December

8, 1993

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 31

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

Oral Questions

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries. I am sure by

now the minister has familarized himself with the Cashin Task Force Report,

Charting a New Course . One of the major concerns expressed in the report by

Mr. Cashin is the need to deal with processing capacity reduction and

consolidation. The report recommends the establishment of fishing industry

renewal boards. It recommends two, actually, one for the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador because of the magnitude of the crisis in the fishery

here and one for the Maritimes and Quebec. I am wondering if the minister

supports the establishment of such boards, which will operate at arm's length

from both levels of government to implement processing capacity reduction and

consolidation? Does the minister support that recommendation?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I had a long meeting this

morning with Mr. Cashin and my colleague, the Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations, and others, and we talked about various recommendations in his

report, not the least of which, of course, was the recommendation dealing with

the setting up of a fisheries renewal board. I am not able at this time to

commit the government to supporting it, or not supporting it. I can only tell

you, that having discussed the matter with Mr. Cashin this morning, the board

appears to be a reasonably good idea. While I am unable and unwilling at this

time to commit the government to its support, I can only say it is somewhat

along the lines the Province has been suggesting, joint management, although

they view the renewal board maybe in a much shorter term. They view the renewal

board as something that would cease to function, maybe, after the fishery

reopened. It has a lot of merit and we will be looking at it, Mr. Speaker, and,

at some point in time, making a decision on it.

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

House Leader.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The report, as well, suggests that a

joint strategy be developed between the provincial and federal governments, to

develop policies and criteria, to determine the processing capacity reduction,

so I guess what I want to ask the minister is, will the Province be

participating in a joint strategy to develop policies and criteria to implement

processing capacity reduction? Will they be participating in that process?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, the whole matter of reducing

capacity, both in the harvesting and in the processing sector, is something that

has very much concerned the Province, and we will be working with the federal

government seeking ways and means of reducing capacity in both sectors. We all

recognize the need for, in fact, a drastic reduction in capacity in both areas,

and the Province will be doing all it can to achieve that objective. As to how

we do it, is another matter, Mr. Speaker, and that is something that will be the

subject of, I am sure, a lot of discussion between ourselves and the federal

government in the future; but again, that was discussed this morning at length

and I think Mr. Cashin knows where the Province stands in that regard.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A supplementary to the minister.

The minister has said, on a number of occasions in the past,

that in dealing with processing capacity capability or overcapacity, the market

forces should dictate, and I want to say to the minister, I am sure he is aware

that Mr. Cashin says, to allow the market forces to dictate and to decide, would

really be an ad hoc approach to the overcapacity situation; he said it would be

naive, and he goes on to say, `A planned and early approach to capacity

reduction also will permit introducing other significant adjustment policies for

the affected people in communities. Any meaningful adjustment in terms of

capacity reduction and related measures demands full co-operation of both levels

of government.' So, I detect from the minister, that he sort of changed his mind

and his position on capacity reduction. Is he now saying that he is going to

move away from the ad hoc, let the market forces decide the approach to a

planned, orderly, processing capacity reduction? Is that what he is saying

today?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, if that is the

interpretation

that the hon. gentleman has put on my answer, certainly, it was not intended. I

think the Province is still of the opinion and will continue to be, that market

forces should dictate, and I say to the hon. gentleman as I said to Mr. Cashin

this morning: Were it not for the fact that in so-called downsizing or

consolidation or whatever you want to call it, there will be thousands of people

affected. If it were simply a matter, Mr. Speaker, of closing a plant or lifting

a licence or a number of licences, without having to worry about the fallout in

terms of the people who will be affected, it would be a relatively simple

matter. But to talk about closing plants, you have to recognize the problems

that will result with respect to the many thousands of people who were employed

in those plants, and therein, of course, the federal government must accept

responsibility, or certainly, a major part of that responsibility.

Another matter, Mr. Speaker, I hear commentators, politicians

and others, in some sense, maybe criticizing the government for not trying to

play the part of God, sitting down in an office somewhere and determining what

plants will remain open. The fact of the matter is, that all groundfish plants,

at this point in time, are closed. And we have no idea - I don't think there is

a man on this planet who can say, with any certainty, precisely when those

plants will reopen. So we can talk all we like about downsizing and about

selecting plants that will or will not operate in the future. The fact of the

matter is, that all of the plants right now are closed, just about, except those

that are involved in other fisheries. So it just would not make any sense unless

and until we have some idea, for example, as to the extent to which the cod

stocks will rebuild and what the TAC will be at a given time and that is almost

impossible to determine. It is difficult for us to say what plants will be open

in the year 2000 or in the year 1997. So it is not as simple, Mr. Speaker, as

the hon. gentleman would have you believe it is.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Now, Mr. Speaker, it is not a simple

matter, I say to the minister, but unless someone makes decisions - because

everyone that is out there now with the fish plants closed are living in hope

that someday they are going to be rehired or work at the fish plants. So really

we are creating false hope for a lot of those people. How do you expect them to

plan the rest of their lives if they don't know what government's decisions are

on capacity reduction? But, really, Mr. Speaker, that is just part of the

problem. I say to the minister. Doesn't the minister agree that with his

approach of letting the market forces dictate, we can have full regions of this

Province without any processing kit capacity or capability? That is the real

danger, and Mr. Cashin addresses that in his report, because he calls for

regional processing presence. So the real danger in the minister's approach is

that we can have regions of this Province completely eliminated, all the plants

will be closed forever and there will not be any processing capability. Isn't

the minister concerned about that and doesn't he believe that every region of

this Province should have a processing presence?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, of course, I am concerned about

it and I worry about it. I agree that maybe that type of thing could very well

happen. Again, Mr. Speaker, it begs the question: Just to what extent should the

government intervene in terms of determining which plants will remain open and

which plants will be closed? Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that, even

as I speak today, there are a large number of plants still operating in this

Province, not processing groundfish, but processing crab and other species. I

might say that it is ironic in the sense that while the groundfish fishery has

literally gone down for the third time, there are plants in Newfoundland this

year that will have record earnings, strange as that might sound, in terms of

crab and caplin. These plants I hope will continue to operate. Until the codfish

rebuilds to the point where we can have a reasonable total allowable catch there

is not much we can do about it.

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

Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

direct my question to the Minister of Environment and Lands. Over the past

several months this government has been spending taxpayers money studying a

Newfoundland Power proposal to store PCBs at Chance Cove, even though I

understand the Premier indicated to the MHA for Bellevue that the proposal would

be rejected by Cabinet if area residents oppose it, which they most certainly

have done, notably in a petition to the House of Assembly. Why is the government

continuing to spend taxpayers money studying a proposal that the Premier says

will be rejected by Cabinet even if it passes the assessment process?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, thank you. I'm just trying to get

this straight in my mind. It has been a while since I thought about it. The PCB

issue, storage in the Come By Chance area, is being re-examined. I have been

meeting with some people from Hydro and talking to them about the possibilities

of finding another spot to store those PCBs. I keep in touch with the Member for

Bellevue on that particular situation. It is more or less on hold for the moment

till we see if there is some other way we can go about approaching this issue.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

redirect my supplementary question to the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation. It was reported in Tuesday's Evening Telegram that the

City of St. John's has received verbal permission from the Department of Works,

Services and Transportation to store PCBs at the Torbay Airport, according to a

memo signed by the City's Director of Engineering. Will the minister confirm

that the verbal permission has been granted by his department to store PCBs at

Torbay Airport?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: No, Mr. Speaker, it is not at Torbay Airport.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East Extern.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Minister, for that lengthy

answer. I would like to direct my supplementary to the Minister of Environment

and Lands. According to the same newspaper story the City has plans to store two

tractor trailer size compartments of PCBs at Blackmarsh Road Municipal Depot

until next summer, but changed their minds because of public opposition to

additional PCB storage at the Blackmarsh Road site.

Does the minister not think that people who live and work

around the Torbay Airport might also have some concerns about PCB storage in the

area? And why has she not subjected this proposal to an environmental review

process, or for that matter even told people that PCB's would be stored in the

airport? Is the minister trying to hide something from the people in the area?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Environment and

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to my

hon. critic.

I saw that in the newspaper as well, and I am always rather

loath to leap to conclusions when I read something in the newspaper. Actually, I

put a little message into my computer this morning to have follow-up to that so

that I will have some of my officials tell me exactly what the position is at

this particular time, so I will be able to let you know that. As soon as I get

the information I will certainly pass it along to you.

I think that we have to be extremely concerned about the

public attitude toward PCB's, and we must do everything we can not to raise

unnecessary concern about the storage of PCB's.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS. COWAN: We have sixty-six PCB storage sites in this

Province. We have never had an accident at one of them. We have to do something

with them until the time comes that we have a facility somewhere in the Atlantic

Provinces to get rid of them in a safe way.

It is always controversial, but I think we have to be very,

very careful that we do not unduly alarm the public because, in fact, as I said,

they can be stored very safely.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for

the Minister of Mines and Energy.

The previous government in this Province - and indeed in the

beginning of the first term of this government they indicated they would prefer

a GBS for the Terra Nova field. It is my understanding that Petro Canada and

government have had some discussions in this regard.

Can the minister tell the House today if government is still

insisting on the GBS for Terra Nova which would, like the Hibernia project,

create jobs in the construction mode of it for Newfoundlanders?

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

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, we have not taken any position

at this time as to what the mode of development should be. Right now, as I stand

in this House, we do not have a development plan before us from the consortium

for Terra Nova, and we are not prepared to make a decision on mode of

development until we see the details in that plan and see what the field can

support.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister that for

five years he sat as Minister of Mines and Energy, and as part of the government

in this Province, and for some time we have heard that Terra Nova field may even

be on stream before the Hibernia field, but I find it strange that the minister

has taken no position on the mode of development. Let me ask the minister then,

Mr. Speaker, if he is satisfied, or is he going to insist that Petro Canada

drill additional oil wells on the Terra Nova field or does he feel that he

already has enough information regarding the amount of oil that is out there to

make a decision?

