that the government is considering changing the present arrangement or formula that is in use for the student aid programme or student loan programme? MR. MOORES: Not at all, Hr~ Speaker. The assistance at t:he university is always under review.

What was meant at that time and beir,g misquoted,or having a quote in some of the local medias, their

interpretation of it may not be the same as the quote made at all times - what was intended

October 25? 1973 Tape no~ 10 Page 2 here was that the loan programme is as ls. What I think I said at that time is that the committee that was set up was to see why the reduction in enrollment. Once those reasons had been established, if the reduction of the government's participation such as it was last year was a ll!.ajor factor, we would then be reviewing that situation because we do not want our policies to be such that those policies will be responsible for a drop in enrollment. After that committee's report is brought in 1 our position will be given again at that time. MR. F. B.

ROWE: Mr~ Speaker, a supplementary question. Is the Hon. Premier suggesting that if it:: is found that. the change in the student aid programme was a significant factor int.he reduction of student enrollment that the said administration would give coasideration to reverting back to the original formula that was in use7 MR. MOORES: Or another formula - certainly, very serious consideration, Mr. Speaker, yes. MIL F. B. ROWE: MR. E. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr~ Speaker~ Mr e Speaker, a que:sti(?_t'.l for the Premier.

He earlier more or less invited me to ask him a question about Hermitage and I should be delighted to do so~ Could the Premier tell the House, Sir, whether the writ has been issued for the by-election in Herudtage and if not, when the government intend to issue it and if so, when the election is to be held? MR. MOORES: All HON. ME.'!BER: MR. ROBERTS: HR. MOORES: Mr. Speaker, the writ has not been issued. The other one has not either.

Soon we hope~ The situation as far as Hermitage is concerned is that I made a comment to the effect that it will be called before the next major sitting of the House; major being when we are here i,529

October 25 1973 Tape no. 10 for a prolonged sitting, which means within the nexl few months. Certai:ily it will not he left as long as some by-elections in the past. As a matter of fact it is almost unfortunate in one way to call it at all because betweea government attention and opposition attention, Mr. Speaker, I am quite sure that they are getting a service better than any other district. in the country right ;;uw. l think we could almost have a unanimous support for the Dis~rict ] of ilermitage, if the threat of a::1 electio:i ¼ere alwavs th<.:re. However, Mr.

Speaker, it will be called in the very near future. Mr, Jim Reid slipped and fell the other day and .:hey nearly paved him into the grourid. MR. MOORES: Mr. Speaker 1 if I might make a comment on the fact that Mr. Reid slipped the other day and they nearly pave<l him into the ground, that I mir,ht say is a unique experience in Hermitage where there has been no paving before. MR. ROBERTS :_ to do it. MR.

SPEAKER: Ah, Ha: But Jamf"s Reid and Sons have the contract Order please: Hotion second reading of a bill, "Ao Act To Govern Collective Bargair,i;-.g Respecting Certain Employees In The Public Service In The Province." . MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I rise to move second readiug of ~his legislation, which legislation contains, Mr. Speaker, ~reat advances in the collective bargaining law of this province for public servants in this province and as the honourable gentlemen opposite have just mentioned, major reforms ,because that is the case and that is what I hope to outline to the House in the next few minutes.

The act will be known, if the House pass it, as 11 The Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, 1973, 11 Now, Mr. Speaker, what was the state, what was the situation, what were the circumstances that surrounded collective bargaining in the public service of this province before the Moores 1 Actm1nistration took over in 1972? i,530

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 10 Page 4 In other words, what shape had the Liberal Administration left the public service bargaining apparatus of this province? What laws were there in effect? What was the system? What was the situation? What had they done? What were we faced with? What are we now proposing? What have we done since? MR. NEARY: What did the honourable member do when he was a member of the Liberal Reform? MR. SPEAKER: Order! MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speak.er, the honourable gentleman can interject if he like. I would like to speak for a while uninterrupted.

If he should want to hav~ a general melee, I shall engaged in that also. I have never been unwilling to do so. At the moment I believe that this is a serious matter that I want to deal with in a serious way. If the honourable gentleman should persist in interrupting, I shall give him as good if not better (usually it is better) than he gives and it will only interfere with what we are discussing here today. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR. SPEAKER: Order please! The Hon. member for Bell Island is well advised to leave the Chambe~,having uttered statements of that nature. Statements of that type will not be condoned.

MR. NEARY: I am not worried, Mr. Speaker. I am staying in the Chamber. Nobody is going to scare or frighten me in this House. MR. W. N. ROWE: Would the Speaker mind explaining his ruling there a moment ago? MR. SPEAKER: Yes, indeed the Speaker will. The Hon. member for Rell Island uttered a term or in a very derogatory manner referred to some honourable member to my left. Statements of this type will not be condoned. MR. NEARY: I shall go now, Mr. Speaker, without having insults flung at me. AN HON. MEMBER: Very touchy today. MR. CROSBIE: Mr ..

Speaker, I think the best thing is to ignore the honourable gentleman and just carry on. i;531

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 10 Page 5 Now what was the situation the honourable gentlemen opposite left us with when they resigned - these freedom fighters] \Je saw on television last night. a freedom fighter. The Hon.

L,~ader of the Opposition who had been deep in slumber all summer awoke a day or two ago and he is now out to save t.he province from some terrible atrocity claat is supposed co be contained in this bill that is now before the House , The freedom fighters, those great friends of labour• how did they leave the situation when they vanished from our midst~nd the hallrywed portals of government in January, 1972, after clinging on with their teeth and their toenails from October~ when they were repudiated by the Newfoundland people, until January 18? !low did they leave it? W'bat was the situation?

The situation was that we had a piece of legislation on the hooks, the hospital employees ler,islation passed in 1967, which forbad any strikes i;; hospitals whatsoever, which had very severe penalties if any one in a hospital ever went on strike and which provided no other method of solvi:.g dispuies than collective bargaining ir1 hospii.als, if disputes were ~ot settled in tl1e regular course of negotiations. That was one situation. Then they lefi:. on the books the Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, passed in 1970, Act. No. 85 of 1970.

They had passed i:. 1970 a Public Servic0 Collectiv@ Bargaining Act that was so bad, that was so .atrocious, that was so o:.erous, that left so much pO".Jer in the hands of the government that the unions concerned in these matters in the public service of Newfoundland and the hospitals of Newfoundland did not want: the. legislation proclaimed. It had a clause in it where it only came into effect upon proclamation by the cabinet. It was never proclaimed.

