Resource Committee — Department of Mines and Energy with the minister the hon — 27 April 1994
1994-04-27
Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
April 27,
1994 RESOURCE
ESTIMATES COMMITTEE
Pursuant to Standing Order 87, Percy Barrett, M.H.A.
(Bellevue) substitutes for Bud Hulan, M.H.A. (St. George'
s) and Lynn Verge,
M.H.A. (Humber East) substitutes for Edward Byrne, M.H.A. (Kilbride).
The Committee met at 9:00 in the House of Assembly.
MR. CHAIRMAN (Penney): Order, please!
Welcome to our third meeting of the Resource
Estimates Committee. This morning we will be reviewing the estimates of the
Department of Mines and Energy with the minister the hon. Dr. Rex Gibbons.
I'd first like to introduce the members of our
committee, my name is Melvin Penney, I'm the Member for Lewisporte and I'll be
acting as Chairman for the meetings today. On my immediate left is Mr. Rick
Woodford, the Member for Humber Valley who is the Vice-Chairman of the Resource
Estimates Committee. On my left is Mr. Beaton Tulk, the Member for Fogo and Mr.
Paul Shelley, the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay. Other members of the
committee will be along shortly I'm sure.
I would like to welcome to the committee procedures
this morning Mr. Mark Vaughan-Jackson representing The Evening Telegram .
I don't know about the other sectors of the estimates committees but this is the
first time we've had the media present at any of the estimates procedures of the
resource committee and I'm glad to see a representative of The Evening
Telegram here today.
For those of you who are not absolutely familiar
with proceedings, this committee is an extension of the House of Assembly. The
rules that apply to the House of Assembly apply here today, except that it's a
somewhat relaxed procedure. The dress code is not enforced, coffee may be
brought into the Chamber if you wish, the Pages would accommodate you and of
course as we're familiar with members being addressed by the names of the
district that they represent, that does not apply today. Members may be referred
to by their names and if you wish, even by first names.
The procedure that we have agreed to follow with
the Resource Estimates Committee and a procedure that's been quite effective for
us, is that we will allow the minister twenty minutes to make his opening
comments and then we'll allow the Vice-Chairman or his designate twenty minutes
in which to reply. That will be followed by ten minutes per member for
questions. Rather than giving him ten minutes to ask a series of questions - and
expecting the minister to remember the questions and to give appropriate replies
- we've asked that it be done in a procedure very similar to what we use in
Question Period in the House of Assembly. That there be an ongoing dialogue
between both the questioner and the minister, the questions be brief and the
answers be likewise. That has worked quite well for us.
I would remind members of the committee that they
are not permitted to ask questions of the ministers officials but any official
that's here can, on the request of the minister, answer the questions but the
answers are then restricted to fact and they are not at all to answer relating
to policy.
Having said that, Mr. Minister, if you would now
introduce your officials and once you have done that if you would immediately
proceed then to give your opening statement. Mr. Minister.
DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
committee members. I have four officials with me today, on my immediate right is
my Deputy Minister Clyde Granter; on his right is the Assistant Deputy for
petroleum resources, Martin Sheppard; on his right is the Director of
Administration and Budgets for the department, Kevin Whelan; on my immediate
left is the Assistant Deputy Minister for Mines and Energy, Paul Dean. These
officials will help me to answer any of the detailed questions today that you
may put to us.
I do have a statement to make. I'd like to run
through that first to tell you all a little about what we do in the department
and would hope that this statement may help stimulate some questions relative to
the money that we spend in the department and we'll justify our expenditures of
it.
I am pleased today to present to this committee the
budget estimates of the Department of Mines and Energy for the fiscal year,
1994-95. The net expenditures in this coming year is projected at $12.6 million
which is approximately the same as the revised budget figure of the last fiscal
year. The Department of Mines and Energy is responsible for managing the
Provinces' mineral resources and energy resources in a manner that will ensure
that their contributions to the economic well-being of the people of the
Province is maximized and the department is responsible for increasing and
improving the body of knowledge on the Province's mineral and energy resources;
and encouraging the orderly exploration and development of these resources.
The department is also responsible for formulating
mineral and energy policy and providing advice to government on associated
matters, including matters involving onshore and offshore oil and gas, energy
efficiency, conservation and the development of alternative energy resources,
and to ensure the achievement of these goals, the department operates under four
main program areas. We have a geological survey, we have a mineral resource
management branch, a petroleum and energy resources branch and a petroleum and
energy economic branch. The provincial portion of the budget of the
Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board is also included in my department's
estimates, and for this coming year it is $2,071,900, part of that $12,600,000.