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

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, it is up to the offshore board

to take a position as to whether or not they want another well drilled. One of

the licenses on the Terra Nova field has not been drilled, the license that is

called the Far East Block. It would certainly help us all if that one were

drilled because it would prove whether there is less petroleum or more petroleum

in that block than has been estimated based on seismic and geology. I would

certainly like to see that well drilled but at this time nobody has given

direction to the company to do so.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the Member for Burin

- Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I wonder why Petro Canada has not

drilled, I say to the minister, and I am sure that he is wondering for the same

reason. Let me say to the minister that with the experience that has been gained

by the workforce in this Province, particularly at Bull Arm, Marystown, and

other places relating to the construction of the GBS, would the minister know if

Petro Canada at this point in time, in the past or in the present, are looking

at a floating platform that is presently in the North Sea for the Terra Nova

field?

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

DR. GIBBONS: Representatives of Petro Canada have stated

for some years that they believe the Terra Nova field is not large enough to

justify a gravity base. In a presentation by one of their vice-presidents about

two and a half years ago they talked about a ship shape floater. In discussions

we have had with them they have said they assessed a ship shape floater and

concrete floaters, as well as assessments of the gravity base. From where we

stand we would like to see a system used that is going to maximize employment to

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, so we would love to see this field

confirmed as being large enough to justify a gravity base, but if it is not

confirmed as large enough to economically justify a gravity base, then another

option has to be looked at.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

DR. GIBBONS: Well, this is one of the things we have

said, I tell the hon. member, and I stated it publicly some time ago when Mr.

Stanford, the President of Petro Canada, was in St. John's giving a speech, that

I personally would like to see the Far East Block drilled. I would feel a lot

more comfortable with the quantity of petroleum that is in the field but nobody

has given any directions to them at this stage. As to the final point he made,

that he is aware of a floating system that is available in the North Sea that

they are looking at, I am not aware of that. I do not know if that is the case.

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

MS. VERGE: I have a question for the Minister of

Education who yesterday afternoon relieved his colleague the Minister of Tourism

and Culture of responsibility for public libraries. Over the past year the

government worsened a previously inadequate public library service in the

Province. Public libraries were opened for fewer days and shorter hours. Public

libraries did without new books for most of the year. In Corner Brook library

patrons and staff are calling 1993 the year without books. What will people call

1994? What is in store for public libraries in Newfoundland and Labrador in the

new year?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member knows, the

jurisdiction for the library board has been put over to the Department of

Education and the Department of Education welcomes the library boards with open

arms and we look forward to a long- lasting and favourable relationship over the

next number of years. My message to all patrons of libraries is to look forward

to good things in 1994.

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

Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have another

question for the Minister of Education. In announcing his new responsibility for

public libraries yesterday afternoon the minister referred to the report of the

Review Committee on the Public Libraries Board, chaired by Phillip Saunders,

completed and given to the government months ago. Why has the government not

made public that report and will the minister table the report in the House of

Assembly this afternoon?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I really can't tell the hon.

member why the report was not made public. I will have that matter checked out.

If I can't table it this afternoon I'm sure that some time in the future I will

table that report, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A cover up, I say to

the Minister of Education, another cover up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS. VERGE: A question for the Minister of Tourism and

Culture. What plans are there and what timetable to implement the government's

stated intention of divesting itself of Arts and Culture Centres and phasing out

completely provincial operating funding within three years? Does this intention

apply to the St. John's Arts and Culture Centre or just the Centres outside the

overpass?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism and

Culture.

MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, once again the member tends to

lead off with statements that are incorrect and looking to put a spin on

something that at this point in time is not even a reality.

There is no determination in terms of the amount of time or

whether funding will be over three years, five years or twenty years. There has

been no determination with respect to that. As for the devolution of the Arts

and Culture Centres, that process has begun and we are at this point in time

holding discussions with a number of councils and community-based organizations

throughout the Province, following through on plan number 71, I think, in the

Strategic Economic Plan.

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

MR. CAREEN: My question is for the Minister of Tourism

and Culture. While the decision was made months ago, sir, it was made while the

House was closed, the Labour Day weekend announcement to see a number of parks

around the Island opened on an experimental basis, and Fitzgerald Park, which

accommodates people going and coming on the ferry at Argentia, the M. V.

Joseph and Clara Smallwood , passengers were travelling in and scheduled

until the end of October. Could you tell me sir how your department made the

decision to leave Fitzgerald Park closed and leave other parks, on an

experimental basis, open?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism and

Culture.

MR. WALSH: It is a very simple decision, Mr. Speaker.

MR. TOBIN: It would have to be simple for you to make it!

MR. WALSH: No, but it would have to be very simple for

you to understand.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: After doing the verbal I will send over the

baby talk explanation so you will know what I said. To get back to the question

at hand, the answer is very simple. What we looked at over the last number of

years was where we saw the most traffic, not necessarily for those who were

travelling. What we find in the fall is that the majority of our tourists

travelling are coming on buses and motor coaches and there are not that many who

are using travel trailers to travel back and forth across the Province.

One of the main reasons for leaving the parks open for that

extended period during the fall, a minute reason, was to do it for the people

coming in from outside the Province. The main reason was to take advantage of

the parks in strategic areas across the Trans-Canada Highway where our own

people in Newfoundland tend to travel and want to use their trailers into the

fall. In actual fact we went one step further in keeping, I think, some five

parks open. What we also did was we kept open most if not all of the historic

sites. Again, that was done specifically to take advantage of and for the motor

coaches who were coming through Newfoundland during the fall. I think that

helped accommodate some one hundred motor coaches which were coming through. So

it was all part of that same plan.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Placentia.

MR. CAREEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Minister, that answer

is clearly not good enough. Fitzgerald Park is in the shadow of Argentia, there

only a few miles apart. Making a decision to close that park while leaving

others open - it is on the route to and fro. It could have been left open.

Obviously the Liberal Party has become the `meet loaf' party, because

occasionally they meet, and the rest of the time they loaf.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CAREEN: And another thing, in an agreement that was

signed three years ago $1.2 million was allotted for Fitzgerald Park, to date

some $90,000 has been spent on it. The first year the provincial government

wanted to do more engineering work on it, the following year they wanted to do

more consultative work on it and to date $90,000 has been spent on Fitzgerald

Park. Now I realize the District of Placentia is being punished. A majority, a

small majority if you like, put me in there and they cannot go on, sir, being

punished. They cannot go on being punished. I am asking, sir, when will you

please put your department up front where it should be to do something about

Fitzgerald Park?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Tourism and Culture.

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are looking real

hard at dealing with that in the near future. Hopefully before or right after

the by-election but we will certainly deal with it in the future. Now let me

say, Mr. Speaker, if you know how to throw it, learn how to take it. I will tell

you that anyone on this side will sit down any day of the week to a meal of meat

loaf but will never eat cucumbers again. Also, Mr. Speaker, I think it is only

fair to remind the member that he didn't get elected by the majority of the

people, he happened to be first past the post. The majority did not elect you,

just so you know that as well.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WALSH: Well he didn't get the majority of votes. The

majority of people who are eligible to elect - first past the post did not mean

a majority. After another five years you will learn that one too.

In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, to deal with the question

concerning the parks once again. When we looked at what parks we should keep

open - the parks that were kept open were designed not for people who are

travelling on the ferries back and forth. That was not the intention. The fall

people that we get in Newfoundland are motor coach. They are not travel

trailers, campers or tent people. It is not the greatest time in Newfoundland to

be sleeping in tents, in the middle of October or late September. The parks were

kept open to accommodate Newfoundlanders who wanted to enjoy fall, fall camping

and fall travel. That is what it was kept open for. None of the parks were kept

open to meet the needs of the tourists who were travelling on the ferries,

either through Argentia or Port aux Basques back to North Sydney. That is not

what they were kept open for.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member

for Placentia.

MR. CAREEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Minister, the

question has not been answered, what are you planning on doing about Fitzgerald

Park? Don't tell me that Newfoundlanders, after Labour Day weekend, do not

travel on the Joseph and Clara Smallwood. Hold it, sir - now just what are your

plans for Fitzgerald Park?

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism and

Culture.

MR. WALSH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Our intention is to

leave the park closed for this winter and we will review it next summer.

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

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation. I would like the minister to tell the House,

if he would, exactly where we are now in the winter

schedule for snow clearing

and ice-control on the Province's highways. Are we now on full winter alert? Are

the standby crews fully in service now?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, Mr. speaker, we are on full winter

operations.

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

Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. speaker, if I were to tell the minister

that a number of people have complained to me, and I have also observed myself

over the past couple of weeks, several instances when the Province's highways,

particularly in the Avalon Peninsula area, were extremely hazardous. Indeed,

about a week or so ago there were six vehicles in the ditch between Butter Pot

Park and St. John's. Can the minister tell us why, by 8:30 a.m. or 9:00 a.m.

that the highway still hadn't had any attention by his crews?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I don't know where the hon. member is getting his information

on the condition of the highway. I drive over that highway every morning at

5:30. I came in over the highway that morning at the same time that those cars

were supposed to be off the road and I didn't have any problem - the road wasn't

that slippery. Sometimes the trouble is the cause of the people driving the

vehicles.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I would like to assure the hon.

member that I drive over that road every morning, as well. I drove over it the

night before.

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

Question Period has elapsed.

MR. WINDSOR: Ah, but we were just starting to have fun,

Mr. Speaker!

MR. SPEAKER: I should point out to the hon. member, I

don't make the rules, I merely provide for them.

On behalf of hon. members, I would like to welcome to the

gallery, Mr. David Hiscock, the Town Clerk of Bonavista.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the Member for St. John's East

Extern gave me a piece of paper some time ago with some names on it from the

university. I have had this matter checked out and I have been advised that the

university has conducted a preliminary investigation into the allegations. The

investigation has involved interviews with all the individuals who would have

legitimate access to the information which the hon. member brought forward, and

as a result of the preliminary investigation, the university is not prepared to

accept the assertion that an individual from outside the institution could just

walk in and have access to the information. Unfortunately, neither the identity

of the individual nor the exact circumstances of the alleged incident have been

conveyed to the university, and no one, including the complainant or the MHA,

has brought the matter directly to our attention.

In the absence of this information, it is very difficult to

proceed beyond the preliminary investigation, which has shown no improper

activities on the part of any university employee. Without more specific details

provided by the complainant, the university is unable to contemplate corrective

action. As to the assertion that the confidential student information is in the

public domain, there is no evidence to show that anyone, other than the

complainant and Mr. Byrne, has this information.

The university is confident in its policy and procedures -

MR. TOBIN: That is a cover-up.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is shocking!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the minister.