Now the honourable gentlemen opposite sometimes point out that they were not in the cabinet in 1967 when the hospital employees legislation was passed and I was in the cabi:iet~ AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 10 6 MR. CROSBIE: These are irrelevancies. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. CROSBIE: From 1969 on ve were advocating its repeal. But the honourable gentlemen opposi_te were in the backbenches then and they supported that legislation and the freedom-fighter from Bell Island never said a squeak against it when it went through in 1967. Now what did he do when he was in the ,cabinet? Did he act on these great points of principle that he now espouses? No! In 1970 while the Hon. member for Bell Island, the Hon. Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. member for White Bay South were in the cabinet and the Hon. member for Fogo, what did they do1 They worked i.533

October 25, 1973 Tape 11 PK - l mightly to produce a reform that would give the labour movement and the public service what it wantl:'d and the mountains squeaked and produced this Public Service Collective Bareaining Act of 1970 so bad that it was never proclaimed. Why was it not proclaimed? It was never proclaimt'd because everthing, everything, Hr. Speaker, was Jeft in the hands of the cabinet. In that act,

Section (5} the government would decide by regulations whether anyone would have the right to withdraw their services and they can only withdraw their services in the manner and to the er.tent prescribed by the regulations. That was Section (5). In Section (7) of that act, that Magna Charta, (Magna Carta) which reminds rne of the honourahle member for St. John 1 s North who has dcr,onstratcd his concern with the situation by introducing his motion today. It shows that one rnemher is thinking. But our back bcncbcrs arc constantly thinking on the prohler:1s of the day.

In Section (7) of tt1.1t .act, the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council could make such regulations as they wished r specting the recognition of bargaining units, if they could recor;nizc them or not recognize thorn, to prohibit employees from organizating ,.rnd negotiatiniz, as referred to in

Section (/1), except in accordance with the ac.t and the rep.ulations. They could prohibit employees from withrlrm-:inp: their services except in accordance with the act and the retrnlations. They could prohibit bargaining units from withdrawing services or encourap;ing such withdrawal except in acconlancc with the act. They could prescribe the manner of negotiations. They could prescribe how and to what extenl withdrawal of services may be effected pursuant to Section (5) of the act, and the conditions to which such withdraw.al would be subject.

They could designate employees or classes of employees whose services shall not be withdrawn, they could. They, the cabinet, the Lieutenant-Governor-in-Council, could do all of this under this great Liberal Hagna Charta. Weunderstand that they are going to oppose this legislation today. it has pernicious principles. Some great things need to be changed, we hear. We nre waiting to hear just exactly what they are, because their feelings and thoughts have certainly changed since 1970 when this went through. Then they were going to designate by :regulations ,as I said, those uho could not withdraw their services.

Then in

Section {

m) they arc going to

October 25, 1973 Tape 11 PK - 2 pass regulations whereby they could declare a state of emergency in the public service or any part thereof and forbid withdrawal of services and so on by regulation. In the regulations they were going to provide what penalties there would be. It was not enough the penalties would be in the act. They could prescribe penalties for failing to comply with or otherwise contravening any provision of the act and so on and so on. There is no need to go into detail. It was never proclaimed. Naturally it was never proclaimed.

It was certainly oosatisfactory to the unions concerned and the Public service of Newfoundland, and they never did have the gall to proclaim it, and it never became effective and it was never proclaimed by us. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: I am leading up 1 if the honourable gentleman will listen. If the honourable gentleman will liaten 1 he will learn. They do not want to hear about the past. They only want to hear about the present because now they are out of office and they can be as irresponsible as they like. Well they are going to hear a little bit more history.

What was the position in the civil service when we took over? The Labour Relations Act, Mr. Speaker, did not apply to the civil servants, Section (68) of the Labour Relations Act states, and still states that it does not apply to the civil service of Newfoundland. That was the position in 1972 and still is, which this bill before us today will change. Section (68) of the Labour Relations Acts said "The Act does not apply to Her Majesty in right of a Newfoundland, or employees of Her Majesty in right of Newfoundland. n That was the pr ,::dtion under the Labour Relations Act. They could not strike.

They could not bargain. They could not go to conciliation unless a voluntary recognition was given. So the Labour Relations Act did not apply~ The hospital workers were forbidden to strike. The Public Service Act was not proclaimed. There was no legislation governing collective bargaining with teachers but there was legislation passed with respect to the police and fire departments under which the police and the firemen do not have a right to strike, they go to arbitration. Now that was the legislative scene when we took over this government in January of 1972 and what have we done since?

We have passed the Teachers 1 Collective Bargaining Legislation, agreed to by the teachers. That has passed, i:.535

October 25, 1973 Tape 11 PK - 3 is in effect and in operation, and it was passed several months ago. We did considerable work, Mr. Speaker, on the legislation now before the House. We have initiated a series of reforms in the civil service and improvement of benefits which have nothing to do with collective bargaininr. I will just cite several incidents. There is the situation with respect to equal pay for equal work. That was a principle espoused but not in effect when we took over the government.

Then it was a prindple that applied unsatisfactorily because it only applied to each unit in which there were men and women working. It did not apply throughout the service and we have since implemented it so that it applies throughout the service so that women doing similar work to men throughout the government service get the same pay. That has resulted in the last two years in increases for many female employees of the government and thC' hospitals of well over one hundred per cent.

There was the question of Labrador allowances which "Was in shamblC':;; before we reformed it this year, Each department had different rules and regulations as to what you would get as a Labrador allowance if you were a government employee working in Labrador. That has now been unified so that everyone receives the same $1,200 if married and $600 additional if not married.

He have passed a Public Service Commission Act which will be proclaimed as soon as we have people experienced in this field become conttnissioners and to implement it which changes completely the approach of the civil service,and many other things have been done and proposed by this government that have improved the situation. But perhaps more than anything, Hr. Speaker 1 the change of government that removed the dead hand of repression and fear that was on this province in January of 1972 has resulted in a great change.

The atmosphere before that change of government was bad as I have every reason to know because I was in every nook and cranny of this province in 1969 and after 1969 and saw it with my own eyes and experienced it. I saw people tum pale if you spoke to them because they were afraid of what Mr. Smallwood and his agents might do to them if they were known to be against him. ~536

OCtober 25, 1973 Tape 11 PK - 4 AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: The honourable gentleman can scoff, and let him scoff because he does not know what the situation was. AN HON, MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: So, Mr. Speaker, there was an atmosphere of fear and repression which was removed from this province with the change of administration.

That of course has not made labour relations any easier, it has made them more difficult because the labour movement know they are dealing with a government who do not believe in that kind of tactic and with a government who are trying to meet wherever we can in the light of what we think to be the public interest to meet their requirements and to introduce a new atmosphere. }ffi. NEARY: This is a new party with a new leader. MR. CROSBIE: Now, Mr. Speaker, AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: Ther~ are many other things I could mention that we have changed but I will not. AN HON. MF-~BER: Inaudible. MR.