Mr. Chairman, I will turn to the Geological Survey
and tell you a little bit about what that survey does and has done in the past
and plans to do in the future.
One of the main activities of the department again
this year will be geo-scientific survey work with the objective of providing
basic geological data for the mineral exploration industry. Geological mapping
has been completed for about 50 per cent of the Province; other elements of the
data base are at roughly similar stages of completion with more completion on
the Island part of the Province than the larger, geographic area of Labrador.
Such information is a major factor in attracting explorationists to the Province
and in the discovery of new mineral deposits.
The program this year will consist of about
thirty-eight projects, that's our present number, most of which are now in the
report preparation and the map preparation phase following four years of field
work over the last four years under the Canada-Newfoundland Mineral Development
Agreement primarily. Only seven projects this year will have a field component.
Last year, as an example, with numerous field surveys, we had over thirty summer
students working. This year, as I understand it, we only have two summer
students working in the geological survey because our Canada-Newfoundland
Mineral Development Agreement has come to an end.
One of the projects this summer that will continue
to be in the field is in Northern Labrador where, in the last year or so there
has been some potential to scout for diamonds so we are continuing an
exploration program in Northern Labrador for diamonds this summer. The total
cost for the geoscience program is reduced to $3.4 million due to the reduced
field program and due to the end of that mineral agreement. However, I am happy
to report that negotiations with the federal government are currently underway
toward a new MDA or more correctly, an extension of the current MDA, and this
has already been announced publicly by the federal minister for Newfoundland,
Mr. Tobin, and we are working out the details now at the officials level and
hope to be bringing something to the provincial Cabinet in the next few weeks
that will, maybe, get us back into field work again this summer to some degree,
but we haven't concluded that yet.
We turn to the Mineral Resource Management Branch.
This branch is responsible for administering the Province's mineral land tenure
system and for regulating all mining developments and operations. This includes
the administration of the mineral land tenure legislation, for example, the
Mineral Act, and Raw Materials Act and jointly with the Department of Finance;
the branch administers mineral holdings impost Act. The branch is also
responsible for implementation of the regulatory framework and required to
control the development, operation and termination of mining operations. This
includes systematic monitoring of ongoing operations and developmental
activities and a pursuit of related opportunities in the mineral sector.
This branch is allocated $2,280,900 this year of
which $471,900 form part of mineral development agreement programs that are a
carry over from last year and, $500,000 in this branch are allocated for the
Mineral Exploration Assistance Program which we launched about a year ago in
June of '93, to cost share some advanced prospects to encourage developments of
some projects.
I would like to say a few words about the mineral
industry and what's happening in the mineral industry in the Province right now.
We have gone through a rather low time in the last few years, and we did hit
rock bottom in 1992. Last year, 1993, we came back from that. We were below $700
million in 1992 in value. Last year we came back to $732 million. We increased
by about 3 per cent in value. For this year, 1994, we are estimating a value of
$790 million, a further increase above 1993 of about 8 per cent, so we're seeing
considerable increase and improvement in the mineral sector.
The mineral sector produces about a dozen
commodities, including iron ore, gold - these are the two major ones - some
copper, asbestos, gypsum, pyrophyllite, slate, limestone, dolomite, stone, sand,
gravel, cement, and peat.
Shipment of non-metals such as asbestos and gypsum,
and structural materials such as cement and stone, accounted for $35 million,
approximately, last year, and metals, primarily iron ore and gold, accounted for
the rest.
The value of iron ore shipments decreased slightly
in 1993 because of lower prices, but only slightly; however, we still produce
approximately 55 per cent of Canada's iron ore products, and estimate that this
year, 1994, we will see shipments of about 20 million tons, an increase of about
2 million over last year.
The Hope Brook gold mine, which was very
successfully reactivated by Royal Oak Mines in 1992, about a year-and-a-half
ago, expects to produce 120,000 ounces of gold in 1994, making it one of the
largest gold mines in Canada. Last year, 1993, it produced a little over 96,000
ounces, so again this reflects some of the increasing value this year. The price
of gold has also increased over last year.
The mining industry is a major contributor to the
Province's economy. It accounts for over $500 million in export sales annually,
and contributes about $100 million to the treasury of the Province in various
taxes. It is also an important market for business opportunities in various
goods and services and, as an employer, the mining industry contributed a
payroll of about $180 million last year. If you consider that only about 3,000 -
or slightly over 3,000 - people work directly in the industry, the payroll is in
the $55,000 to $60,000 range on average per permanent employee in the mining
industry, which is quite substantial compared to some other sectors in the
Province.