MR. DECKER: The university is confident in its policy and

procedures regarding the private and restricted student information. In general,

the policy is that the university will not release to outside agencies or

individuals, information about a student. University employees with access to

this information system are required to sign a confidentiality statement. Any

breach of these procedures would result in disciplinary action, Mr. Speaker.

Petitions

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to present a petition of several citizens of the

Province, mostly residents of St. John's and Mount Pearl.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, the prayer of the petition is:

`We, the undersigned citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador, object to the

government's recent action in appointing all men and no women as adjudicators

for the Police Public Complaints Commission, and we petition the House of

Assembly to take corrective action to ensure that the panel of adjudicators has

an equal number of women and men.'

I heartily support this petition and have signed it. Mr.

Speaker, women and men in the Province were offended to hear that the Minister

of Justice, after having being shamed into admitting that the government made a

mistake in appointing all men and no women to the panel of adjudicators for the

Police Public Complaints Commission, is now sponsoring a bill to change the

composition of the panel from six to nine and is stating his intention to keep

all six of the men previously appointed and add, perhaps, three women.

Mr. Speaker, people can see that there are dozens of

qualified, eligible women in the Province, women who are lawyers, women who are

other professionals, women from a variety of backgrounds, women who are

suitable, and willing to serve on the panel of adjudicators for the Police

Commission.

Mr. Speaker, women's groups have been promised by the Premier

that the government, in making discretionary Cabinet appointments, will

alternate between men and women until the percentage of women reaches 50 per

cent. He has not only stated that orally, but he has put it in writing.

He wrote the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of

Women, after he was Premier for a year, and said, quote - this is a direct quote

from a letter written and signed by the Premier - "I assure you, it is

government's policy to appoint, where possible, women to alternate discretionary

appointments until their representation is at least 50 per cent."

Mr. Speaker, it is perfectly possible for the government to

appoint 50 per cent of the panel of adjudicators for the Police Public

Complaints Commission who are women - perfectly possible. Instead, the

government is proposing to appoint a maximum of one-third women. Mr. Speaker,

this is insulting to women, and women are not going to put up with it. This is

The Premier, unfortunately, is absent today, although for

good reason. The Minister of Justice is absent today. I expect the minister

responsible for the Human Rights Commission and the Human Rights Code, the

Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, to speak to this petition. I expect

him to indicate that he will work with his colleagues in the Cabinet to revise

the bill before the House of Assembly, as recommended by the all-party

Legislation Review Committee, to allow the Cabinet to appoint an unspecified

number to the panel of adjudicators, and then, that he will work with his

Cabinet colleagues to see that there is gender equity - in other words, half

women and half men - as well as balanced representation by geography.

This won't cost the government any more money, and if members

are appointed from each geographic area of the Province, it should save the

government money. As it stands now, there are six men, five who reside in St.

John's, one in Corner Brook. There is no member from Labrador West, which is

policed by the Constabulary and, as I said, only one from Corner Brook. Unless

the number is enlarged so that it is possible to have people from each region of

the Province, unless the number is enlarged to ensure 50\50 women and men,

people will not be satisfied.

These petitioners are calling on the government, and I join

the petitioners, in urging Members of the House of Assembly to take corrective

action to ensure that the panel of adjudicators has an equal number of women and

men. I will wait now for the minister responsible for the Human Rights

Commission to respond.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise in support of the petition.

MR. EFFORD: I wonder why.

MR. HARRIS: The reason I rise in support of the petition,

Mr. Speaker, is because it needs support from this side of the House. It doesn't

appear to get very much support from that side -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I can't hear the hon. member.

MR. HARRIS: - including any members of the Cabinet who

apparently sat around the table when this decision was being made and didn't

recognize that what was being done here was totally contrary to the government's

stated policy of making it clear that in boards and commissions that are

appointed by the discretion of the government, there should be an equal number

of men and women. The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation was one of

those people who was sitting around the table when this decision was made to

appoint only men to a board looking into the activity and the questioned actions

of police officers.

It needs support, Mr. Speaker. It needs the support of the

hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. It certainly needs the

support of the Minister of Environment and Lands, who is responsible for the

Status of Women. I am not sure it gets that support or attention, so we have to,

only on this side, present petitions and make clear the position that the

government has taken - at least given lip service to - in a letter to the

Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, but seems to ignore in

practice.

I see the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, also a

member who from time to time mouths platitudes about equality of women, but when

the chips are down, when the time comes for an appointment, is not able to say:

Hold it there, `Clyde', just hang on a minute, `Ed', we have a responsibility

here to ensure that we are appointing an equal number of women and men.

The Minister of Employment and Labour Relations is another

individual in that government who is supposed to be attuned to the Human Rights

Commission needs. He is the minister responsible for that body. They have a

mandate to ensure that the equality of men and women and non-discrimination - I

would go so far as to say that the appointment of the six men was

an act of

discrimination contrary to the Human Rights Act, that it was contrary to the

Human Rights Act to do that in the circumstance where an existing policy exists,

so that by appointing only men they have discriminated against women. And they

aren't even going to fix it up. They are given an opportunity to fix it up, Mr.

Speaker, by what I would have to call a friendly amendment. I know that the

chairman of the committee, the Member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir, would regard

the amendments proposed by the committee as friendly amendments. It is a

friendly amendment to the Minister of Justice, a suggestion that instead of only

going from six to nine they can go from six to an unlimited number.

What is the purpose of that? I say to the Minister of

Forestry and Agriculture, the purpose of going to an unlimited number is to

allow the government to follow its own policy. So, if they have six men

appointed and they don't want to un-appoint them, and they want to follow their

own policy, stated on paper, to appoint equal numbers of men and women to

bodies, they will have the ability under the legislation to do that.

I would regard the unanimous proposal - there were no

dissenting voices - of the Social Legislation Review Committee as a friendly

amendment. I see the Member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir agrees with me - a

friendly amendment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HARRIS: Oh, he is shaking his head. Perhaps he is

going to speak now when we finish and tell us why he doesn't regard it as a

friendly amendment. I think it was a friendly amendment. It was to allow the

government, I say to the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, to

follow its own policy. I would expect that the Ministry, all those members of

the Cabinet who have had the benefit of our discussions in the House about this,

will now be able to recognize that this is a friendly amendment and convince the

Minister of Justice to accept that to change the number from nine to an

unlimited number would allow the government to follow its policy and not

continue to further embarrass itself in discriminating against women in this

fashion.

I support the petition, Mr. Speaker. It is a very fine

petition and it represents the full measure of government policy. I see the

Minister responsible for the Status of Women on her feet - perhaps she wants to

speak, so I will sit down and allow how her to speak in response to this

petition. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member was speaking I

saw that he had his hands in his pockets. It is nice to see a lawyer with his

hands in his own pockets for a change.

I thank the hon. the Member for Humber East for the petition.

We heard her comments and those of the Member for St. John's East. We will

certainly bring this petition to the attention of the Minister of Justice, who

is in Labrador on Her Majesty's business today. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: Today being Private Members' Day, the motion

to be debated is Motion 4.

The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes - Motion 4.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, I rise and put forward a private member's resolution:

"WHEREAS the five-year federal-provincial Rural Co-operation

Agreement expires on March 31, 1994;

AND

WHEREAS funding under this agreement supports, among

other programs, rural development associations, co-operatives and local

development organizations to plan and implement economic development programs in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this House of Assembly supports

the negotiation of a new Rural Co-operations Agreement that will continue to

fund Rural Development Associations."

I am pleased, Mr. Speaker, to be given the opportunity to

speak and to present this resolution to this hon. House on behalf of the

thousands of Newfoundlanders who have given years and years of hard work and

commitment to the survival and development of rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Let us begin by reviewing the history of development

associations and their impact on this Province. Development associations have

been around for about thirty years and have made a significant contribution to

the economic, cultural and social framework of this Province. Development

associations have to continually justify their existence and try to prove their

work to funding agencies in government.

Thirty years ago, the issues facing Newfoundland and Labrador

were far clearer than they are today, Mr. Speaker. The resettlement program,

more than any other single factor, brought around development associations.

With the resettlement program come memories of our former

Premier, the hon. Joseph R. Smallwood. I am a strong believer that Mr.

Smallwood's heart was in the right place. Sometimes, the advice he received from

others was not the proper advice, but I am sure his heart was in the right

place.

For more than two decades, the development associations have

provided the framework that has kept many rural communities viable. The Rural

Development Council, under funding from ACOA and Enterprise Newfoundland and

Labrador, prepared a twenty-five year regional development project inventory,

that is available for anybody to have a look at, and it shows exactly how the

Province has benefitted from rural development associations.

Something like $184 million has been brought into the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador under the Rural Development association

over the past twenty-five years, Mr. Speaker. Many things have been brought to

this Province for the first time, such as; aquaculture development, agriculture,

breakwaters, craft shops, you name it and development associations have taken

part of it in rural Newfoundland.

The list could go on forever, Mr. Speaker, but all you have

to do is drive around the rural parts of this Province, and you can see the work

and the commitment that has gone behind the Rural Development Association

movement in this Province. Many communities have been put on the road to

prosperity by the fact that a grass roots organization, Mr. Speaker - an

organization brought forward by the people for the people so that they knew

where their own problems were, they knew what the solutions were and they worked

together to try to benefit themselves. There is an old saying, `Nothing is as

easy as it looks.' Everything takes longer than you expect. If anything can go

wrong it will at the worst possible moment. In rural Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker,

over the last number of years, things have not been so rosy, but history will

show that we have survived before and we will again survive through the current

hard economic times.

In my own area, the development association played a major

role. A number of years ago, their main objective was to put fishery

infrastructure in place. You can go around my district on wharves, slipways and

gear sheds - maybe sometimes too numerous, I will admit, but still, that was the

focus that they had at the time and that fishermen, plant workers and people, in

general, were looking for. Another major role that they played in my own area

was when we had a plant closed up for several years, and they came forward with

ideas and worked on our behalf to make sure that the plant was reopened so that

people could go back to work. I believe that without the development association

efforts, in this regard, the plant would be as it is today, closed, Mr. Speaker.

The agriculture development that has been forward by Rural

Development Associations, not only in my own area but throughout the Province,

is second to none. They have brought in many new ideas, some failed, some were

successful, but overall, it was the chance to try something new, which was what

we had a chance to do under the development associations.