CROSBIE: If the honourable gentleman is going to get - I will hear all about that in a minute. I will leave that little bit until later,as the honourable member is getting impatient. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to clarify one thing right here and now: That this legislation, the draft bill now before the House was made available to interested parties last April. On April 27, 1973 a letter with a copy of the draft legislation went to Mr, Tom Mayo, Provincial Representative of CUPE, Mr. John Peddle, General Manager of NAPE, and to Hrs.

Elizabeth Wilton, President of the Association of Registered Nurses and within a week a copy of the bill was delivered to Mr. J. Walsh, Local Representative of the IBEW. These are all unions who are involved in negotiating with the public service½ The only reply received, the only reply received for the draft legislation was from NAPE. NAPE wrote back on May l;: wrote me on May l outlining certain points they thought should

October 25, 1973 Tape 11 PK - 5 be changed or could be corrected. They met with officials and with the Treasury Board who went over these points with them. Some of the changes suggested were adopted and others, after discussion,appearedn01 ro be ncedrJ

October 25, 1973, Tape 121 Page 1 -- apb and I think that most of their substantial changes were met. There was no opposition~ no opposition by NAPE at that time to the principles of this bill. Whether or not there is opposition by them now will be interesting to see. The Newfoundlanrl Federation of Labour and CUPE having come out against the whole principle of the thing. Certainly on May l, 1973, there was no opposition to the principles of this bill 1 as far as I know, fron NAPE and they suggested some changes. We heard from not one of the other parties from the end of April to this week.

The House was said to be meeting on October 25, to discuss this bill,and copies were given to NAPE last Saturday and I think to CUPE nnd others interested on Monday and I myself, Mr. Speaker, attended at the opposition office Monday at twelve noon and left there eight copies. I delivered one personally to the honourable member for St. Barbe North. Yet last night I heard on television the Leader of the Opposition state that no copy was made available to him nor came into his hands until the day before, in the middle of the day.

That was correct because the honourable gentleman was not in town apparently and did not get back until Tuesday but on TV he conveniently forgot to mention it so that he could give the impression that the opposition had just gotten the bill the day before. The Opposition had the bill on Monday, at noon. Now since these copies, Mr. Speaker, in addition there is one change in this bill between the draft presented to the various unions last April and the draft now before the House of the suggested bill; and that is in Section (23) (3) 1 which I shall come to later.

Otherwise there is no change~ MR ROBERTS: Would the minister permit a question, please? With the exception of Section (24) (3), this printed bill which we now have is the same as the one distributed last April? Is that

October 25, 1973 1 Tnpe 12, Page 2 --· aph rir:ht? HR. CROSBIE: --------- Right. Yes.

Section {24)3. As I say we h~d some submissions and suggestions fron Nape then. Since then. f'r. Speaker, we have had a r.;ect:Lr,g yesterday, I believe it was ycsten1ay, with Mr. Peddle nnd }1r. Locking of :JAPE nml have gone over the bill and they made some further suggested chanrcs. They supgestcd twenty-three altogether of which we have accepted seven. Smni: of the other we (11.(1 m,t thinY t.rere necessary. >1r. Lockinp did say yesterday,ns :t rrntter of course when opr>ninr: the mectinr, thnt r-IAPE is opposed to cor.ipulsnry arbitration. That is the first time we have henrd fror,, it.

J do not l<now t-1lwther they t-!il1 hold to thnt isut we met idth then yesterday and \/€. met this rnorninr: with f'r. nc~-1 illan and n large group. Several from the forner Brook Hospital, several from the {;rand Falls Jlospit.:!l, vr. n,whes and trr. ·•cintyre of the Cnna<lian llnion of Public Er;q,loyecs and reprcsent.itivcs from those several hospitals. They told us of their opposition to the bill because they are agninst it in principle. I will come to that in a nomcnt. They arc n•ally VfCainst this bill in prlnciple.

We also discusscJ various sections and l hove assured them that if this hill is passed by the House the bill does not have to stay in this forn forever, that if provisions of the bill or systems provided by the bill turn out to be not effective or objectionable, that they can be n!T',endcd and that in any event, wHh the review of the labour legislation of the province generally nou beinµ: conducted, that if there are chanp:es in the ne'ttt Labour­ Relations fact that have application to this bill, the changes to this bill if it is passed would be made also. Just before passinp on, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to explain that there was, of course, a system of collective bargaining in the public service which started, I suppose around 1969 or 1970. The treasury board havt a division, the Collective BargaininfZ Division. That division is headed by Mr. Blanchard. The three i.540

October 25, 1973, Tape 12, Page 3 -- apb principal people who do the government's negotiating are Mr. Blanchard, Mr. Norris and Mr. Alcock. The cabinet ministers on the treasury board do not do any negotiating they are only there to give guidelines to our negotiators. Our negotiators are the full-time professional people who wo,rk for the government in the Collective Bargaining Division. They have every year now these t~irty-four sets of negotiations to do.

Since the press and the media only appear to be interested in the negotiations - the honourable gentleman has an agent there, has he7 Since the press and the media only appear. Hr. Speaker, to be interested in disputes and when there is trouble (as one might expect )and not vhen matters are settled it might be of some use just to give a run-down on the collective bargaining position this year. Altogether there had to be thirty-four negotiations with different bargaining units. To date, collective agreements ratified number eighteen.

The Newfoundland Teachers' Association; the Newfoundland Constabulary; the Firefighters; the Warders at the Penitentiary; Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation; the General Hospital Corporation; the Janeway Childrens' Hospital I Corporation; the Childrens' Rehabilitation Centre; St.

Clare's Hercy Hospital (now signed after a strike); the open-vote employees of the government; the Association of Interns and Residents; the Fishermens' Food and Allied Workers Union in the Burgeo Fish Plant; the same union and Coastal Foods Limited; CUPE and Western Memorial (settled after a strike); CUPE and the Central Newfoundland Hospital (settled after a strike); the Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the Power Connnission (settled); Lab and X-Ray,which I will come to in a few minutes, (there is now a strike on); the St. John's Operating Engineers and the F~man Catholic School Board.

All of those with the exception of the four I mentioned where there were strikes were settled successfully. 0541

October 25, 1973, Tape 12 1 Page 4 -- apb Collective uµrecments hnve been arrived at but not yet ratHied. Hopefully they will be bv the Registered i\urs,:;s, the Hospital /,ssocfatlon and Trensury Board; by NAPE nnd the Liquor Corporation. The gcnt:cral service is still not settled although a collective agreement was reached but was not ratified. Tht:re are ner,otiations in progress in three others at the n:oment - Hnterfonl Hospital; Vocational Collene Instructors; the !Jarmon Corporation and there are nine nore sets of ncgoti0Li0ns pendlnp.

