Volume XL Friday Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY . OF NEWFOUNDLAND Third Session VERBATIM REPORT (Hansard) Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas Number 51 29 May 1987

....... ._;._:... . .:.~-.:.. ... ___ ....... _. __ ~~·--~- .. ...,.] ·--· -··------c:-- ----· · . -·-·- -~--··- The House met at 10:00 a.m. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! Before calling for Statements by Ministers, I have great pleasure in welcoming to the Speaker's Gallery Mr. Stephen Neary, a for.mer member of the House. MR. TULK: We have him on Question -Period today, Mr . Speaker. SOME HON·. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! Statements by Ministers MR . DINN : Mr . Speaker . MR . SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of ~ines and Housing. MR. DINN: Mr .

Speaker, as minister responsible for housing, I would like · to take this opportunity to update members on the status of the sale of market rental units in Stephenville which are owned by the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. As I informed the House last year, after a number of expressions of interest from private concerns and an examination of the financial performance of the units in recent years, the Corporation placed 53 5 market rental units located in Stephenville in a sales position .

In doing so, it was hoped that the sale of these buildings would promote a more competitive rental market environment. In this regard, Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to inform members today L2690 May 29, 1987 Uol XL --~-- ~ ------------- that this initiative has met with a great deal of int~rest from local business and individual homeowners. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, details are presently being finalized for the sale of 22 multiple unit buildings which contain 1~2 units. In addition, there is every indication that 36 other buildi ·ngs containing a total of 132 units rna~ be sold by the end of June.

I will be apprising members of such sales as they are finalized ~ The sale of these units is consistent with bhe mandate of the Corporation to provide a moderating influence in the marketplace . The Corporation has offered for sale similar units in the past and will continue to review its portfolio throughout the .Province in an effort to promote a viable and active rental market. Mr. Speaker, I understand that there is some anxiety among Corporation employees in the Stephenville office regarding these sales.

I would advise members that Corporation officials are aware of this situ~tion and that all employees will be kept informed of any developments as they occur. I would also report, as I indicated last week, that the Corporation will soon be inviting proposal calls for the sale of 6 apartment buildings in Pleasantville. I would hope that there is the same level of interest in these buildings on the part of the private sector as is now being generated in Stephenville. Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would note that the sale of these units is No. 51 R2690 ----·-- ··--·--·- ----· ---...

cons is tent with plans outlined by the hon. Minister of Finance in his Budget Speech earlier this year. Thank you. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: T~e hon. the member for Step~enville. MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. - I would like to thank the minister for a copy of his statement ahead of time. I was pleased to hear the minister indicate that there is some news forthcoming on the units.

I have had some. meetings with the employees out there, with the maintenance shop, and they have been very concerned since last Summer when the minister was there and he was assuring the employees of their status and of the future of the Stephenville area. I would ask the minister to look into the situation where there is contracting out of work, outside of Stephenville, which can be done by the maintenance shop employees and which would help ensure their long-term futures and their jobs.

I believe they have pointed out to the minister and his officials that jobs are the big consideration there, and I would ask him to take tha·t under consideration. I am also concerned about the secrecy attached to the sale of these units. We are finally getting some information on it, and I would ask that his officials be a little bit more forthcoming L2691 May 29, 1987 Vol XL with their info. I also notice that in his statement he talks about the financial performance of the units in recent years.

Now, that financial performance was laid out when the Western Residential Tenancies Board gave NLHC a nice smack between the two eyes with their roll back of rents, when they pointed out that the financial statements presented were not giving exactly the truest picture in the world to the people of the area. I would also ask thE! minister to take .that under consideration. Looking at the Stephenville office, Mr. Speaker, recently advertising appeared in the Newfoundland Herald which had all the regional offices listed, but Stephenville had been omitte!d from that list.

I have asked the minister's department to look at that as it has created some concerns in the area about th~ future of the Stephenville operation, and I am still awaiting an answer I would hope that he takes all those things under consideration, as well as a number of others that I will be pointing out. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: I have two points to make, Mr. Speaker, with regard to the statement.

The first is with regard to the divestiture of these apartment units in the Stephenville area: I know last year there was considerable anxiety by the residents concerned and some efforts were forthcoming No. 51 R2691 --.. -.. ···-· -·-----~---... ·-----r-----·-----·--· --

-:-..:..--......;._,._._ ---~·-·-- ·-···~ .. ~·--·-.-------- .......... , .. to try and put up a housing co-operative in order to put the people there. I would hope that the minister is allowing efforts like that to go forward as profitably as they can and hopefully to a successful conclusion. because it is my feeling that that would be the most appropriate way to divest of them. The second point has to deal with the profits accrued from the sale of this.

In the past, the minister has told us that the profits would be filed into other activities of Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and into providing additional units elsewhere, subsidized housing and so on, and we have accepted the minister's comments on that. But, Mr . Speaker, one point I would like to make today is that we learned several weeks . ago_ that the Housing Corporation is putting $1 million worth of land into a Sprung greenhouse project. Because it is supplying the thirty acres of land involved, the questions we would have to ask are: Are the proceeds of this sale being ploughed into it?

Is the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation being compensated by the joint venture for the land it is giving away, or is the Housing Corporation taking an equity position on this Sprung greenhouse project? Because I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, for the Housing Corporation to give up $1 million worth of land, or whatever, would be totally irresponsible for the Corporation. given the situation that it has a mandate to provide housing and not to go into harebrained ventures like this. MR . SIMMS: Mr. Speaker. L2692 May 29, 1987 Vol XL MR . SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR.

SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I just have a brief statement. It is not in writing or anything. and I apologize for that. In response to a question yesterday by the member for Humber West (Mr. Baird) with respect to an extension of the deadline for the responses to the Green PapE!r concerning the outfitting industry. I can advise the House that we have, in fact, now decided to extend the deadline because there is such interest in responding. The new deadline now will be June 22. So any responses dated June 22 will be welcome and indeed accepted. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. BAIRD: Thank you. MR. SIMMONS : Mr.

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Opposition . Leader of the MR . SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. the government has finally twigged to thE! fact that they could not get away with this, they could not sneak this through. They brought the paper in a couple of months ago, neVE!r did any advertising, hoped that they could go through the motions, and then, after the deadline, say with a straight face. • We gave you an opportunity for input and you did not do anything about it. • I went to wee .k s ago graduation, No. 51 Burg eo to and I two or three speak to a was invited to R2692

---------------------·---·----- meet with a number of men who had concerns about this paper and who had just heard about it a few days before. As a result, I did a Cable T.V. i tern for Burg eo and it was played a couple of times. Whether as a result is not the question, but following that· there was a meeting in Burgeo with 500 people present, which goes to show the kind of concern there is when people are alerted to the options. I have heard what the minister has said. The government has not decided, the government has laid out some options.

Some of the options are downright frightful, and for that reason people ought to have full opportunity. So I commend them for extending the deadline. It is too bad it has come down to the wire before it was done, and it is too bad it got caught up in that little bit of gamesmanship yesterday, because the minister knew yesterday, Mr. Speaker, when he stood in this House that there was going to be an extension.

This idea that you can run off and consult your Cabinet colleagues overnight is very instructive for . when we are trying to get a decisidn some other time, when it takes weeks and weeks and weeks to get a Cabinet decision. So this charade was completely unnecessary and it is a bit of an insult to the people who feel threatened by that Green Paper, Mr. Speaker. The good news here is that there is an extension. Now, could I ask the minister to run some ads in the paper, with or without his picture, and make people fully aware of this particular extension.

It should be more than an afterthought written on a bit of paper, an overnight scurrying to consult Cabinet colleagues, and a little btt of gamesmanship wi.th L2693 May 29, 1987 Vol XL the member for Humber West (Mr. Baird) so he can mak1a his maiden speech to the House. It should be more than that. It should be now a form~l announcement through advertisements so that the people of the Province know that this extension is in place and that they can come forward with their concerns. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the -member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: Mr.

Speaker, I, too, welcome the decision to extend the deadline on s·ubmissions to the ministe!r wi t.h regard to changes to the rules governing outfitting and so on. I think, though, the whole need for an extension outlines the problems that this government seems to be having · with its cons u 1 tat ion process. I think it is appropriate that they" produce Green Papers like the one on the change to the outfitters rules. They also had a Green Paper on time changes, which the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth has produced.

But in a sense it is only half of the consultation process, because very few people who are concerned with it actually get the information and are in a position to act on it. Mr. Speaker, what I would like to suggest we should strongly look at in this Chamber is strengthening the committee system that we have to allow it to do more of this kind of consultative work. For example, if the Estimates Committee were struck on a year-long basis, then one of them could have held hearings on the changes to the outfitting rules rather than just sort of throwing No. 51 R2693

-.... -··--. ·-.. ---·--·-··-· ----- --..-... , .... _ ·--··· ...,..- -~=- ·~--~ .. ·~-- --·- a Green Paper into a void and hoping . that people would pick it up and do something. Similarly, I think, the Green Paper on time changes also deserved a lot more discussion and debate than it got. I think, again, a House commit tee would be very useful in this kind of process. I know it is .done in the House of Commons on a very frequent basis. It is even done by the Senate, the useless Chamber of the House.

I think we really should start looking at using all members of the House in the process of developing policies that there will be a broad · consensus on, rather than just throwing the paper out and hoping someone catches it and brings back some comment. MR. SPEAKER: I would like at this stage to welcome to the galleries sixteen Grade V students and three teachers, I have just one ' of their names,· Mr. Critch, from the Pentecostal Academy in Botwood. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Oral Questions MR . BAKER : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Gander. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I notice the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mr. Doyle) was not pounding his desk so I have a question for him. In one L2694 May 29, 1987 Vol XL of his famous television appearances the Minister of Municipal Affairs, in relation to the community of Benton, left the impression with the people of the Province and with the people of Benton that money would be provided to get a start on a sewerage system for that community so that $100,000 of federal funding would not have to be sent back and would not have to be wasted.

Yesterday officials in his department informed people from that community that in fact the funding would most likely not be there. I ask would the minister today ~top playing with this issue, stop playing with the people of Benton and stop playing with television cameras, and once and for all would he please straighten this situation out for us? Are these people going to get their definite answer by the end of May, as they were promised, and ·are they going to get that $30,000 to start their sewerage treatment system? MR. SPEAKER : Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. DOYLE: Mr.

Speaker, we are very well aware of the situation in Ben ton and the fact that they do have some federal funding to start a much needed sewerage system in that community. We indicated to the town of Benton approximately two weeks ago that we would not see the $100,000 of federal Funding, being sent back simply because they could not get a small supplement from the Government of Newfoundland to help out in putting that system in there. What I indicated· was what monies could be made available through the Community Water Service programme.

If the hon. gentleman No. 51 R2694 ---- ·----- --- -·- ·------- .. -·-- ·--- ·----- -------- ··- ·-.

is following everything as closely as · he should . within the department, he will know that we have not dealt yet with the Community Water Service programme and, when we do, the community of Benton will be considered. MR. BAKER : Mr .. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER : A supplementary, the hon. the member for Gander . MR. BAKER : Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I suggest the minister check with the officials in his department and find out 1.\Jhy they are telling the people in Benton they are not going to get the money. Yesterday as !.\Jell, Mr .

Speaker, police delivered to nine families in Benton a letter informing thein of a court case that 1.\Jas going to take. place on Monday in Grand Falls l.Uith a view to evicting these families and having them remove their houses or have their houses torn dol.\Jn because the ground 1.\Jas not sui table for proper sewerage treatment 'and so on. I 1.\Jould like to ask the minister is this hol.\1 in connection with the sewerage treatment, a nel.\1 approach of government, instead of solving the problem you force the people to get out? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs. MR. DOYLE: I 1.\Jant to respond first of all, Mr . Speaker, to the first part of the hon. gentleman 1 s question 1.\Ji th L269S May 29, 1987 Uol XL regard to officials. Officials do not make the decisions on 1.\Jhere the funding goes in this Province. That is number one . So 1.\Je have made a commitment to Benton that 1.\Je 1.\Jould not see the $100,000 of federal funding go back if it means a small supplement coming from the Community Water Service programme to help them out , and that commitment is still very much in place.