The tourism potential of this Province, as everybody knows,

is something to which we all can attest, and it is important that the

development associations know what is available in their regions for tourism

development and therefore can work on it at a local level and give it its best

shot at being part of the future tourism development of the Province. But, most

of all, I think, the major thing with development associations, and maybe the

reason why they came into being in the late 1960s, was because of the fact that

we wanted to bring areas together. We wanted to develop areas. Instead of each

and every small community working on its own, the development associations

brought forward a kind of map of areas of development, and it was broken up - it

started off with only a dozen or so, and ended up, today being fifty-nine

different development associations.

There are many opportunities for growth and development

outside of one community. If you look at a whole area, your chances of

developing it are much better supported by government departments than if you

were operating on your own.

Today, we face what is, I guess, one of the major

catastrophes of our time, and that is in the close-down of our fishery. I, for

one, live in a community that depends one hundred per cent upon the fishery. It

is a major economic collapse that I guess we will be feeling for a number of

years, and I believe now, more than ever, that development associations have a

role to play in making sure that the future of rural Newfoundland, the future of

the small communities - there are over 700 small communities throughout this

Province, and over 400 of them depend one hundred per cent on the fishery. And I

believe it is important that development associations are maintained so that

these communities have someone on the local level who can work on their behalf

to bring forward the concerns of the areas to the right government officials to

be dealt with in a proper manner.

As well, because of the economic collapse in rural

Newfoundland at the present time, we have to worry about the many other problems

that come with it, most of all, the social problems, the social impact. As I am

sure the Minister of Social Services will attest to, the social problems in our

Province, of late, have increased immensely, I say, due to the fact that the

people are not fully employed in the fishing industry, in the plants throughout

our Province.

People will, over the next couple of years, I am sure, become

very upset and frustrated with what they have to face. It is no rosy picture for

anybody to think about, but we must think about it and we must plan now for the

years that lie ahead, because it is not the generations that have gone before

but for those coming behind us. It is very important that we understand the

frustrations of the people and why they are upset.

Go back to earlier this year when the hon. the Minister of

Employment and Labour Relations had a run-in with some people out on the West

Coast. It was not because those people had anything against the minister, I am

sure, it is because they were frustrated and upset because of the economic

conditions and the future facing them when they are laid off and put out of

work.

The question remains: What do we do right now? I refer back

to a few months ago when the hon. the Premier was interviewed. He made a comment

that I certainly agree with. There are a couple of responses to those who

suggest that people move somewhere else to go to work. The question is: Where do

people go? There is 10 per cent unemployment in Toronto now. And the Canadian

Government has presided over the devastation of the Newfoundland fishery -

therefore, we are depending on their help in making sure that we survive.

We need co-operation on all sides. We need it from the

federal government, we need it from the provincial government, we need it from

the municipal governments, we need it from the people who are out in the areas

of the Province, and the people who are involved in the fifty-nine development

associations. The Rural Development Corporation agreement will expire on March

31, 1994. In a letter that I received from the President of the Newfoundland and

Labrador Rural Development Council on November 8 - well, it was wrote on

November 8 and I received it a few days after, he advised me, and all MHAs, that

they have not been advised by the federal/provincial governments of a

replacement agreement or any arrangement to provide continued funding for the

Province's fifty-nine development associations, and the Rural Development

Council. Nor have we, Mr. Mullett wrote, been advised by either level of

government that they support the continued existence of development associations

as community development organizations in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I understand that over the past couple of weeks there have

been meetings with the Premier and the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology with regard to this, as late as last Friday, and the feeling received

from the minister and the Premier by the Newfoundland and Labrador Rural

Development Council was a positive feeling. I have to compliment the minister

because at least he made them feel good when they left his office. At least

there is optimism in the air and I am sure the minister understands the

situation that rural Newfoundland is facing at this time and will do everything

in his power. We must remember that we do not expect much even though many

people outside Newfoundland think we do. Nobody settled here in Newfoundland

because of the untold luxuries of the place. It is a hard place to live. It

always has been and it always will be, but still it is the way we like it or we

would not stay here, therefore, it is important that we do everything within our

power to make sure that we do survive.

Many people have condemned over the past year or so the

compensation package which a fair number of rural Newfoundlanders now receive.

Some people call it the enjoyment of being on the compensation package. Well,

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the opportunity to explain the impact that the

compensation package is having on rural Newfoundland, because, like I said

before, I have a fisherman who lives next door to me and the package now brings

him in approximately $20,000 a year, but that man earned $30,000 in July two

years ago fishing alone. All they get extra on the package they did not get

before is the ten, twelve, or fifteen weeks when they got work in the summer. If

we size things up and we ask who is enjoying the $800 million package I have a

strong belief that if we sit down and figure it out it is not 100 per cent the

fishermen and the plant workers of this Province.

There are schools throughout this Province, the unions, you

name it, there are a lot of people who have their hand in the pie, or their hand

in the pot, whatever you want to call it, Mr. Speaker, with regards to the $800

million. Now, that there is a possibility of this being cut, or changes being

made to the compensation package, this will only hurt rural Newfoundland more,

and if ever there was a need for strong representation from the local level such

as rural development associations, I believe we need it now in our Province more

than we ever did.

Back in the 1960s there were possibilities of growth in our

Province such as the Upper Churchill and many other different possibilities

where people could get work outside the fishery. As all these developments ran

their time many people had to return to the fishery to try to make a living and

it is sad to see that that way of life is slowly passing us by. I know in my own

community, which I referred to several times, and will do so again, it has

changed the way of life. It has totally changed our way of life. People are not

the happy-go-lucky people they were. There is concern on their faces. The

parents are concerned about their children's future. There is concern in the

community as a whole that the future may not be there for them, and the question

remains where do we go from here? There is a need, as far as I am concerned, for

a new Rural Development Agreement in this Province.

As I mentioned before the Rural Development Agreement will

expire on March 31 of next year, and the fundamentals that were brought forward

in that old agreement, have no doubt improved the way of life in rural

Newfoundland. There are, perhaps, parts of the agreement, and everybody with

whom I have talked to, Mr. Speaker, agrees with the restructuring that needs to

be done within the development movement in the Province, because there are a

number of organizations and associations that are somewhere up around - the

Premier answered my question last week - 160, I believe he said, and they need

to be looked at and restructured, and I agree with that; I have no problem

whatsoever with that, but I would ask the Premier and his Cabinet, when they are

putting together their Terms of Reference or whatever the case may be for a new

agreement for this Province, that they remember that development associations

have been around much longer than anybody else. They have been around now going

on thirty years and what they have given to Newfoundland and Labrador, is

uncountable with regards to the economic and social development that they have

brought this Province. They have been part of tough times and somewhat easier

times I guess, in the 1980s as some people refer to them.

A new agreement has to have the support of all sides, and I

am concerned with the fact, that as of now, there seems to be not so much

support I should say or movement, I have to be careful about the words used, but

there is not so much movement from the federal government on a new agreement.

The latest correspondence that I have received from different parts of the

Province told me that there is nothing really coming forward on a new agreement

except for what the Province has initiated over the past couple of weeks, and

again I applaud that. I urge the minister and the Premier to move as quickly as

possible with regards to contacting the federal government and putting the Terms

of Reference together, so that they can sign a new agreement before the end of

March'94, and that the future of Newfoundland will not be held in the balance

with regards to dollars, that we will have something that we can put forward and

work on.

Several years ago, the development associations were asked to

put a five-year plan in place, a plan that would foster tourism, agriculture,

fisheries in some cases, the development of the Province and most of them had to

put that in place in order to receive the administration funding. I am concerned

that some of those associations now are only into about their second or third

year of that five-year agreement, and they are now left with the door almost

closed in their faces and I urge that we try our best to bring forward a new

Terms of Reference as quickly as possible, so that out Province can continue on

with the development that has been happening in rural Newfoundland for the

betterment of not only rural Newfoundland, because if rural Newfoundland is

prosperous, I am sure the cities such as St. John's, Mount Pearl, Corner Brook

and all the other places will be prosperous because of rural Newfoundland.

Someone mentioned a few years ago about the parasites inside

the overpass living sometimes off rural Newfoundland and that is to some extent

true I know, but when you walk around the stores and the gas stations and in the

malls here in St. John's, you see many people from out around home, out around

the bay, and the bay keeps her all going and I just wanted to put it across that

it is important that we continue to keep the rural areas of our Province alive

because, only by them we will keep all Newfoundland and Labrador alive and well.

I will close off and let someone else have a few words now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Acting Government House Leader.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, that should send shivers down the

spine of the Member for Naskaupi, I am sure.

I am very pleased to join this debate today, Mr. Speaker.

When I first heard of this resolution verbalized in the House on Monday or

Tuesday past, I sort of had visions of the hon. member hunched under a kerosene

lamp somewhere reading the final chapters of Machiavelli's, The Prince,

but as I read it and as I saw it in print, I realized that we on this side, if

you look at it and you are honest about it, can only support the general thrust

and tenor of this resolution. We will be supporting this resolution. We will be

supporting it, Mr. Speaker, basically because of the hon. member's final

comments. I don't know how many heard what he said. He said that he agrees with

what the Premier said in response to a question here in the House on the 167

different organizations around the Province. He said he agrees that that ought

to be restructured, that economic development ought to be refocused, and we

ought to have a new vision, particularly for rural Newfoundland. I accept that

and I thank him for it. In that regard we can look at the general thrust and

principle and support this resolution fully.

I would also like to align our government's position with the

hon. member's comments with respect to the rural development movement generally.

He said some very kind things about the movement. It has been around for a long

time and in fact it had its roots, I believe, on the Port au Port Peninsula as

well as the Great Northern Peninsula.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. FUREY: It just so happens that my friend for Eagle

River has Machiavelli's The Prince and Other Discourses . Not many

pictures in it, but if the hon. member would like it, it is a pretty good read.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. FUREY: The blue book, yes. I want to tell my hon.

friend that his comments about the rural development movement are very valid.

When I think and read the history of the movement, particularly as it relates to

the Northern Peninsula, and NARDA, that was in essence one of the first, if not

the first, development association. It came about because of isolation, because

of a lack of government help, because of a lack of initiative from St. John's,

because people felt abandoned in many ways. It wasn't because government came

with bags of money and said: here, you set up an organization and we will help

you fund it and you can do all kinds of wonderful things.

There would not be, Mr. Speaker, proper negotiations for

fishermen with unions with fish companies without the rural development

association on the Northern Peninsula. There would not have been a bank, which

we all take for granted, on the Northern Peninsula. CBC television and radio

would never have been up there except for rural development associations. Power

in Brig Bay, electric power that we take for granted, wouldn't be there, except

for a rural development association.