The Collective Bn.r,:aininp Division of the Treru;ury Bonn! have n monumental task t0 attempt to deal with all these senarate sets of negotiations. While it is beinp very much to he hoped thnt they would all he settled ar,1Lcably, unfortunately it cannot be done. Now, ?!r. Speal'cr, let us come to the mnln pri.nciplcs of the bill. Every govcnm:cnt, ~fr. Speaker, have to veirht nnd decide whnt it can and cannot do in view of the public interest. There are more ripJits involved in this 1ep:islation nnd in this situation than the rirhts of employees nnd of unions. Y('S, they b.:ivi rights.

Yes, we recognize their ridits. We have recognized them far more than they were ,:,ver recor:nizcd before in this province but ue also have to remember tlrnt they have responsibilities and that the public have a rip.ht to be protected in situations where their health and safety and security could possihly be endangered by n cessation of a public activity. Every government have to face that situation. This goverm:ient, Hr.

Speaker, are not prepared 1 because we feel that it is not in the puhlic interest, to have a situntion in Hhich every public eJ?.ployce and every hospital worker and nll those involved in this process can go on strike regardless of the public interest and what effect it may have on the public. We do not accept that principle. Perhaps

October 25 1 1973 Tape 13 IB-! honourable members opposite do. We will see if they now accept that principle. We believe that there should be a system of collective bargaining in the public service that is as free and unrestricted as possible but that there are some situations and some circumstances where the right to strike must be cribbed, cabined and confined. This legislation, if passed by the House, gives the civil servants of this province, government employees and those who work in hospitals the right to strike. It gives them a right that the civil service and government employees do not now have.

Government employees now cannot strike legally. It gives them and makes legal the right to withdraw their services, consorted withdrawal of services or a mass resignation which is nothing more than a consorted withdrawal of services. This is what this legislation does~ Yet I see in the newspaper Mr. Mayor, for example, saying that it is going to make the members of his union second class citizens, a statement whi.ch is just not true and is just not correct. This is legislation that is going to give far more rights, liberties and freedotrs to the government employees of this province.

There are two main areas where this government feel and many other governments dos that we cannot just give a blanket right to strike, In Section (10) of this bill, dealing with one important area, we say in this legislation - and this is our policy - that there are certain employees in the public service who are essential. We are not saying in this bill that we are going to decide who is essential. It is not the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council, the Cabinet, the government that is going to decide whether they are essential or not. We have left that decision to the Labour Relations Board.

So,Section (10) of the legislation states that upon certification of a bargaining agent or if this is passed - by the way~if the legislation is adopted) all unions we deal with.now certified under the Labour Relations Board~are automatically certified under this. 1f' unions are recognized under this their position remains the same. The board shall request,the Labour Relations Board shall request the employer of employees in the unit to and such employers shall as soon as practical after receiying ;-;543

Octoher 25, 1973 Tare 13 IR-2 the request, provide the hoard nnd the bargaining ;,gent with a .statement in t,·ritinr of t!-w errinlnvees or classfs of emr:dovees in the unit represented hy the bnrpainin)c! ar:ent Pho arc considered hv the er:n~loyer to he essenti,11 employees - ve cannot sugpest anyone is essential - that ls to sav e1;1ployees whose rluties consist in whole or in part of duties the performance of which at anv particular time or rlurinr: anv specified period nf time :ts or may he necess;irv for what? i:'or evervthJng under the sun? No.

For the henlth, s;ifetv or sccuritv of the nuhlic or otheruise in the public interest. Those words ,.re, 0f course, to he interpreted in accord;.once tdth health, snfetv or security. Sn, what would happen, '.'1r. Speaker, when the leg is lnt ion is nasse:i? h1e 1.a1ould or the ernnlovers would present the I.ahour 'Relations Hoard with a 1 ist of the err:nlovees in the harpainin}~ unit thev think are essential for the health, snfetv or securitv of the nuhlic.

Thev have to give a rnpy to the un.ion, Tf the union of'iect to tLcse people to be deemed essential, thev report that to the Lnhf1ur Pelations Borird who ivill have a hearinr:.

The Lnl'our Pelntions Bonrr 1 which ronslsts cf an independent chnirnnn nn<l tvo rer,r.-,sentatives of the lnJ,0or rr.ovement and two renresentatives of managen:~nt w:l11 <lecide ,,•hetht>r thev think the employer's snhmisni.on is right, thf> 1m!nns BuhmissiCln is rir-ht or whether it is somewhere in hetv:een. :{ow it mi1;ht he that the hosnita1 0r the government - 1et us take ;m example of the Y rav nnd lnh technicians - mav suhmit to the Lahour Pe1;1tions Board that Borne number or some r1 ercentage of x-ray and lab technici;ms in a particular unit, some minimum numher are essential, are necessary and essent1al to carry on emergencv services.

If the unions object to that. the board would have to decide whethe.r this is so or not and whether Jt :is necessary for the health, safetv or security of the publJc or othenJise in the public service. Now, F:!th respect to employees found to be essential by the Lahour Relations Board, if we cannot agree they are not riremitted to strike. Now, the emp1oyees do not have to be designated by name. The board may say that it is ten per cent in this unit or fifteen per cent ;:,544

October 25. 1973 Tape 13 IB-3 in that one or such and such a percentage of this particular bargaining unit or some particular group who must remain on service because of this public health, safety or security aspect. This is not something alone in t.he Newfoundland Legislation. Similar provisions exist in legislation of the Government of Canada and the Government of New Brunswick. Anyway, the effect of the

section would be that such employees found by the Labour Relations Board to he essential, that number of any particular unit or whatever could not strike if there were a strike The rest of the employees in the unit could hut this minimum number would have to stay to operate public facilities necessary for the health, safety or security of the public. These employees would receive whatever settlement was arrived at if this strike action vere necessary by the other members of their bargaining unit. We have an amendment to propose which was suggested by NAPE wbich seems to cover n gap we had in the bill there.

The question was asked, what will happen if over fifty per cent of the employees of the unit are deemed to he essential? There is obviously not much point in a strike if that did happen, if the Labour Relations Board found that. So, what is their remedy? Well, it was not clear in the bill so we will he suggestin~ an amendment so that if that situation should occur, and we do not know whether it wil_l or not, I doubt that it will - if it should that after all collective bargaining procedures have failed including the conciliation hoard and there is still no settlement, they will be entitled to go to arbitration.

Now, what is the other area of the legialationt Mr. Speaker, that is objected to so much by CUPE in particular? The other

section is

section tw£nty-seven.