With respect to eviction of people, to my knol.\Jledge 1.\Je have not been notified of any evictions at this point in : timE!, but I l.Ui11 be quite pleased to look into it. MR. BAKER: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the member for Gander. MR. BAKER : Thank you, Mr . Speaker. It is the Department of Municipal Affairs that is instituting this action against those families and it is very serious. They have been given only tl.Uo days notice of a court hearing to be held in Grand Falls, all instigated by t:he Department of Municipal Affairs, and the minister does not know .

I 1.\Jould ask the minister to immediately check into this and to at least put a hold on those evictions until 1.\Je get the sel.\Jerage treatment problem straightened out in Benton, and to do the job that Municipal Affairs is supposed to do. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! · MR. SPEAKER: The hon . the Minister of Municipal No. S 1 R2695 ----------·------- --- --·---~------ ·- --~--- - -- --···~-- -·· --- ... ···--- " ·----- ----· ··--· -----. ·-- ... .... .

•••••• .~_ ...... ____ , ___ .,._ .. ... -.~---·- ... ·~. ___ .., .. - · -- · ---·,.., ·-·-- --· .. ~ -· ·- -· ··--···~ . .. .. y. Affairs. MR. DOYLE: Obviously, Mr, Speaker, what the hon. gentleman is saying is quite misleading. The Department of Municipal Affairs do not serve eviction notices on anybody in this Province and that includes the community of Benton. So I would very much like to check into it because I feel very sure indeed that it is not the Department of Municipal Affairs which is evicting people from Benton. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. Barbe . MR. FUREY: Mr.

Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development (Mr. R. Aylward). He will know that the appeals tribunal will be rendering · its decision today with respect to the appeal from the minimum price on milk. I want to ask does the minister expect a fair and neutral decision from a tribunal that he himself has hand picked and appointed, number one? And, number two, does he expect this decision to be fair in light of his public comment that he expects the tribunal to uphold its original decision? MR .

SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon . member for his question. The tribunal dealt with the request fro .m Judge Cameron of several months ago . last weekend, and L2696 May 29, 1987 Vol XL upheld their initial ruling, Mr . Speaker . That was done a week ago . I expect that all decisions of the tribunal to be fair. The chairman of that tribunal has been a judge in this Province for quite some time and I have no reason to doubt his integrity, Mr. Speaker.

The other two members of the tribunal are very honourable people and I have no doubt about their integrity. I really feel as harned to be a politician when I can hear someone across the way doubting the integrity of Newfoundlanders who are serving this Province and not making any , money on it, serving this Proyince to make decisions that are outside of government•s control, Mr. Speaker. MR. FUREY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. MORGAN: You are getting worse than CBC. MR . SPEAKER: A supplementary, the member for St. Barbe. hon. the MR.

FUREY: It is the comments that Speaker, which decision. minister•s public I worry about, Mr. could influence the My supplementary is to ask the minister: Under his own authority and legislation he has

an act called The Natural Products Marketing Act, 1973, which enables him to call before an independent enquiry processors who increase prices on natural products, such as milk. I would ask the minister to read his own act,

Section 11, paragraph (

j) which allows him to look into unfair pricing. I ask will he invoke that legislation to force the processors to carne and appear before an enquiry to No. 51 R2696 ------------------------- ·------ -- -- ·----- -· -

----~----- justify this six cent increase on a two liter carton of milk, especially in light of the fact that he . is already slamming the consumers in the face with a minimum price? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural, and Northern Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the minimum price was set by the Milk Marketing Board. It was upheld, Mr. Speaker, by an independent tribunal. Their right to do it was upheld by a court of this Province, Mr. Speaker, and it was reaffirmed by an independent tribunal again.

That is why there is a minimum price in this Province. The Natural Products Marketing Board has its regulations and they can act as they see fit. I am sure if they have any major concerns about the increase in the cost of milk, Mr. Speaker, they will act on that behalf or recommend to me how I should act. Mr. Speaker, I have never had a recommendation from that board to call in any of the processors. The hon. member on television the other night said I should call in the producers. Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of calling in every dairy farmer in this Province to go before MR. FUREY: Processors, I said. MR. R.

AYLWARD: He said producers, Mr. Speaker, and I have no intention of calling in every dairy farmer. Peopl~ L2697 May 29, 1987 Vol XL like him got their industry as risk as it is, Mr. Speaker, by complaining about a good marketing syst~m. the same as there is anywhere else in Canada. MR. FUREY: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the member for St. Barbe. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, the minister can play verbal gymnastics all he wants, but the fact of the matter is that the Minister of Consumer Affairs (Mr.

Russell)-in this House the other day, on Tuesday -we have not seen him since -said he had already discussed with the Minister of Agriculture this six cent increase. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. FUREY: Now, I ask the is minister gotng to do what is right for thE! consumers? Is he going to ask the processors to appear under his own enabling legislation to justify this increase or are they going to be a brace of cowards, he and the Minister of Consumer Affairs? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development .. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr.

Speaker, I will do what is right to provide a good quality, fresh product and protect thE! dairy industry and create jobs in this Province to the advantage of farmers. and consumer~s in this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. 51 R2697 ·-· -------· .... ________ .. ____ ·-·---·---···---· .. --------.......

-- .... - ~-" ·-·· ............ ~._ ............... -..,_..-~. # ........ . --... ... -- --·- - - · ~·--·--- .. ·-· _. ___ _ _ ••• _. _ __ ,_,...,. • • • • • __ ,_ _____ _ _ ___ ••• ~ ..... - Hear, hear! MR. DECKER : Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR . DECKER : Mr . Speaker, my question is for the hon. the Minister of Health (Dr. Twomey). The minister is aware that after Bill C-22 becomes law there is every indication that the price of drugs will go up.

I say to the minister that if the · price of drugs goes up, the old and the poor. whose drugs are now subsidized, will not have access to drugs or, if they do have access, the supply of other services will have to go down to offset the price of new drugs. I ask the minister what contingency plan has he made to offset the ·effects of Bill C-22? DR. TWOMEY: Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. DR. TWOMEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To be quite frank I we do not have a contingency plan at this time.

I do not think that imme diately the Bill is passed that the cost of drugs is going to escalate to any degree. I think what is going to happen is there is going to be a slow increase in the price. I think a lot of the expensive drugs will come under the new discoveries. I do not believe that there is going to be that price jump on the drug user at this particular time.

And it is the new ones that will come on the market that are going to cause the L2698 May 291 1987 Uol XL increased cost of drugs, not that tomorrow morning you are going to have a jump of 10 per . cent or 20 per cent on any particular pharmaceutical . MR. DECKER : A supplementary, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary~ the hon. the member for the Strait of Belle . MR. DECKER : The answer is in tune with the crisis management aspect this government has been using. The minister attended Senate hearings on Bill C-22 yesterday, Mr . Speaker.

Now in all honesty the minister will have to admit that that is like closing the barn door after the horse has run away. Will the minister explain to this House why his government did not take more aggressive action to stop _ this bill while it was before the Commons - not now that: it has gone to a Liberal Senate - which is controlled by his Tory friends and buddies and where this government has all of thE! influence I as we were told in the last election? Why did the minister wait until Bill C-22 came before the Senate before he acted? Really it is just a formality anyway. no great action could be taken.

Why did he put it off until the last minute, like he is going to do about making a contingency plan when the price does go up? DR. TWOMEY: Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of Health. DR. TWOMEY: Mr. Speaker I how does one answer that question? It is like as king No. Sl R2698 --------- --- ----·-· · .. ·-----·--- ·-·-------- ·---- ---~

·- --·· . -·--- -- ··------------------- how high is hi g h? It is a perception of which each and every one of us has. How do we approach it? How much love is love? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! DR. TWOMEY: What is one supposed to do as a minister other than communicate with one 1 s opposite minister at the federal level? Beyond all shadow of doubt, I announced in this House previously my communicatio~, my meeting with the Minister of Health (Mr. Epp), and · my communication with the various Ministers of Consumer Affairs . Not alone has that been done, but the Minister of Consumer Affairs (Mr.

Russell) in this Province has met with his opposite, has communicated with his opposite . Each of us have letters to these respective ministers, each of us have replies from these respective ministers. I understand that the Premier has d~s cussed it with the Prime Minister of Canada. What more can one do as an elected representative other than perform your duties to the best of your ability? Quite honestly, I do not hang my head in shame. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! DR. TWOMEY: I speak for myself: I have done everything that any human being or any minister can do. MR .

SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Menihek . MR. FENWICK: Thank you, M:. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. In a previous answer L2699 May 29, 1987 Vol XL the minister said that the minimum retail price for .milk was in line with practically all the provinces. My question to the minister is this: In Prince Edward Island there is not a minimum retail price, there is a minimum wholesale price; in Nova Scotia there is not a minimum retail price but a minimum wholesale p·rice, and there is not even a minimum wholesale price the prov~nce of New Bru nswick .

How can the minister say that our practice of having a minimum retail price for milk is consistent when the three other Atlantic provinces ha ve no minimum retail price for milk? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development . MR. R. AYLWARD : Minister and of Rural, Northern The NDP governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan ·brought in minimum pricing of milk in both their provinces and that answers his question, Mr . Speaker. I mak ·e no apologies for what the Milk Marketing Board is doing in th is Province.

In 1983 this Province was producing 12.5 million li tres of milk a year; as of December 31, 1986 we are producing 17,754,000 litres of milk, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. R. AYLWARD : Since the establishment of the Milk Marketing Board, Mr. Speaker, we have increased local production of milk by 42 per cent, and not another industry in Canada can claim that, Mr . Speaker, and that was caused because of the good management of our Milk Marketing Board. We now have a $12.5 million business employing about No. 51 R2699

__ ___ • ____ ._· ---- ··- ••"• .. -• -•••-• "'•- • ... ---- u ~-· • .. , .. , ... ••••·- ••• ·- ·-~ •• ~····-• '"•••··~ ·-•-.,••··"-" -'""'••• ••••~ • ;-~•••.,• 1000 people in Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker. I make no apologies for minimum prices or anything the Milk Marketing Board is doing. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A . supplementary, the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK : han. the We accomplished all of that without a minimum retail price for milk, so why do we need one now? My question to the minister is this.

As he knows, our minimum retail price for milk is considerably above the minimum wholesale prices in the Atlantic provinces. MR. MORGAN: There is a_ big difference between retail and wholesale, is there not? MR. FENWICK: It is my understanding that his Milk Marketing Board, or one of his agencies, has now done a study of the dairy Farmers in the Province in order to establish a reasonable minimum farm gate price to the producers - the producers and not the processors. The question I have for the minister, Mr.

Speaker, is: Is the minister willing to release the results of that survey, or that study, in order to give us an indication of why we need a minimum retail price for milk which is considerably above that which has be set in the other Atlantic provinces? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. - MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural, Northern ~r. Speaker, there was a study L2700 May 29, 1987 Uol XL done.

Some time last Fall, I believe, there was a study done by an independent consultant from New Brunswick and the purpose of that study was to get good, up-to-date figures on the cost of fluid milk production in this Province. It is the property of Ag Canada and the Milk Marketing Board. My staff has a copy of it now, we are doing an assessment of it, Mr. Speaker, and I have no problem in releasing it. When I get my assessment and get briefed on it, I have no problem in releasing that study, Mr.- Speaker. MR. FENWICK : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon . the member for Menihek. MR.

