March 22,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLI No. 14

The House met at 9:00 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Before moving on with our business, on behalf of Members I

would like to welcome to the House of Assembly today forty-five level II

students from Ascension Collegiate, Bay Roberts, accompanied by their teachers,

Mr. Drover and Mr. Neil.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, as Members of the House of

Assembly are aware, alcohol and other drug problems are unfortunately a reality

of today's society, and our Province is no exception. Through the Alcohol and

Drug Dependency Commission of Newfoundland and Labrador, Government provides

funding in an effort to do its

part in combating this major public health and

social problem.

I am very pleased to inform hon. Members of a decision by the

Alcohol and Drug Dependency Commission to appoint two regional co-ordinators

within the Labrador region of the Province, one to be situated in Labrador West

and the other in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

We believe these full-time professional positions will

facilitate the co-ordination of existing services, as well as implement programs

available through the Provincial Commission. As staff of the Commission, they

will also provide the region with greater access to national programs and

expertise across the country.

These new positions, which result from a re-alignment of the

Commission resources, will work very closely with other organizations in

Labrador West and Happy Valley-Goose Bay area in the provision of alcohol and

other drug related programs.

The new co-ordinator position of the ADDC will be working

very closely with the Labrador West Advisory Committee, the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary, the Councils of both Wabush and Labrador City, and the Iron Ore

companies, to maximize all efforts in this important area.

With respect to Labrador West, I would like to pay particular

tribute to the work of the Labrador West Alcohol and Drug Advisory Committee,

which has been very active in Labrador West over the past number of years.

In Happy Valley-Goose Bay, the position will enable the

Commission to focus on working closer with organizations such as the National

Native Alcohol and Drug Abuse Program, the Labrador Inuit Alcohol and Drug Abuse

Program, and related groups, in co-ordinating and implementing services to the

area, especially on the North Coast. It will also provide much needed support to

the Commission's Regional Office located in Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Mr. Speaker, potential solutions to alcohol and other drug

problems require a long-term strategy, particularly in the areas of community

action, public awareness and professional training. We feel these initiatives in

Labrador will go a long way in providing a greater focus on such issues

throughout the region and will fill a major role in attempting to impact upon

related problems in the years to come.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I say to

the Minister, and on behalf of my colleague for Labrador West, we welcome the

news of the two new co-ordinators for ADDC. But I find it very ironic that the

Minister comes in today and announces those two appointments which will probably

cost the Government about $100,000, when only just a few days ago we heard that

nearly $900,000 was cut from the Budget for the hospital in Labrador West; the

hospital in North West River is being closed down, another $150,000 that the

Government has taken away from the people of Labrador.

Nr. Speaker, I want to say that I welcome those two

appointments, but at the same time, we must recognize that this is only a drop

in the bucket for the wounds that have been inflicted upon the native people in

Labrador by our white society.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WARREN: I think it is high time for this Government

to address the serious problem with alcohol, but you need more than two

co-ordinators; you need people, and a Government that is committed to addressing

this problem in a most serious manner. Thank you very much.

Oral Questions

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for

the Minister of Education. I would like to ask the Minister whether or not the

Minister himself would approach the President of Memorial University and ask the

President of the University whether or not he would reconsider the decision to

totally eliminate the Extension Services Department at the University, the

Department, by the way, which provides the uniqueness of the University to rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. Would the Minister be prepared to approach Dr. May

and ask him to reconsider that decision?

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, the University was faced this

year with a severe funding problem, as this Government was, as all Governments

in Canada are. They face a $7 million to $8 million funding problem this year,

and they could only solve that problem through additional revenues from a

variety of sources, or cuts. The University is not permitted to have a deficit

on its budget, Mr. Speaker.

I understand that Dr. May - the Board of Regents had a

Committee first of all, and Dr. May and that Committee went through every

possible option. In accordance with the, law they have the right, Mr. Speaker,

to make decisions about programs -

AN HON. MEMBER: That was not the question.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

DR. WARREN: - and what programs in difficult times will

be cut. They gave every possible consideration to all the options. They made the

decision and the Government supports the right of the Board to make that

decision and supports the decisions they have made, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. RIDEOUT: Well, Mr. Speaker, that is a great way to

say nothing. Absolutely nothing! No commitment to even talk to the President of

the University.

Let me ask the Minister this, something that he can do. Will

the Minister agree to reconsider the budget for Memorial University and increase

it by the amount that is necessary to keep the Extension Services open? Will the

Minister do that? Will the Government do that? And then Dr. May will have to do

what the Government wants him to do?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

DR. WARREN: The answer to that is no, Mr. Speaker. We

went through all of the options. This Government is prepared to face the real

problems this Province has.

AN HON. MEMBER: You do not need to say any more.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, we gave a global amount to

Memorial University. I am delighted that in the process of dealing with its

decision, its difficult problems, it puts students first. It has guaranteed that

the impact on students will be minimal. Unfortunately, they had to make some

cuts, Mr. Speaker. Unfortunately a tremendous service, the Extension Service,

which has served this Province well, and I pay tribute to the Extension Service,

in the past they have served this Province well, in the decisions they made,

this was one of the unfortunate decisions they had to make.

Mr. Speaker, the Government is pleased, also, that we have

other agencies -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Sit down! Sit down!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I would ask the Minister, please, to become more precise. I

realize he is into philosophical dissertations, but the onus is on the Chair to

ensure that questions are short and answers are short.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, we are pleased that the

community colleges in this Province, the rural development associations,

Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador, and many of the other agencies that serve

rural Newfoundland in this Province will expand their services in the future to

meet the needs of all people in our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary to

the Minister.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister said in this House last week that

Memorial University Extension was relevant 20 or 30 years ago. The friends of

the extension services say that the Minister was relevant 20 or 30 years ago.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RIDEOUT: Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister

once more, will the Government reconsider its grant to the university and

increase it by the amount necessary to keep the extension services open and

prove his relevance today?

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to get personal

and political with the hon. the Leader of the Opposition, but I am likely to be

here after this fall when the hon. Leader, for various reasons, is not going to

be here.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: Chicken.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order please! Order please!

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, this Government has education as

a high priority. In these difficult times some tough decisions have to be made.

The university and the colleges are making these tough decisions in accordance

with the law of the Province, and we appreciate their efforts to deal with

difficult problems in these difficult times by making the decisions in the way

that they have, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the

Minister of Education as well. The Minister said in supporting the university's

elimination of MUN extension, he said: we do not need extension services in

Newfoundland anymore because we have community colleges offering all kinds of

programs and the Economic Recovery Commission Development Association.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in my particular district, Fogo Island

might have been saved from resettlement because of the aid of MUN extension.

Does the Minister believe that it is a good policy to abandon an already

established program that has a high credibility in this Province, the nation,

and even around the world, and disperse those programs among the numerous

educational and Government agencies, and will the programs be delivered as

efficiently now as was then?

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I want to correct the hon.

Member. I did not say that Extension Services were not relevant. I did say that

the face of this Province has changed in the last twenty years, and there are

other services out there now which will meet the needs of rural Newfoundland, as

they should.

Mr. Speaker, the Extension Service was and is an important

service. I think the hon. Members opposite are really doing a disservice to the

other colleges in this Province - the community colleges which are doing

outstanding work in community education in this Province!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. WARREN: They are doing a disservice to the hundreds

and thousands of people out there who work in communities, who are giving

leadership in communities throughout this Province, Mr. Speaker, the community

colleges are doing a tremendous -

MS. VERGE: That's why you're cutting (Inaudible)!

DR. WARREN: - performing a tremendous service in rural

Newfoundland and will continue to do so in the future. I have every confidence

that they will meet the educational needs of rural Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Since the

Minister has again indicated that he intends to transfer responsibility for MUN

Extension to community colleges, how does he propose to have the colleges do

that since he slashed their budgets even more than Memorial University? How does

he propose to offer that program?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I would hope that my hon.

friends would, when they meet their colleagues in Ottawa, tell them. Say the

same thing that they are saying in this House, because I do not want to play the

blame game, but it is a fact of life. If the Federal Government provided this

Province with the established funding programme, the equalization payments that

they should, we would not have to make any of these cuts in post-secondary

education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I would ask the hon. Minister to take his place.

Invariably in the last few days when a question is asked,

there are people still asking questions, and it is very difficult to answer a

question, very difficult for the Chair to know if the question has been

addressed properly, because many times the Member speaking will address the

question that has been asked. So I please ask hon. Members to restrain

themselves and give an opportunity for the question to be answered.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, we are now in the process of

consulting with community colleges. I hope next week we can make some

announcements of what the colleges are going to do in these difficult times. It

is rather interesting, Mr. Speaker, I heard a report this morning that school

boards are doing precisely what the Government is doing, rationalizing their

service. I heard last week, Mr. Speaker, that two school boards in Deer Lake

have now begun to share, the Roman Catholic school board and the Integrated

School Board to put the schools together.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I want to remind hon. Members that the Chair cannot require a

Minister to answer a question in a certain way. I have been noticing time and

time again during the last few days that Members have been shouting 'not

relevant'. I do not want to say there is no relevance but the Chair cannot

dictate as to what a Minister says in a question. All I can try to do is to see

whether the Minister is dragging out the answer. I am attempting to do that but

when hon. Members are shouting it makes it rather difficult for the Chair to

make that decision. So, I ask the Minister to please clue up his answer in a

very short while.

DR. WARREN: It is unfortunate that the Opposition do not

like the answers, Mr. Speaker, but I can assure you that all educational

institutions are attempting, in these difficult times, to rationalize their

services, including Memorial University, including the colleges, and I am

delighted to say, including the kindergarten to twelve system, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

When is the Minister going to take some responsibility for

education in this Province? Because of the important role that MUN Extension has

played in the social, economic, and cultural survival of rural Newfoundland, can

the Minister not see why the people of rural Newfoundland see this as another

chapter in this administration's program to get rid of rural Newfoundland?

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I find it difficult to answer

that question. The hon. Member knows what this Government has done to promote

rural Newfoundland, to promote the future of this Province, to promote equality

in this Province. Mr. Speaker, he knows and we will continue to do that.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, a couple of days ago the

Minister of Social Services assured me that individuals will receive the same

quality of respite care and services as they did in the past, and that the

workers would have the same degree of experience and professionalism, and that

the continuity between patient and client would be the same. That is what he

essentially told us in the House of Assembly a few days ago. Now, Mr. Speaker,

is the Minister aware that I have spoken with two families who depend on

respite care, one family in the Marystown area and one in the Twillingate area,

and they assure me that they are unsure as to where they will get help at the

end of this month. As well, Mr. Speaker, I spoke to a laid off respite care

worker in Central Newfoundland who is not doing anything right now, just sitting

in the office. I also spoke to an individual involved with respite care in the

Gander area and none of them have any idea as to what is happening with respite

care? Now, I would like to ask the Minister: why is it that the Minister did not

see that a replacement service was in place before removing the present respite

care service?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. EFFORD: First of all, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. Member

would tell me which person is sitting in his office not doing anything I can

assure you that he will not be there very long afterwards. Also, let me say to

the hon. Member about the respite care we are going to provide: naturally there

are people in the Province concerned because it will not change until the end of

March. As of April 1 the program will change and I can assure the hon. Member

that all people needing respite care in this Province will receive equal or even

better care than they have received in the past. It will be by each regional and

district office in all areas centred around the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador, there will be nobody doing without any service.