Section 27 is to the effect that ¾~ere the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council 1s of the opinion that a strike of employees is or would be injurious to the health or safety of persons or any group or class of persons or the security of the province, he may proclaim that from and after the date stated in the proclamation a state of emergency exists and forbid the strike of all employees or any cl&ss or group of employees specified in the proclamation, and may order the emrloyees 6545

ilctoher 25, ]Q7J Tape l] or nnv class er group to return to dutv either irnmedinte.ly or rit such time as mav he tWt'.f'i fied in the rrocln.nntion. Ifl-t, Now, "1r. Speaker~ in our viev there ohviouslv hn:s to he some nover in the bill r,iven tn frc government to nllow ns to ,·xerctse sor:ie discretion hecause of that"'" hone. wil:. be the vcr:v rare situation when such an emergency may nri.sc.

It would not he safe in our vi.ew tn proceed without some ldnd 1 can nss11re the House that 1-12, the grivernr:-ient, do not v:ant co:rmul.sory 0rt1 itrat:ion in anv s1tnatlcn vherc lt cnn 00~•s:l.hlv be av01! 1ed. 1-.'c vilJ nvnid i.t, We do not relish ;::md Pe ,10 not intend and ve ilo nnt 1'ant to put the treasury of thj;-; province in the position i,,;herc what is rolny to come out of it is goinf, to he determined hv some three man Pr three wona.n arhitratlon bo,,nl. h"r ,iu rwt L;,nt conpulsnry ;i:rJ-dtrnti'm. 1-.''" Rre not nressl.ng for lt, Fe uil.1 not sceh to p_o to comnul.sorv arhitr;lt]nn.

We have to re in the 1m;L cztrcnits.· lieforc Fe would even cnni;ider !t. \-.'1.c rlo not vant three strang0rs v+o hnve nn respons lbi J i.t:v wh.itsoever tn the fH~op]e of this rirovince 0r tr us decirHmc what ve arc gnirH! tn rav .in v2p:es nnd Si11ar1es or ,1d-wn-.'lsc, That is just n sL:tenent of -rttrc fnct, The w11.ons do not v:mt com"nlsorv nrr.Jtrntion. Cl'Pr rlf,es not vn.nt it.

The NewfoumlJrm<l Feder:ition of !,;;hour docs not wm\t it nnd ?MPE .enid vestenl.ay thev c1o not ,,:;mt it. '."ionc, of HS v2.nt it. 1,ut there hns to be some device 1eft Hhere there are workers, cssentinl v~0rkers, cd1ere rm emergency nri ses thnt n.ffocts the health and safetv of the rwopJe of the province. Then' has to he some other means used tn settle a dispute that cannot be otherwise settled. To us it is nnlv common sense.

Sure.}y lt would not he arp:ued that tJe should have no contro1 .at all and thnt this should just be thrown wide open and that no measures at all should be taken hv us so that we can try to protect the public ,,.;hen that sitnat1.nn docs urise. }lopefollv it will be verv infrequentlv. So, these are the tuo areas in the bill, points of r,r.1.nci.p1e that seem to hnve aroused the opposition of CUPE nnd the Federatftin of Lahom.· and perhaps !·1APE too. Hell, the position is that we have listened to thetr arguments i, 5 4 6

October 25. 1973 Tape 13 IB-5 and we have listened to their submission and we cannot agree with them. We cannot always agree with the labour movement nor the individuals units of it. In these particular instances we do not agree and therefore we must present the ]egislat:!.on to the House which contains the principles that we think we should be guided by. If experience show that there is something wrong with this or if experience show there is some retter w-ay of doing it, then certainly we are open to be talked to about it and to listen to it.

Now, the rest of the bill, the major principle of the bill is one that if passed will permit public servants to strike except in that instance that I have mentioned or the two instances where there should be interference with that.. The bill would apply to the government of the province and agencies boards, commissions, corporations and other bodies as the Lieutenant Governor may designate, crowned corporations that are designated, the Public Utilities Commission, the Workmen I s Compensation Board, Computer Services and corporations~ bodies or authorities managing hospitals.

That is who it will apply to. i, 5 4 7

Tape :,Jo. 14 Now some of the bodies that it wouid npplv to . if the list were completed it woulrl probably he tiwri all. If p:..ssed, tlw cabinet would likely design.ate the following; the i-;ewfoundlanrl Liquor Coporation, the Power Commission. Fann Products, the College of Trades, the Collene of Fisheries, the Medicnl Care r:ommi.ssion, the Fisheries Loan Board, the Farm Development Loan Board, the Marketing Board, the Public Libraries Board, the Rural Development Authority, the Civil Service Commission, the l':ewfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, St. John I s Housing Corporation.

Harmon Corporation, Newfoundland and Labrador Development Corporation, Egg Marketing Hoard, the St. John's Metropolitan Area Board, the Provincial Plt.mni.nr Appeal Board, the Human Rirhts Commission, the Corner Brook Housing Corporation, These would be agencies that would come under it 01 that would be designated. It is not .intended that it apply to others. There is no decision heinp: made on tf"le Cabinet. These wouJd he the kinds or corporations that uould he suggested to the cabinet should come under it.

As I say, the Horkrnen 1 s Compensation Board and the hospitals• the hospitals are already included in the act. That is who the act would apply t.o. The minister who would administer the net is the Minister of Labour. The President of the Treusury Board is charged with the responsibility for conducting collective barr,nining carr:i.ed out under or by virtue of the act. As I say, '.fr. Speaker. the President of the Treasury Board does not involve himself or engage in collective bnrgaining.

He are there to p;ive guide lines, and the Premier - yes, the Premier has to be involved when an emergency arises or some .serious situation evolves. !-fR.. ROBfRTS ,:_ Inaudible. CR.0SB,1.E.:_ Do not stop me when I am trying to - you know, later on. I will tell you I arr getting pretty battered, not from the rug pulling but I am getting punchy. 1 give up! I hope T do not hnve to have

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 14 a lab or x-ray examination within the next few days. AN HON. MEMBE!l_ Inaudible. NM - 2 MR. CROSBIE: The honourable gentleman looks like he just had one. Now, Mr. Speaker, not to go into detail on the bill, thPn the bill proceeds to describe how you can become certified if you are not certified now, the kind of thing that is in the Labour Relations Act, You have to gain a majority in a unit and then you can become certified and act as a bargaining agent. All these normal things are there.

Section (9) protects all bargaining agents for employees who are now certified or recognized under the Labour Relations Act who would come under this act and all collective agreements now in force and in effect would be deemed to be collective agreements under this act, I have mentioned Sectinn (10) dealin~ with essential employees and the position of the Labour Relations Board in it.

What we were planning to do with the legislation if passed, is during the next three to four months we start immediately but hopefully within the next three or four months the Labour Relations Board would have before it any questions that arose as to who are essential service employees and have that all settled in the next three or four months. We do not propose to wait ten months or a year but to get at it right away to try to get settled who are essential and who are not so that we will all know where we are and see how satisfactory that process works before the board where we cannot agree.