FENWICK : My final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, is: Could the minister give us an exact date on when we can aet a copy of that study? Also, could he show us why we need a minimum retail price,, since he says all we are trying to protect is the producers, when in fact the minimum retail price protects only the processors, three- dairies, two of which are not even owned by Newfoundlanders? MR. SPEAKER: The hon . the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural, Northern Mr.

Speaker, from the information that I have I am not sure that the statement the han. member made about minimum prices elsewhere in Canada is true, Mr. Speaker. The information I have now is that there is a minimum retail price in effect on milk in Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, Quebec, No. 51 R2700

Alberta, _ . Manitoba and Saskatchewan,· not only for two liters of milk, Mr. Speaker, but also for 250. milliliters of milk. I do not know the exact date, bu ,t I certainly will undertake to get that report made available to han. members as soon as I can get it and as soon as I get a good briefing on it. MR. LUSH : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins).

A couple of days ago in response to a question on the review committee, and in trying to rationalize why he decided to usurp the function of the Auditor General the minister said, and I have Hansard and I quote, 'The Auditor General has his proper function in assessing things after the fact.' Now I ask the minister what is a review committee supposed to be doing? The very definition of the word 'review' is to examine things after the fact, to look into things that happened in the past, which is exactly and precisely the role of the Auditor General. So I ask the minister to explain that. MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I thank the han. member for his question. It was a good, nicely worded question, it was not like the unduly provoca .tive questions that were coming previously that raised the ire of my honourable friend in the Department of Health and the L2701 May 29, 1987 Uol XL attack on the Minister of RAND and so forth. It was a nice, quietly worded question. So, Mr. Speaker, my answer to it, though, is that this is a much broader process and much broader exercise than just reviewing what went on in the past.

This is· a group working for government and government have a lot of input into it, and it will not be just confined to the par ·ti cular individuals announced to date, it fuill . be a broader thing than that, and it will actually forward plan also~ It wi 11 e v o 1 v e , I suppose , at 1 east a three year plan, probably a five year plan, and probably even more than that.

This is an indepth review, at this particular stage in the life of this government, as to what programmes in the past have done in terms of effectiveness, which is only one aspect of it, but also what we are doing now and what we can do more effectively in the future. So it is not just a review. As I mentioned earlier, Auditors General, even if they go into this new thing that Audi tors General tend to go into, this effectiveness thing, that is all review and assessing •?.ffectivenes s of what went on previously.

As far as I know no Auditor GeneraJ. has any mandate to lay out the direction that government should go in the future. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the minister again alludes this morning to the fact that this is a government review. He says, "The government is in No. 51 R2'701 - ~- ... -.. - .. --- ---- -·--· - - ·- .,·- ---- -- - ·· --- - -- - - - ~ .. ----- -·----- --·------ -· .... --. ... -· ·-·--- ···· -··-

control of this review process. 11 Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the problem. Maybe the minister has misnamed the committee. Maybe this is just form. Maybe this is just window dressing to impress the financial institutions of the world that the government is doing something about its fiscal mismangement . Now I ask the minister this: What kind of solid, frank, objective evaluation is the minister expecting from a review of itself. What kind of a frank, honest, objective evaluation is the minister expecting from this kind of process, one similar, I would say, Mr.

Speaker, to locking the fox up in the coop with the chicken? MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the Minister of Finance . DR. COLLINS: Mr . Speaker , I have to pick up on . the hon. member having some misgivings about the government being in charge of this. Who is elected to run publi ·c affairs in this Province at the present time? Surely it is government. We cannot hand the mandate that has been given to us by the people over to some third party. I mean, we should resign if that was the case. We have to be in control of these matters.

In terms of what are we expecting from this review process, in many respects that is what the review process is all about. We are going to be very firmly involved and very firmly in control of the process, but we are not in any way tying the hands of those actually doing the work of the review in any area that they can look into. They can suggest, and I am sure they will, and make recommendations on all the programmes, be they Health, be L2702 May 29, 1987 Vol XL they Social Services, be they Forestry, be they Fisheries, whatever.

They will be free to look at all the programmes and see how we can more effectively direct the public monies - it is not government monies, it is public monies - to the welfare and the good of the people. MR. LUSH: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, th e hon . the member for Bonavista North. MR. LUSH : I would suggest to the minister that the process now in effect is like putting Dracula in charge of a blood bank. Now, Mr.

Speaker, my question to the minister is this: In view of the fact that these senior civil servants now on this review committee have to have staff and office space, and in view of the fact that there have to be replacements found for their positi~ns while they are serving on this review committee, can th(~ minister indicate how much this boondoggle is going to cost this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, at the present time there is only one of the deputy ministers assigned to this on a full-time basis, and indeed he will need a replacement in the department that he is temporarily leaving. When I say temporarily, that is presupposing he is going back there. I think he may well be, but he may not be, I suppose . Anyway, there is only one full-time person assigned from the Public Service at the present time who will have to be replaced. No. 51 R2702

Others will serve while continuing their present duties. We may well have to get in some outside people, and that was stated in the budget. We may get some management or efficiency people involved in this as the process unfolds and as plans are made. There certainly will be a research group. Whe_ther they are going to be made up of public servants or people in the private sector and so on, will be determined as the process moues along. · There will be some additional costs, but I think it will be' money well spent. I do not think there will be very large costs.

I am quite sure that as the plans are put on the ground much more firmly than they are at the present time, we will be able to assess the costs more clearly and inform the House at that time. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: Could I put a question to the Minister or Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development? It is about his Sprung proposal, the $13 million pickle he has got himself into. Mr. Speaker, could · the minister indicate to the House whether, as part of the deal -as soon as he finishes getting educated by his colleagues around him - MR. R.

AYLWARD: Ask your question. MR. SIMMONS: with Sprung, he has an undertaking from Sprung that their technology will not be used L2703 May 29, 1987 Vol XL elsewh~re in Atlantic Canada? Has he that kind of undertaking from Sprung? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I never said that at any time. As a matter of fact, there are two other Atlantic Provinces -except they will have to come up with their own money because they wanted federal money who desperately want this technology, Mr. ,speaker.

I have knowledge now that Alberta is so desperate to keep Sprung out there, Mr. Speaker, tbey are after offering them a deal that was three times as good as ours, I think, Mr. Speaker, or somewhere in that vicinity. MR. SIMMONS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: thE! Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister. He indicated that therE! are possibilities for other Sprung developments in Atlantic Canada. Would he now relate this to the Province•s proposal that 80 per cent of the Sprung output be exported?

Would he not see the problem for market availability if Sprung becomes as successful as hE! pro j e c t s it wi 11 be , not on 1 y here but in other developments in Atlantic Canada? If the government has not naiJ.ed down some restriction - MR. DINN: Now it is successful. No. 51 going to be too R2'703 --------..-.:t. ~-.--...-----_ _..,. .. __ -~·-·-:"'"''"""' .... ~~,_....--.~----·~--·-·------·---· -----........ ---

_ _ ___ _.. _ ___.j- •• ~---•- • ~• -~-- •--· ~-•••-• ~-·- -- -•·- -•-"" ., ·•·••--•--• . ••• •n• _ ,.. ,,, · • o MR. BARRETT: It will be too successful now . MR . SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: No, Mr. Speaker, we do not know what i t is going to be . We k now the offshore is going to be a flop thanks to the idiot who is running it. We know he sold the shop on that, We are trying to · see we do not have a shop sold agriculturally as well. · MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr.

Speaker, what kind of a guarantee do we have now that the great export markets that have been projected will be there if Sprung gets to the point where it has competing operations in Atlantic Canada? · MR. R.. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Rural Agriculture and Northern Development. MR. R. AYLWARD : What a change, Mr. Speaker! They finally got to the right people and someone must have informed them that this is a good project, Mr. Speaker, and we got the first one. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. R. AYLWARD: What a change in attitude, Mr . Speaker.

Yes, there are people interested in the Atlantic area. There are opportunities in the rest of the Atlantic Provinces for L2704 May 29, 1987 Vol XL Sprung . There are also other opportunities in other parts of Newfoundland for Sprung, Mr . Speaker. That is where we are going to develop them and that is where they will be if we get the first one, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Fogo . MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Public Works and Services (Mr. Young) and it concerns the Pippy Park Commission .

As I understand it, the Chairman of the Pippy Park Commission has resigned, there is a police investigation into the affairs of that Commission, and there have been records seized and so on. I would ask the minister is there a connection between the two events, between the Chairman resigning and the matter of the police investigation? Is there some connection between the two? MR. YOUNG : Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG : Mr. Speaker, as there is a police investigation going on I do not think I can make any more comment on it.

But, yes, there is a connection. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: No. 51 R2704 --------- - ----~ --- ----••••••- •· -· · - ·· -- - 'MO• _,., ------· -• ooo- o ------- __ M _ , __ -- ·-

·------- The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I do not expect the han. gentleman to get into the 1 ega 1 it i e s of this rna t t e r . I as k would the minister now inform the House, in a general sort of way if he cannot get into the specifics, just what the general nature of that investigation is? In other words, what are the police investigating? Are they investigating theft, or just;. what are the·y investigating? Are they investigating grand larceny or murder? What are they· investigating? Could he give us the general nature of the investigation? MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Public Works and Services. -MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, investigation completed I details. MR. TULK: there is a police going on and when it will give him the A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman will recall that the Opposition in the Legislature last year warned him that there were certain things that were not right with the Pippy Park Commission.

Let me ask the hon. gentleman if indeed the problem that now exists in Pippy Park might very well have something to do with his being lax in following up what the L2705 May 29, 1987 Vol XL -------------·--· ---- Opposition proposed to him? Again I ask would he tell us, since we have a right to know in this Legislature in regards t.o the Pippy Park Commission, just what the general nature of the police investigation is into this thing? Is it caused by his incompetence in administering and not listening to the Opposition of this Province as he should have done? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I wish to the hon. Opposition House Leader that Pippy Park is an autonomous body and I do not have much control over it, only just report to the House. And it is unfortunate that if the hon. member knew something last Fall he did not bring it to my attention. But, Mr. Speaker, this has nothing to do with last Fall. This happened recently. When it was brought to my attention I acted. I have no further comrne nt, Mr. Speaker. MR. LONG: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John • s East. MR.

LONG: I have a question for the Minister of Career Development and Advanced Studies (Mr. Power). It is to follow up a question I asked yesterday in which the response given suggested that the concerns about the problem of battered No. 51 R2705 ... -·-... ~*'·~-·--·---·····-~·· ~-.. --·-· ...... ·--···------·--··-·--··-----···-...... -... -·- -----·-------·-......... _ ··-·----·---..

·-------- -~ ·-----·---- -- - women in this Province were shallow and narrow-minded. I would like to say to the minister that my question concerns two basic issues, that women in this Province who are battered need assistance, and that all people in this Province need ·a public education programme on the problems of family violence. My question to the minister is: Will he consider taking money that is left over from the $4 million for his Private Sector Employment programme that is waiting for applications to come in - MR. J. CARTER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order, the hon . member for St. John's North. MR. J. CARTER: the This has nothing to do with the hon. gentleman, it has to do with something else entirely. Would the Leader of ·the Opposition care to say again what he just said quite clearly in my hearing about the Speaker? MR. SIMMONS: You are a fool! MR. J. CARTER: Would you care to say the same thing, repeat what you said? MR. SIMMONS: To that point Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: of order, Mr . To that point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I am flattered that L2706 May 29, 1987 Vol XL the member for St.