The outlook for 1994, I've already given some
indications of it, we are now forecasting up to about an 8 per cent increase in
value chiefly because of an extra 2 million tons of iron ore, but also about
20,000 ounces more of gold. Also, mineral exploration is expected to improve. In
1993 the value - the final number that we got in - was about $8.5 million to $9
million, and we're presently forecasting about $15 million for 1994, and there
is an upside potential to that. It could even go a little bit higher than that.
There are a number of important events in the
mining sector to watch for this year as we move through the year. This year, I
believe, we should get the final decision on Nova Gold in Baie Verte. As I look
across at Mr. Shelley, I say we both hope so. We've been waiting for a year or
so, and I believe this is the year that we will get that decision.
There are also two additional gold deposits in that
region, one called Nugget Pond, over in the Snooks Arm area, and one called
Hammer Down in the Springdale area, and both of these are proposing to go
underground this year, with underground exploration and development. If this
work is successful, both of these, I believe, will becomes mines within the next
couple of years.
Also this year there will be no summer shutdown in
the iron ore sector. Last year IOC had, I believe, five weeks, the year before
last, eight weeks. This year they are having zero weeks, they are having no
shutdown. Not only that, in the last month or so they have started to recall
staff who have been laid off for a number of years. I think they're recalling
100 or so people this year.
In the second half of the year there will also be
further developments in the emerging dimension stone industry, and increased
production from operations that got started in 1992 and 1993.
Unfortunately, everything's not good. The Flat Bay
gypsum mine will close. Currently it's operated by Domtar, but that company has
told us that they are scheduling close down by about October of 1994. They will
produce some more this year, primarily for shipment to Corner Brook for gyproc
production but they have obtained a market in another Province and are going to
get out of the mining business themselves. However, we believe that in the
longer term we can find some other operators that may be interested in looking
at the gypsum resources of that region, the Flat Bay region, and we're going to
vigorously market these resources.
I'll now switch to the petroleum side. The
petroleum and energy resources branch is allocated $3.9 million in this years
budget. The branch is responsible for formulating policy and providing advice to
government on all matters arising out of the Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord
Implementation Act for Newfoundland, also the Petroleum and Natural Gas Act and
the development of subordinate legislation and regulations related to these
acts. This branch liaises significantly with the federal government and with the
offshore board as well as with the oil and gas industry. It monitors and
interprets industry activity and provides assessment of decisions taken by the
board for government. The branch also provides a wide range of technical
expertise with a focus on petroleum, energy efficiencies, alternative energy,
social impact and community relations. The branch also is responsible for
policies and programs promoting the efficient use of energy in all sectors of
the economy.
Relative to the petroleum section, I want to say a
few things about what's happening in that sector, particularly in the onshore
sector because we've had some exciting things go on in the last year or two in
Western Newfoundland. Onshore petroleum exploration in Western Newfoundland has
continued to gain momentum during the last year. We started with an initial
request for bids a couple of years ago. We had a second one that closed last
May, less than a year ago, which resulted in an extra six licenses issued for
about 190,000 hectares and exploration commitments of about $5.7 million and
that money is getting spent.
Labrador Mining and Exploration Company, which took
two licenses in the Parsons Pond area last year, continued to do seismic surveys
in that area, adding to the work they had done on earlier licenses. Vinland
Petroleum required two permits in the Deer Lake basin and has spent some time
doing some work on the potential in the Deer Lake basin. They made an
interesting report to me a couple of months ago on their activities. They're
very enthused and they're promoting potential internationally and attended an
international oil and gas show in the United States a few months ago promoting
that.
Canadian Roxanna Resources; a new player, they
haven't been in Western Newfoundland before or in Newfoundland before to my
knowledge, acquired a permit in the Flat Bay area, south of Stephenville. They
haven't even started their exploration program and I'm hoping to see some action
from them this year. Most encouragingly though, Hunt Oil last year bid $5.1
million to get the on land permit to the Port au Port Peninsula. Since then they
have done an extensive seismic survey, they completed the survey around the end
of March - I'm not sure of the exact date but around the end of March - 87
kilometres last fall through the winter. They have identified targets and they
are seriously considering a possible well later this summer. They indicated in a
public meeting in the Port au Port area a few weeks ago that there was a 70 per
cent chance that they would drill a well that would be about 12,000 - 15,000
feet deep, a conventional vertical well on a structure, on the Port au Port. I'm
hoping that they will carry through with that and I'm looking forward to it.