It is important to realize that it is not in our hands, it is in the hands of this independent Labour Relations Board. Then the bill proceeds with various clauses that are common to the Labour Relations Board about collective bargaining. It provides for conciliation. It provides for the appointment of conciliation officers and the appointment of conciliation boards. The Minister of Labour can appoint conciliation hoards, he can under the Labour Relations Act. Each side nominates a candidate and if they agree on a chairman, that is the board, if they r;549

October 25, 1973 Tape No, 14 N;i - J do not the minister appoints - no wait now, no it is not the ninister, T think it is the drnirrran - yes it is the minister, The minister appoints a person as member and diairmnn of the conciliation board. There is the usual provisions about conciliation hoards and their procedure. By the wny, we have agreed ta certain amemlmcnt.s, The minister may request the c.oncil.lation board to reconsider and clarify o:r amplify. We are geing to change that, at the either of the parties. But these are all nonnal provisions.

I.lnt-H we r,et to Sect.ion (2}) - these are conditions precedent before strikP nction can he taken. Thn."c will be one or two -0111-eodments r;urgested there. The hargaininr, unit uiU not be nhle to stdke until fourteen <lays elapse from the time the report of the conciliation hoard is received by the minister, if our amendment is accepted, Could ve hnve these writ.ten out?

Under Section (24) no strike is to be ta.ken by an employf'e unless a majority of the emp.ioyees in the unit vote hy secret ballot ln favour of n strike and. (li) until seven days hnve elapsed from the date on which the barf;aining ap;ent p:ives notice to the 'Hnister 0f Lnbour that u majority of the employees in the unit have so voted.

He are requiring in this tiection that before there is a strike there should be a vote by secret ballot and a najority of the employees of tlw unit should vote nffirmntivdy for a strike, obviously, At least it is ohvious to us, at least fifty per cent plus one of the members of the unit should show that they favour strike action by voting in u secret ballot. To be certified in the first place, fifty per cent of those eligible in the unit have to vote in favour of certification of that particular unit.

Where less tbm 0. majority of the employees in the unit vote in favour of strike, either party can resume the resumption of negotiations.

Section 24 (3) Mr, Speaker, we changed since last Hay, states ;;55u

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 14 NM - 4 that if during a strike the employer of the employees in the unit submit to the bargaining agent an offer designed to bring about agreements between the parties, which offer is one which confers greater benefit or advantage to the employees in the unit than hitherto tendered, such offer is to be submitted forthwith by the bargaining agent to all employees in the unit, and unless a majoritY of those employees in the unit actually voting by secret ballot vote to continue the strike, then they shall resume the duties of their employment forthwith.

So we provide in this section, Mr. Speaker, that if a strike he on and a new and improved offer ie made, there will be an obligation under the law for that offer to be passed on to the employees in the unit and for them to be permitted to have a secret ballot to vote as to whether or not they wish to accept that offer or for the strike to continue~ Now to us, Mr. Speaker 7 that seefflS the only right and proper thing to be the situation.

We do not think that matters of tl is kind should be decided at opes meetings by show of hands, where the individual member has not had a chance to indicate what he wishes in secret and by secret ballot~ ,: That is the purpose of that section. There will be a change in amendments suggested in

section 26 which was suggested by NAPE. In

section 26 we did have two subsections under which the Labour Relations Board was to decide whether or not a strike action was lawful or unlawful and on consideration it appears to be objectionable. Unless you are going to have the Labour Relations Board in power to issue injunctions and to do all these other things~ there is no point in the board having that, power and we would be suggesting that

section 26 (2) and (3) be deleted.

Section 27, I have described which deals with declaring an emergency, Mr. Speaker, if an emergency has to be declared then the matters in dispute will go immediately to arbitration. Each party will have the right to nominate a member of the board. The two members ~551

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 14 N~ - 5 nominated will have the right to select the chairman of the arbitration board. lf they cannot agree on who the chairman of the arbitration board should be, then the Chairman of the Labour Relations Board, not the :-linister of Labour, the Chairman of the Labour Relations Board, who is an independent person, will nominate the ch:1inran of this arbitration panel or adiudication board as it is called in this legislation, Now this is only going to happen in those hopefully rare cnses where there has heen and there is a definite threat to the heal.th or safety of the people of the province and therefore a state of emerr,ency has to he declared or in the unlikely situ;ition where over fifty per cent of the employees of the unit are deemed essential, The board is thendn

section 30, directt!d t0 consider all the mattcrs(and some of the considerations are listed there that they should take into account'and to make a judgement on all the matters that issue. The following sections deal with that; such Judgement is to he binding on all of these p;uties involved, the employers as well as the employees. The following sections after that are pretty straightforward anct have the same kind of provisions as are in the Labour Relations Act now. HR. WM. ROWE: Could the minister answer a question1 l'ffi. CROSBIE: Yes. HR. WM.

ROWE: The legislation which the Government of Canada had passed through the House of Commons, did it contain an emergency clause, does the minister know? HR. CROSBIE: 1 was going to get a quick survey about 'What has happened in other provinces which includes that. So, Mr. Speaker, these are the main provisions of this legislation which in our view is a vast step forward in the labour legislation of this province.

While it does not contain the provisions perhaps that the union movement think it should, we have other considerations in our mind and their rights and the riRhts of their members have to been tempered with what must he sometimes done in the public interest.

October 25, 1973 Tape No. 14 NM - 6 Now what is the situation in other provinces? I am just goinR to go over this quickly. I will only deal with two or three things, the right to strike - in Nova Scotia: No, not in the public service. Do they have any provision about essential employees? No, because no one has the right to strike. Can there be arbitration? YesJ if it is declared by the Lieutenant-Governor in Counci], 1'his is conciliation procedure 1 that is in Nova Scotia. mediation precedures. In New Brunswick - do they have the. right to strike? Yes.

They have a choice between strike or arbitration, that is the bargaining agents do. Do they have any provision about essential employees? Yes, they can be designated by the New Brunswick Public Service Relations Board. It is a provision for arbitration? Yes. The bargaining agents have a choice between strike or arbitration, and conciliation services are supplied by the public service labour relations board, designated employees i;553

October 25, 19 7 3 Tape 15 PK - 1 employees do not have the right to strike. Prince Edward Island you have no rights at all. No right to strike. No essential employees. No arbitration. Quebec, there is a right to strike but it is suhject to a period of delays and where certain actions can be taken if a strike is found to be injurious to the public interest, for an eighty day cooling off period, eiehty day suspension of the rirht to strike. It is quite a complicated series of things.

But no strike in the public service in Quebec is permitted unless essential services are maintained by mutual agreement of the parties or at the decision of the Quebec Labour Relations Board, There is no provision in the Quebec net for arbitration because their policy is they are not going to have arbitration, too much of their budget is involved and that is going to renain a cabinet responsihility. So they do not have arbitration. They just forbid striking for the essential employees. Ontario does not permit strikes in the public service. It has no provision for the essential employees.