John's North would want to put questions to me. I tell him that it is only appropriate to do so in this Chamber after the next election when I will be in a position to answer some questions. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, there is no point of order. I would like to point out that the time for Oral Questions has now elapsed. Order, please! I would like to welcome to the Visitors' Gallery fifty-five Grade IX students from Assumption Junidr High School in Avalondale with their teachers Miss Dunphy and Miss Tilley. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR ..

SPEAKER: I would also like to welcome forty-two Grade VI students from Davis Elementary School in Carbonear with their teachers Mrs. Tilley and Mr. Lambert . SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! Petitions MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Port de Grave. MR. EFFORD: No. 51 R2'706 -~~~--....-- ... -.. ~.,--.--- --·-···--·- .... ~--~-- ---~ · ,~ -- ------- ·-----. ,------~----. ···--- ..__ ____ __ __ ... --~-..- .... -- ._ .... - -----· ··- ·- __ ,, , .... ·-...... .

---· ___ .., _ _ . ...... ~ ..... ----· --·- ··-·· .... , ......... ·· -··-· )...____. • ..-..._..._ __ ,,,;,.~ ....... ·-··--·· ...... ~-· ... ~--·...: •• ·.f ............ ~; ... ~_. ......... , ''i"" Thank you, Mr. Speaker . Mr . Speaker, I rise here today to present a petition on behalf of twenty people from the Bay St. George area in connection with the recent layoffs by the Department of Social Services and the problems which these particular layoffs have put on the social workers, not only in the Bay St.

George and on the West Coast of Newfoundland, but all over Newfoundland in the Department of Social Services where these layoffs have taken place. In conncection with these recent thirty-five layoffs - Mr. Speaker, I see that the Minsi ter of Social Services (Mr. Brett) has now left his seat. I ask him to come back in be cause there is a moj or concern that on top of the thirty-five layoffs that have presently taken place . in the Department of Social Services, there is strong talk among the social workers that there will be another thirty layoffs take place. If that happens, Mr.

Speaker, on top of what already has taken place in the Department of Social Services, as we pointed out in petitions that were presented yesterday and khe day before, and in fact every day this week, it is going to cause a lot of mass confusion and frustration along with that which has already been taking place in the Department of Social Services. One of the major areas that this is having a great effect on is where the social workers have expanded into child abuse and working with the mentally handicapped children.

Those people require a lot of special attention and a social worker•s case load has to be small in numbers in order for them to do L2707 May 29, 1987 Vol XL the proper job that those type of people require in attention and time. You do not just walk into an office or walk into a home for a visit in four or five minutes and expect to complete something as serious as this. Each sociaJ. worker cannot have a case load of ten, fifteen or twenty· individuals or families that they have to see in one day.

Last year, when the people were hired on in the Department of Social Services, it was because of the ·study ·that was done and the investigation that was done by the Department of Social Services where the social workers themselves could not pay attention and properly give the attention required by these people who needed this type of service.

Now, a year later, with the minister, as we said yesterday, admitting himself that there are more people, as many, or as he said, even more peopJ.e than last year depending on the social service system in 1986-87, why he sees fit to cut back thirty--five people and cut back the services by the Department of Social Services and by the social workers not only il1" the district offices but also in the regional offices? The minister alluded very clearly to the fact that his department spends more money on social services than any other department of any other province in Canada. MR. FUREY: That is shameful. MR.

EFFORD: As my colleague for St. Barbe (Mr. Furey) points out, that is shameful because what it is doing is admitting that the people of this Province, through no fault of their own, only the fault of the No. 51 R2707

government not creating jobs, are not given any other alternative but to survive on social assistance. So, it is not the fault of the people of the Province that they are going to Social Services. The greater majority are going there because there is absolutely nowhere else to . turn. If that type of environment has been created by the present government, then it is the responsibility of the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Brett) at least to give them enough to live on and keep them away from starvation.

Now, aside from the people who haue to depend on the small amount of money that Department of Social Services hands out to buy groceries or to survive on, we have the people who are handicapped, disabled, and the senior citizens of this Province who require, and have nowhere else to turn for assistance, not only financial assistance but the daily assistance they require to enable them to get along in live. The few problems that they do have needs the advice of social workers. So, Mr. Speaker, we, as the official Opposition, have to keep presenting these petitions that are being sent to us.

I think the numbers are growing and growing. We are now up to over 1, 000 names that have come l:.o us on different petitions sent to us by people around the Province who have no other alternative but to put pressure on the government and to implore the Minister of Social Services that he cannot layoff these people and expect the same service to be given out. He must immediately reconsider and admit that he made an error, and he must rehire those thirty-five people.

L2708 May 29, 1987 Vol XL If the trend continues where more people are depending on social services, he is not only going to have to rehire the thirty-five, he is going to have to hire more people. Get the word out that the rumor is not accurate that there are going to be another thirty layoffs and the service will be further cut back because this is the word the Social Services offices, regional and district, are getting, that there are going to be further layoffs.

If he needs to save money, the $700,000 that he indicates that he is going to osave by these CU "tbacks, I suggest to him to look to other areas where the government is wasting money in patronage appointments and thi s special committee that they have set up to monitor government spending which is going to cost the taxpayers of this Province a minimum of $50~,000 a year. It is not hard to figure that out. You do not have to be a great mathematician to figure that out. You have four deputy ministers who are receiving approximately $60,000 to $65,000 a year each. So that is $300,000.

Each one of them is going to need a secretary, they are going to need office space, and they are going to need office furniture. So it is not hard to come up with a minimum figure of $500,000 that the government is spending to SE!t up a committee to tell them how to spend money . It is absolutely ludicrous for any government to expect the taxpayers of the Province to pay this when we hear the Minister of Social Services laying off thirty-five people to save $700,000 . It is absolutely ridiculous, Mr. Speaker .

No. 51 R2708 .. . ----- ~ · · - .. 40 • • • • • - ·- · • • · - ~.e·,-··-~--.-~~ -...----:- ---- -~.----...----- ·~---·.·- ·--....... --:-, ............ ....,......, ............ --~-"...----.. '

·---.... , ___ ______ ,._._..__.......:.-,._~-·-· ....... __ -"'-..__.,, .... ,..:..,,~,_:..;...;..;. ..... "'""'"""''~- ... ---·-=- ··· ....... -... ..:..... ........ ..J.\jOO.:...• ..... ~.:.,·~·.w ...... ..:: ... ~~: ... : ... .J..;.: ... .:... ......... -' .. ,,;..._.~. ~-- .... ~ •• --·~ · ....... ... -· -- -··· 4 - ...... -·· .. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. member•s time is up . MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr . Speaker . In co~clusion, Mr. Speaker, we ask the Minister of Social Services to take this under serious consideration and to rehire those thirty-five people . SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR.

FUREY: Mr . Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. Barbe . MR. FUREY : Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise in my place to support the prayer of this particular petition so ably presented by my good colleague and friend from Port de Grave (Mr. Efford). It is interesting to see, Mr. Speaker, that government, right now, has terminated thirty-five jobs in an area and in a department that ought not just be sensitive, Mr.

Speaker, but ought to be super-sensivitive to the needs of people who are less fortunate, and through no fault of their own, are relegated to this particular department of government to seek help and assistance. Mr. Speaker, if you listen to the minister • s comments and if you listen to commentary generally, we are led to believe that these thirty-five jobs or positions will be terminated because there was no work for them in the first place.

This leads one logically to ask L2709 May 29, 1987 Vol XL -- -- --:---- -- _,.,, ____ ~- - .~ -- -·- . the question, if there was no work for them in the first place, what were they being paid for for the last five years? Why pay somebody for five years if they were not doing anything? Now if that were a reflection upon certain Cabinet min.tsters, that would be understandable throughout the Province tha ·t we terminate certain Cabinet ministers because they are doing nothing . For example, the Minister of Consumer Affairs (Mr. Russell) and corporate affairs, what a telJ.ing lame duck department that is, Mr .

Speaker, when they cannot do anything for the very people that this department was initiated and put into place for - to protect the consumer. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad reflection on the government because what the government ha s said to · the people of this Province is. that, in the name of restraint and in the name of cutback, we are going to reduce the costs of this department by $700,000. Mr . Speaker, that in ' itself is not a bad thing but when you line it up against the priori ties of this go vernment, you are left scratching your head and you are left wondering just what are their priori ties.

Let me offer an example, l"lr. Speaker. They want to save $700,000 so they chop and cut and dig into the most sensitive portfolio over there, the Department of Social Services. They want a cut so they cut where it hurts mos t. Why did they not cut back on their travel, Mr. Speaker? Does this House know that Cabinet ministers in their jet setting role last year spent $3 million - not $1 million or $2 million - $3 million jet setting arou nd the planet. No. 51 R2709

--- ----------- ------ --- ---·-- - - Mr. Speaker, if you line up on the left side of the ledger against the expense on the right side of the ledger and ask yourselves how many jobs have these people brought back from Norway and Germany and the Scandinavian countries and South America and all across the United States and all parts of Europe and Moscow even, how many jobs did they bring back, Mr. Speaker, for that $3 million expenditure? MR. DECKER: Not one job. MR. FUREY: Mr . Speaker, if you look in the estimates, these are not my figures, Mr. Speaker, these are their figures, the government's figures.

On the cocktail circuit alone last year they spent $250,000. Mr. Speaker, again, not my figures, their figures. Eight ministers hired eight press secretaries at a cost of $250,000 when we already have a global press secretary called the Newfoundland Information Services. So add that up, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, $3, 500,000 and they want to cut back on Social Services. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. from the member is petition. any case, is now up. MR . FUREY : getting away His time, in Mr. Speaker, . I am sure the House would allow me leave- to conclude. AN HON. MEMBER : By leave. By leave . SOME HON .

MEMBERS: Oh, oh! L2710 May 29, 1987 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: Are there any further petitions? MR. PARSONS: Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St . John's East Extern. MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I beg present a petition on 620 residents of Airport leave to behalf of Heights. Mr. Speaker, the petition reads, "To the hon. members of the House of Assembly of :Newfoundland, in Parliament assembled, the petition of the undersigned, representing the citizens in the area known as Airport Heights, St. John's, is humbly submitted showeth:" I am going to read the prayer, Mr. Speaker.

"Whereas the Province of Newfoundland unilaterally annexed in 1980 without public hearings, a local vote or any transitional funding the area known as Airport Heights to the City of St. John's. "We, the undersigned, petition hon. members to request the hon. the Minister of Municipal Affairs to initiate immediate actjon with i n s i x t y day s of the tab 1 i n g of this petition to ensure that Airport Heights either receives fair treatment within the City of St.

John's on taxes and services, or failing that, that the minister be requested to conduct a feasibility study and related local area elections to decide on the future local government for Airport Heights. 11 Mr. Speaker, in essence what the people of Airport Heights want, under the guidance of the Airport Heights Citizens Committee, a very No. 51 R2710 -"""::- ·~ .- ---=- - - ... --•-••,"•.- .. --,.....,.. .-.. , __ ,._......,,~__.-.., .- ---.. · ... --. -. -- - ··--~· -- -·----. -.-r--- ·v~---..---• ... -

·--- --·w-- .\-··- ·•"'·---.---·--•-· ... -- ·r ·-- ··-·• fine committee, a responsible committee, is they are trying their utmost to have better services in their area. In essence, Mr. Speaker, what they are saying in the people's prayer is before taxes, services. Mr. Speaker, before the City of St~ John's took over Airport Heights, legislation was brought into this hon. House whereby people not receiving full services could receive a lesser mil rate than those people serviced. The city council stayed within the guidelines of that legislation but almost in an insulting way. The City of St.

John's did not take into consideration the inequities or the rninu s e s that prevailed in the area known as Airport Heights. Mr. Speaker, they have no buses. They have no recreational facilities. They have _no water and sewerage. Their streets are in a deplorable, in many instances, condition. Mr. Speaker, at that particular time, if the mil rate had been substantially decreased from the prevailing rate, which was 10 mils, then we would not have this petition today. But again, Mr. Speaker, the city council did not say minus 6 mils, nor 5 mils, nor 4 mils, nor 3 mils, nor 2 mils, but 1 · mil.