Marathon Petroleum has an offshore permit in Bay
St. George. They've also completed seismic work in the bay, as well as
air-magnetic surveys in the bay in cooperation with onshore. They've identified
structures and have proposed to directionally drill a well from the onshore near
the draw into a structure in the near offshore. This particular well that
they've suggested would be about a mile deep. I think they said 5,550 feet
directionally drilled. They are presently trying to find a drilling rig that
they could bring to the Province to do that work. They have an application
before the offshore board for a permit to drill as well as an application to us
because they are drilling from on land.
It is very encouraging to have these companies
actively exploring in the Province and we can only wish them well. This is the
first time we have had this type of activity proposed based on seismically
discovered geological structures. In the past, most of the drilling that was
done was based on surficial geology and oil seeps and you could call it rank
wildcats and most of that was very shallow drilling. This time you have a little
more to go on, they are still wildcats but at least they have well-identified
structural, geological targets. I will switch now to a little bit that the
petroleum side does on the regulatory aspects of petroleum.
Global competition for petroleum investment capital
coupled with low, crude oil prices over the last few months has led to a
dramatic swing in activity and not just the last few months but the last few
years the prices have tended downwards but particularly in the last year, the
prices have been the lowest they have been in many, many years, and companies
are looking for, I guess the most prosperous place to put their money in terms
of where they are likely to have discoveries and where they can get quick return
they are looking all over the world, so we have to compete with the world in our
frontier areas.
We are trying to enhance our competitiveness in
this regard so that companies will come to this Province. Increasing
competitiveness is also a priority of other provincial and federal authorities
and we are working with the federal government and with Nova Scotia in
particular, for the Atlantic region in reviewing all regulations regarding oil
and gas legislation and the rights issuance process. We are also comparing our
situation with the situation for example in the North Sea; around the North Sea,
Norway, the United Kingdom and elsewhere. I expect to receive some
recommendations within the next few months from the work that is being done by
the joint federal/provincial committee. A number of things have been done in the
past, for example removing the 50 per cent Canadian ownership federally, a year
or so ago and we think that helps. We have also extended licences from seven to
nine years and we think that helps but we have to look at everything else as
well.
On the energy efficiency and alternative energy
side, back in 1991, I put an advisory committee in place to look at all aspects
of energy use in the Province and that committee which is made up of people from
the producer sector, the user sector, the utility and distributor sector, as
well as the federal government, looked at it and put together what they call
the: 10-Year strategic plan for energy efficiency and alternative energy. In
1992, that plan was approved by the provincial government and included in the
Province's Strategic Economic Plan, with the objectives primarily of a 20 per
cent improvement in efficiency and energy use and a 50 per cent increase in the
use of alternative energy sources.
These measures contained in the plan are designed
to meet these objectives by stimulating economically, viable energy options. A
recent progress report on the first two years of the plan shows that
twenty-three measures have been implemented by the government, by the utilities
and by other participants since we started, so we are making progress. Actual
expenditures have totalled $3.7 million, with the main provincial contribution
being the staff of one particular division in the department. The resulting
investment as a result of this money has totalled $10.8 million. Of particular
interest is a reduction of energy costs in government-funded institutions. There
have been a number of energy performance contracts for example, where, the
private sector paid the bills and are getting paid out of the energy savings so
it is not costing us anything, and several other such projects are underway
right now.
Also, jointly with the federal government and a
company called Superior Propane, a pilot project is underway to sponsor a
transfer to the use of propane fuel as a transportation fuel. Our participation
here was to reduce the tax on propane from 15.7 cents per litre to 7 cents a
litre and we are having some effect; about 120 vehicles are now converted and we
are aiming for 2,000 vehicles in Newfoundland within the next four to five
years. On Monday, April 25th, two days ago, I informed this House about the
signing of a four-year Letter of Co-operation on energy efficiency and
alternative energy with Canada, with my federal counterpart, Miss McLellan.
This agreement provides for an orderly planning and
control of co-operative initiatives to boost energy efficiency and the use of
local alternative energy resources and it follows from Action 95 of the
Strategic Economic Plan.
In addition this year, and in this Budget, we have
funding for an integrated energy resource plan for the Province. This plan is to
be prepared in co-operation with the energy industry and the Public Utilities
Board with advice from that advisory committee, and it is a recommendation of
the advisory committee coming out of its planning over the last two years. The
intent of the plan is to establish a process that would lead in this Province to
the least cost-mix for future supply and demand options.
I want to say a few words about the Offshore
Development Fund. The Canada Offshore Development Fund, a $300 million fund that
was put in place when this Province started towards the development of the
offshore. To date twenty-five projects have been approved and the total
commitment to now is $279.4 million and the balance in the fund is only about
$20 million which is very little. I do not know if there are any new projects
coming forward but certainly we need to keep a few dollars in the fund in case
something particularly important comes forward.