As to the family he is speaking about, in Marystown, if he

wants to tell that family to call me personally, I will talk to them and I will

give them assurance of exactly what is going to be done in the near future. But

each regional and district manager is fully aware of the respite service that is

going to be provided. As to individuals whose jobs will terminate as of March

31, I am sure they are concerned about their future and concerned about what is

going to take place. They are professional people and they should be concerned.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Is the Minister aware that each of those

people I have talked to have gone to the offices and talked to their social

workers, and the social workers do not know anything either? Is the Minister

aware of that? And can the Minister tell the House -

MR. TOBIN: The Minister is not telling the truth. That is

the bottom line (inaudible).

MR. HODDER: Yes. And last night, Mr. Speaker, he told us

that it was a budgetary measure.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member is on -

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) the truth.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I am going to ask the Member for Burin - Placentia West,

please, to restrain himself. Our rules are quite clear, that an hon. Member is

not to interrupt another Member. And this is what we are getting in Question

Period. I do not know where hon. Members get the idea that once the question is

asked and the Cabinet Member stands up to answer, everybody can keep shouting. I

cannot see how debate can proceed in that kind of a situation, and I am asking

hon. Members, please, to restrain themselves. As I have said, the rules are

quite clear. No Member is supposed to interrupt another Member, and when a

Member shouts across the floor, that is obviously interrupting the Member trying

to answer the question.

I would ask the hon. the Member for Port au Port to clue up

his question, please.

MR. HODDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. As I said, is the Minister

aware that his social workers are not able to tell these people, either? And can

the Minister tell the House when those people who are now without respite care

because the Minister fired the twenty-seven - that is why there is somebody

sitting in their office. Can he tell us when these people will begin to receive

respite care again, under the new programme? Can he tell us that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. EFFORD: I do not understand, Mr. Speaker. Probably it

is my accent, or probably the hon. Member is hard of hearing, but I am telling

the people and I am telling the House of Assembly once again that there is

nobody in this Province doing without respite work. Absolutely nobody. All the

people are in place until March 31. All regional people, all five regional

offices, the fifty-two district offices, information has been passed along to

everybody on what will take place as of March 31. If there is an individual

family not receiving care now, all they have to do is make a call. All social

workers have been advised.

And let me tell the hon. Member. I can produce at least seven

to eight scrapbooks filled with letters from people across the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador telling me, and telling the people of the Department

of Social Service, it is the first time in nineteen years that they have had

total access to all people within the Department of Social Services, including

the Minister. And they are totally satisfied. Unlike when the former

administration was in power.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Table the scrapbooks! Table the

scrapbooks!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Fairy tales, Mr. Speaker! The Minister is

very good at fairy tales. Mr. Speaker, there is total confusion out there. Now

has the Minister considered the possibility of an increased caseload under

foster care if the respite care is not provided properly? Now, Mr. Speaker, one

mother told me, `I will certainly consider alternate foster home care if I

cannot obtain respite care.' Some of these people need respite care badly. And,

Mr. Speaker, they are not getting it. And what will the cost be to the Province

if they have to provide foster home care rather than respite care? Because that

is an option to some of these people.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. EFFORD: I suspect, Mr. Speaker, what is happening is

that the hon. Member is out fearmongering among the people of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, when we made decisions within

the Department of Social Services we took into consideration the effect of the

changes we were about to make on the people of the Province. And we did not do

it in isolation. We talked to a number of groups of people - the Foster Parents

Association, the people in the MR Rehabilitative Division, and the people across

the Province who need this type of service. We just did not make decisions

within the executive level of the Department of Social Services without

considering all the facts and talking to the groups of people that would be

affected.

And I will assure the hon. Members opposite that while I am

Minister of Social Services and there is a need out there to provide service to

people, all the people in the Province will receive the service. There are no

cutbacks in respite care. In fact, there will be an increase. As I pointed out

last night, with the budgetary process this year the Department of Social

Services got major increases in every programme. In one programme alone, a $15

million increase over last year. An increase to single parents, increase to

child welfare allowance, increase to foster parents -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: - increase to foster parents clothing,

increases all over, Mr. Speaker. There is no change, absolutely no change.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

As tempted as Cabinet Ministers might be to give a catalogue

of all the budgetary things in their particular Department, I would advise them,

please, to again remember that the questions should be brief and answers should

be brief. The Chair cannot tolerate or permit quoting all items of increases or

decreases in their budgets.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the absence of

the Minister of Justice, I will direct my question to either the President of

Treasury Board or, perhaps, the Premier. It deals with the very tragic death

last weekend of a constituent of mine at a local hotel, under unusual

circumstances, to say the least. I realize there are certain issues that are not

appropriate to be debated in this Chamber, and I do not wish to. I ask the

Minister simply, does Government have the police report on that incident yet?

And if so, is Government prepared now to appoint a judicial inquiry into that

matter immediately?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the Government as the

Government does not answer those questions. The Attorney General is responsible

for the administration of justice in the Province. He is the only Minister in

the Government who has a special role outside of being part of the political

Government, and that is his role as Attorney General, and in that role he must

be totally and completely impartial. The Government makes no decisions as to

what to do with police reports or anything, that is the particular role of the

Attorney General as Attorney General, not in his capacity as Minister of

Justice. So the Government cannot sort of stand and answer questions. I do not

know where the Attorney General is this morning, but I will see if I can get the

answer for the hon. gentleman before the House closes this morning and let him

know.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I advise the Premier

that I notified the Attorney General yesterday afternoon that I would be asking

this question this morning and recommended that he brief either the Premier or

the President of Treasury Board. Obviously, this Government does not have their

act together.

I ask the Premier, in view of the fact that this Government

last year eliminated the Ombudsman's position, which was the only avenue that

anybody who has an aggrievement with Government or any agency of Government had

to appeal, and in view of the fact that the Attorney General, the Minister of

Justice, has said on a number of occasions that he is considering establishing a

police commission so that there is an avenue of appeal, will the Premier now

stop procrastinating and appoint a police commission immediately?

AN HON. MEMBER: A good question.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, this kind of tragedy points

out a deficiency in the way we administer justice in the whole country. Now no

other province has a solution, but that does not mean that we should not have

one. We have to start to look for one. In circumstances where a possible

criminal offence occurs, or a death, as in this case, occurs, where the police

have some involvement, it is just an unacceptable situation really to have the

police who are potentially involved investigating themselves or their own

members. Now we need to find a solution to that.

The Attorney General has spoken to me about that concern, and

we have looked at ways in which it might be addressed. In Newfoundland, where we

have the good fortune to have two competent police forces, the Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary and the RCMP,. even though the area where the event

occurred is within the jurisdiction of the Newfoundland Constabulary and they,

of course, were involved, we are looking at the possibility that either we will

have to appoint an independent judicial inquiry to conduct a full inquiry into

this event, or we might look at putting in place a standardized procedure: in

any event where one police force is involved, the other police force does the

investigation. Now we cannot declare that to be so without working out an

arrangement with the RCMP beforehand. But in either case, we must do that.

Now the other aspect of the hon. Member's question was a

suggestion about using a police commission to do that. That is another

alternative, to put in place a police commission that has a power beyond simply

hearing complaints, that would have a power to direct an investigation in this

kind of circumstance, and perhaps engage or appoint the other police force to do

the investigation. We are looking at it. It is regrettable it has never been put

in place in the past. In the year and a half we have been there we have not done

so, but I think we ought to get on with it, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I certainly agree with the

Premier's last statement, that they certainly should get on with it. A year and

a half certainly has been long enough. And I remind the Premier that there is -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. RIDEOUT: We had the Ombudsman.

MR. WINDSOR: We had an Ombudsman there. This Government

eliminated the Ombudsman, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member is on a supplementary.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier, in view of

the fact that the RCMP is covered by a Citizens' Commission which looks into

such situations, will the Premier act immediately to appoint either a citizens'

commission or a police commission, or whatever mandate he chooses to give it, so

that there is an independent group, other than other policemen, to look into

this type of situation? And I will say no more about the situation at this point

in time.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, in 17 or 18 years in office,

they did not do anything.

AN HON. MEMBER: We had the Ombudsman.

PREMIER WELLS: The Ombudsman! The Ombudsman had no

jurisdiction.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WELLS: The Ombudsman had no jurisdiction to

conduct a police investigation. He did no such thing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order please! Order please!

I am going to remind hon. Members again that when a question

is asked, if the answer is not liked that is why we have supplementaries, so

that the supplementary can flow from the answer. It is not meant to be a

free-for-all, where everybody shouts and responds. Question Period just cannot

proceed that way in this small House, so I am asking hon. Members to please

restrain themselves and to keep their questions for the supplementary.

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SIMMS: (Inaudible) silence in Question Period.

MR. SPEAKER: I am not going to get into debate with any

Member about what should be. I am not allowed to, and I am not going to. The

Member mentions there is not supposed to be silence. Quite true. But we are far

away from silence.

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I was merely pointing out

that we have been in office for 20 months, or whatever it is up until now - 19

months - and we have not yet had an opportunity to correct all of the evils and

ills of the past. We admit that having a situation where a police force

investigates itself is not a good situation and it should be changed, and I have

already indicated to the House what the Government intends to do. The Government

is looking at putting in place a police commission and giving it powers beyond

merely receiving complaints, and hopefully, Mr. Speaker, that will enable the

administration of justice in these kinds of circumstances in a manner that can

have full public confidence.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: I want to ask the Minister of Health a

question this morning. I have received several complaints from my district, from

councils and from residents, regarding the inability to get inspections done by

the Health Inspection Department for people who want to construct a residence

and councils who want to have work done. I have now discovered that there is a

backlog of over one year's requests at the health office. The position of one of

the health officials has been frozen, the secretary is now on maternity leave

and that position will not be filled. Can the Minister assure me and assure the

residents of the Burin Peninsula that he will have the necessary people put in

place to ensure that backlog is alleviated immediately?

AN HON. MEMBER: A good question.