Last year, to add insult to injury, they assessed the property again increasing the value and thereby even erased that one 1 mil rate. Mr. Speaker, the Airport Heights p eo p 1 e in the r·e , I h a v e s p o ken to a number of them, are not looking for any great things. All they want is to be treated fairly. From where I sit, the provision of a water and sewerage system is essential. Over the years in many of the places within Airport L2711 May 2?. 1987 Vol XL Heights there were small lots. In any area, land can only sustain a certain amount of fluids, and I am speaking about septic systems.

That has been in there for a great number of years. This situation will have to be addressed because, if not , you wi 11 e v en t u a 11 y s e e a health problem. The Airport Heights Citizens' Committee ·received a mandate to circulate this petition . In this petition, 98 per cent of the people elected to sign it. Mr.

Speaker, in their petition they ask that if nothing can be done as far as the mil rate is concerned, as far as their over·all taxation position is concerned, if thE!re is not some kind of a guarantee From the city that they will accept the proposal from this government to cost-share water and sewerage, then what the committee asks is very simple. They feel they haVE! been u nj us tl y treated. They want this government to reassess the whole situation, and in saying that, give them a chance to look elsewhere outside the City of St. John's where they will receive better representation and better services. Mr.

Speaker, I support this petition, but in supporti .ng it I will have to point 0ut to this House that in ·the interim, since this petition had been circulated - MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! The hon. member's time has elapsed . SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave! MR. SPEAKER: By leave! MR. PARSONS : No. 51 . R2711

::. . .. ~- ... In ~the interim, since this petition had been circulated, I have met with the Mayor of St. John 1 s and I at a later date I the Mayor of St. John 1 s, the Deputy Mayor, and four of his staff, met with the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mr. Doyle) and his staff I and at that time, we agreed upon or. formulated a package. In that we suggested, and it was acceptable to both parties I that a five year plan be brought into place. At that time we were also advised even before this date, Mr. Speaker, there was a TAC, a Technical Advisory Committee in place.

At the present time I would certainly like to impress upon the people from Airport Heights that these meetings are ongoing. Why this committee had to be in place, Mr. Speaker, is because the cost of water and sewerage· in ~irport Heights is tremendous. We are talking about a lot of dollars, millions upon millions. There is no way that this government would have the finances to complete that water and sewerage in any one year. That is why we proposed the five year plan, and that five year plan was accepted.

Again, I want to reiterate what I said previously, that these meetings are ongoing and we hope to have a submission to the members of the Airport Heights Committee in the near future. I cannot be specific in saying it is going to be tomorrow. There is a lot of work that has to be done but the work is ongoing. Again, Mr. Speaker, I thank the House for leave and its indulgence, and again I want to say that I support the petition wholeheartedly. L2712 May ~9. 1987 Vol XL Thank you very much . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR.

SIMMONS : Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleagues in the Official Opposition, I take pleasure in rising to support the prayer of the petition presented by the gentleman for St. John 1 s East Extern (Mr. Parsons). I am not particularly looking for an argument with him. He is a gentleman whom I respect greatly, but I believe the support he gave to the petition then must classify among the more stranger occurences in this House. You either support a petition or you do not. · I thought the member was somewhere in between.

Once he was saying I am one of the petitioners, and in the next mouthful he was saying, we, meaning the government, and I do not believe he can speak for both in the same sequence, Mr. Speaker. It is up to the minister to justify what is clearly unjustifiable. The member does himself an injustice, subtracts from the cause that he says he is supporting by trying to in any way give any semblance of fairness to what the minister has done. What the minister has done here is blatantly unfair.

Raming this down the throats of those people without consultation, without plebiscite, this whole. tht "R-g- is sour because it was done wrongly No. 51 R2712 ___ __, ,-....-.-..--:---:--~~ -----:--- ... ~ .. ~ .. --- - ---~--.-- -.,._..-- _- ··-~ ·-~-- ·--.--- .. - .... - ---- ,- ~ ·· ·--- ····--·--- --

-- ·-· -·-- .__.-~ _..;_- ·--· -- ·o.-£....._.W.._ -··- ...... ~._.__ ... , _ _.._~-"'--·~~., _.-.,!,..,, ,._.,._~ ....... ,,, -£ .... ~ ,.,._,.j~~ ...... ·~---· ............ -......... ...__~, ...... _.,_O•H• ·'"'•• in the first place because a group of people out there were told what was good for them. That is the problem. That is where the whole problem arises from. It is the same issue that I have been fighting for fifteen years out in the town of South Brook, under

Section 141 (a). They talk about it here as taxation without compensation. It is the same old issue. People of this Province are not unreasonable people. They do not mind paying taxation. They do not mind being included in a local municipal unit, Mr. Speaker, as long as there is some sense of fairness, as long as there is some return on the tax money they are paying in, as long as they can get some services . Mr . Speaker, they are asking for a fir 'm comrrii tment on a water/sewer installation. They are as king for a firm commitment from the Province to provide an equitable settlement to St.

John's insofar as busing is concerned . These are · two of the requests they are putting forward. They are saying very directly, 'Either give us some fair treatment here, give us some justice here, or cut us loose and let us decide our own destiny insofar as the municipal government is concerned. 1 Now that is not an unfair request, Mr. Speaker. As it has come to the point where more than 600 people living throughout this Airport Heights area have had to affix their signatures, have had to establish a committee s tru .c ture, have had to meet again and again , why?

They have put forward some of the most basic concerns that anybody has to deal- · with as far as municipal L2713 May 29, 1987 Vol XL - - .. ,._ ... government is concerned. Concerns about road paving, about recreation, about fire protection, land assessments, water and sewer, I mentioned earlier, and busing I mentioned earlier . All these concerns, Mr . Sp•:!aker, are concerns that people who live in a democracy, who live under the aegis of a constitution such as we have in Canada should not be put through what those people have been put through for the last six years. Mr.

Speaker, I see some dismay on the face of the gentleman for St. John 1 s East Extern so I wi.ll read to him a sentence from a press release put out by the Airport Heights Concerned Citizens Committee a short while ago. It says in part, Mr. Speaker, 'The people of Airport Heights, having lost all patience with their non-voluntary inclusion in the boundaries of the City of St . John's six years ago~ in a virtually unanimous vote in a local area plebiscite conducted by the Airport Heights Concerned Citizens Committee, have endorsed a petition seeking to end this injustice 1 • Mr.

Speaker, first in their words and in mine what has happened is an injustice. Secondly, in their words and in mine it was an involuntary inclusion six years ago in the City of St . John's, and thirdly, in their words, they have lost all patience, and in mine I can understand their losing all patience. They have had one complete runaround on this . MR . J. CARTER : Your time is up . MR. SIMMONS: I kn ·ow the gentleman for St . No. 51 R2713

John • s North (Mr. J. Carter) does not want to hear about the concerns of the people in Airport Heights . For him that is foreign terri tory. What would he know about Airport Heights, Mr. Speaker? What would he care about Airport Heights? But I assume, Mr. Speaker, that my friend for St.. John • s East Extern (Mr. K. Parsons) does care and does want to hear, Mr. Sp~~ker. MR. J. CARTER : A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member f~r St. John's North on a point of order. MR . J.

CARTER: I realize we should be reasonably indulgent but the member is being abusive and his time has long since elapsed. I think he should sit down . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! There is no point of order. The hon. member has about a minute and a half left. MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have also given the member for St. John 1 s East Extern the benefit of our indulgence of a little extra time and I was · assuming the same privilege would be accorded 1 but I keep forgetting that the gentleman for St. Jonn • s North has two rules, one for himself and one for everybody else .

I can say what I want to say in the next minute or so, and I will say it otherwise outside this chamber. Those people in Airport should not be inflicted with the notion that L2714 May .29, 1987 Heights further taxation Vol XL --------------- ·-- without compensation can be allowed to go on indefinitely and the onus on the minister, Mr . Speaker. The onus is on him to see that the denial of these people's constitutional rights does not continue. It is on his shoulders, he is party to it, he is the headwaiter on this particular one and that might be a more appropriate term than he thinks.

He is the headwaiter on this one, and he ought now, Mr. Speaker - this has festered too long, those people are beginning to use terms such as, 'lost all patience•, and they use those phrases with justification. They have been pushed to the limit, their backs are against the wall and they are getting no substantive response, no sensible response from those people, and now their own member . almost abandoned thern right in the full view of all . He' comes in today and says, • I support the petition but • . I hope he will clear up the record on that , Mr.

Speake·r, because elither he supports this thing wholeheartedly, and he said that these people have been hard done by; he says there has been an injustice; he says he is prepared to help them correct that injustice; or he is against the petition. He can not have it both ways . What I would like to hear, Mr . Speaker, is what the Minister is prepared· to do to address the grievence in this particular petition which we on this side wholeheartedly endorse . MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker . MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal No. 51 R2714 -- -----~- .-..- - ...... --_.,l ••----·-·--··- · -.. -- ~- ... ···--·-- ··--· -· ·--- ·---· -··. --··-·- ··-- --· - ·- ~---- - ---- -·-·····- -

__ ... ,. -·· - ····~ -.... --·· -4· .. 0-·----·-·· -........ --·'-· ..... _ Affairs. MR, DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition so ablely presented by my colleague, the Member for St. John 1 s East Extern (Mr. Parsons), on behalf of 6 50, I believe, people in the Airport Heights area. Now, in supporting this petition, ~r. Speaker, I first of all have to make one correction in the prayer of the petition . The first part of the prayer states, 1

Whereas the Province of Newfoundland unilaterally annexed in 1980, without public hearing, the area known as Airport Heights. 1 Now, I think, there has to be a little bit of confusion in that statement because back in 1980 there were indeed public hearings. Before Airport Heights was annexed to the city of St. John 1 S, there was a feasibility study and a public hearing process. Now, it very often happens, as we are all aware, that sometimes in that public hearing process a number of people object, and object strenuously, to the inclusion of their particular area within another municipality. That is fair ball.

But no one can say that there was not a public hearing process, because there was a public hearing process in which residents of the area did make representation to the Commissioner. Mr . Speaker, that is one small correction. It might be irrelevant at this point in time, but that is one small correction I would like to make. I do support this petition, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of Airport Heights and rightly so, because the people of Airport L2715 May 29, 1987 Vol XL Heights do have a very, very legitimate case. They are certainly an area of the city . that should have services.

We have made some effort, a great deal of effort , as a rna t t e r of fact , over the last couple of months to see that this particular problem is addressed in some substantive manner. As the member for St. John • s East Extern (Mr . Parsons) indicated a few minutes ago, meetings did take place, initiated by the member for St. John 1 s East Extern, the Citizen 1 s Committee of Airport Heights, and myself with the City of St. John 1 s.

At that time we agreed that we would put in place our own Technical Advisory Committee from the Department of Municipal Affairs, along with the City Manager, who would J.ook into the costing, if you will, of service in the Airport Heights area. That Technical Advisory Committee is in the process of conducting these meetings and these engineering studies to determine what the cost is and, hopefully, we can come up with some kind of a five year plan. I think this was the intention of the mayor of the city of St. John•s and the committee and my own department when we met with the member for St. John•s East Extern.