On the offshore I probably should say a few words
about what is happening with Hibernia. I know it has been in the news quite a
lot but I want to emphasize some of the positives of what has been happening in
this Province relative to Hibernia. I want to say a little bit about
expenditures. Up to March 31, the end of last month, expenditures on the project
have totalled $2.17 billion with 70 per cent of that money in Canada and 39 per
cent of that money in Newfoundland, so $390 million out of every billion in the
last few years has been spent in Newfoundland.
As we look forward for the next three years we are
looking at at least $1 billion a year until Hibernia floats out to sea, three
years at $1 billion a year, and again assuming the same amount we are looking at
again about $400 million per year being spent in this Province on Hibernia.
One of the positive things about this is the number
of people directly employed. At the end of March there were 4,017 people working
in this Province and 3306 working at Bull Arm, 519 in St. John's, and 192 in
Marystown and some others internationally, but over 4000 in this Province. A
year ago the number was less than half that. We are reaching towards the peak
and this summer we expect to reach the peak, but when you look at Marystown
there are now around 200 and looking down the road a year, by this time next
year I believe Marystown should be pushing 400 to 500, maybe close to 500 people
on the Hibernia project. At Bull Arm 3300 should be become 3500 this summer, and
I expect it to go higher than 3500. I do not know what the top will be but it
will continue to grow.
On March 31 an office in Montreal that had 183
people working in it closed and these people, most of them, transferred to this
Province, so approximately 200 people came down from Montreal and started
working here the first week of April. We are at least 4200 right now in this
Province and still growing, a lot of direct dollars going into our economy.
The super module being built at Bull Arm has passed
the 50 per cent mark. They had a ceremony a few weeks ago when the passed the 50
per cent mark. They have done great work and the people working on it have
received great praise because not only is the quality good but the productivity
is good and they are ahead of the Koreans who are building two super modules and
they are ahead of the Italians who are building two super modules.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
I remind the minister that he has gone over his
allocated time of twenty minutes, but if the committee is prepared to give him
leave we will allow him to continue.
DR. GIBBONS: If you could give me two minutes
then we can wrap it up? I will not go to the end of the notes I have here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister, proceed.
DR. GIBBONS: The other thing I want to mention
about Hibernia concerns Marystown. Even though we were disappointed earlier on
in the year and did not get one of the contracts we were working hard to get we
did finally get contracts for drilling derricks, and the driller's pipe rack,
modules 71, 72, and 73, and we also got contracts to build two supply boats, so
in total right now we believe the amount of work at Marystown is about equal to
what we expected to get with the earlier contract we bid on and did not get.
Another thing we have worked on considerably in the
last year is in the royalty area, the economic section. We spent a considerable
amount of time on royalties and recently, a few weeks ago we approved a royalty
regime for the onshore sector of the Province and are presently continuing some
work to get one for the offshore sector, a generic royalty system, and we hope
to finish that in the next few weeks.
I will stop there, Mr. Chairman, and let the
vice-chair have it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
Before we proceed any further, I would ask if I
could have a motion to adopt the minutes as distributed, the minutes of the
previous two estimate committee meetings, April 19 and April 20, dealing with
the estimates of the Department of Industry, Trade and Technology, and the
Department of Tourism and Culture.
On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would like to take advantage of
the opportunity now to welcome another couple of members of our committee, Mr.
Don Whelan, the Member for Harbour Main, and Mr. Percy Barrett, the Member for
Bellevue, who will be filling in this morning for Dr. Bud Hulan, the Member for
St. George's. I would also like to recognize this morning Mr. Glenn Tobin, the
Member for Burin - Placentia West.
One point that I omitted when I was going through
my opening remarks is to remind officials that if they speak in reply to
questions we would ask them to first of all introduce themselves, and secondly
to lean into the microphones. In the Legislative Chamber here we're used to
standing to speak, and the microphones are placed accordingly. Today you will be
speaking from a sitting position, so we will ask you to lean into the
microphone, and for the benefit of the people doing the recording that you would
introduce yourself so that it can be properly noted in Hansard.
Having said that, I will now turn it over to Mr.
Woodford.
MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The minister, in his remarks in his opening
statement, one of the statements he made, and one of the comments he made, was
pertaining to the onshore oil exploration and activity on the West Coast of the
Province.
You mentioned Hunt Oil in the Port au Port area,
and you mentioned Parson's Pond, I think, Labrador Petroleum, is it?