MR. BARRETT: The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member raises a

question concerning a specific case which I will be glad to deal with. However,

I should tell the hon. Member that there is a shortage of health inspectors

throughout the Province. It is a situation we inherited when we took over. There

is a shortage throughout the whole nation. We have ten or twelve health

inspectors at this moment being trained at Ryerson College so that they can come

back and fill these positions. So it is difficult. It is a problem we have

throughout the whole Province, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West on a supplementary.

MR. TOBIN: Will the Minister give me assurance that the

position now vacant in Grand Bank will be filled this year?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, it is difficult to give a Member

assurance that a position will be filled, assuming we can recruit a person who

is qualified to fill the position, assuming we have the financial, fiscal

capacity to pay for the position. There are a whole lot of factors, Mr. Speaker,

which we have to take into consideration. But I will assure the Member that we

will do everything in our power to make sure that all the health inspection

needs of the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador are addressed

according to the best of our ability and our means.

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to present a petition from a number of students

originally from my own district of Green Bay attending the Cabot Institute. As a

matter of fact there are seven students from the communities of Springdale,

originally, Triton, Robert's Arm and Rattling Brook.

The prayer of the petition says as follows: As a voter and

one of many citizens who believes that the Cabot Institute is vital to

Newfoundland and Labrador, I strongly oppose any move by Government to reduce

programs or cut funding to Cabot Institute. Thousands of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians need Cabot Institute to ensure the economic future of Newfoundland

and Labrador; we want quality education and we deserve no less.

Mr. Speaker, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever in

agreeing with the prayer of the petition and have affixed my signature as well

to that petition.

Mr. Speaker, it must be very frustrating for students in

post-secondary institutions right now in the various colleges and institutes and

the university to know that they are putting a number of years of their lives

through a gruelling course of study, running up student loans - obligations to

the bank which they will have to pay off in due course, only to find probably

that a course they are into is cancelled in mid-stream or to come out of school

and find that there is absolutely no work, Economic Recovery Commission or not,

that they can use the course that they took, it is extremely frustrating.

We have a Liberal Party in Government here, Mr. Speaker, and

if the hon. Joseph Smallwood will be remembered for anything in this Province,

it will be for his commitment to Education, for his commitment to the notion

that the people, all of the people had a right to a good education and that was

the way, that we, as a poor society, after having joined Confederation, would

pull ourselves into the mainstream of the twentieth century, and here we have a

Government, a Liberal Government, the second Liberal Government since

Confederation, and where is one of the main areas that they are cutting, Mr.

Speaker, it is in the area of education, the one area that will allow our people

to pull themselves up by their boot straps and better themselves and take

part

in mainstream North American life.

Mr. Speaker, we have community colleges, the hon. Minister of

Education referred to them earlier, with students in them the same as these here

at Cabot, I raised in the House last night that there is a front page newspaper

story in Green Bay that the community colleges at Baie Verte and Springdale are

on the chopping block for next year. Is that the truth? One wonders, and I

challenge the Minister to speak to that. With regard to this particular

petition, Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that these people from my district

originally, are now in school wondering if what they are doing is going to be of

any use to them when they get out, wondering if the courses that they are

currently into will actually run their course and finish, and like I say, what

future is there for our children if we cut back on education; we are a poor

place and our greatest resource, probably the only resource that we have left is

our human resource, our brain power; we are in the third world in terms of a lot

of our public services and our daily living standards but, Mr. Speaker, as we

saw in the Gulf War, we have entered a hi-tech information age and if our kids

are not out there able to compete in that kind of world, we will continue to be

a third world place for many years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I support the prayer of the petition.

MR. SPEAKER: Is the hon. Member speaking to this

petition?

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I would like privilege to

rise. It looks like the Minister of Education has now lost it all over there. He

will not even rise and speak to the petition. He is playing his games again as

he has played now for the last two years with the education system of the

Province.

I want to rise today, Mr. Speaker, to support the petition

presented by the Member for Green Bay. I think most Members of this Legislature

have received petitions from students at the Cabot Institute, particularly those

that are from our own districts. I have had a petition myself signed by, I

think, thirteen students who are attending the Cabot Institute and who are very

concerned about the funding for the Cabot Institute in this year's Budget. They

are wondering if programs will be cut, they are wondering if they will be able

to continue their studies -those that are involved in multi-year programs. We

have not heard too much yet from the institutes about the Province, or from the

community colleges. I am sure most of them are still evaluating their Budgets. I

understand in the community college budget itself, I think there is $3 million

less this year than was given last year in grants and aid. So, that is going to

cause some hardship as well and we are going to see about 100 people laid off,

as I understand it, in the community college system. I want to rise to support

the petition. I want to rise and say that I share the concern of these students

who are attending the Cabot Institute and the other provincial institutes in the

Province, and all the campuses of the community colleges. What we see happening

with the education system, Mr. Speaker, and particularly the post-secondary

system, is the same thing we are seeing happen to the health care system, this

Government is reducing funding to everyone. They are reducing funding to the

three Provincial institutes, they are reducing funding to all the community

colleges, yet they are expecting some facilities and some institutions to be

able to handle additional pressure. Now, I do not know how they expect that.

When we heard Ministers talking about the Budget process since October they in

essence were saying that some people might get more money and some people might

get less, and I can see in their regionalization if they had seriously given

thought to providing those facilities that are going to be under greater

pressure, if they had given them more money one could understand the logic, but

that is not what has happened. What they have done is cut the budgets of

everyone, of every institution and every community college in the Province, and

yet they are expecting some institutions to be able to handle more students. The

same thing with the health care system, they have eliminated a number of health

care institutions in the Province and they are expecting the regional facilities

to handle more pressure with less money. Now, I do not know how the Government

or the Minister of Education really expects that to happen because how can you

expect to do more with less money? That is the question. You cannot do as much

with less money.

DR. KITCHEN: That is the challenge.

MR. MATTHEWS: The old mad hatter, the Minister of

Finance, said: that is the challenge. Well, I say to him, yes it is a challenge,

but it is not much consolation to post-secondary students in this Province who

have to wonder if they are going to be able to finish a program they started,

because the Cabot Institute and the other post-secondary institutions, such as

the University, have gotten less money from this Government. They want a

challenge to finish their education. They want a challenge to start a career,

and this Minister of Finance and this Minister of Education is denying that.

That is why all of those students are sending petitions to Members on this side,

I know, and I am sure to Members opposite, asking for their support and calling

upon all Members of this Legislature to oppose any reduction in funding to

post-secondary education in the Province.

I support the petition, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

DR. WARREN: I always respond to requests and meet with

groups. I might tell the hon. Members that I met with students and federation

student leaders more often in the past year than the former Minister did during

his whole term, and I will put that to the test, Mr. Speaker. I have met with

student leaders and student organizations. On Monday of next week, Mr. Speaker,

I have a meeting with the Federation of Students.

MR. MATTHEWS: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister is making false accusations in this

Legislature. He does not know how many times I met with them and I must say, Mr.

Speaker, in concluding, that if I imposed as much devastation on the students of

this Province as this Minister there is no wonder he has to meet with them so

often to try and put out the fires.

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I said I would put it to the

test and we can do a count.

MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order. I thought the

Minister might want to make a few remarks to the point of order but since he

does not the Chair has to rule on the point of order. There is no point of

order, the hon. Member was making a point. In the meantime I want to tell hon.

Members, again, with respect to petitions, that Members should keep themselves

to the material allegations of the petition, speak to the material allegations,

the signatures, and this sort of thing.

The hon. the Minister of Education.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, I know the

concerns of students, I meet with them regularly, and next week I will be

meeting with students to discuss the issues raised in the petition. That is the

first point.

Mr. Speaker, the Boards of Governors and the Board of Regents

have been examining - the Board of Regents has made its decisions, the Boards of

Governors of the colleges are meeting, and Cabot. And next week we hope to be in

a position to hear from them as to the decisions they made with respect to any

cuts for next year.

I want to correct something the hon. Members have said. There

have been no cuts in funding. Mr. Speaker, there is more money in the Education

budget this year than last year, even with a salary freeze. So that is

incorrect. There are no cuts in funding, Mr. Speaker. Yes, there is not enough

money to meet all of our needs. Yes, the institutions will have to rationalize

their system. Yes, Mr. Speaker, they will have to do that.

The third point I would like to make relevant to the

petition, is that this Government believes in the importance of education. It is

a high priority for us. We are going through a difficult time now, we have to

rationalize the service. But I can assure the hon. Members and all the students

who signed the petition that we believe in the future of this Province. We

believe in the future of our young people, and I am delighted that they are not

as pessimistic about the future of this Province - our young people - as the

Opposition is. They have given up, they have lost faith in our Province. Our

young people have not, Mr. Speaker, and we are going to meet their educational

needs.

MR. SPEAKER: Are there further petitions?

The hon. Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: I have a petition that I would like to present

on behalf of 479 parents of students in Jamieson Academy, in Salt Pond, Burin.

The prayer of the petition is: we the undersigned,

representing the 504 children at the Donald C. Jamieson Academy in Salt Pond,

Newfoundland, support the PTA executive sub-committee for no educational

cutbacks. Our children need a good quality education in order to help them to

become strong and productive leaders of our future society. Let us together send

a message to this Government.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Education, just speaking on a

petition, spoke about the belief that he has in Newfoundland. I wonder what

fantasy land does he figure Newfoundland to be in if he is allowed to continue

with his educational cutbacks in this Province? Where do we think the youth of

our Province are going to get jobs? When you look at the students today that are

to graduate from high school, they have to make a decision as to whether or not

they will pursue a profession in education. And if they do, what job

opportunities are there, based on the way this Minister has slashed the budget

and the positions for teaching the teachers in this Province?

If they want to pursue a career in nursing, what

opportunities are there for them when one considers the way the Minister of

Health has slashed the budget and cut the positions of nursing professions in

this Province? If they want to become doctors what opportunity is there for them

to practice medicine in a province where the government is ready to gut the MCP

and the health care system, like they are doing throughout this Province, in

various hospitals, and particularly my own district, in excess of $1 million

this year.

If they want to pursue other professional occupations what is

there for them in this Province? I think that is a question we have to ask

ourselves, for those of us who are parents, for people who have children who are

now ready to graduate from school and post-secondary institutions. I have a

young sister who is graduating from University. She just finished off her Phys

Ed degree and now she is doing her Education degree. And she is expecting the

closest place she will probably find employment is somewhere west of Ontario.

Ontario or West. She knows that there is no opportunity available for her here

in this Province.