So I can only align our government with the general tenor and

comments of the hon. member in a positive way that the rural development

movement, as a fundamental grass roots organized movement, has been a superb

movement in this Province, and one that we can only endorse and support.

Let me just qualify our support for the resolution. Because

it is important to qualify it. The member is quite right when he says that over

the last number of years, particularly the last ten years, I would say, there

has been a great proliferation of economic development structures all around the

Province. They have been growing up out of crisis funds, railway closures,

one-industry towns shutting down, whether it is Daniel's Harbour or Long

Harbour, or Trepassey in the case of a fish plant. There have been crisis funds

jumping up everywhere around the Province.

There also have been other organizations and economic

instruments in the form of organizations around the Province. You have the

Fisheries Alternative Program, FAP offices springing up everywhere. You have

Community Futures springing up all around the Province. Springing out of those

who have development centres and business development centres and women's

enterprise bureaus, along with the rural development movement. Somewhere in the

ball game somebody has to stand back and have a good global look at what has

cropped up everywhere around the Province. There are, that we can uncover, 167

separate organizations that have sprung up, including the development

organizations, all around the Province.

He would be interested in knowing that just the

administrative dollars, the operating costs, to hire somebody to turn on the

lights, to hook up a fax machine, in all of these organizations around the

Province, you will see that the administrative costs alone are over $41 million.

Before we ever get a cent into a project or into industry or into small business

or into the development association to create economic opportunity there is $41

million being spent.

I named some of the agencies that are spending it. They are

the rural development associations, the Fisheries Alternatives Program, the ACOA

offices, ENL offices around the Province, and on it goes.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. FUREY: You agree. Mr. Speaker, there has been a lot

of concern in the rural development movement that somehow the government is

going to abandon the movement. I want to make it quite clear, as I made it quite

clear in my letter to them of September 30, that nobody in this government or

nobody in this Province is about to abandon the rural development movement.

When you ask in the final

preamble of the recitals that

follow in your resolution, you ask for support to negotiate a Rural Development

Agreement and that funds continue into the Rural Development Associations. I can

tell you that there will be an agreement from which the rural development

movement will have access to funds but I can also tell you - and tell you this

quite clearly - let us not be afraid of change. Let's not be afraid to step back

and ask ourselves, just how has it been going for ten years? How have these

organizations functioned?

Right on the Northern Peninsula, in my own area, we spend

nearly - if I count the Member from the Strait of Belle Isle and myself - there

are nearly thirty-five employees in something like sixteen different offices,

getting sixteen separate administrative budgets, moving in sixteen separate

directions. Now surely to God, we have to refocus that. Surely we have to get

people to come together in the seventeen economic zones and surely there has to

be a restructuring and a new vision given, Mr. Speaker, because I will tell you

something, if it were working for the last ten years, if everything were

working, there would be zero unemployment. There would be very, very, little

unemployment in the rural areas, Mr. Speaker, if the agreements that we signed

in the past and the structures that are there in the present, continued forward

and were doing their job in the past, there would almost be no unemployment in

the rural areas.

We recognize the great burden that has been placed on the

shoulders of the rural development movement. We also recognize, Mr. Speaker,

that their job has been thinned out with the plethora of organizations that have

cropped up throughout the Province. It is time we refocused, it is time we

circled the wagons, it is time we questioned what we have been doing and it is

time to set it on a new economic vision for the future and that is what this

government has set about to do.

Mr. Speaker, while we are doing this, there are four things I

want to mention to the House, that I mentioned earlier today to some of my

colleagues. The first is that we take this very seriously, so seriously that we

have instituted and ordered that the current Rural Development Agreement which

is set to expire March 31, 1994, be extended by one year. In order to do that

the operating funds required would be $2.3 million. We have frozen project

funding, with the exception of the craft development movement and we have rolled

the project funding into administrative funding which will give you $1.9

million. The shortfall of $400,000, Mr. Speaker, the government will stand

behind so that there is $2.3 million, so that there are fifty-nine

organizations, so that they can administer their programs and carry on until

March 31, 1995. That is number one.

Number two, Mr. Speaker, Cabinet has ordered that myself and

the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, in his capacity as the minister

responsible for jobs and employment in the Province, meet with our counterparts

in Ottawa. They would be Mr. Axworthy, the Minister of Human Resources currently

governing manpower and employment and Mr. Dingwall, who handles all of the

cooperation agreements under the umbrella of ACOA. Myself and the minister have

sought that meeting and we expect to get it in the very near future.

We are going to ask the federal government, in partnership

with the Province, to set up a federal/provincial task force to look at the

great explosion and proliferation of all of the agencies that have come about

over the last ten years. To take a very serious look over a six month period to

see - how can all of these organizations fit into a new agreement which can fit

into what the people have asked us to do in the seventeen economic zones, to

create these zones and make them cogent, tight and focused? How can we do that?

We are not going to do it unilaterally and they are not going to do it

unilaterally. So the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations and I will meet

with our federal counterparts and we will ask to set up this federal/provincial

task force to look at all of these agencies that are sweeping across the

Province spending huge sums of money just in administration. We will ask that

that task force also have representation from the rural development movement and

the Federation of Municipalities, and the ACOA people and human resources

people, and the ENL people in the Province, and people from my own department.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot see, for the life of me, why the

federal government would not acknowledge and accept that very sensible

recommendation from both these very sensible ministers. I think that at the end

of the day we will see a reshaped, restructured, focused opportunity for small

business, for community development, right in the regions, because the way we

are going, it is not working. It is just not working, and if you do not believe

me, just look at some of the areas that have been really hit hard - that have

major funds.

The answer is not to dump bags of cash into Trepassey. The

answer is not to dump a railway fund into Port aux Basques. The answer is not to

throw bags of cash, because if that were the answer, with all the cash that has

rained in here in the last two years, there ought to be no unemployment - if

that were the only answer.

I think what we have to do, inside these seventeen zones, is

get the people to form themselves into business, municipal, economic

development, rural development partnerships, and form boards in these zones

where they create their own strategic plans, where they look at the

possibilities around them in their own zones, and they come back into that

general agreement and draw out the necessary funding to kick-start their own

plans. I think that is eminently sensible, because right now it is

helter-skelter, a shotgun approach, and it is bags of cash flying everywhere, in

all directions. It is not working.

So I tell my hon. friend from St. Mary's - The Capes, we

support the general thrust of this resolution. There will be an agreement. It

may not take the same form as the status quo, but we cannot be stuck in the

status quo. The status quo may have worked in the past; it may work slightly

into the future, but there is rapid change happening. Technology is moving at a

blistering pace. Our electronic highway around rural Newfoundland shows that, as

businesses link up to it and start creating opportunities for themselves. Do not

be afraid of change. Rise to the challenge. That is what our document is all

about - change and challenge.

Mr. Speaker, I think I have probably said enough. The

government stands full square behind the rural development movement. We see them

as a very sound opportunity to create economic development, but you just cannot

sign an agreement and say: There is your money; everybody run as they are going.

Go chase make-work projects when they come out here, or job creation dollars

there, or

section 22 there. We have to build new partnerships. That is what a

new agreement should reflect. It should reflect the partnership at the grass

roots level so that rural development is not going in isolation this way,

Community Futures going in isolation that way, the FAP offices going this way,

business development banks going that way, ENL going north, ACOA going south,

Community Futures all over the place.

Look, on the Northern Peninsula, which we represent, just

that little area, did you know that there are three - on the Northern Peninsula,

where there are 28,000 people - there are three full-time Community Futures

organizations - three. Springing out of those there are three full-time business

development centres.

Now, for the love of God Almighty, if we cannot get

organizations to start talking to each other, and co-operating, how dare us even

sign what would be called a `co-operation agreement'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FUREY: - if we cannot agree to co-operate.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would see, early in the new year, this

federal-provincial task force up and running, pending the agreement of the

federal government. I would see their mandate to go out, and to dialogue and

debate, and make public, and listen to the public, on how the economic zones -

the seventeen zones - ought to appear. What should they look like? What ought to

be their mandate? What should be their focus? How can we collapse all these

organizations down into a more focused, rational, economic vision? And, Mr.

Speaker, I would see both orders of government supplying the funding under a

newly restructured, a newly enlivened, agreement which will allow the rural

development movement to participate 100 per cent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. CAREEN: It was nice to hear the minister give support

for the Rural Development Agreement for which I have total loyalty. I spring

from rural development - that is not the proper word here, I have sprung from

rural development. It is not perfect. It originated in areas of crisis, isolated

crisis, which people took unto themselves because originally in our communities

there were one, two, or three people, who spoke for the community.

MR. DUMARESQUE: You are wrong there.

MR. CAREEN: Oh, I hear him again, the Member for Eagle

River with his waterproof voice. Nobody seems to drown him out. The rural

development movement cut short forever one, two, or three people speaking for

communities and speaking for areas - made up of individuals who were concerned

with their towns and with their regions, and they came together and started to

break down barriers. In a moment I will go back to the one that originated in

Placentia. It originated in the late 60s with the downturn of the base and the

inconceived plan of the Liberal government to resettle the people of Placentia

Bay, it's islands, into growth centres.

The first few years of the development associations were

spent - because they grew out of a task force, a task force that was put in

place by one of the people opposite, the present Minister of Fisheries, who had

been the PC Member for St. John's West at the time. The Placentia area

development association grew out of the task force and while it was in being for

three years it became fully incorporated in 1972. They knew that the Americans

still remained in Argentia and held a lease, a ninety-nine year lease on the

base properties, so they proceeded to put in a fishery infrastructure. It took

them years.

That should have been a reason to have the places done first

but it took the volunteers to start putting stuff in place. The associations

have done yeoman work across the island. The women have shown themselves to be

equally as good or better than men in some cases, but it gave them room to move.

We speak of voluntarism ladies and gentlemen. Voluntarism is a due. As someone

said we pay for being allowed to exist upon this planet. Development

associations take voluntarism to a height. Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

working together, meeting together, and learning from each other, breaking down

regional area rivalries and pursuing ideas they have on social and economic

development. There in to people development. People development is very

important, products are great, but we have to develop people as well.