It was our intent, and still remains our intent, ·to come up with a five year plan to address the problems in the Airport Heights area. This is not a small job. This is not a small job at all because to address the immediate needs in Airport Heights you are talking about an expenditure of approximately $10 million. You are talking about the Penetanguishene trunk sewer which No. 51 R2715 -·---·-·---- ........... ----- ----·-··---- - -~- ----- ------- -·-··· .. ...... ... --· ---- ····-· -·

~-~ ------·---· -------~-----· will have to be addressed, the upgrading of the Winsor Lake area, a reservoir to be built, and the roads that will be torn up in the process of doing all this work. All of this will have to be addressed in that Technical Advisory Committee study that is presently ongoing right now. Hopefully, some kind of a cost-shared agreement can be worked out with the City of St. John's and my own department to try and address, in a meaningful manner, the problems in Airport Heights.

I would like to address myself for a moment, Your Honour, to the tax rate that everyone keeps talking about with respect to the right of the city to reduce the mil rate in areas where they do not have services. Now, it should be clearly understood that this House passed that legislation back a couple of years ago which would give the right to the municipality to make that determination as· to what reduction in the . mil rate $hould take place.

We cannot, as a Province, and we cannot, as a department, go to every municipality and say, • Well, we want you to reduce the mil rate by one here, two there, and three somewhere else. • The mechanism was put in place by the House of Assembly to give that authority and that jurisdiction to the municipality who would make that determination as to what the mil rate reduction should be. The people of Airport Heights obviously feel .that a one mil reduction is not enough and they could very well be right. Hopefully the City of St.

John • s will address that problem with the people of Airport H·eights but the fact of the matter remains, we are making progress on this particular L2716 May 29, 1987 Uol XL issue because we have the technical advisory committee in place working with the engineering staff in the City qf St. John's. Hopefully - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR . DOYLE: By leave, Mr . Speaker? 'SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave. MR. SPEAKER: By leave. MR. SIMMONS: (Inaudible) we do not play. No. MR. DOYLE: And hopefully we can come up with a five year plan. MR. SIMMONS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition . MR. SIMMONS : Mr. Speaker, earlier in this petition - and this is an important petition it is an issue that I would like to have debated - but we are not going to sit here and have games played. When the gentleman for St. John • s East Extern (Mr. Parsons) was speaking. he knows the subject well and we wanted to hear what he said, so we gave leave. When it came time for me to ge't a bit of leave, the g·aloot from St. John's North (Mr. J. Carter) was there to prevent leave. So, Mr. Speaker, no, there is no leave for the minister.

I am sick and tired of his words anyway. Let him go out and act on this particular · No. 51 R2716 --------------··-· ·----- .... .,. ______ --·· •--"\----·---·--· · --·------ --. ---·

. ... -·-· ~.,..oo..-- - ·-·-- ·- .... ··h.t - ~ ·· - :·· ·'--· ··---- .- .... -~-- ..... --- · . - -- - · ..... - - - __ .. :.. • .. _.. _ . .... .. __ ... ,....._ _.~ .. ..... ..... _J .. .. issue. I want it made clear the only reason we are refusing leave, Mr. Speaker, is because, as I said in my speech, there are two rules here. When I was speaking, the member objected that my time had expired. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is a . matter of our getting it straight that if we want some civility in this Chamber, the people on the other side of the House are going to have to chain in that irrational being from St .

John's North, chain him in somehow and then we will have a bit of civility in this House ; MR. DOYLE: It would take only a minute to clue up my remarks. MR. SIMMONS: Not a second. DR. COLLINS: To that point Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! of order, Mr . To that point of order, the hon . the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I think it has been a well accepted tradition in the House that if tirne runs out when an han. member is in the middle of a sentence, or really in the middle of a thought, he is allowed to very quickly complete that sentence or complete that thought.

L think that is all the han. minister is asking for. MR. J. CARTER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! L2717 May 29, 1987 Vol XL I am quite prepared to rule on that point of order . There is no point of order and I understand leave has not been given for the minister to continue . MR. J. CARTER : To a further point of order, Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER : To a further point of order, the han . the member for .St. John's North. MR. J. CARTER: I object to my actions being misinterpreted . Hansard wi11 bear me out.

I did suggest that the hon. member's time was up and that I might not give leave but when his time was eventually up after that minute and a half, · I paid no attention to him and if he had asked for leave he might have gotten it . He certainly was not refused and I would like to -set the recorcl straight. · He delights in insult, invective . and assertion, but he is completely wrong in this ins.tance and I think he should apologiz e to Your Honour and to myself and to the House . MR. SIMMONS: I would apologize to Your Honor I if necessary I but I will not apologize to the House. MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker . MR.

SPEAKER : To that point of order I the hon. the member for ·st . Barbe. MR. FUREY: Mr . Speaker, the Minister of Municipal Affairs is a good and decent man and we, under differant circumstances, would have allowed No. 51 R2717

·--- --- -------- ·------ ---- leave. Now, we sincerely on this side apologize because I know that the government members would not want to do it because it would be embarrassing to them. So we will apologize for the member for St. John • s North who continually sits there and just interjects with silly comments and absolute arr-ogance and ignorance and destroys all the credibility of people who are credible on that side. The Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mr. Doyle) is a good and credible human being and a decent person and we would give leave, Mr.

Speaker, under normal circumstances, so we take it upon ourselves to apologize for the government for his childish behaviour. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, there is n~ point of order. Orders of the Day DR. COLLINS: Motion 10. Motion, the han. the Minister of Minister of Justice to introduce a bill, 11

An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors In The Statute Law, 11 carried . (Bill No. 43) . On motion, Bill No . 43 read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow . MR. SPEAKER: Order 11. Before we get to that matter, I just want ·to point out that I made an error yesterday. I have had a chance to look at the Hansard : Towards the end I recognized the han. member for L2718 May 29, 1987 Vol XL Menihe k (Mr. Fenwick) and he said, 11 I adjourn the debate. We will pick it up tomorrow morning. 11 I then continued on and said, 11 It is 5:30 p.m. We will adjourn this debate.

If the han . the Leader of the Opposition would like to move that. 11 Now that. was an error on my part. The debate had already been adjourned . I apologize to the han. the Leader of the Opposition for that. I suppose to err is human and no doubt I will again. Anyway, the last comment I made was, 11 The han. the Leader of the Opposition adjourned the debate, 11 when, in fact, I was in error in saying that. I will recognize the hon. the member for Menihek. MR. SIMMONS: A point of order, Mr . Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon . the Leader of the Opposition. MR.

SIMMONS: I submit there error, but I may have been an think that is irrelevant to what happened yesterday. What this, Sir: I was clock. The minister the hand had five-thirty, it was seconds past, and I because I fully Speaker would five-thirty action. MR. TULK : Which he has to . MR. SIMMONS: happened L~Jas watching the sat down and gone past ten or twelve did not rise expected the trigge!r the Which he has to at that time. So, I did not rise for that particular reason.

So, I submit to you, if you want the accurate version, that nobody adjourned the debate No. 51 R2718 ---------·-·-· ·· ---····-·· .... ·-·· .. -.. ----- ·- ··-····----·-··--·- --~· -- - - -·--- ·--- --·---. ...-- -····-.. -·.

because it was improper for anybody to adjourn debate after five-thirty. I was invited from the Chair to adjourn the debate, I thought nothing of it and said okay. But the point of the matter is, the reason I did not rise, because I was fully intending to respond to the minister and say some things we want to say to him, is that the clock had passed five-thirty and therefore it would have been improper for me to adjourn the debate because the five-thirty business had been triggered by the clock.

It was in that spirit I did riot rise. 'It is not a liFe and death matter, but for future reference and for future instruction, I would hope we have recognized that the onus should be not on. individual members to make time determinations, that if it is five-thirty the Speaker .will say so, and if it is not five-thirty, we can get on with other business that r e 1 ate s . 8 u t it was in that spirit that I did not immediately rise. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the hon . the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I think this is somewhat of a unique situation.

I think Your Honour has extremely, graciously acknowledged an error that I am afraid I do not have the reference to right with me, but my understanding is that if the Speaker acknowledges an error, it is in the posses sian of the House as to what to do with it. Normally speaking, I think it would be accepted that on a substantive bill, such as the L2719 May 29, 1987 Uol XL aquaculture bill, the Official Opposition could be expected to want to respond to it and to respond to it by one of the senior members of the Opposition.

I guess the House has to dispose of this, but I would suggest, if the hon. member for Menihek would accept considering Your Honour•s gracious acknowledgement of an error, that the easiest way of disposing of this would be to just go by what would normally bE! expected, have the hon. the Leader of the Opposition make his response to the bill. The hon. member for Menihek can certainly respond to it. It is not really taking away his opportunity, it is just a matter of timing.

I guess the House can only dispose of this either by leave or by some substantive motion, and I would say that For everyone • s peace of mind and getting on with business, perhaps we could dispose of it by leave. I would therefore ask that the House give leave to allolJJ the hon. the Leader of the Opposition to rna k e his res pons e , if he s h o u 1 d wi s h to do so , and t he n , of course, the hon. the member for Menihek would carry on.

I thin k t hi s was j us t a c 1 ear rn i x up of signals in the House, Your Honour has very graciously accepted blame for it, arid I think it is up to the members now to dispose of it in the most amicable way possible. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker, roder. MR. SPEAKER: to that point of The hon. the member for Menihek to that point of order. MR. FENWICK: To the point of 9rder, Mr . No. 51 R2'719

Speaker, if the Acting House Leader is as king for leave, I am not going to give it. One of the problems of sitting this far away from Your Honour is that it is difficult ·to be recognized and I accept that. I realize that it is a problem, but I do not believe there is any ironclad law which say.s that the official Opposition should respond to bills first. All we are doing, Mr. Speaker, is "following a rule of the· House which is: The next person to stand up is recognized. You graciously admitted you did not notice me and you did not hear me say that I had adjourned the debate, which, indeed, I did say.

Quite frankly, I am ready to address the second reading of the bill. I do not give leave to do anything different, unless · the Acting House Leader wishes to make a motion to take away my rights. If he does and if that is what is going to happen, then that is fine. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, order. MR. SPEAKER: to that point of The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, two points: First of all, the Leader of the Opposition, when he rose in his place, was being, I suggest to Your Honour, very, very, very gracious in the way that he approached the subje~t.

Under the Standing Orders of the House, at five-thirty on Thursday there is no requirement for anybody to adjourn the debate. · I refer Your Honour to Standing Order 31, subsection (h), 11 At 5:30 o • clock p.m. on any Thursday the Speaker may, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 14, deem that a motion to adjourn the L2720 May 29, 1987 Vol XL -- - ·-~·---·- ··-·..___ -------··- ----·---------- - House has been made and seconded. 11 So the procedure that went on yesterday· evening, regardless of who adjourned the debate, was not necessary and is not proper.

Having s aid that , I wo u 1 d s a y to you that that gives the Leader of the Opposition the right to respond to what is a government order. I refer Your Honour again to 49 (1) and to a long standing tradition in this House, that a minister introduces .a government order and then the official Opposition has the right to reply. So while' Your Honour was gracious in admitting his mistake, I would submit to Your Honour that the member for Menihek does not have the right to refuse leave.

It would have been far simpler, as the Acting Government House Leader said, if he had given leave and that it had been understood by all of us that we were not setting a precedent. The hon. the member for Menihek has not granted leave. I would submit to Your Honour that he does not have the right to withhold it, and that indeed the Leader of thE! Opposition, or whoever the spokesman is for the official Opposition, now has the right to reply. As a matter of fact, there is no point to moue the adjournment of the debate at five-thirty on Thursday.

Because if I am in thE! middle of a sentence at five-thirty and Y0ur Honour so chooses, he can interrupt me and say, 1 A motion to adjourn the House is now in order. 1 What we are saying is absolutely correct, that the Leader of the Opposition now has the right to answer the government order that has been proposed, no leave required. No. 51 R2720

..-....... -·· ·'•"'"'""''··;,~,;;..._ .... __ ... ~-·--- MR . FENWICK : Mr . Speaker, order . MR. SPEAKER : ·- ·----"'- ---- · to that point of I have heard the hon. member for Menihek. There are a couple of points I would like to make: If one refers to our rules of debate, in. Standing Order 49 (2) there is no mention here that the Leader of the Opposition, as such, has the right to speak first. The other point I would like make, and I accept what the hon.