So is that what the Minister of Education means when he says

he is proud? Is that why he is proud, because our young people have to leave

Newfoundland to go away and find employment? Is that the type of pride that

constitutes the front benches of this Government? Is that why the Minister of

Education says that he has a commitment to education, despite the fact that

nobody in this Province believes him? And he has demonstrated in this House that

nobody should believe him. Because the Minister of Education has not been honest

since the pressure came on him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, that is true, the Minister of Education

has not been honest with this House of Assembly since the pressure went on him.

You have not been honest, sir, with this House since the pressure went on you.

Prior to the pressure and the slashes and the cuts I thought that you were a

very honest person. But the questions that have gone to you of late, Mr.

Minister, you have not given us honest answers. I would suspect that is part of

a plan by the Cabinet of this Province to do whatever you can do within the

realm and rules of this House not to give right answers. And if we have ever

seen a Minister blatantly misleading this House it was this morning with the

Minister of Social Services and the Premier laughing and supporting him. I

thought it was shameless. As a matter of fact, if I had been in the Chair I

would have probably named the two, but I was not there.

But in any case what we want in this House is both Ministers

to be honest. And I ask the Minister of Education on behalf of these parents of

504 children in the Donald C. Jamieson Academy, Mr. Speaker: the namesake of

that school, a great man, who did much for this Province, if he was only around

today to see the destruction that the Liberal Party has caused to the dreams

that he had for the educational system, I wonder what would he think. And I beg

the Minister of Education to give the necessary funding to education in the

Province, not to be freezing positions to the teachers, to let our youth who are

going to go to the University have an opportunity to practice teaching school in

this Province. We have the greatest teachers in the country here in this

Province. And why is the Minister of Education trying to drive them, why is the

Minister of Education together with his colleagues developing a plan that is

going to drive them away from the Province and to brain drain Newfoundland, why

is the Minister of Education behind some sort of a system that is going to drive

the best people we have got in the Province to the Mainland?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: A good job.

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

DR. WARREN: A very brief response, Mr. Speaker. As I said

earlier these are very difficult times. We do not have all the money we need. I

said earlier there are more dollars in the Budget this year, but that does not

mean we meet all the needs, Mr. Speaker. We have I think in the education budget

this year a total of about $761 million compared with $745 million revised last

year and budgeted $733 million. So there are more dollars, Mr.Speaker, but not

enough.

I agree with the hon. Member on one thing, I agree that we

have excellent teachers. This year I am pleased to inform the House again that

the teachers we are losing in the Province are as a result of declining

enrolments. We are losing 3,000 students a year on the average. As a result of

that the numbers of teachers are declining. And this year the vast majority of

the teachers we are losing are as the result of declining enrollment. This

Government is pleased with that. This minimizes the impact on the classroom. And

many of these units are going to be units from school board offices so that the

classroom is going to be even further minimized as a result of our actions. We

believe in the future of this Province. We believe in the importance of

education. We want to provide for this Province the best possible education.

That is our commitment and we will do it, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words

in support of this petition so ably presented by my colleague the Member for

Burin - Placentia West, who fights like a Trojan on behalf of his constituents

time after time, after time, and does not hesitate to speak on behalf of those

constituents that he represents whenever he has the opportunity, unlike -

AN HON. MEMBER: Whether the rules allow it or not.

MR. SIMMS: Whether the rules allow it or not, Mr.

Speaker, he is prepared to speak out and stand up for his constituents,

unfortunately unlike many Members opposite, because as has been pointed out, no

doubt Members opposite have received similar petitions with respect to education

and cutbacks in education and cutbacks in all levels of education. But you never

see anybody standing - the Member over there shakes his head - nobody has

received petitions? Well that is not what students tell us, Mr. Speaker.

Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, it does not preclude Members opposite from standing

and speaking to petitions that we present on this side of the House. They must

not forget that.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I only have three or four minutes to speak

to the petition so I thought I would take the opportunity to respond to some of

the comments made by the Minister of Education in particular.

The Member for Burin - Placentia West used terminology that I

would not necessarily use with respect to the Minister's actions but perhaps the

terminology I would use would mean the same. I really think a number of

Ministers over there, including the Minister of Education, are playing little

games or using little tricks in responding to questions, in participating in the

debate even; last night we caught the Minister of Social Services talking about

last year versus this year in the budgetary process and when we found out and

caught him and studied it, we realize the Minister of Education had been doing

the same thing.

They were talking about their budgeted figure for last year-

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Yes, you say it now but you were not saying it

all the time and we can show you excerpts - we will say to the Minister of

Education, we can show him excerpts from Hansard if he would like where he did

not always say it. Now they were using this comparison: they talked about the

budgeted figure versus the estimates for this year and there is a nice sizable

increase, but the truth of the matter is they should be comparing their

estimates this year with what they spent last year, that is the reality and the

Minister of Social Services was caught and he knows he was caught.

Mr. Speaker, I want to be kind to the Minister of Education,

as kind as I can, and you know, comments made by groups, for example the MUN

Extension Group, who talk about the importance of MUN Extension to rural

Newfoundland are only saying what other people in Newfoundland are saying these

days and I am sure the Minister is cognizance of that, he knows that there is a

lot of concern out in the Province for rural Newfoundland and for what appears

to be happening, what is perceived to be happening.

The Minister might not agree that it is happening but

certainly, I do not think you can disagree that that is the perception out

there. MUN Extension talks about cutbacks to rural Newfoundland and the effect

it will have on rural Newfoundland and they talk about the Minister being

relevant twenty or thirty years ago as opposed to being relevant now; well, I -

MR. GRIMES: Who is saying that?

MR. SIMMS: - somebody is saying it, I say to the Member

for Exploits. I am surprised he interjected with something other than his usual

'not so' comment, it is nice to know that he has a different vocabulary.

Somebody is saying it here, several hundred people participated at a

demonstration and protest about MUN Extension and they said, here is the quote:

'Phil Warren says, Extension was relevant twenty or thirty years ago. Friends of

Extension say, so were you, Phil'. Now, all I can say to the Member for

Exploits, is that there are people saying it,

there are people saying it, there are people saying it, -

AN HON. MEMBER: Mostly students.

MR. SIMMS: - but the Premier is trying to suggest -

PREMIER WELLS: I am saying I am looking across at a lot

of irrelevance.

MR. SIMMS: - oh you might be, yes, but not as much as we

are looking at from this side, Mr. Speaker, that is the point, that is the

point. There is a lot more irrelevance over there I can assure the Premier than

there is over here, even if it is simply by sheer numbers. Now, Mr. Speaker, I

was not suggesting that the Minister of Education is irrelevant, I was saying

that others are suggesting that the Minister is not relevant to today's

activities.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, I do.

MR. SIMMS: Then he uses pious words and righteous words

in talking about all the great things they are doing in education; education is

a high priority with this Government -

MS VERGE: More scholar for the dollar.

MR. SIMMS: - but, Mr. Speaker, the evidence, the evidence

is quite the contrary -

MR. GRIMES: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: - the evidence is quite the contrary. Well,

the Member for Exploits says it is not, perhaps he will be brave enough to get

up in the debate or in presenting petition and argue why, debate why, but until

then, I would ask him to let me finish my point.

The point is, all the evidence that is out there with respect

to education and cutbacks in education points to the contrary of what the

Minister of Education is saying. He talked today about community colleges -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. Minister's time is

up.

MR. SIMMS: Well, that is unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, I will

get at it in debate, but I support the petition.

Orders of the Day

MR. BAKER: Order three, Mr. Speaker, Bill 12.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion three.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole on Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole On Supply

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order please!

The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to

have a few additional words in this Motion of Supply. It sounds rather

innocuous, but if your average citizen on the street out there realized we were

talking about a billion dollars I think they would sit up and take notice.

I wanted to continue on from the line of thought that I was

developing there in my address to a petition from the students at the Cabot

Institute, students originally from Green Bay who are now attending that

institute and hope not only that their courses continue, the course of study

that they are into, but that when they do come out they will have something to

do with the education they have obtained - east of Calgary or west of Kuwait,

Mr. Chairman.

When we entered confederation in 1949, one of the great

selling benefits of confederation that Mr. Smallwood used in talking to the

Newfoundland people was that we would get certain modern living standards,

public services, etcetera, that you could see about, I suppose, in picture

books, there was no television at the time, so you could not see what mainstream

North America or Europe was enjoying in terms of modern public services and so

on. But Newfoundlanders did have some idea of what the rest of the world, the

modern world, was involved in, and were certainly enticed because of promises of

these things coming from the Canadian Confederation to actually vote in a

referendum in due course to join Canada.

So therefore, Mr. Chairman, we did join Canada and that

brought with it certain modern living standards, certain modern social programs,

certain aspects of municipal and provincial infrastructure like roads, water and

sewer, that sort of thing that a citizen of a modern western nation could

expect. But unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, because we were sort of dragged into

the twentieth century overnight in 1949, entering Confederation did not bring

with it automatically a highly literate, highly educated population. As a

result, even today, Mr. Chairman, there are experts in the field of literacy who

indicate that our population today is somewhere in the 40 per cent range of

functionally illiterate adults, and that is a truly sad and tragic circumstance.

I am very proud and pleased to say that my wife is a volunteer in this area. She

is president of Teachers on Wheels, which is an organization that provides

reading and writing training to functionally illiterate adults. Mr. Chairman,

the fact that my wife's organization is one of many in this Province including,

I do believe, one that the Premier's wife is involved with, bespeaks the need of

greater education among our people.

Mr. Chairman, while we might have a population that is not as

highly educated as the North America mainstream, most of the communities in my

district have cable TV with a dozen channels and they can see what is going on

around the world, be it Kuwait or be it down town Canada or down town USA, and

they are not a part of that mainstream in many ways.

We have entered, Mr. Chairman, a very high-tech information

age. The third world is going to end up doing the heavy industry. Our world,

especially the North American Continent, is going to have to move into the area

of services, into the area of brain power, into the area of high technology, all

of which require a highly literate, highly educated population. It is

unfortunate, Mr. Chairman, and it is tragic that at this point in our history

that Government would decide to cut back in education. If anything, Government

needs to put a special emphasis on extra expenditures in the area of education,

priorize education.

There is another island, Mr. Speaker, to the north and east

of us which is a small island nation called Iceland. Icelanders are among the

most highly literate and educated people on this planet, Mr. Chairman, and that

is because 100 or more years ago the Government of the day decided that if

Iceland were to ever become anything, given the fact that it had no forests, no

mines, a bit of geothermal power and several million sheep, and that was about

it, they had to develop their brain power to exploit their fish and their sheep

to the best of their advantage because that was all they would have to make it

on, Mr. Chairman, because the Government of Iceland, some hundred or more years

ago, decided to make that a priority of the government and of the society. We

have a small country, half the size of the population of Newfoundland, to the

north and east of us, who are relatively well off in terms of their standing

among the Scandinavian nations, mainly, I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, because

the Government of Iceland, some hundred or more years ago, decided that

education had to be a priority of the Government, of the society, of the people

as a whole.