The original development associations were not kindly adhered

to by government because they were a new entity and while the minister just a

few minutes ago said we should not be afraid of change, originally governments

thirty years ago were really afraid of change because of this new movement

coming out of certain areas of this island who were concerned that their voices

were not being heard. It is too bad that over the years development associations

with all their good schemes and ideas were regulated for decades by bureaucrats,

some well intentioned, some government people, either side of the political

spectrum. They were given lip-service but they were only allowed so much say,

ladies and gentlemen, they were treated like youngsters. They were allowed to do

stuff, you were allowed to go outside, but only if you had your mittens pinned

to your sleeves. That was not good enough. There were some of them out there who

wouldn't roll over and take their mittens pinned to their sleeves, some men like

the man opposite from Port au Port, or the man here from the Cape shore, or

others.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CAREEN: I never took backwater from any man. Anyway,

the thing is they were regulated, and sometimes tried to be suffocated. You can

be suffocated by good intentions as well.

The development associations will continue, I'm sure of it.

The minister said there will be an agreement. They will talk about downsizing.

There will be downsizing, because all indications say there is downsizing.

Whether it is going to be a bunch of them wrapped up into seventeen economic

bundles, who knows, but it is coming. You can almost smell it in the air. The

development associations will continue because in areas where there is the money

that they thought might be forthcoming mightn't come, they will continue in a

struggle themselves. Money sometimes does not keep people quiet. Lack of money

allows them to speak louder and clearer.

Ladies and gentlemen, the rural development movement is

special to this Province. It was here before all others, and sure they have

shared their share of jurisdiction with others. I have been parts of groups and

others around. We took advantage of the Community Futures movement to be able to

attract new entities into our regions. Some say that we were going to be gobbled

up by Community Futures. Our attitude was that if you can allow yourself to be

gobbled up, probably you deserve it. But development associations can stand on

their own hind legs and they have done so for thirty years. I'm confident in

those people, of all walks, political stripes, different coves, nooks and

crannies, of this Province of ours.

I am glad to have the opportunity to speak from a crowd that

have accommodated me too, Sir, because I was one of those people who was lucky

enough to draw a wage from the development associations. I also put in many

days, weeks, and months over and above what you get paid for. I was a kin to it

and I'm still a loyal person with regards to the development associations. I

know their struggles. I have been with them.

Ladies and gentlemen, we have been through many crises in

this Province. Since the first European put his ugly boot on our Island we have

been subject to change. For a century or so we weren't allowed to settle here.

We were not allowed to settle on this Island until 1749. Probably men like the

Island Cove man, a friend of mine, and people - because we were told around that

time, 1739, that there were 3,000 illegal European settlers between Cape

Bonavista and Cape St. Mary's. So people did struggle to settle this Island. We

have a legacy to continue, we have an obligation to carry on and to pass on, and

that is the reason I believe - because the development associations are not

fraternal organizations. There is no secret handshake, there is no special card.

There is a thing here, this is our home, and this is where we chose to stay, and

we chose to try to make it bigger and better.

We are also in the rural development association, the one

organization that we have taken to task, it is better for us to make our own

mistakes than have someone in any government do it for us. Whoever that

government is, or whoever those bureaucrats are, well-intentioned though some of

them might be.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. CAREEN: Oh, he is at it again is he? Someone told me

that the Member for Eagle River does not listen to his conscience because he

never talks to total strangers. Ladies and gentlemen, we are going through a

crisis here like we never did before; and it is ironic and strange that the

thoughts of downsizing and pulverizing into a nice little package - rural

development associations. They should be as the old term, high, wide and

handsome and that is the way I look at them. I mean, whether you agree with them

or you don't, they are an entity unto themselves because they are the people of

this Province.

The crisis that we are facing now, we have never faced before

in our history. We are losing our people more steadily than ever. People who are

used to slipping their lines, going to work wherever, are looking out through

the windows, trying to pass the time of day, trying to do something else; well

there are all kinds of stuff out there to be done and this crisis will not go

away without the help of every single one of us; and I was glad to hear the

words of the minister earlier today. I am glad to be able to be here, because on

other occasions we were on the outside trying to get someone else in to speak to

past ministers over a period of years and they were of all political stripes,

federal and provincial.

On this occasion, Mr. Minister, I have no political alliances

when it comes to helping out rural development, or all political alliances

trying to get something for them. Ladies and gentlemen, the development

associations too, have become speed bumps for governments.

AN HON. MEMBER: Become what?

MR. CAREEN: Speed bumps, for all of them. I mean, we are

closer to on the ground delivering packages for governments and we have, because

you live close, you live near John or Mary or Tom or Hannah or whoever need

their stamps, they need work and we have fallen into a trap because having a

conscience and having a heart, and knowing what the other poor devils are going

through, you would haul every stop out to be able to get them on a certain type

of package so they can qualify for UIC. In addition, you are trying to use

short-term monies to get long-term plans or whatever, but probably in the new

agreement we might look at something a bit different.

Development associations, instead of carrying on with the new

agreement in the same amount of monies, probably there should be an extra

incentive in there for development associations. Probably, in the word of people

development being one side and a person hired to liaison with other peoples of

this Province and in the areas where they live themselves and following the

criteria that is set down and agreed upon, probably there could be a second

component. A job creation division.

A job creation division of long-term and short-term work that

one would not take away from the other. The development associations, the doors

are open and they have expressed the winds of change themselves and they are not

stagnant, but they want to be helped and they want to be encouraged but they do

not need to be patronized by any of us. Ladies and gentlemen, they are not

razzle-dazzle associations, but ordinary Joes and Joans of this Province. They

have not, many of them, over the years, thirty years, had the opportunity to

join overseas junkets. They have heard and read and seen of others who have gone

overseas to explore stuff for rural developments, and I think they should have

the opportunity to see the stuff up front themselves.

Ladies and gentlemen, I am shortly going to finish up but I

have to quote from a person called Douglas Dunne, in the People's Choice From

Extension Division of Virginia Polytech: Without local, meaningful

participation by citizens, actions seldom take place except where government is

willing to bear the full burden of such action. Experience has shown that

government initiative is most prone to criticism and often results in ill

feeling within the community. Decisions on what is to be done, how to do it and

the conditions under which it will be done, require a partnership between local

people and governments.

I am trusting that the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology, and his colleague, will open the agreement up so that the best of

what the associations have to offer can be heard so they can put it on to their

federal counterparts, because as good intentioned as they are, the federal

ministers, the most we ever had to deal with, do not have to live in this

Province. This is not their home; this is ours, and anything I can do in my way,

any small bit, any time, any place, I am only a phone call away. That is the

furthest I will ever be.

I thank the minister for his statements. I thank my colleague

from St. Mary's - The Capes for coming up with the idea, so I can get up here

and speak about something that I truly support and believe in.

I will end my words by saying: People management is

important, and in the process we cannot forget the people development of this

Province, because in the development of our people it will make it better for

all of us. Lots of times we stand to question, and sometimes you might be able

to stand and be able to answer, but we do have to answer to ourselves, and lots

of times we have to answer to the people who we are responsible for.

Thank you kindly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to have the opportunity to rise in this

debate this afternoon. As most of you would be aware, I am sure, if not prior to

my arrival here, certainly in the short time that I have been here, and on the

few occasions I have had the opportunity to speak in this House, I have taken

great pride in referencing the fact that much of my own involvement in community

development has been directly with rural development associations, both locally

and provincially.

I would like to state once again, and have the record record

and note, that I have been involved for about twenty years in community

development, and about seventeen years directly involved with the Port au Port

Economic Development Association, which the minister mentioned earlier today was

one of the earliest development associations in this Province.

I am also very proud to have served for five years as

President of the Newfoundland and Labrador Rural Development Council, the

umbrella body of all the development associations in the Province.

So I think in that capacity I certainly do have an

understanding as to the concerns of the rural development movement in this

Province, and I do have some knowledge from whence they have come, or `from

whence they have sprung', to quote my hon. friend across the floor. Also, I

think, I do have some sense as to where they expect and would like to go in the

years ahead.

As the previous speakers have pointed out, the rural

development movement in this Province has now been around for some thirty years,

and I think it is well to note, and keep in mind, that this movement is, in many

ways, unique. There is nothing quite like it anywhere else in this country, and

I think it is something that we should well remember, that this is a grass roots

movement, something that grew up in the rural areas of this Province, in the

earliest instances in response to immediate economic crises, as the hon. Member

for Placentia relates to the development of his own association in Placentia,

and similarly in Port au Port.

The Port au Port Economic Development Association first came

about in response to the imminent closure of the base at Stephenville, when some

of the local people got together and tried to devise ways to ensure that there

would be a future for that area after the closure of the base which, at that

time, was the cornerstone of the economy of the whole of the Stephenville - Port

au Port - Bay St. George area. Indeed it is well to note, that association

initially did include the Town of Stephenville and the whole of the present

District of Port au Port.

The Port au Port Economic Development Association has now

been around for about twenty-eight or twenty-nine of those thirty years and

indeed is one of the oldest in the Province. The greatest catalyst, bar none,

for the development of these associations in the Province was, as my hon. friend

pointed out, the resettlement program. If you look at the history of the

development associations, where they really got their impetus and where they

really took off was back when many communities felt threatened by resettlement

and the prospects of having to leave their areas. I could, if time permitted it,

speak at great lengths and with great passion on that particular project. While

I was not directly involved - most people feel that the resettlement in this

Province is something that dates from the sixties. There was indeed a much

earlier program going back to the thirties under the Commission of Government,

when at that time people from Fortune Bay and Placentia Bay were relocated to

the West Coast of the Province. I had the opportunity to experience this first

hand since my parents were among the group that resettled from a tiny place in

Fortune Bay.

I guess to have a real sense as to how deep the roots of

people in this Province run, my mother is now ninety-six years old and is still

living, she moved out to the West Coast back in the thirties and she still

refers to that tiny little settlement in Fortune Bay where no one lives - no one

has lived there now for twenty years - she still refers to that as down home.

That is something that has always been with me and certainly gives me a strong

sense of the kind of feeling that people have for their communities here in this

Province, the kind of identity that they have with their roots and the kind of

great pride that they take in where they come from. I think that is something to

be admired and something to be preserved.