AN HON. MEMBER: Labrador Mining and
Exploration.
MR. WOODFORD: Labrador Mining and Exploration.
AN HON. MEMBER: A subsidiary of Norcen Energy.
MR. WOODFORD: In the Parson's Pond area. He
also mentioned in the Deer Lake area there was some activity especially as it
pertains to Vinland Petroleum.
Could the minister elaborate on that particular
area and tell me what has been done in the past year there, and what are the
plans for the upcoming year?
DR. GIBBONS: Yes, Mr. Chairman, Vice-Chairman,
Vinland is a local, Newfoundland based company that has obtained I believe it's
three permits in total - two in that area and one in the Northern Peninsula
area, I believe it is - and they did a survey of all the available literature as
well as some field work this summer, and they looked at the possibility that
they might try to do a seismic line across the basin this year. They have not
done any seismic to date. It would start to get into significant dollars to do
seismic, but the geological model that they showed me was very interesting
looking, and they seemed to be very enthused about it, and they were hoping to
be able to do a seismic profile across the basin as their next step.
I think they are working on the possibility of
trying to arrange that in the future. I haven't heard anything from them now in
about two months, I believe, but they made a presentation to me in my office and
showed us what they had done, and they put together a nice picture of the
geology of the basin and what they consider to be the potential of the basin.
The rocks are of the right age that there is
potential for oil and gas, but we have no known sources, although I think there
might have been some gas puffs in the past - are you aware of that - from some
of the drillings, from the shell drillings from gas pumps, but there is
potential there with the rocks of this particular age that they could have some
gas and oil. It doesn't have the same historical work that we know about in
Parson's Pond or Shoal Point on the Port au Port, but it has some potential and
they're promoting it.
MR. WOODFORD: You also mentioned that you have
agreed, and came up with a royalty scheme for the onshore development, because I
think that one of the concerns that Hunt Oil had in the Port au Port area for a
few months was the royalty scheme, and whether they - I don't know whether they
- maybe it was just rumour, whether they are going to keep on drilling or make a
decision to drill a well this summer. So you've mentioned that you got a royalty
scheme, is that scheme favourable to the companies and have they agreed so far
with it?
DR. GIBBONS: We've reviewed it with the
companies and it's approximately like a scheme that's in place for Canada Lands
by the federal government but a little less onerous then that particular scheme
because we are, in a sense, a virgin area where there's no production going on.
We have reviewed it with the companies and it appears that it's acceptable to
Hunt Oil. It's very comparable actually to a proposal that they made to us when
they were looking at what the potential number should be. There's some
variations in structure but in terms of the take by the industry, by the
government from the industry is about the same as what they saw as appropriate.
MR. WOODFORD: I understand that there's an
environmental assessment being done now that pertains to the Tiara Marble
Company on the Goose Arm Road, the dimensional stone whichever, could the
minister give me a run down or his officials on the status of that particular
development now?
DR. GIBBONS: Yes, well I know that we helped
sponsor some drilling on that particular development last fall under our mineral
exploration incentive program. As a matter of fact we contributed $38,125
towards a joint project where we go up 50/50 on the drilling, up to $80,000. So
they did a project that was twice that I guess and I know that they had to get
approval from environment to even get that drilling to go ahead. Now I'm not
sure exactly what the status is of the other environmental work there but
they've got a huge marble deposit that has a variety of colours in a number of
spots. What I should do is ask Paul Dean, the Assistant Deputy, who is most
familiar with that and maybe Paul can give a more detailed report.
MR. DEAN: The drilling that was done last fall
by Tiara identified the best type of marble and the marble that would be most
acceptable in the marketplace, the colour and texture. There's a variety of
marble types there, as we know. So the next stage is to remove some commercial
blocks. In order to do that on a commercial basis the Department of Environment
and Lands has asked for an environmental preview report. My understanding is
that the terms of reference for that report have been finalized or near to being
finalized - the terms of reference included public hearings at the Legion in
Deer Lake. I don't think the preview report, as such, is very far along and
until that report is completed and the public hearings are taking place then the
quarrying cannot proceed. Hopefully that will happen in 1994.
MR. WOODFORD: Could the minister or his
officials give me a so called status report on the Glover Island activity as it
pertains to the exploration for gold?