Here we sit in this Province, in the 20th Century, in the

high-tech age, and we get to sit back and watch it on our cable TV stations, and

we get to stand in this House of Assembly and bemoan the fact that our

children's futures are being endangered, and the future of our society remaining

in the modern world is being endangered because we are cutting back on

education. We are becoming in this Province a third world culture, and that is

unfortunate. Ourselves and the Mexicans right now are probably third world

peoples on a North American continent. The Mexicans, I gather, are entering into

a free trade agreement with the United States with the hope of boosting their

economy. Hopefully, they will boost their education as well, and they will

enable themselves to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, so that most if not

all of North America will enter the high-tech information age.

We, Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, seem to be lagging behind,

and there does not appear to be the will or policy on the part of this

particular Government to catch up what has to be done in terms of educating our

people. We have to do in our lifetime what other societies have taken

generations to do. But I say, Mr. Chairman, we cannot afford not to do it.

Otherwise, we will be in this swamp of third worldism forever and a day. I thank

you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want

to have a few words to say on this Interim Supply Bill. I was hoping the

Minister of Works, Services and Transportation would be here so I could ask him

a few questions on some of his priorities in his Department. We have seen this

Budget brought down which attacks the sick, attacks the young people in the

Province, and attacks social service recipients in this Province, and we see

what the priorities of the Department of Works, Services and Transportation are

when we see that most of the layoffs undertaken in that Department happen to be

security guards, who are probably the ones who can least afford to lose their

jobs, and probably the ones who will be the least able to get another job in

another area. We see a Government putting in electronic security systems in

Government buildings here in St. John's, and supposedly in Labrador West and a

couple of other areas, which is creating jobs in Halifax, Nova Scotia, in that

when an alarm goes off at the Colonial Building here in St. John's because of

some problem with smoke, vandalism, water pipe breakage, or a break in, that is

going to ring in Halifax, Nova Scotia, creating a job for someone in Nova Scotia

who is checking that alarm. They then have to phone back to the few security

guards who are left here in St. John's and report it to them, so that these

security guards can instruct the police or the fire department to go and check

out the problem which was rung in in Halifax, Nova Scotia.

Mr. Chairman, over the last two weeks, I know of three

occasions on which police and security people have turned up at several

buildings - Howley Building was one, and Colonial Building was another, as far

as I know - at great expense to find out they were false alarms. Now had we had

our security people in these areas, had we had even more security people to

check them more often from the outside, we would not have to be creating jobs in

Nova Scotia, we could be looking after these buildings with Newfoundlanders in

the different Newfoundland communities.

But just to emphasize what the priorities of the Department

of Transportation might be, in a week in which was brought down the most

devastating Budget this Province has ever seen, there was a press release which

came out from the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation on March 15.

His priority for that week: The announcement says, `The hon. Dave Gilbert,

Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, is pleased to announce a

contract, project number such-and-such, to construct a new vestibule and install

an elevator in the Howley Building.' Mr. Chairman, they laid off all their

security people over there so they could put an elevator in the Howley Building

and make a new vestibule. Anyone with these types of priorities, there has to be

something wrong.

On the same date there was another press release that came

out from the hon. Dave Gilbert, Minister on contract number 7990, Trans-Canada

Highway, hydroseeding from Deer Lake to Howley. I am sure it is necessary for

this Province to close down hospital beds so that they can do some hydroseeding

on the Trans-Canada Highway at a cost of some $56,200. That certainly could have

kept on the security guards the Department laid off, a couple of them, for

another year.

On the same date another press release came out. `The hon.

David Gilbert, Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, is pleased to

announce' - the day he is closing the hospital beds in Burgeo -`is pleased to

announce a contract for hydroseeding from Red Cliff to Badger, at a cost of

$333,000.' I am sure the Trans-Canada Highway, between Red Cliff and Badger, is

in such desperate need of hydroseeding that we had to close hospital beds in

Burgeo, an operating room in Port aux Basques, a clinic in Come By Chance, and a

hospital in Placentia - just so the Minister of Transportation could put in

hydroseed along the Trans-Canada Highway.

Just these three announcements on March 15 cost this

Government a half million dollars. I wonder what we could do with a half a

million dollars for the nurses who are being laid off in our hospitals. And for

the sick people who are not going to be able to get the hospital services they

so rightfully deserve in this Province. But we are going to spend the money on

hydroseeding. The only hope I have is that the best hydroseeding company in the

country will get the contract, because they happen to be from my district. But

if they were consulted, if they did get the contract, being the compassionate

people they are, I am sure if this half million dollars could go into the health

care system of this Province, that company would gladly give up the contract to

save the half million dollars for the health care system rather than spread seed

on the rocks on the Trans-Canada Highway so that we will get grass for two

years, then yellow weeds for the next 100 years.

I know it is a problem, transferring money from the

Department of Transportation to the Department of Health or Education, but at

least they could have looked at this $500,000 in light of laying off the 100

people they are going to lay off in that Department. The forty-seven people from

the MOS unit, I guess their average wage, the average cost to Government for

these people, might have been $25,000 a year. There are a couple of hundred of

those jobs in that half a million dollars. We could have saved a couple of

hundred jobs at around $25,000 a watchman just by saving the hydroseeding money

that is to be spent on the Trans-Canada Highway. Certainly it looks great,

certainly it is a worthwhile project, but sometime in the future, when we have

enough money to afford it. But not the same day that the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation was shutting down hospital beds in his own district,

in Burgeo; not the same day that the hospital in Placentia was gutted and will

probably be closed for a couple of years before the clinic that is necessary

down there will be put in place.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Gutted is not (inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Gutted, certainly. It is just as bad to

the 1,000 people who were out in that lobby. Had we gone out and announced -I

think they need about $300,000 to keep it going this year, until the new service

is in place. It would have been nice had I had this press release to go out and

read out to the 1,000 people out there that the Minister of Transportation was

going to spend a half million dollars this summer on hydroseeding on the

Trans-Canada and asked those people if they thought that was the priority this

Government should have, when they were out here pleading with the Government,

pleading with the Premier to come out and meet with them, pleading with the

Premier to come and talk to them for a couple of minutes so that they could make

their points.

Now the Premier did meet with a delegation of them yesterday,

as far as I know, and hopefully there will be some changes. It was interesting

to see on television last night the four or five people who happened to be

sitting around the table, certain community leaders of the Placentia area, Mr.

Chairman. Most of the people who were there I met as Minister of Rural

Development, and they are very concerned with what is happening in rural

Newfoundland. And I notice that in all the protests that are happening because

of what this Government is trying to do to resettle rural Newfoundland, most of

the people I see on television making comments on why it is so bad what this

Government is doing happen to be people who were involved at one time with the

Rural Development Movement, and that itself ties into the Extension Service, Mr.

Chairman.

MR. NOEL: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Certainly, Mr. Chairman. The Member for

Pleasantville says no.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. R. AYLWARD: Last night, one out of five was a Rural

Development co-ordinator.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: Take up where he left off, now.

MR. TOBIN: Take up where he left off.

MR. MURPHY: Give us your NDP philosophy (inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: That is why we have him sitting up in

that end of her.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I said it before and I will say

it again, my philosophy on how this Province should be governed is a lot closer

to the philosophy of my friend for St. John's East and the ND Party, than it is

to the philosophy of my friend for St. John's South and the Liberal Party.

Because I do not believe in balancing the books of this Province on the backs of

the sick and the suffering and the poor of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TOBIN: I do not share that view with the Member for

St. John's South. I do not believe that big business and the lawyers, the

multi-millionaires in this Province, the crowd down on Duckworth Street, I do

not believe they should be able to take advantage of every tax loop in the

system, designated by this Government so they can avail of it, when, at the same

time, petitions we are representing in this House show how extensively the poor

of this Province is being taxed. When we hear tell of layoffs and cutbacks, we

do not see too many people affected who are doing business with the Government,

we do not see too many effects on some of these people, who are advising

Government and holding other positions, while we see the poor of this Province

cannot get vision care, while we see people on social assistance not getting an

increase. That is the philosophy I share as a Member of this caucus, and I

believe that is the philosophy my friend for St. John's East shares as a Member

of another caucus.

So, yes, my philosophy on how this Province should be run is

not the same as that of the Member for St. John's South or the Liberal Party,

okay.

MR. MURPHY: Your friends at the Raddison will be glad to

hear you have changed your philosophy.

MR. TOBIN: I never changed my philosophy. Mr. Chairman,

all of my working adult life I have been involved in social work in this

Province and I can assure you that anyone who has dedicated most of his or her

life to that profession, is not a person who has been very cosy with people in

big businesses in this Province. I can tell you that the last Premier of this

Province was a man with a social conscience. He was a man who had a commitment.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who was that?

AN HON. MEMBER: Mr.Rideout?

MR. TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Rideout and Mr. Peckford. The two I

served with had a conscience. This is the first time I have seen a Government

being led by a person who believes in nothing but big business, with no

commitment to health, education or social services of this Province. That is

where I am coming from. That is where I have always come from.

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: And the Member for St. John's South over

there, Mr. Chairman, keeps interrupting every time I try to speak. Where was he

over the last ten years he talks about, when I was Minister of Social Services?

Your were in the corporate boardrooms of FPI, that is where you were, going

around and not even giving a fair wage to half the people in this Province.

MR. MURPHY: No.

MR. TOBIN: Yes. Tell us about your role with FPI.

AN HON. MEMBER: No problem!

MR. TOBIN: That is where you were. You talk about the

poor, and the sick and the suffering, a man who has dedicated his life to the

boardrooms of this Province. Now, Mr. Chairman -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: There is a man who had a social conscience at

one time, Mr. Chairman, until the PCs said farewell to him.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. TOBIN: The Minister of Finance. The PCs said farewell

to him. Frank Moores said to him -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Until Frank Moores put you in your place and

you could no longer function.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: You could no longer function. I know it and

know it well. The Minister of Fisheries was an active Member of the PC Party at

the time. And I know of others. I do not know, Mr. Chairman, but my father was

at the same meeting, which I believe was held in Corner Brook. That was a good

many years ago.

AN HON. MEMBER: Your father made the motion, did he not?

MR. TOBIN: No, he did not. But he would, I can assure you

of that. That is where we are coming from. Now, Mr. Chairman, there are some

statements here, as I look through this Liberal Policy Manual. When one reads

this you would think -

AN HON. MEMBER: They do not read it.