One of the interesting things as well, that has been alluded

to here this afternoon, is that as the movement itself and the earliest

development associations did grow up spontaneously, they did not grow up in

response to government funding that was made available and that was offered to

encourage people to get out and organize. As a matter of fact, development

associations existed for a number of years before any government, either level

of government, made any offer to provide funding. Indeed, if you were to talk to

any of these associations today many of them would say to you that perhaps the

biggest mistake they ever made was to accept funding from government, because

the first day that they made the decision to accept funding, then automatically

they began to develop that dependency. So in time the strength that they had

that kept them going early on, began to disappear and gradually they saw

themselves as becoming more and more dependent on government and government

funding to remain in existence.

The other thing that usually strikes me whenever I have

occasion to speak at functions dealing with the Rural Development Movement is

the lack of knowledge in many quarters with regards to the development

associations, the length of time that they have been around and what indeed they

have contributed to the overall development in this Province. I have always been

amazed, especially in dealing with the government bureaucracy, at the number of

people who express a complete lack of knowledge with regards to the development

associations and even indeed beyond that - really lack any kind of sensitivity

as to how important these development associations have been to rural

Newfoundland over the last number of years.

I guess that credibility crisis, if you may, is something

that has plagued the rural development movement for some time. Indeed going back

to 1986 when the Royal Commission Report, Building on our Strength - the report

on Royal Commission of Employment and Unemployment - one of the things I feel

that this document did do - and I was President of the council when this

document was released - was, I felt at the time, did lend some creditability to

the movement in this Province. There is a whole

section in this report that

references the rural development movements, the associations and their

importance to the overall development in the Province. There are many things

that one could quote from that, but one of the things I would just like to quote

from the

section dealing with community and regional development. I quote as

follows:

If the Province as a whole is to achieve economic development

and employment enhancement its constituent regions must be strengthened and

given greater autonomy in the developmental process.

That whole

chapter very well summarizes and highlights the

importance of the rural development associations and the movement generally to

the development of rural Newfoundland.

Just to underline the credibility crisis, as I referred to it

- as a matter of fact the background paper that was produced for the royal

commission report was entitled, Rural Development in Newfoundland: A

Legitimation Crisis . So obviously the commissioners at the time and the

people that they had researching did recognize and in fact did uncover and

substantiate the fact that throughout the Province there was a lack of knowledge

as to the type of work that was being done by the development associations and

of the importance of the role that these development associations were playing

on a daily basis in rural Newfoundland.

The greatest and most common criticism that I have over the

years heard of the rural development associations - and this was true back in

the days when I served at the provincial level, and I still hear it today - is

that the rural development associations in this Province are primarily the

delivery agents of make-work projects. I really feel that this is an unjust

criticism. Development associations basically have relied heavily on make-work

projects primarily because there have not been a lot of development funds

available to them. I submit to you that if you were to look back and study the

kind of innovative ways in which development associations took government funds

- which, let us not lose sight of the fact, were designed and earmarked

primarily to create employment. Really, at the times these programs were being

announced their primary objective was to create jobs, bring down the

unemployment rolls.

Basically, what development associations did, showing a

little ingenuity, was they were able to take this money and use it towards

developing infrastructure which could enhance the long-term development of rural

Newfoundland. That is always overlooked. People just focus, the media in

particular, on the short-term, the fact that the amount of money was spent to

create these short-term jobs. Really, no mention is made of the fact that after

these projects were completed there were facilities that were left in place that

enhanced the ability of people in the area and in their communities to have

long-term employment.

I can reference specifically in my own District of Port au

Port, the fish plant. The fish plant at Port au Port, the main

section of the

building, was constructed by the development association using what we refer to

as make-work projects. Once the building was completed, as was the practice and

the policy of the government of the day, this facility was then turned over to

the provincial Department of Fisheries which administered and maintained the

facility.

I submit to you that if the development association did not

exist at that time and if they were not able to avail of the existing resources

that were there, then this is one instance where a facility that has over the

years served the community well would perhaps have never been there. Because I

doubt very much the government of the day would have been able to find the

resources necessary to provide that particular facility.

In addition to the fact that development associations have

shown ingenuity in being able to take these monies and use them to create

infrastructure enhancing long-term development, the other question that we have

to beg is that in any of these make-work projects, in the absence of

organizations like the development associations to deliver these programs, what

would government do? Would government then have to go out and create for

themselves a separate level of bureaucracy to deliver these programs?

A recent case in point is our own EERP program, which was

announced some time ago. From my understanding, I know in my own district, a

fair amount of these funds were delivered and administered by development

associations, and the fact that these development associations exist, I can

certainly speak for myself as a member of this House, is of great assistance to

me, because I know the money is well spent and I know that they operate from a

long-term plan, and when that money is spent it will be built into their

long-term goals and objectives.

Development associations, over the years, have been involved

in many and varied developments - many things, I suggest to this hon. House,

that perhaps would never have been undertaken if development associations were

not there. I think particularly of areas like aquaculture. We have examples of

development associations being involved in aquacultural activities involving

salmon, trout, mussels and scallops.

Again, speaking from my own experience in the District of

Port au Port, the scallop project there has been ongoing for some ten years,

being promoted and run by a group of volunteers, and now they have gotten to the

stage where the development association is in the process of divesting

themselves.

There are thirteen aquaculturalists - fishermen who have

become trained as aquaculturalists. They have undergone some training in

business management. They have recently formed themselves into a co-op, and are

now ready to assume full ownership and control of this development, and to

continue it on into a viable commercial enterprise. Mr. Speaker and hon. members

of this House, I suggest to you that this is an example of the type of thing

that development associations have done, and can continue to do, for this

Province.

It is very easy, with any organization, for us to find

examples that are less than perfect. The simplest thing in the world is to go

out and find examples of things that do not work. I admit - I would be the first

to admit - not all associations may be even measuring up. Maybe there is room

for improvement, but in recognizing that let us not lose sight of the fact that

we have so many development associations, that we have so many dedicated

individuals, who give freely of their time to go to meetings, to work and lobby

on behalf of the people of their district and, as a result we, in this House,

and indeed the whole of this Province, have been the beneficiaries of the long

and hard work of these many thousands of volunteers who over the past thirty

years have laboured throughout this Province, and indeed the record, I am sure,

would suggest that very seldom, if ever, had they been recognized for the

contribution they had made to development in this Province.

I think I would be remiss certainly this evening, standing in

this hon. House, if I did not reference that fact and, as one who has been

directly involved for a number of years, to make sure that the record does

indeed indicate that these associations have performed a very valuable service

to the people of the different areas of this Province.

Other things that development associations have been involved

in, I mentioned aquaculture. Production of peat moss - again a whole new

industry of which we are just on the verge. Tourism, agriculture, forestry -

here in particular I think of tree nurseries and Silviculture.

One other area that maybe we should mention as well, and we

should recognize, leadership development. If you look at the development

associations over the years, and if I can just mention the fact that two of the

hon. members opposite have come to this House directly from the rural

development movement, and over the years many other hon. members of this House

have had the opportunity of gaining and weaning many of their skills because of

their involvement in rural development.

Let us never underestimate the kind of contribution that has

made; that we have, through the rural development movement, provided a forum for

leadership development in this Province. I suggest that in the absence of these

development associations it is questionable that this leadership would, in fact,

have developed.

The way in which development associations have operated is

somewhat unique in that their mandate is to experiment with new ideas, to go

where no man has gone before, if you will, but the idea being to work with these

ideas, to demonstrate that they have merit, and then to turn it back over to the

private sector for further development and implementation. I see by the note

from the Speaker that I am invited to - I am supposed to be winding down.

I would like to reference, for a few minutes, the concern

that has been raised in terms of the overlap with regard to agencies that are

now involved in economic development in this Province; and we can't deny this.

In preparing my notes for this afternoon, I was looking at a

recent

article in this regard. Looking at the provincial and federal, on the

provincial side they list the Department of Industry, Trade and Technology, then

coming down, Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador, locally five regional

offices, and seventeen economic zones; on the federal side, industry, science

and technology Canada, and under that they have ACOA, under ACOA one Atlantic

regional board, seven FAP regions, under CEIC seventeen community futures, four

to five local labour force development boards, and then coming from all of this,

fifty-nine regional development associations, some 295 incorporated

municipalities, and some 396 unincorporated communities. If you look at the map,

Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt you cannot but be struck by the fact that there

seems to be just one layer on top of the other of bureaucracy, all purporting to

deliver economic development to the rural areas of this Province. I think we

have to recognize that there is, indeed, a need to consolidate, to revise, and

to fine-tune the operation so that at a time when we do have limited resources,

this Province is able to avail of the maximum benefit of what limited resources

we do have available.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SMITH: By leave? Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank

you, hon. members.

If I could, just for a minute, reference the Strategic

Economic Plan, which is the most recent document we have dealing with economic

development in this Province. In the

section referring to economic zones and

regions - and this is something that I guess all of us are somewhat concerned

about; I do know that the rural development associations, in particular, are

concerned as to what the future holds for them within these newly-proposed

economic regions. If I could quote from this document, it says, `The division

will provide for better co-ordination and integration of economic planning and

development activities, including the provision of the infrastructure and

services that are needed. More specifically, the creation of these economic

zones will facilitate or allow the development of economic plans by the people

in each zone, communities within each economic zone, to undertake joint

initiatives which will benefit the whole zone; government to strengthen the

major centres in each zone to ensure that they have the necessary infrastructure

and services to attract new investment and build a strong economic base; the

economic zones to work more effectively with the five regional offices of

Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure that each zone's economic plan is

considered in the policy and program directions being pursued by ENL and other

government agencies; the Province to promote more effectively the economic

opportunities and strengths of each zone and region, and more regionalization of

government administration.'

I do not see within these economic zones that anywhere do we

sound the death knell of the rural development associations in this Province.

Basically, as the minister has mentioned earlier today, and as the hon. members

opposite recognize, what it does call for is that I think, in the face of these

changing times, that there is a need for development associations to redefine

their roles, to carve out their niche, if you will. And if I could just quote

one other passage from that, dealing with a co-operative approach, again coming

from the Strategic Economic Plan:

`The people of Newfoundland and Labrador have indicated that

they believe all orders of government have a responsibility to contribute to

economic development and that partnership among the federal, provincial and

municipal governments is essential to future economic growth. It is

counterproductive for one order of government to address economic problems in

isolation from the others. There has to be a full co-operative effort, involving

all orders of government, as well as the private sector and others with

particular interest.'