And arbitration can be held handled by the public labour relations tribunal. In Alberta there is no right tc, strike in the public service. No provision for essential employees because it is not needed, they cannot strike. There is arbitration by the executive council and by the cabinet of Alberta. They have quite an unusual set up which thc>re ls no need to take all of the time to go into. Saskatchewan, yes. In Saskatchewan they have the right to strik~ in the public service. They do not have any provisions about essential employees.

In Saskatchewan everyone working in the public service or in a hospital are free to go on strike, to strike if they wish. There is no essential employees. There is no arbitration provided fot, that is conciliation. In Manitoba civil servants are not permitted to strike. Crown corporations are but the cabinet has authority to stop strikes in those crown corporations and agencies. There are no essential employee provisions because they have not the right to strike, They do have arbitration. In British Colu,~bia, at present this is being changed, this present

October 25, 1973 Tape 15 PK - 2 New Democratic Government is changing the situation but up to when these changes go through or perhaps they have gone through, there is no right to strike in British Columbia. TherefOre there is no essential employee, no arbitration. That situation has now been changed and I am told by people who look at the legislation, they will have a right to strike now. I do not know the detail of - I do not think they have provisions of essential employees either. In the Government of Canada there is a right to strike given but bargaining agents have a choice between strike and arbitration.

A bargaining unit can say we either go through the process and end up in a strike or we accept to go the other way where we can end up in arbitration but the federal legislation provides for designating certain public servants. It is somewhat similar to the New Brunswick legislation. Bargaining agents Can choose to go one way which ends in arbitration if they cannot agree or the other way conciliation and strike, and they choose that at the beginning. So if they gothe arbitration route the arbitration is compulsory and binding on them both.

If they go the conciliation strike route, then theycannot take strike action,but with respect to services related to the safety and security of the public there is provision for the public service staff relations board of the federal governemnt to designate e~loyees who cannot strike under any circumstances. These designated employees will be similar to the essential employees we are proposing on our legislation. That federal legislation covers govermnent departments and certain boards and agencies. That is a rough survey of the situation in these various jurisdictions. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I want to say something ~n the present situation with respect to the lab and x-ray employees: The position with respect to the lab and x-ray employees who number some 325 or 350, they are in one unit which has received voluntary recognition from the government, and they are lab and x-ray employees in most of the hospitals across the province! i;555

November 25. 1973 Tape 15 PK-3 Negotiations commenced with them on Nay 7, 1973. They broke off June 11. 1973, with NAPE. who represents these employees, requesting conciliation. There was a meeting with a conciliation officer and them on July 4, 1973, and they reaffirmed they wanted a conciliation board. A board was appointed August 17, 1973. The board's report was filed S~tember 13, 1973. On September 19, 1973, Mr, John Peddle, the General Hana~er of Nape, wrote indicating that the negotiating committee of NAPE was prepared to recommend the conciliation board report.

So that ~IAPE. on behalf of the x-ray and lab, technicians~ informed us that they accepted and what was recommended by the conciliation board report be the agreement, Negotiations res11,;1ed on September 20, 1973: and NAPE'S committee then indicated they would accept the report of the board and recommend it to their membership. At a ne~otiating session on September 21, governr.ent and the hospital association agreed to offer the conciliation board report, Pith one exception - and that related to a recommendation that there should be a thirty-five hour week for all employees in the unit.

The situation apparently is that there is a thirty-five hour week for something like seventy or seventy-five per cent of the lab. and x-ray technicians across the province - a thirty-five hour week - but for the others, some twenty, twenty-five or thirty per cent, there is a thirty-seven and a-half hour week. The hospital association did not wish that chan~e. so there were negotiations with the negotiating committee who finally said that they would recommend this settlement, what the conciliation board had reported, with that one exception, to the membership. Now that was on September 21.

Ballots went out to the members of the x-ray and lab. technicians' union. I believe there was mailed out to them a copy of the proposed agreement or a substantial, written document that contained the terms and conditions of the offer. The ballots were counted on Monday, October 15. We were informed orally then that the proposals were accepted by the membership, 0556

October 25, 1973 Tape 15 PK~4 Before coming to the rest of it; what was the offer that the negotiating unit themselves had said that they accepted? Based on a conciliation board report, they informed us that they had accepted the conciliation board report and infonned the Minister of Labour. We met with them. They said they recommended it to their membership. This is what went out to a vote: A salary increase of nine per cent on all scales~ Aprill, 1973. That employees in the bargaining unit 1 as of April 1 1 1973, and still on staff, will get a lump sum payment of $200 on or around December 1, 1973.

This was recommended by the conciliation board. Salary scales increased by another seven per cent and employees advanced a step on their respective scales, for a total salary increase of twelve per cent, effective April 1, 1974. So that it is nine percent this year, plus $200 on December 1. 1973, plus twelve per cent next year. An improvement in call-backs, so that when they are called back to work they get a minimum of $10 per call and up to one hour and time and a-half thereafter; unregistered technologists, a minimum of $7.00 per call and up to an hour and time and a-half thereafter.

Effective April 1, 1974, an increase in the standby rate, Ftom $1.50 to $3.00, for an eight hour shift. These were all recommended in the conciliation board report. Then, in addition to that, this was not included in the board's report but it was part of our earlier offer, a shift differential,from April 1, 1973, of eighty cents per shift for those who work 4:00 P.M. to 12:00 P.M. and lZ:00 P.M. to 8:00 A.M. A change in the annual leave provisions, so that from April 1,1974, i;557

October 25, 1973, Tape 16, Pagel -- apb change in the annual leave provisions so that from April l, 1974, those with fifteen years or more of service will p;et an additional five <l;:1ys annual leave, At the present time they get that after twenty years, Another paid statutory holiday in 19711 and a scvcrance-pny provision where un employee with five or more years of service will be entitled to be paid for a portion of his nccumulnted sick leave np to n r1uxinum of sixty days on retirement or if his employment terminates throur,h any disah:1.lity or layoff. ::low, '-'r, Speaker, 1 cannot see how honourable mernhcrs of the House could foil to ar.ree that this seems to be :1: fair nnd 0dcqu:1te and reasonnblc proposnl.

Ts this a proposal that ir: crushin.e or that is so nenn that it would cnuse everyone to lose their senses and say:; "To hell w:ith everythinp, 1 cannot accept thls. 1 cannot accept being gro11nd umlcr the heel of the oppressor 1,d th such an offer as this?' A twenty-one percent increase over twr1 years foq:;ctting the two hundred <lollars on December 1 and all of these other fringe benefits. Ts twenty-one percent over two years some.thinf .so terrible :it would co.use you to lose your senses and say that you do not Cilrc 1,1hat happens to anybody or anything, that you arc roing to get nore than that?