MR. TOBIN: - this was a Government with a social

conscience; when one reads this you would think this was designated and

articulated by a Government with a social conscience. But what has happened to

the Liberal Policy Manual? What has happened to the Liberal Campaign Policy

Manual? There is not one commitment in this that has been honoured by this crowd

opposite. Not one! They got elected by fraud, that is what happened. All of

these Members opposite who went around and preached the self-righteousness of

the Premier, how they were going to create social programs and what they were

going to do for municipalities and what they were going to do - there is one

here I have for the Minister of Development and I would like to get his

attention.

AN HON. MEMBER: Read it up now.

MR. TOBIN: I am sure the Minister of Development will do

me the courtesy of listening to this.

AN HON. MEMBER: Go on, read it.

MR. TOBIN: The process of municipal financing will be

re-examined by a Liberal Government to ensure that smaller communities with

limited commercial tax base receive priority consideration for funding. This is

what I want the Minister of Development to listen to: Crown Corporations and

Agencies would be required to make financial contributions to municipalities

equal to the taxes paid by private corporate sector.

Now having read that, does anybody in this House know what

happened to the grant in lieu of taxes the Marystown Shipyard was paying? Does

the Member for St. John's South know that?

MR. MURPHY: What is that?

MR. TOBIN: What happened to the grant in lieu of taxes

the council was receiving from the Marystown Shipyard? Does the Minister of

Finance know that? You promised during the election campaign to have grants in

lieu of taxes paid by Crown Corporations to the councils, the same as if it was

the private sector. That was an election promise. That is what this Liberal

propaganda machine says.

MR. MURPHY: We are working on it.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, you are working on that. Well, then, if

you are working on it, why did you take away the grant in lieu of taxes which

the Marystown Shipyard has been paying for the last twenty years?

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. TOBIN: Why? Why? That is the question, if you are

working on it. If you are working on it, you are working on it in reverse. And I

am not surprised that the Member for St. John's South is working in reverse,

because he has been in reverse since he came in here. So it does not surprise me

one bit.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: The Minister of Development can tell you, and

I have been told, and I have been told by the Mayor of Marystown, who, by the

way, is a member of the Board of Directors at the Marystown Shipyard, that

Government has instructed the Board to take away the grant in lieu of taxes.

What is the Minister of Municipal Affairs saying about that? What is he going to

say about it? And I will read it again, Mr. Chairman. `Crown Corporations and

Agencies would be required to make financial contributions to municipalities

equal to the taxes paid by the private sector.'

Now that is what they promised. They got elected and what did

they do? They robbed it. They stole the money the Marystown Town Council and the

taxpayers in Marystown were deriving from the Crown Corporation. Yet, you have

the Minister of Development, and you have the Minister of Municipal Affairs in

particular, because under this

section that commitment was made, Municipal

Affairs, and he has stood by and watched the Minister of Development and the

Premier take $35,000 from the Marystown Shipyard through the grant in lieu of

taxes. That is what the Minister of Municipal Affairs has done.

Not a word, Mr. Chairman, from anyone over there. The Member

for Bonavista South who lived in Marystown and enjoyed it for a good many years,

not a word from him when someone in his Government tries to destroy the fabric

of the place where he learned how to practice law - not a word. And I do not

know of a better lawyer to have trained him than my friend, Mr. MacBeath, in

Marystown. It is unfortunate he did not stay at law, because he is a poor

politician; he was a better lawyer than he is a politician. And no doubt, Mr.

Chairman, he will be a better lawyer after the next election, because he will

not be practicing politics.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: No, Mr. Speaker, he will not. Any man who

stands by and sees a Government close down his hospital - I spent last weekend

in Clarenville. My son was down there playing hockey, as a matter of fact. I

will not say it in this House, but I am going to tell the Member for Bonavista

South something I heard about a meeting we had some time ago regarding the

health care system at the Public Accounts Committee. I will not say it here.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We just heard the two

previous speakers, the Member for Kilbride and the Member for Burin - Placentia

West, criticize this particular Government on the basis of their spending

priority. The Member for Kilbride says, how can you be closing hospital beds in

the Province when you are out hydroseeding the Trans-Canada Highway? That is

your priorities. Your priorities are towards big business. You want to close

hospital beds and you want to help big business. Well, Mr. Chairman, before we

evaluate how much credibility we can put in their claims, we have to look at

what their priorities were when they were in power. I just happened to be going

through some press clippings for 1987, and one clipping from the Sunday Express,

dated February 22, 1987, the headline: `Peckford says Province facing financial

crisis. A financial crisis on the order of magnitude of the crisis the Dominion

faced in 1933.' They had documents that showed the financial state of the

Province that would blow your mind. That is how serious the crisis was.

AN HON. MEMBER: He was not ruthless enough.

MR. GOVER: Well, we will get to how ruthless he was. Here

we were facing a financial crisis that was just as serious as the financial

crisis which occurred in 1933. And that was the Budget, let us not forget, in

1987, which imposed a three year freeze on all construction and renovations of

hospitals and nursing homes in the Province.

Now let us see exactly what the freeze was on. In an attempt

to limit overall spending increases, Newfoundland put a three year freeze on

construction and renovations of hospitals, nursing homes and public buildings.

In addition, it froze at current levels its construction of water and sewer

lines, paving and non-shared road construction. So this was a Province that was

facing a financial crisis of the magnitude of the financial crisis we faced in

1933, that had imposed a freeze on the construction of new hospitals and nursing

homes for not one year, not two years, but three years.

So that was the financial situation we were in. What were

their priorities? After that headline appeared in the Sunday Express, in

February, which said we were facing a financial crisis, the headline in the

Sunday Express a month earlier said, `Premier and staff spent $51,000 in sixteen

days, records show.'

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. GOVER: In sixteen days, $51,000. And around the same

time we have another headline: `King Peckford's lavish spending under fire.' So

their priorities while they were freezing hospital and nursing home construction

were not even to hydroseed the Trans-Canada Highway, they did not even want to

spend the money out in the public, no, their priority was to spend the money on

themselves. In 1986, for example, the Premier's private dining room cost $1446 a

week to operate. While they were freezing hospital and nursing home

construction, they were running a private dining room.

AN HON. MEMBER: $1446 a month?

MR. GOVER: No, a week. And while there were going to be

no renovations to hospitals, no renovations to nursing homes, no renovations to

public buildings and freezes on other capital expenditures, recent renovations

to the Premier's suite cost nearly $450,000. Those were their particular

priorities. Now I just got through talking about the $51,000 spent in sixteen

days. What was that spent on? How did $51,000 get racked up in sixteen days?

That amount included a $1000-a-night hotel room, whopping limousine bills - as

much as $1400 a day on limousines - plus a tip of $201 to the limousine driver.

I think my friend for St. John's East would be interested in what his Leader

felt about this spending at that particular time. This is what the Leader of the

NDP, Mr. Fenwick, had to say at that particular time. Now I notice he is getting

to be pretty good friends with the Opposition over there, but this was what his

Leader was saying at that particular time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible), is it not?

MR. GOVER: Well 1987 is not that long ago. Most of those

people over there criticizing us were Members of the Cabinet who approved

expenditures on the Premier's office of $450,000 while they were freezing

hospital and nursing home construction in the Province.

Now let us see what the NDP had to say, because I think they

were on the right sort of line at that particular point in time. Since the new

Leader has come on, perhaps they have fallen away from the correct tack. But at

that particular point in time they were pretty well right on. This is what he

had to say: Peckford and advisors are taking on trappings that belong to, I do

not know, perhaps the lifestyle of Louis XV1, the Sun King.

AN HON. MEMBER: He did not mean that, did he

MR. GOVER: Yes, I think he meant that. I think he did. He

was right about one thing. Just let me read a little further here. He said that

former Premier Peckford was becoming like Louis XV1 and, he went on to say, if

Newfoundlanders are not yet ready to stage a revolution, the French reaction to

Louis' opulent lifestyle, the latest financial disclosures and Peckford's

seeming lack of seriousness in running the Province since last October have set

of another round of speculation as to whether or not he is going to resign. Now

if the Sun King's opulent lifestyle set off the French revolution, well I would

say the former Premier's lifestyle led to the revolution which occurred in

April, 1989. When the people saw a government freeze hospital and nursing home

construction and yet renovate the Premier's office and operate a private dining

room, and -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) the bodyguard?

MR. GOVER: Oh, the bodyguard! Between April 1986 and

September 1987, the Province with one of the lowest per capita crime rates paid

$101,450 for Premier Peckford's personal bodyguard. So that was the priority of

the previous administration when it came to the financial affairs of this

particular Province. They did not even bother to go out and spend money on

hydroseeding. No, they had to spend the money on themselves.

Now I have a highlight here from the 1987 Budget that the

Finance Minister of the day brought down. And what was the objective of the 1987

Budget? The objective was to kick-start our Province out of the deep disparity

which has been a festering blight on our people since 1949. Well, I have to say,

if that was a kick-start budget, she was really slow in getting off the mark. So

that was the kick-start budget. It was such a kick-start that they decided to

kick them out of office in April of 1989, two years later. That is how much of a

kick-start it was. It was a kick-start to their demise.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: It is all right. You only won by eighty.

Don't get too cocky now.

MR. GOVER: They are over there criticizing us, saying you

should borrow more, especially the Member for St. John's East. And I think the

Opposition is along that tack, too, because they are saying do not cut health,

do not cut education, do not do this, do not do that. Well the only answer, if

you are going to -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave! By leave!

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.

Mr. Chairman, I heard it all now. We are in a province where we heard

questions from the Member for Humber Valley the other day concerning doctors

sending patients from Deer Lake to Corner Brook, when the Corner Brook doctors

are saying, do not send them, because we do not have any room for them, and we

have the Member for Bonavista South up justifying hydroseeding the Trans-Canada

Highway. Well, what a silly, silly thing to be doing. Imagine anyone standing up

here today and trying to justify hydroseeding. You know I might say that made a

little bit of sense if you could drive your cows out to it, or let your horses

and sheep roam so they could feed. But you are not even allowed to do that any

more. That hydroseeding on the Trans-Canada Highway, one half million dollars

announced March 15, is a complete waste of money when you are closing hospital

beds. And the Member for Bonavista South just spoke in this debate for ten

minutes and never brought up one concern of his district.

His fisheries is in shambles out there, the health care

system is in a shambles in his district, his education system is in jeopardy,

and he is justifying hydroseeding the Trans-Canada Highway. You should be

ashamed of yourself!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: No, you shouldn't. You should do it on

Friday night, when you come on with the Member for Green Bay. Do it on

television so everyone in the Province can see that you are trying to justify

the hydroseeding of the Trans-Canada Highway when people are sick and suffering

and they cannot find hospital beds - they are closing down 450 hospital beds in

this Province.