Leader of the Opposition says about time, but I would like to point out to him that as far as I understood about time, and again I may be wrong, in Hansard the hon. member for Menihe k said, 'I adjourn the debate . We will pick it up tomorrow morning. ' I said, 'It is 5 : 3 0 p . m . ' , not that it was after five-thirty, 'it is 5:30 ~ .m.' So, unless the hon. member for Menihek gives way, I am forced to recognize him by right to speak to the debate now. The hon. member for Menihek. - MR. FENWICK : Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker . I do not have a huge amount of comments substantially about the bill itself.

The first thing I should say is we certainly support the setting up of legislation to regulate the aquaculture industry in the Province. I think probably the only negative thing we could say about the legislation itself is that perhaps it should have been in place several years earlier, and I do not think that that is a major criticism of it. It is an industry, as all members know, which is growing, and growing at an explosive rate, L2721 May 29, 1987 Uol XL •. ·---~-- ---------· · .. ·- -·- -- perhaps.

It is certainly legislation that we will need over the next the number of years, because I think myself as well as all members of the House, are very much looking forward to aquaculture being one of the major growth industries for the Province. There is one point which I think should be made about it, Mr. Speaker: In talking to the manager of fish hatchery in Bay . d' Espoir, some of the points that he made to me about · the aquaculture industry are that. we are in a position to be playing catch-up now.

Quite frankly, we are considerably behind industr".ies in Europe and we are behind industries in other parts of Atlantic Canada. I have bee!n told by Jim Maine, who is the Provincial Leader of the New Democratic Party in Prince Edward Island, that the mussel farming industry in Prince Edward Island has now advanced so substantially that the equivalent Department of Rural Development is no longer in ·the business of lendj_ng monE!Y to the industry, that the commericaJ. banks see it as such a viable operation that all funding that is necessary can now carne from regular commerical sources. Mr.

Speaker, on Tuesday or Wednesday of this Lt.Jeek, I was fortunate enough to talk to a gentleman from the WElst Coast of our Province who is also into mussel farming and this year intends to start marketing his first mussels from his operation on the West Coast. I am not sure if it is Flat Bay or one of the other areas, but it is in the Stephenville area. Quite frankly, I was quite surprised that he had the operation going, but was very pleased to hear it, because I, like all members of this House, am No. 51 R2721

eager to see this kind appropriate industry appropriate technology take our Province. of an and off in But having said that, Mr. Speaker, I think there is a caution that we should put in here which is,· that because the industry is growing so substantially across the world, especially in the Scandinavian countries, it now starts to threaten some of our traditional industries.

I have been told by individuals in the industry that our commerical salmon fishery is quite frankly under attack by the domestic salmon farmers in the sense that they can· produce a superior product, a high quality product on a regular, year round basis, and have developed a market so that the wild catching of salmon, if you want to put it tha l: way, may suffer substantially as a result and we may have a _difficult time marketing salmon in the future ·,

whereas it was one of our high value species in the past. Mr. Speaker, what that seems to indicate to me, and I have no severe argument from individuals to suggest that is not the case, is that we are forced to go into aquaculture. Because if we do not, we will lose the markets for the natural fishery that we have right now. The other points that I would like to make about it, Mr. Speaker, are with regard to the provincial government's specific initiatives with regard to aquaculture which, several years ago, were highly lauded by myself and my party and other members of the House.

The specific venture, of course, was the salmon hatchery put in place in Bay d'Espoir and which has been operating with the Development Association for the last number of L2722 May 29·, 1987 Vol XL years and which is, I think, the classic model of development that this Province should follow. It is a high tech industry, it is at the leading edge of the ·kinds of industries that are being developed in the country, and it is a place where we are developing the kind of expertise we need in order to become world leaders in salmon farming and, indeed, in the farming of other species.

One of the things I should mention to members of the House is that the Bay d'Espoir salmon ·hatchery is now interested in moving into Arctic char. The intention there is to lao~ at Arctic char as a species that can be farmed as well to produce the smolt, or whatever the small Arctic char are called - I believe smolt is probably the correct term - and then to Farm them also in the Bay d'Espoir area and other areas. In talking to knowledgeable individuals in this industry they also inform me that there are many other sites, including sites in St. Mary's Bay and other parts of . the South Coast and the Southern

Section of our Province, IJJhich also show extreme promise for farming various kinds of species. I think one of the things that is a problem in our Province is that on other shores we have waters that are a little bit too cold in order to enable us to raise salmon, for one thing, on a continuous basis, but even in places on the East Coast and the Northeast Coast we have seen experiments to heat the water slightly in order to try and obtain those objectives, and maybe we will see more when this legislation is enacted. Mr. Speaker, having said those No. S 1 [~2'722 -... - ··------·- · -- -·--- --· ~ .... ________________ ----- ··---·- .... ···--- ···- ---·· -- ·-----· ----··-·-

good things about the government's project - and indeed they are - I would have to say that the events of the last three or four months have become virtually a disaster and an example of the way in which you should not continue to develop. Instead of going ahead with the fish farmer's co-operatives which were being put together on the South Coast, this government, in a monumental example of lack of faith in Native Newfoundlanders and rural Newfoundlanders in particular, decided to bring in National Sea in what can only be described as a major takeover of the resource down there. Mr ·.

Speaker, what they did is say to National Sea, If you come in and set up a salmon farming operation there, we will give you 60 per cent of the smol t being produced at the Bay d'Espoir salmon hatchery. Of course, giving them 60 per cent meant that there was only only 40 per cent left for the farmer's co-operatives which were being established there. Mr. Speaker, this was the wrong way to do it. It clearly indicated a bias on the part of this government for large companies they perceive to have some natural advantage over the individual producers and the co-operatives.

Yet, if you go back and look at the House Royal Commission, you will see that at the basic heart of the philosophy of that Commission is that we Newfoundlanders live a pluralistic lifestyle in rural communities that should be supplemented by enterprises like this. Mr. Speaker, I am not talking about the 252 individual recommendations, what I am talking about is the heart of the perspective of that royal commission.

And the . perspective L2723 May 29, 1987 Vol XL it was coming from and the thrust it wished to see advanced, were much more consistent with cooperatives and with small scale operations like that on a larger basis than with having a National Sea come in and gobble up - to use a fishing term - 60 per cent of the smol t coming out of that operation, virtually making it impossible for any more than one or two other ventures to succeed in that area when wE:! could haVE! had a half a dozen or so. Mr.

Speaker, I am not. sure that difficulty was resolved, because it came to some ' sort of a head when National Sea said that they would pull out, that they would not go ahead in this particular operation . As a result of not going ahead, of course, we have the whole works now in slings. But some initiative was taken in that area and the 60,000 smolt that were ready tci go out and had to go out in salt water, were taken out and put in the cages that ·were necessary in order to keep them living.

But we now have an extremely precarious position where the individual farmer's co-operatives, which are going ahead with this development, do not have the financial resources to keep the salmon in place for the next twenty months in order to bring them to the seven pounds that are required for marketing, and unless there is provincial government help in that area, we have some major problems. And, Mr. Speaker, I am not tal king about grants, I am talking about guaranteed loans. It s eerns to be the only help that is necessary now.

There is a commercial viability to this project that is extremely important to recognize. The seven pound salmon, of course, once they _ are grown to full size, will 'be an excellent high quality, No. 51 1~2723

high value product which will continue to keep the farmers in place. What is needed, if you want, is bridge financing for the next two or three years in order to get them going. What has happened, of course, is that we now have the whole thing in slings; we do not know where it is going to go, we do not know what the progress of it will be, and primarily this government•s total incompetence when it came to setting up the next stages of-this operation that has been the problem . Of course, Mr .

Speaker, . if we get a major negative experience in Bay d 1 Espoir it will put a damper on the entire aquaculture industry, an industry that in the future, I believe, will provide more jobs than our entire agricultur~l industry quite frankly, that is not a very difficult thing to do at this point - and will start _competing with our primary fishing industry and our fish processing industry in terms of the number of people who are capable of being employed. Mr.

Speaker, aquaculture is the industry we should go into for the number of reasons that I will put forward: First, we have natural advantages in that industry. We are surrounded by sea water. Sometimes that is a major liability when it comes to transportation, but other times it is a major advantage when it comes to being able to use that resource in order to farm fish. Secondly, we are familiar with fishing and we are familiar with the kind of rural lifestyle that is necessary in order to feed fish in cages that are in the Bay and so on. L2724 May 29, 1987 Vol XL Thirdly, Mr.

Speaker, we to -marketing fish. companies that have done years. are used we have . that for We have, in short, Mr. Speaker, all the kinds of things that wilJ. make us world class fish farmers for the next hundreds and hundreds of years, and it is, Mr. Speaker, in that area that I believe some of our major development efforts are going. I want to talk for a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, about the other projects that this government has been pursuing and' why I think they are making a mistake in doing them versus more in terms of aquaculture. In the aquaculture industry I believe we have winner.

I believe and most economists believe that we have a winner, so do the biologists who are working there. Every one of the specialists in .the field believe that we have the resources necessary to be world class leaders in aquaculture. We are substantially behind the Scandinavian countries and behind other Atlantic provinces, but we have such major natural advantages, that somewhere along the line we may be able to catch up and indeed by-pass them in the future.

We have, as everybody knows, the Marine Institute here which is developing the expertise in terms of fish farming and will hopefully be a major resource to be used in that area. Mr. Speaker, what are we looking at in terms of development projects from this government? Well, we are now looking, believe it or not, at an 8.4 acre greenhouse project that the provincial government has put forward in the interest of No. 51 R2724 -- --·------· ··-·--- -·-·-----· ·--- ---- -·-·- -··-·- . -·-·- .. ·-- ··--- -·· ., ___ _

__ ....__...;:_ ... __ _ ,.. _ _, __ _ ~._,,, •• •---- ·~ -- • •~ _ ,.,_ ,, ._, ,., , .,, ·-- • -•• ,.. t, ••• -•- •' ~ · .... ·•·-- •• ••-••• • - • .- • •• ·-- .... ,, .. - .... - ........... , • .,:..,._, ,~ j_.,._ , ,· •• .:.-- ~ ... '•' M creating 150 permanent jobs admittedly, a couple of hundred reassembling the· project, but at least 150 permanent jobs afterwards. Mr. Speaker, how much money are we putting into it? Well, that is a question of debate. We are certainly liable for $11.4 million if it collapses, and on that basis, Mr.

Speaker, we are talking about incredible amounts of money for the 150 jobs we are talking about. My estimate · is that it is somewhere in the neighbourhood of at least $7 5, 000 per job. What are the other development alternatives? Well, Mr. Speaker, looking at the Department of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development, we have found in recent years that in their sawmill programme they are capable of producing jobs for a little over $1000 each. In other words, if every job produced by Sprung was put into sawmilling, we could produce seventy five.

In the loan and grant programme operated by the Department of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development $5000 to $60.00 is necessary in order to establish a new job. In other words, Mr. Speaker, for every job that is created in this Sprung greenhouse project, we could create fifteen in these areas. What I am saying to you, Mr. Speaker, is if we were to take $11.4 million in equity and loan guarantees and divert them to aquaculture and the generating of aquaculture industries in this Province, it is my guess that we would produce thousands of jobs, not the mythical 150 that the government says. Mr.