Th.'.1t was the offer. That brought us up to October 15, and I have the letter here thnt we received on October lfi, I have the letter here of Se.ptenber 19, saying thnt the nepotiatinp: committee is prepared to recomnend acceptance of the terms of the report provided we accept the complete report and that a meeting be held soon. October 16, we received a letter: "The results of the ballot were determined on the night of October 15, (this is from Hr. Peddle) and telephoned to you immediately.

This is to confirm that telephone conversation that the agreement has been accepted by seventy percent of the voting members. The other thirty percent rejected the agreement on hours of work and natcrnity leave for x~ray employees. As related in our phone conversation, the lnb and x-ray employees across the province are i:;558

October 25, 1973, Tape 16, Page 2 -- apb upset by the recent offer made to nurses. As your are aware. there is always a close relationship in comparison between the lab and x-ray employees and the nurses. With the proposed increase this relationship no longer exists.,: That was October 16, telling us it was accepted. Then,as you know, on October 16, the lab and x-ray employees commenced withdrawing their services.

On October 17, we were told that they had withdrawn their services at eight o'clock that morning and we were told this in a letter of October 17, from John F.Peddle, general manager of NAPE1 with a copy to Hajor Mcinnes of the Grace Hospital and to Jack Burt. HThese employees have agreed that emergency services should be maintained in all hospitals. It is understood that in most hospitals there are sufficient management personnel to conduct emergency services.

However, in any hospital where there are insufficient management personnel, they have agreed to provide personnel to handle emergency situations. 11 Then it goes on to say that the main cause of the walkout is the salary and the nurses, the thirty-seven and a-half hour a week maternity clause and stand-by in smaller hospitals are also issues. That was the statement made in this letter of October 17. Now, Mr.

Speaker, a week later or eight or nine days later we have the situation where a great number of the x-ray and lab technicians not only have withdrawn their services but they are not even going to assist in providing emergency service any longer, despite the fact that a week ago they said they would, The strike connnenced on the 17th. of October and we received this letter. Hr. Speaker, this week, on Tuesday I believe it was and on Wednesday, representatives of the Hospital Association and Treasury Board staff met with Mr.

Peddle and representatives of the x-ray and lab technicians to discuss how best there could be provided this emergency service. How this could best be done and ;:;559

October 25, 1973, Tape 16, Pace J -- apb whnt was the best way of doin?: it so there would not be disputes as to whether there were emergencies or there wen, not. They seemed to hnve arrived at a satisfactnry mcnns of doing that, This was all agreed on Tucsdn.y and Wednesday, how this could best be clone. lln Thursday there were other discussions. On Tuesday and 'Pednf"sday it wrrs surr.ested to the x-ray and lab technicians - they ucrc nskr>d if they would consider arbitration to settle this matter. Would they consider arhit.rntion to do that?

If their case is sound and strong, if there is a case for the x-ray nnd lnh technicians, if they have a case that they were crossed up somehow in this situation or that they unalterably iJnd with :my fnir and irnpnrtinl person lookinp: nt it should alw.:1ys and ever pet whatever nurses p:et • if that arpurnent 1s sound, tiwn why should they fear going into arbitration on the matter? So it was suggested to them that we go into arbitration.

In fact. we were even prepared because of the essentiality of their services and because of the danger to the public who are now sick or who rna.y hec.ome sicl'. nt any moment we were prt>pnred to p-o further, Trensury Board was, and say: ''Just in the event that an arbitration board uill give you less, supposinr thnt happens that they give vou less than we hnve n.lready agreed, we would agree in writing that in that event you would not t'Ct less. The only thing you can do on an nrbitrat.ion is better but vou will do no worse. 1' We are still prepared to agree to that but for some reason, Hr.

Speaker, the x~ray and lnb employees refused,or so we arc told have refused to even consider arbitration in this matter. Nr. Speaker, there is only one way I can see where this dispute can he settled nnd that is arbitration. The government is firmly, definitely and irrevocably committed; Committed because of principle to the position that we are not going to offer any more in terms of wages and salaries to tlse x-ray and lab technicians than we have offered and then .nore than they voted on and accepted.

October 35, 1973, Tape 16, Page 4 -- apb If we do that we can forget the collective bargaining process. We cannot forget it. If we are prepared to offer more after some group with whom we bargained agreed with us and recommends it to their membership and it goes out and they vote for it and then come back and say: "We are not satisfied" for this or that reason, Or someone else got more anri we then go and offer more and after that, we can forget the whole collective bargaining system. Hr. Speaker, there is no way J there is no more, there will not be any more money laid on the table in this case. We cannot do it.

AN HON. MB'BER: (Inaudible) MR. CROSBIE: Yes, even that. That is the situation. But, Mr. Speaker, we are not so unreasoning that we cannot see that there must be some way out of the impasse. The only way we can see out of the impasse is arbitration and that is still open to the x-ray and lab technicians. I 9nly wish that they would think seriously about it and accept it now. When the x-ray and lab strike started it was thought to be illegal. I remember the Leader of the Opposition saying that it was illegal and I think I said that it was illegal myself. It turned out .•• MR.

ROBERTS: The minister who is normally right, in fact was wrong. }1R. CROSBIE: The honourable minister has to admit that he was wrong. Closer examination by legal scholars revealed that it was not illegal for those who work in board-operated hospitals. It is not illegal for them. It is illegal for those who work directly for government because the Labour-Relations Act does not apply to employees of government, therefore, they have no right to strike.

As I understand the position,and there ~~y be some room for doubt, the government employees, it is illegal for them to strike in this situation but the ones working in non-board hospitals, it is not illegal. It is not [;561

Gctolwr 25, 1973, Tnpc 1(, l'age 5 -~ <1µb l 11cgal, '.'r. Spcn.ker, hut it ir; cuntrary to the whole intention and spirit of the Lnlmur--ilcl;1U0ns J,.,ct for there to he u stri_k, and been accepted by the nmbcrsh:ip liLc t1'ds, contrary to th<'.' whole intent. The only renuon it is not ;,5ii2

October 25, 1973 Tape no. 17 Page I - MRW The only reason it is not illegal is that. there "Was no collective agreement signed but the collective agreement was known, every term of it was known, and it was accepted by the members. Now apart from the legality or illegality, if we come to today where there are a number of X-ray and lab technicians who have resigned, mass resignation and will no longer provide emergency service, one must think to oneself what would induce a group of Newfoundlanders or Canadians to take such an extreme position today, here in St, John's, Newfoundland?

Have they been oppressed by the oppressor? Have they just been driven too far that they will, ~r. Speaker, forget any obligations they may have to people w,!to are in hospital in this province or are going to go in hospital, that they will no longer provide even emergency services? l can