I will give you a concern. You will not believe what I say,

because I am an Opposition Member. But while I am at it, I will tell you what

the hon. Member should do now, the hon. Member who represents a rural area, and

all hon. Members here. To see what is happening, get some advice from an expert

on rural Newfoundland. He is here in the gallery today, Mr. Alf Sullivan, a

former mayor of the Goulds and former worker for Rural Development. Get him into

your caucus room for half an hour or so and he will inform you of what you

should be doing in rural Newfoundland.

I have a concern here from people. This is important and I

want to read this letter out. It is a letter to me from the graduating class of

1991 at St. Kevin's High School in the Goulds. It is important to listen to

these young people, the people who are going to be taking over from us in the

next ten years, taking over from all of us in this House of Assembly, all the

businesses, and all the health workers. Here is what they have to say about what

they see for their future.

The graduating class of 1991, St. Kevin's High School, would

like to voice our concerns to the Government about the proposed $1.7 million

cutback in education. This is something which directly affects us and our

future.' Mr. Chairman, when they said us, I include it to mean the whole

province, not only the 117 people who signed this. 'First of all, many

opportunities are being ripped from us, from our grasp. Secretarial Studies at

the Cabot Institute will be cut back, and what about Medical Laboratory

Sciences? If it is taken away from us we will then have to leave our Province in

order to take this course. This is a luxury which we cannot afford. We realize

many of the courses available from the Cabot Institute could be studied at

Memorial University, however the problem is still money. Money is still the

issue. If there is an increase in tuition, many of us will not continue our

education.'

The Minister of Education should be listening to this because

this is what the students of the Province are saying. These are the people who

you are responsible for now and this is how they feel, Mr. Chairman. So if there

is a different message to be put out there you are not getting it out. These

people are concerned, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, they say they will not continue their

education, and their prospects for employment after high school are bleak if we

do not have a post- secondary education. Anyone in the world, and especially

your white knight in shining armour, Doug House, as he said in his report, that

the most important thing to emphasize is education or we will never get out of

the hole that we are in now, Mr. Chairman, if we do not educate our young people

Mr. Chairman, is that what our Government wants for us? The

question to the Minister of Education from the graduating classes of St. Kevin's

in the Goulds is, Mr. Chairman, does the Government want them to go away to be

educated? Does the Government want them to go away to get jobs? Do they want

them to remain uneducated and unemployed? That is what the students in the

Goulds are asking, Mr. Chairman.

There are still student loans available, something which the

Minister of Education touts as the saviour to the education system of

Newfoundland. Here is what the students think; there are still student loans

available, but they are not as easily obtained as one would think. This is due

to the fact that our family incomes are being a requirement on application.

Mr. Chairman, the students in St. Kevin's elementary have not

got the message that the student loan program is going to be the saviour of the

education system in this Province as the Minister of Education says, so I would

suggest that he would get a message to the schools of this Province to tell them

what a great program he has brought in because they do not know about it. They

are missing it, Mr. Chairman. A lot of these students have older brothers and

sisters who are now involved in the post-secondary education system, Mr.

Chairman, and they are getting first hand information as to how great is the

system that the Minister of Education has put in. They cannot afford to go there

now and you are increasing tuition.

Mr. Chairman, the letter goes on to read: 'It is true that

education is the key to employment; however with Newfoundland's unemployment

rate so high, the job of the Government should be improving education.' That is

what the students in the Goulds are saying to him. I know he does not want to

listen to what the students in the Goulds are saying to him, Mr. Chairman, but

he says that your job as Minister of Education should be improving the education

system, not reducing the education system and reducing the opportunities for

these students when they come out of high school next year; 'not destroying

education and our futures.' Those are the words that the students in the Goulds

are saying, not me, Mr. Chairman. I know you will not listen to me because I am

an Opposition Member. Listen to the students that you are responsible to. This

is how they feel. They do not know, they did not get the message; you are not

telling them what you are doing. There is something -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes, you better tell them very shortly,

Mr. Chairman, because they only have two months and they are going to be out.

They only have another two months, Mr. Chairman. 'The Government should not be

destroying education and our future. We are the leaders, the workers and the

voters of tomorrow.' This is the important one, Mr. Chairman. 'We are the voters

of tomorrow. If we are not properly educated, what will become of our Province?'

All these questions are to the Minister of Education and I hope he will answer.

'Isn't it time that our Government took that into consideration?' I agree with

them. I say yes, it is time that you take it into consideration, but you have

not. You have missed the students in the Goulds at least.

'Mr. Aylward, you are our voice in the House of Assembly,'

and proud to be so, I might add, Mr. Chairman. 'You are the one who can express

our deep concerns on this passing educational issue. Our parents voted for you

in the last election,' and I thank every one of them, Mr. Chairman, and I am

sure they will vote much, much heavier in the next one to get rid of this

Government. 'However, in the next general election, it will be the students of

today who will be the constituents, therefore would you please show us your

support on this matter.'

Mr. Chairman, I read this letter into the record of this

House not to show them my support, Mr. Chairman, but to try to beat it into the

head of the Minister of Education that the students of this Province, and the

Goulds high school is only five miles away from the center of Government in this

Province, and if they do not know what is going on, if they do not see the great

improvements in the education system that the Minister touts every time he gets

up, how are people out in rural Newfoundland who are further away from the

center of Government, who are further away from the news center of this Province

and the information centre, how do they know? The people in the Goulds are well

informed and they are close to the center of Government, and if these young

people in the Goulds do not know the great benefits that you are offering them

for education, how can other people around this Province, other students around

this Province, from northern Labrador, from the Port au Port Peninsula or from

the Northern Peninsula, how are they expected to know what great improvements

you are making. The reality of it, Mr. Chairman, is that there are no great

improvements. The reality of it is, Mr. Chairman, that their opportunities are

being limited and cut back. That is the reality. And these students are not

uninformed, they know that their opportunities are being taken away from them

every time this Government brings down a Budget, the opportunities of these

young people who want to get educated are being stolen from their future, Mr.

Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time has elapsed.

The hon. the Member for LaPoile.

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, we have been using statistics a bit to try to

make some points in here over the last number of days. I have a few here that as

naked statistics do not really say much but when you look at what they offer to

those who look at them and dig through them and try to understand just what

those statistics might mean then you can offer to the people a little bit of a

capsule of what has happened over the years.

We are talking this year and, of course, last year by virtue

of the Federal transfer cutbacks and as well with the decrease in revenues as a

result of the economic recession we are in now, the current account deficit on

last year's current account of $117 million.

If we look back through the Peckford years we find a lot of

current account deficit operation. I will note that, I think it was 1982 that

the Peckford Government came into power?

AN HON. MEMBER: 1979.

MR. RAMSAY: It was 1979 when Peckford came in was it?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. RAMSAY: Okay well he had two years of surplus and

then in 1983 a $37 million current account deficit; 1984, $59 million current

account deficit; 1985, $87 million current account deficit; 1986, $44 million

current account deficit; 1987, $27 million current account deficit; 1988, the

year ended 1988, $28 million current account deficit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. RAMSAY: And was there ever a call for a mini-Budget

or anything like that? Did they guess wrong?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. RAMSAY: The current account deficits, and as well of

course the capital account borrowing or deficit was quite high as well in all of

those years.

Now the three years of which we have been responsible for

bringing in the Budget, there is one year where the surplus is listed as $77

million; one year with $792,000 deficit; and of course last year it was $117

million.

If we look at the numbers as far as the current account

deficits go I find in the number of years there are six total Liberal current

account deficit years and seven Progressive Conservative current account deficit

years.

AN HON. MEMBER: In a row.

MR. RAMSAY: Yes, in a row, and also over the whole

period. And look at the number of years that each Government was elected

respectively, and the percentage of years that the PC Governments operated on a

current account deficit as a portion of their years in power, was quite

substantially higher than that of the Liberals. Also, I would like to note that

as far as the increases in expenditures: if you talk about how much increases we

make in expenditures through the years and what this really means. Well, overall

there has only been one year since 1950 that there has not been an increase in

expenditures on the part of the Government from one year to the next. The one

year there was a decrease was the year 1953 when there was a decrease in

expenditures of 13 per cent. I think at that time there was a bit of a row

between Ottawa and the Province over Federal transfers. But if we go down

through we note that through the Liberal years there were substantial increases,

some, of course, due to increases in transfers, and some due to inflation, but

the largest years of increases tend to be certain years. I note that in the year

1970 the increase from the previous year was 3.5 per cent, but in 1971 it jumped

19 per cent, that is the increase from the previous year. Now, take note of

these years. In 1972 - was that not around the time that there was some internal

struggles within the Liberal Party and the PCs, who called themselves PCs but

who were really Liberals at the time, but decided to take the moniker PC and

went on to form the Government. There was an increase of 30 per cent from 1971

to 1972. The next year when there was a large and very substantial increase was

- well for reference let us look at 1974. In 1974 the increase from the previous

year was 9.7 per cent and then all of a sudden in 1975 she jumped 21.57 per

cent. What happened in 1975 I wonder? Let us look at 1979 the first year of the

Peckford administration. In 1978, just prior to that, the increase in

expenditure was 2.57 per cent, a very small increase, but in 1979 the increase

was 16.54 per cent. Remember the years. Now, let us look at 1981, the year prior

to the next election, as I understand, a 4.01 per cent increase, but in 1982 -

remember the year 1982, there was a 14.01 increase, quite a substantial

difference. Let us look at 1985, l.97 per cent.

MR. POWER: A point of order.

MR. RAMSAY: Sure.

MR. POWER: I believe the hon. Member should table that

document that he is reading so completely from.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is his own research, he does not

have to.

MR. CHAIRMAN: I can't quote the specific

section but we

have made rulings on private Members in this House before, that a private member

has neither the right nor the obligation to table any documents.

MR. RAMSAY: If the hon. Member wants a copy of this I can

provide it for him.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Let us note another year. Well, the year prior was 1985 and

the increase in 1985 was 1.97 per cent in expenditures. In 1986 there was a huge

jump, 11.49 per cent. Then we look at the next year, 1988, well, the year ending

1988 it went from 2.5 per cent increase in 1987 up to 9.13 per cent in 1988.

Now, that was what some could possibly determine, some statistics that would

sort of point to election type pork barreling. Election year economics. It is

very interesting to look at this and single out these years of largest

increases.

AN HON. MEMBER: 1985?

MR. RAMSAY: In 1985 it was 1.97 per cent. The promises

were made in 1985 but then in 1986 she went to 11.49 per cent. It was a real

huge increase, post election increases. Now, there is another thing here I

wanted to note, Mr. Chairman. It was noted, I must mention, by my hon. colleague

over here, the hon. Member for Bonavista South, as far as what percentage of our

gross expenditure are we using to service our debt. And over the years this has

grown. There was only one exception in there, and that was the year 1972 where

our debt service cost went down as the natural percentage. Every year from 1950

on it increased, and the first year since that it decreased was 1989. It dropped

from 16.2 per cent down to 15.4 per cent, as a total of gross expenditure. In

1990 it went down again to 14.5 per cent, and in the year ending 1991 it will go

down again to 14.3. So as hard as it is to get this deficit under control, the

overall purpose is to create a lower percentage of your overall budget as the

deficit service costs go.