Speaker, when all the arguments about the greenhouse project are finished, this is what it comes down to: If it is successful - I say if because I do L2725 May 29, 1987 Vol XL not believe, not for a minute, that it wi 11 be a s u c c e s s in · the long-term - we have invested or exposed the credit of the Province to the tune of $75,000 for each job.

If we were to take that $11.4 million and pour it into aquaculture development, we would make long strides in catching up with the Scandinavian countries and other Atlantic provinces in an industry that we know we have all the advantages in 1 not some 1 quite frankly, harebrained scheme that does not look like it has any chance of success whatsoever. Mr. Speaker, we just got a bit of additional information this morning that I would like to read into the record today. We have been told by the media - AN HON. MEMBER : A good source. MR. FENWICK: Well, it is an interesting one.

We have been told by the media that the Sprung greenhouse project that we are going to work on now has some major financial problems back in Calgary. We understand that the city of Calgary has now seized the assets of Sprung, and the greenhouse, for non-payment of $350,000 in back taxes. The question, Mr. Speaker, is this: If they have seized the greenhouse structure that they were dismantling to bring here, what will be the progress of the Sprung greenhouse project if they cannot bring the structure here and it is tied up in litigation for perhaps six or eight months? So, Mr.

Speaker, what I am saying to you is that not only - MR. FUREY : A point of order, Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER: No. 51 R2'725 ------- ---- ------- ·- --·-- ... --- ... ~- ··---------

·------ ----------- ----- '----'--.:._:.; _____ _ Order, please! A point of order, the hon. the member for St. Barbe. MR. FUREY: I wonder if the Leader of the NDP would care to tell the House which media it was that gave that information? MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order; the hon the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK : It is not exactly a point of order, but the fact is it came from Broadcast News. It was on the radio this morning, but we just have gotten the information, otherwise, we would have asked about it in Question Period. MR. SPEAKER : There is no point of or~er. The hon. the member for Menihek . MR.

FENWICK: The point is what does that prove to you? Here we have a company -that allegedly has a 100 year history of producing all sorts of stuff, that has been purported to be by our government a strong, financially successful organization with all kinds of competence and $35 million worth of research, and now we find for the lack of a mere pittance in comparison to the $18 million, it has its whole project up in slings. I would suggest to you, Mr.

Speaker, it starts to smack of an adventuring company that was in major financial difficulty in Calgary and luckily had our provincial government to bail it out under the most generous terms possibly imaginable. But, Mr . Speaker, in order to L2726 May 29, 1987 Uol XL bring it back to the bill that we are discussing, since we want to make it reasonably relevant, what I am saying to you is that aquaculture is the kind of industry . that the House Royal Commissiori pointed out we should be developing. Aquaculture is something that we have a natural advantage in . We know where the ocean is.

We know how fish swim in the ocean. We know how to feed them in the ocean. We know how to grow thern in the ocean. And, Mr. Speaker, once it is over, we know how to market fish, which is what we have been doing for hundreds of years, and that is another advantage we have over trying to market cucumbers God knows where. Mr. Speaker, all of the elements required to produce a successful industry are there. What is lacking are the funds to do it properly.

If we were to take the $11.4- million that we are frittering into this incredib1.e! project and put it into an aquaculture industry, we would make major strides in catching up with the industry in the rE!St of Atlantic Canada, with the Scandinavian industries and with putting us on the road to creating not just a couple of hundred very temporary jobs in this greenhouse project, but thousands of jobs that will see in the long term in an industry that we arE! good at, that we will develop, and we will eventually be able to bring ourselves to a degree of prosperity. Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of myself, on behalf of my colleague here, and on behalf of our party on both levels, we heartily endorse this legislation to establish an aquaculture industry in this Province. We believe that if the No. 51 R2'726 --- .. -·- -· --···-- --··- _ .. __ ,,_,.. __ , __ -·-- ·------·- .. ··-----~-·---~--.. ..... ------- ~- ·----- ·--..·--- ·- --·- ---- ...... -

·-· · ~ ·-· -·. ---- -~ ·-- ... --··------ __ ...., ____ , _____ __ ., ..... _________ ~ .- ........... _ .... ---- ··-- -·-· -··- ·--·---·. --- ·-·- government was not so foolish in its other projects, we would actually have enough funding to do something, and that in the long run we would be able to produce the thousands of jobs we need in order to employ Newfoundlanders all across the Province. Mr~ Speaker. I sit down saying that I think it is a great piece of legislation and hopefully we will be able to us ·e it to do the things we want to do. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SIMMS: Mr .

Speaker, I would like to rise on a point of order - MR. SPEAKER : A point of Minister of Lands. MR. SIMMS : order, Forest the hon. Resources the and - so that the hon. member 1 s time will · not be taken up with the point of order. The point of order deals with the matter that was dealt with earlier in the House by the Speaker with reference to who should be acknowledged as the replier to the bill presented by my colleague the Minister of Fisheries.

I will not go into that dispute because the Speaker has already dealt with that in a way that I understand was more or less an anomaly in which the Speaker more or less indicated that there was an error on his part. So that has been accepted and understood. My point of order, Mr. Speaker, is that we have to ensure that what transpired today is not seen as a precedent setting ruling by the Chair.

Even if the rules do not specifically say that a member of L2727 May 29, 1987 Vol XL the Opposition would be the official replier, it certainly has been the practice and the tradition that a member of the Official Opposition be the official replier to a government bill: I would not want the member for Menihek, for example, to get up on some future occasion and bE! recognized and argue that it is no longer the practice and tradition because, in fact, 1 you recognized us on May 29, as the official lead off responder to a government bill.

I I want to raise the point of order in the hope that · Your Honour t.uill confer with the Speaker . and with others and give us a ruling. perhaps on Monday or whateVE!r, to ensure that the ruling or what transpired here today is not accepted as a precedent setting ruling, that, in fact, the correct practices and traditions of this House for the last . many, many years has always been that the member responding to a goUE!rnmE!nt motion or a government bill is. in fact, a member of the Official Opposition, notwithstanding what transpired earlier today. That is the reason I raise the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. FENWICK: To that point Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: of order, Mr . To the point of order, the han. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK -: Mr. Speaker, I think if you go back and check Hansard you will find that whoever the Acting House Leader is today is not qui t.e correct. If you look back you will see previous examplE!S. where actually there has bE~en a budget debate. where the Minister of No. 51 R2'72'7

., Fin~nce presented his budget and the initial response was not by a member of the official Opposition but by an independent member, at that time, who not only got to respond to it but got the unlimited time required. You are obviously going to have to check the precedents and so on, but I think you will find that the rules of order are quite clear that it is the next member to get up from t·he Opposition,- and that is generically the official Opposition and what other caucus and what other independents are there. The hon. member for Grand Falls (Mr.

Simms) is trying to establish a precedent if he is as king you to rule that it has to be someone from the official Opposition when, indeed, the precedents very clearly state that it does not have to be, it is whatever other member is recognized next, whether . they be from the official Opposition or any other caucus in the House. MR. TULK : Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Further to that point of order, the hon. the member for Fogo. MR .

TULK: I am glad to see we have become the third party in the House when it comes to replying to points of order and so on, regardless of who is involved in them. Mr. Speaker, let me, first of all, support the Acting Government House Leader, the member for Grand Falls, who is absolutely right. The precedent that the member for Menihek refers to is a budget debate, it is not a government bill.

I would add to what the member for Grand Falls has said by L2728 May 29, 1987 Vol XL saying that _it is the practice in this Legislature, it is tradition in this Legislature, it is a precedent of this Legislature that when a minister, whoever he happens to be, speaks in introducing his bill - he has an hour to introduce it - not only do you recognize the official Opposition, you recognize the official spokesman from the official Opposition. I believe the member for Twillingate (Mr . W.

Carter) was out of the House, he could not be here, so the Leader of the Opposition rose in his place, which is also normal practice, to speak in reply to the minister. It is very important, as the member for Grand Falls says, that even though we have had this ruling this morning that it not be established as a tradition, and that whoever chooses to rise on the Opposition side of · the ·House, regardless of whether he is official Opposition or not, has the right to be recognized over the official spokesman for thE! official Opposition, or the Leader of the Opposition, or a designate of the officia~ spokesman.

So I would ask, as the member for Grand Falls has said, that we not establish this as a precedent and that Your Honour would consider the matter and bring us back a ruling at the earliest possible opportunity, whether that be Monday or Tuesday . MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order; I will take it under advisement and I will rule on that at my earliest convenience. The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands to a point of order. No. 51 R2728 --- ···-· ····- --··-····-.._ ____ _ ._. -----~ -·--··-- ·-· ---·--·· ·--- -··· ___ .,, ··--------------· --- ·--· ...... -

_ .. _________ ,..._ _ .......... ~- .. - ·- ·-·~ ··--- - ·· ·---.,;-··~ · ··-··-···· ·" ·-·-----·- .. MR. SIMMS: Mr . Speaker, I shall have to rise on another one now in that case. I want to make just one final contribution to it with respect to the comments made by the member for Menihek on a so-called precedent that occurred many moons ago, I suspect. I do not know when it was. When did we have independents? Back in 1974, or something? MR. SIMMONS: Steve Neary was the one . MR. SIMMS: Yes. That would have been 1974 or 1975 -. So that is twelve years ago. back in ten or I want to point out to him, Mr.

Speaker, that we have Standing Orders now that were revised and amended in 1979. These are the Standing Orders of the -House of Assembly that we go by. Certainly, to my recollection, there has not been a breach from that practice and tradition that I referred to earlier, certainly since 1979, in the last eight or nine years. I want to make that point. The second point I want to make is whatever he is - referring to referred to a budget speech. I am talking specifically about government bills right now, this morning, with reference to the bill we have before us. I just want to make those two points. MR.

FENWICK: One final comment on that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Further to that point of order, the hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK : L2729 May 29, 1987 Vol XL Mr . Speaker, I think the precedent is clearly established in the case which the minister has mentioned.

He also should mention that although the rules of order were adopted in 1979, they were adopted in a condition in which there were only two parties in the House of Assembly.· I t:hink it is very important to recogniZE! that as of November, 1984, that situation changed, and as of, I think February or March of 1987, it changed with the Speaker 1 s ruling that there was another legitimate caucus in this House. So, on that basis I tJJould suggest that he not rely too heavily on the rules of order.

Besides, the rules of order support our position, that it is any member, so I am not worried about that particular part of it. But I would suggest that a lot more be taken into account than just the simplistic rationalizations from the member for Grand Falls, because, in fact, situations have! changed. The rules, themselves, are clearly supportive of our pos ition.

But I think the precedent should not be de 1 v e d at· too qui c k 1 y , be c au s e to look at precedents at a time when there was only a government sidE! and an official Opposition and nobody else in the House clearly does not give any instructions whatsoever to the Sp~:!aker, so it. should be a case of only situations since there has been another official caucus here l:hat one should look at. MR. SIMMS : Mr. Speaker, I must rise once again. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of ordr:!r, the hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. No. 51 R2729

MR. SIMMS : Just to pick up on what the member for Menihek said, that as of November there was recognition of his party, or a third party in the House. My recollection of the ruling of 'that day was simply that members in that caucus would have the right to respond to Ministerial Statements. Now, that is the only recollection I have, nothing more, nothing less. The hon. member for Menihek obviously wants to give that a broader

interpretation to try to give the public the impression that they are fully recognized and all that · stuff. That is not my recollection of it and I do . not think that is the case, they are simply recognized to respond to Ministerial Statements. With respect to his other point, the fact that the Standing Orders were developed when t~ere were only two parties in the Hou.se, so what? That is irrelevant. These are our Standing Orders of the Legislature. The hon. members are members of the Legislature and they should respect the Standing Orders the same as every other member does. My point is: Since the Standing Orders - the first time ever - were brought in,