DR. GIBBONS: Yes, Mr. Vice-Chairman, there was
drilling on Glover Island as well last year. As a matter of fact there were two
different drilling projects on the island, two different zones. We again
cost-shared one up to $80,000, the maximum under our exploration incentive
program with the company, again a Newfoundland based company, and that was the
Lunch Pond zone on Glover Island and we cost-shared Kettle Pond drilling as well
for a total of $16,317 for us. I don't know exactly where it sits today and what
they plan to do in 1994 but again I would ask Mr. Dean if he could give us some
more details on what he knows about their plans for 1994.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, Minister. Some of the
drilling that took place in 1993 was successful. There's a lot of gold on the
southern end of Glover Island but to date, I guess I could say in
summary that a
large enough body of sufficient grade hasn't been outlined by exploration. So
it's our view in the department that more exploration is required. Most of the
exploration that's been done there to date has been encouraging but the grades
have been relatively low versus some of the deposits on the Baie Verte Peninsula
for instance
MR. WOODFORD: Minister, I can't help but take
notice that this morning there are no officials available or present from
Newfoundland Hydro. Every other year that I have been involved in the estimates
there have been officials available from Newfoundland Hydro to either assist the
minister or whatever, for informational purposes, whichever. In any case, the
report from Newfoundland Hydro from last year, is there any indication when that
will be available?
DR. GIBBONS: Yes, I know that. Mr. Vice-Chair,
I have to tell you that in my memory I don't think there was anyone with us from
Newfoundland Hydro last year. I know in some earlier years they were with us
because there were line items in the budget related to Hydro in terms of
subsidies that the government was paying to Hydro, but last year there was no
one from Hydro with us, and this year there is no line item in my budget dealing
with Hydro. We no longer pay any subsidies to Hydro. They're not present in the
budget, but the annual report from Hydro is a different matter. The statutory
requirement of Hydro is that that report be available to me, that I receive it
by April 30, so I shall receive a copy. They have never failed yet to deliver
the annual report, provided to me by the statutory date, April 30, which day is
what, Friday of this week?
AN HON. MEMBER: Saturday.
DR. GIBBONS: Within fifteen days after that, I
believe, I am required to table it in the House of Assembly, so in the next
couple of weeks I would expect that the published report will be available.
I have been told that the report is at the printer
right now being printed, and we're waiting on completion of the printer. As soon
as it comes back from the printer then the one for tabling in the House will be
available, but I will receive the statutory copy no later than April 30. The law
requires that they give it to me by that day.
MR. WOODFORD: Minister, approximately a year
ago - and you can clarify that for me; I don't know the exact date, but I think
it was approximately a year ago - you said, I think it was in last spring's
session, before we ended in June month, that the privatization of Hydro was not
viable at that time. Correct me if I'm wrong. Why would there be a difference in
the privatization of Hydro not being viable last spring and would be in the
fall, a few months after? Can the minister explain that statement?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Vice-Chair, I don't remember
ever saying that privatization was not viable. I don't remember ever saying the
privatization of Hydro was not viable. I don't know where that comment is...
What has changed, we had not made any decision on
the privatization of Hydro a year ago, and I think we have been over and over
that in the last few months, but we've been assessing it and we made the
decision two months ago that we were going to proceed with it, but only after a
lot of analysis and finally a decision by the government.
A year ago I would not have known whether it was
viable or not in terms of an analysis that was done, because at that time we had
not completed any analysis. This is April. It was January a year ago that we
started the second assessment of the proposal from Light and Power to buy some
components of Hydro, in particular the 15 per cent of distribution assets now
owned by Hydro, including the rural diesel areas, and some transmission related
to it. We started that analysis in January, the second time around. We had done
it, as everybody knows, back in 1989 relevant to a report from Fortis to buy
some components, but we had not done a great detailed analysis of Hydro for
privatization. We have done that in the last twelve months or so.
MR. WOODFORD: Can the minister tell me whether
- I heard early last fall there were some rumours, nothing official, just some
talk around, that Newfoundland Hydro was thinking about - there was a
possibility of them going for a rate increase. Now I haven't heard anything
since and, like I said, there might not have been anything to it, but would
there be anything the minister could tell me that would indicate, whether they
are privatized or not, that Newfoundland Hydro would have to go for a rate
increase in any case, in the past year?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Vice-Chairman, the last time
that Hydro was in, again I don't know the exact dates but it was in 1992 I
believe that Hydro was in to the Public Utilities Board for a rate hearing and
at that time the Public Utilities Board ruled and gave a report, effectively
gave them no increase, effectively left them with fixed rates. It was at that
time that we, as a government, made a decision that we were not going to allow
even a recommendation of the PUB to carry forward relative to some recommended
increases in rural diesel areas and said that we were going to have a policy
hearing on rural diesel rates. That one did get called last year although it did
not get held because it got tangled up in a sense with the timing of the Hydro
privatization assessment. Hydro said a year ago that they were not going to look
for any increases for 1994, I think I said that in the House and they did not
look for any increases for 1994. What we are now saying is that Hydro would
expect to go to the Public Utilities Board in the fall of 1994 for new rates for
1995 subject to privatization. It would be a rate hearing in the fall of 1994
for next year but they decided they did not need to go in in 1993 for a rate
increase for 1994.