There is one other point I did want to make and it concerned

the overall current account deficits of the Peckford years versus our years

right now. Now if you look at the totals, the total we are looking at is $117

million deficit in 1991; $792,000 in 1989; and $77.8 million surplus in 1990. So

you are looking at a total, then, of about $20 million to $30 million deficit

since we have been operating. And understanding the fact of the current economic

recession, that is a factor that has to be taken into account.

Now in light of the previous Government's activities and the

period from 1979 on through to 1989, that ten year span, you are looking at a

total of about $150 million current account deficit over that period of time.

Now granted that is a longer period of time, but taking into account inflation

and the actuality that Government expenditures have increased immensely over

that period of time, you are looking at a very severe instance of current

account deficit financing and current account deficit operations of Government,

and also, as I noted, election time economics, as these statistics will point

out. And any hon. Member who wants to have a look at the statistics, I will make

a copy available to them if they want. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am delighted to

take

part in this debate after seeing the Member for LaPoile, who must be trying

to get the Minister of Finance's job. Because he spent the entire ten minutes

quoting some statistics that provide an immeasurable amount of help to the

people of Port aux Basques, who have had their health care system shut down

completely. He failed to even acknowledge that in the ten minutes he was up.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I also want to remind the Member for

LaPoile that some of that debt he referred to came from the construction of the

new hospital in Port aux Basques which his Government has shut down.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WINSOR: And it is time for the Member to acknowledge

it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Chairman, the pattern the Member was

trying to establish loses its logic in 1985, which was an election year. And

then he went on to say well, the expenditure in 1986 was to live up to promises.

That being the case, Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding from the Minister of

Municipal Affairs that things committed one year are not spent until the next,

and that would make sense for 1985. But that does not explain any of the other

years, so there is no logic in the Member's pattern as there is no logic to the

Member.

The Member for Bonavista South referred to the 1987 Budget.

Mr. Chairman, I will have to say that henceforth, when the Member speaks you

will have to give the Member to his right some protection, because he just about

got knocked out on fifteen different occasions; he spent his time ducking the

barrage of blows that was coming that way. I think the Minister of Health must

be educating him into the use of his hands.

Anyway, he makes great mention, or spent most of his time

talking about the 1987 freeze. Now he makes no mention of the 1992 cutbacks.

Because there is a substantial difference, you see, between a freeze, when

things are kept at the level they were, and cutbacks and shutdowns like this

administration has put in place in this Province.

MS. COWAN: (Inaudible) definition every time you get up

on your feet.

MR. WINSOR: Now if the Member wants to take

part in

debate, then she should get over to her own seat. We will then gladly entertain

any discussion from the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, just as the

council in CBS, I am sure, will have a great debate with the Member the next

time she meets with them.

Anyway, the Minister of Education has left his place and it

is too bad. I really wish the Minister had stayed around. Because, you know, of

all the Members on the other side, the one Member whom I thought was going to be

straightforward and honest was the Minister of Education. He has presented

himself to the people of this Province as being a champion of education.

MS. COWAN: He is!

MR. WINSOR: The Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations says he is. Well, I wonder -

MS. COWAN: (Inaudible) one of the finest educators in the

nation (inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: I wonder why the teachers and the students

and the faculty of Memorial University do not think so, and why the people at

MUN Extension, the institution he just left, said Phil Warren was relevant

twenty or thirty years ago. I think that is the degree of the Minister's

relevance today. I do not think he was relevant then. As a matter of fact, the

first time I ever saw the Minister was in 1967, when two small school boards in

our area merged and the Minister came out. It was also a speech night, I think

we used to call it. And I remember my father and mother coming home and saying,

who was that fellow? That was the most boring speech I have ever heard. And we

have not heard much more since he has been here in the House. He has not changed

very much in twenty or thirty years.

But, anyway, the Minister has been very good at trickery in

this last Budget. All of them, in fact. The Minister of Social Services has even

caught it now from the Minister. What they are starting to do when they are

comparing the increases is use the budgeted amounts instead of the revised

amounts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Right.

MR. TOBIN: Sam, tell Wins about when his brother and

myself and you (inaudible) the 1969-1970 (inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Oh, I cannot tell them about that. No, I

cannot tell him about how his brother was involved in the campaign to get rid of

Liberals. That is not the one you are talking about, is it? I think he just got

a job with CBC now, a new job. That is the word we are hearing, that the -

MS. COWAN: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Now the Minister can keep quiet or leave the

Chamber, if she does not want to hear it. The Minister made a fool of herself

yesterday. Does she want to make a fool of herself again? Now, Mr. Chairman,

what the Minister of Education did some time ago was send out a press release

saying that Memorial University was going to get a $5.5 million increase.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who said that?

MR. WINSOR: The Minister of Education. In fact, I will

supply my colleague with a copy of the Minister's press statement if he needs

it, which says we were going to get a $5.5 million increase at Memorial

University. He had the nerve, the audacity to get up in the house and say yes,

but then on Monday he realized the press statement he had written perhaps a

month before, did not apply any more because of the freeze. So he said, okay, we

were going to give $5.5 million, but we really could not. We only gave $1.1

million because of the freeze. We intended to give $5.5 million. And left an

impression out in the community that they were actually giving a $5 million

increase.

AN HON. MEMBER: The day after the Budget.

MR. WINSOR: The day after the Budget. And then the Budget

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) all over.

MR. WINSOR: It is not all over, no. The Minister deceived

the people of this Province, another act of deceit on the part of this

administration. And then the Minister of Finance read from the Budget speech,

Government has budgeted an additional $3.4 million to cover additional

anticipated demands by students at post-secondary institutions.

Look at the estimates and we find that is not the case. We

find that is not the case, that he did not budget $3.4 million, it was just a

little over a million dollars. And what the Minister was using was the budgeted

figures instead of the revised figures, which are the accurate ones. Now, if we

are to use that analogy, that we are going to use the budgeted figures, then we

did not have a deficit in this Province last year. There was no deficit. Because

we only have to use the budgeted figures, not the revised ones. Now sometimes

they apply and sometimes they don not. If you want to let the labour unions

think we have terrible fiscal problems, you use the revised figures. If you want

to bolster your image in the polls with the people of the Province, you use the

budgeted amounts. Now you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You are either

going to have the revised figures or the budgeted figures. Now let's stick with

them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS. COWAN: You should be working for Merrill Lynch,

(inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: You should have been working for the teachers

of this Province instead of betraying them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WINSOR: You will go down in history as the biggest

traitor to the teachers of this Province. Now the Minister should keep quite, or

I will tell even more of what the teachers are saying about her.

MR. SIMMS: Open mouth, insert foot.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WINSOR: I voted for her? No, not ever. As a matter of

fact, one of the worst times the NTA was ever managed was during her reign. Now,

I want to get back to the -

MR. SIMMS: It was under his reign over there.

MR. WINSOR: Let me tell you how he spent most of his

time. The year before, the defeated Liberal candidate in Terra Nova was the

President of the NTA - I will not mention any names.

AN HON. MEMBER: Goulding.

MR. WINSOR: Goulding. Okay. You said it, so I will have

to say it, too. And there was a real confrontation with Government, a real

confrontation. Except for the hostilities that are there now, perhaps the worst

time in fifteen years, since, perhaps, 1970 I think, when teachers were

legislated back by Dr. Rowe. I think it might even go back that far, 1970-71.

Anyway, the Member for Exploits spent two years knocking on the Minister of

Education's door, seeing if he could get him to take him out to lunch because he

was trying to patch up the relationship. He came to branch meetings and told how

he was patching up the differences, how the Ministers were taking him out to

lunch and wining and dining him, and how good it was.

MR. SIMMS: Loyola.

MR. WINSOR: I cannot say who the Minister of Education

was, but I know there are prints left in the door where the Member for Exploits

knocked on the door so many times trying to get into the Minister's office to

see if he could patch up the relationship.

MR. HEARN: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: What did the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes just say?

MR. SIMMS: He said there were no problems when he was

there.

MR. WINSOR: There were no problems when he was there, but

there were problems shortly after. Because I think the last president, who is

now the Member for Conception Bay South, I think she set us on a path of

destruction in education, and then the present Minister of Education -

MR. HEARN: (Inaudible) her away so that they could get

the contract (inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Yes. In fact I think they did send her away,

and a contract was negotiated with the president out of the Province, I seem to

recall.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: I do not know. Well it depends, if it was the

suite he was sleeping in in Moncton. Is that the one you are talking about, the

$298 a night suite? Is that the one?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: You were the one who brought it up. I did not

bring it up, you did.

MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: You brought it up, not me.

MR. SIMMS: A point of order, Mr. Chairman. The Member for

St. John's South is not even in his seat.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

I have not recognized the hon. Member.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SIMMS: He is not even in his seat, Mr. Chairman. He

should not be interjecting like that from somebody else's seat.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Government House Leader on a

point of order.

MR. BAKER: To the point of order raised by the Opposition

House Leader. The Opposition House Leader well knows that his interjection is

meaningless, that there is no rule anywhere, in any parliament that I know of,

or any decision by Speakers or anything else, that indicates that a person

cannot sit in some other persons chair. The only rule is that a person cannot be

recognized to formally speak unless that person is in his or her own place. So

the statement made by the Opposition House Leader is not only meaningless, it

probably tends to prolong a false impression that seems to be around here, and

that false impression is that interjections are legal, are proper in the House.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, the rules are silent and do not accept the

fact that interjections are proper, and interjections can be made from anywhere.

It does not matter what seat they are sitting in. I think the Opposition House

Leader is thoroughly confused in his point. So, Mr. Chairman, I would like a

ruling on that.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The rules are very clear in that it is

unparliamentary for any Member, whether he is in his own seat or anybody else's

seat, to interject and interrupt another Member from speaking.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

AN HON. MEMBER: His time is up.

MR. WINSOR: Is it?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Time up, yes.

The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

No, no there is going to be no trickery this morning and not

even any intention of doing it because I have to bring a little bit of

information to the House of Assembly that -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: I just had the opportunity, Mr. Chairman, of

speaking to approximately forty-five students from my District, from Ascension

Collegiate in Bay Roberts. If you listen to the Opposition Members, and if you

listen to the criticism that is thrown back and forth across the House of

Assembly, you would swear that everybody in the Province is totally