I have no difficulty, Mr. Speaker, in foreseeing a continued

and important role for development associations in this Province. I have

complete confidence in the ability of the Rural Development Associations to rise

to this challenge for change, and our ability to co-operate as laid out in the

Strategic Economic Plan. I think we all recognize it is absolutely essential if

we are to survive and succeed, first of all, as a community, secondly, as a

region, and ultimately, as a Province.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before recognizing the hon. the Member for

Humber Valley, the Chair would like to welcome to the gallery on behalf of all

members, the First Torbay Scouts and their Leaders, John Wheeler, Brian Rice and

Marion Sharron, of St. John's East Extern.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WOODFORD: Usually, on Private Members' Day, the third

speaker, especially from our side of the House, doesn't usually get a chance to

get his full twenty minutes in, but the way Question Period went today, and with

no Ministerial Statements and so on, it gives me an opportunity to have a full

twenty minutes, and I must say, to speak for twenty minutes on a subject such as

this, I consider a real privilege.

Having heard the previous speakers so far today - my

colleague who introduced the resolution, and especially the last speaker from

the government side, who made reference to the fact that his mother was

ninety-six years old right now, and she still refers to her home as `down the

bay', is it? - or down Fortune, I think he said, back home.

There is a bit of irony, I suppose, in the fact that I am

from an area -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: - I hear it, I have two development

associations in my district, the White Bay South Development Association and the

Humber Valley Development Association. Now, down in the White Bay area of my

district, I have heard, time and time again, references made somewhat along the

lines of those the hon. the Member for Port au Port just made pertaining to his

mother, and people who came from Harbour Deep, up to Jackson's Arm, or from Sops

Island into Jackson's Arm - or Sops Arm - Pollards Point, always make references

to the resettlement program and so on at that time. But up in the other part of

my district - it is funny how the Rural Development movement works. And the

reason I mentioned it, is because down in that area I hear those particular

comments, but in up in my area, up in the Deer Lake - Cormack - Howley area,

Reidville, is a different situation altogether.

If you ask most of them, they don't know anything about it

except for references made to it by someone else. So the Rural Development

movement - the intent of the Rural Development movement, originally, is really

synonymous with the bottom part of White Bay and not so much with the Deer Lake

area, and I was trying to draw an analogy between the two, and what the member

had said.

He also made reference to the resettlement program. In the

submission made by the Rural Development Council, that they call Community

Development in Newfoundland and Labrador , on the first page - and I quote

two of the headings, Mr. Speaker: Is There Anything Left To Do That We

Haven't Already Tried? and secondly, It Was The Best Of Times, It Was The

Worst Of Times .

In that submission, they stated that the resettlement

program, perhaps more than any other single factor, helped to coalesce the

forces on both sides of the question, and in the case of rural Newfoundland, led

directly to the birth of the Rural Development movement.

Now, that was out of necessity, no question, based on some of

the things that were happening at that time and based on the resettlement

program. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have in my district, as I said, in the White Bay

area, a development association that encompasses the fishery, tourism, forestry.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: Well, they just got, I suppose, mainly into

tourism right now. Because the fishery in the White Bay area now, all of a

sudden, is after gaining some life. Years ago, when that particular organization

started, they were involved primarily in the fishery aspect of it. Only for that

association in the White Bay area, there would not have been much employment,

especially when you go back ten, twelve, fifteen years ago.

Mr. Speaker, that movement has grown progressively over the

last number of years, and I have concerns, as do members who have spoken, with

some of the possible changes to that particular movement. Up in my area, I had

the Humber Valley Development Association, responsible for - really, they take

in forestry, agriculture, tourism - they are involved in pretty well everything,

agriculture, especially, in that particular area. If anybody watched television

- Here and Now , the Land and Sea show Monday night, they would

have seen one of the things that the development association in Humber Valley

should be proud of. Because it wasn't the farmers, really, who started it - it

was the development association in conjunction with the farmers that started the

Humber Valley Strawberry Festival. The Minister of ITT knows full well how the

Strawberry Festival in that particular area of the Province benefits the whole

area economically and socially. The money that it brings in through tourism, the

money spent there during the year getting it ready - and as I said, anybody who

watched that show the other night can see what it has done to spawn and nourish

and help small businesses grow in the area. I could watch, I suppose, with some

sense of satisfaction in knowing that I was involved over the years as a

councillor in Cormack, I suppose, and in supporting the Rural Development

movement in that area, out of which grew some very good and important businesses

in the Humber Valley district.

I hear, as the Member for Port au Port has stated already,

people around the Province, people in my own district, ask: What did Rural

Development do? What are they doing? They are not doing anything. I have to

defend them. As in any other organization, we have churches - we have an R.C.

church, we have good R.C. people, we have bad R.C. people; in the Pentecostal

movement, you have good and bad; you have good politicians and bad politicians.

Everything we go into today, you have good and bad. But we should not, as stated

in this particular submission, throw out the babe with the bath water.

We should look at the positive aspects of the Rural

Development movement, we should look at some of their history and what they have

done over the years. I mentioned the Strawberry Festival in Humber Valley

district - a great success. Not only did it help the whole area as it pertains

to tourism, to agriculture, to social and economic development - there was also

the spin-off, the direct and indirect spin-off from such a movement. For

instance, that Strawberry Festival every year - what did it do since it started?

It enhanced the growth of agriculture in the area, especially as it pertained to

strawberry production. Some of the biggest - if I am not mistaken now, I think,

about 80 per cent or 85 per cent of the strawberry production on the Island is

in the District of Humber Valley. Now, Mr. Speaker, the potential for that alone

is very significant. Members opposite are struggling every day, wondering where

to create jobs and wondering what to do. This is an area where it can and should

be done.

What is happening, Mr. Speaker, is this: farmers were busy

growing and never spent enough time marketing. So, in steps, the Development

Association, along with the farmers, finally created the Strawberry Festival

where people are coming in - they have U-picks, where people can come in and

pick their own berries. The festival goes on for eight or ten days - a very,

very successful organization. The spin-off from that - the Development

Association last summer had, I think, eighty-five students hired. In the whole

District of Humber Valley, eighty-five students - in Howley, Reidville, Steady

Brook, Cormack and Deer Lake. That is very, very significant. And although it

was CEIC funding, for students it was a must, for students it was a godsend,

allowing them to go back to university in the fall to continue their studies -

not only that, it was a learning experience. We forget what people learn by

getting involved in those organizations. We forget what people remember and take

when they do get out of university, like young people and how it can help them

when they want to start a new business or if they want to further their careers.

Another example is the abattoir in Cormack which was started

by the development association. Now it has taken over, as the hon. member

mentioned, the fish plant - I just forget the other thing - in the District of

Port au Port, about to be turned over to private enterprise. That has just been

turned over to private enterprise. Did anybody watch the show the other night -

the young lad, Boyd Gillingham, came back from Ontario after working for Canada

Packers for sixteen years, and started a sausage business, took it over and

started making sausage. He is selling that sausage all around the Island today,

to Dominion, to Sobey's, year-round, twelve months, giving all kinds of steady

employment - Countryside Abattoir, it is called.

The minister responsible for Tourism and Culture - talking

about spin-off. Outfitters in the Province - he is doing almost all the cutting

now for the outfitters in that particular area. You can go down to the airport

any Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday and all the flights are packed, filled with

meat, meat cut and packaged, ready to go back to the United States or Europe,

all done by this local entrepreneur. And it was spawned by the development

association.

They helped the Cormack Pasture Committee, helped with the

pastures on the West Coast, they helped in the forestry industry with regards to

silviculture and they helped organize and sponsor the golf course. The Upper

Humber Valley golf course in Deer Lake was started the year before last. Last

year, they ran into some problems with regard to weather, getting the seeding

down; next summer, nine holes will be open there. That was sponsored by the

development association in that particular area with funding from ACOA, with

some funding from Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador, along with funding and

help from the development association. Now, we have another industry, as far as

I am concerned, because the golf course is situated next to the airport in Deer

Lake and is going to be a big attraction starting next summer and it is going to

enhance the whole tourism industry on the West Coast of the Province.

They are also involved in a museum. The Member for Port au

Port mentioned that there is no trouble to remember the bad things that people

and organizations do. Everything I have said so far, Mr. Speaker, about the

development association, has been positive. They have a museum started there

now, what they call a heritage museum. If someone passes along the Trans-Canada

in Deer Lake today can see the new building going up, all log construction. They

are still at it there now, and it is going to be a beautiful building come next

spring, so people from around the Province can come in and view the Heritage

Museum in the District of Humber Valley.

I suppose I could say it is going to be a theme museum,

really, because it is going to deal primarily with the logging industry and what

really constituted why that particular area of the Province was developed in the

first place, because of the logging industry. The Fishers and so on came up the

Humber River and went up and logged the area for years, and some of the older

people from around the area got together with the development association and

now we have a brand new building started there in the Deer Lake area.

Another thing they are looking at is an insectarium. There is

neither one in the Province. I do not think there is one east of Montreal. That

is in the works now, for a building to go next year, an insectarium for that

area, and it is going to be a great tourist attraction. The one they put in

Montreal around four years ago, the first year of operation took in $6 million

in revenues just from paying customers on the door. The plans and everything are

drawn up for it now and, hopefully, if it goes through and passes, that

particular building will be put up and that will really, really enhance the

whole area.

Aquaculture - remember I mentioned aquaculture. We have an

aquaculture Arctic Char. A young fellow there has an Arctic Char operation

started in Grand Lake. So far it has been fairly successful and with another

little bit of help he can continue to make it a real success.

We have salmon enhancement on North Brook. We have salmon

enhancement in the Hughes Brook area - all spawned and nourished and helped to

grow by a development association. Now granted, like everything else, an

association is only as good as the people involved in it.

The Minister responsible for Industry, Trade and Technology

mentioned the fact that we had 167 organizations in the Province, and there is

going to come a day when that has to change. I agree. I agree with him

wholeheartedly, but I would go along again with the Member for Port au Port in

saying this: Be very, very careful not to jeopardize something that has already

proven to be a success in this Province. Like I said: Don't throw out the baby

with the bath water. We have to be very careful.

We have to have changes. The rural development movement knows

and realizes that there have to be changes, but we must be very, very careful.

All of those organizations - some of them have different intents. Some of them

have different reasons for existing. ACOA does not do the same thing as a

development association. FAP I do not agree with. As far as I am concerned, FAP

should still be with ACOA, still under ACOA. Never mind another organization;

that is ludicrous. It does the same thing. The only difference is that the only

people eligible for funding under it, you have to be from an area affected by

the fishery, or else someone who