MR. WOODFORD: So what the minister is saying,
whether Newfoundland Hydro is privatized or not, that they would be going to the
PUB in 1994 for a rate increase?
DR. GIBBONS: No, I am not really saying that. I
am saying subject to privatization - they certainly said since we have been
dealing with privatization in the last few months - they certainly said that
they would be going to the Public Utilities Board in the fall of 1994 for a
review of rates for 1995 for a privatized Hydro and I don't think we have made
any comment on what they would or would not do if it were not privatized, I have
not discussed that. I have not said anything publicly on it either.
MR. WOODFORD: Wouldn't it be obvious that if
you went for a rate increase for a privatized Hydro based on what the minister
and the government has made available now, that surely god they would be going
for one, if they are not -
DR. GIBBONS: They probably would as well, again
that would be subject to the company making that decision. Then the PUB ruling,
they could rule like they did in 1992 saying: sorry you get nothing or they
could give them something depending on what is being asked for but the last time
they went in in 1992 they did not get an increase. They were allowed to keep - I
believe, if I understand it right - the same base rates.
MR. WOODFORD: Has the minister or his
officials, been approached or know whether Newfoundland Light are planning to go
for an increase this year?
DR. GIBBONS: I have not heard anything on it.
Again, last year they decided not to go in for a rate increase for 1994 and I
have not heard any comments from that company as to whether or not they would be
going in 1994 for 1995 but normally these companies have been going in about
every couple of years. That has been the normal practice, every few years they
would be going into the board and getting a review of rates and review of costs.
MR. WOODFORD: A few years ago - I just forget
what Budget it was now, I believe it was Budget 1991 - there was a statement on
mini-hydro sites in the Province, up to 15 megawatts and so on and there was a
lot of activity over the last couple of years by small companies around the
Province and outside the Province as it pertains to mini-hydro sites and hydro
developments in areas of the Province. In fact, there were a number of
submissions given to Newfoundland Hydro at the time and I think they called for
a total megawattage of some fifty. I think there was a total of 50 megawatts
called in small hydro sites, so there were a number submitted to Newfoundland
Hydro, I know that and there were some adjustments made as it pertains to the
tender at that time because of the local preference policy, that had to be
recalled and I think that deadline was last August. Has there been any activity
or, why hasn't there been any activity since that? Would that have anything to
do with this proposal to privatize or what, because there has been absolutely
nothing on it since last August?
DR. GIBBONS: No. I can bring the hon. member up
to date on that. Vice-Chair, you and I, both recall when the amendment was put
through this Legislature to allow up to fifty megawatts to be done by private
developers and Hydro put out the proposal call looking for, in a sense, the
first time around looking for expressions of interest and they received
expressions of interest on over thirty sites; and then, the second time around
which was last year, they said: okay, now let's get serious and let's get the
detailed, specific proposals in with the quality of power that could be
produced, and proposed rate at which that company could develop that quality of
power.
Initially, that was supposed to be decided on, as
you said, mid-summer last year, last July-August, but things had been changing
in the last two years in terms of our energy demand on the Island; our growth in
demand had decreased because, primarily of our recession so instead of needing
these sites to be available by 1996-'97, which was what we thought two years
ago, the date kept getting pushed later, and now, the sites don't need to be on
stream until 1998-1999, because our energy demand has flattened considerably,
and has not grown so steeply as it was growing when the initial proposal call
went out.
The initial proposal call said up to fifty
megawatts. The final response that came in last year had, I think, eleven
projects totalling something over 100 megawatts. Hydro reviewed these proposals
and they selected four, that totalled thirty-eight megawatts. They didn't select
fifty because the call only said up to fifty and if they had selected one more
it would have put it over fifty and the next one in line I think would have
driven it to about fifty-three or so, but they took the four projects that bid
the lowest four prices and were all technically acceptable.
The companies that did not win were informed in
December. There were seven companies that bid, were informed in December: we are
sorry, you are off the short list, we have done our evaluation, we have
short-listed four, the rest of you are gone. The four that were short-listed are
then reflected in the privatization legislation. They are reflected in that
legislation saying that Hydro could purchase up to thirty-eight megawatts of
small hydro from these sources without requiring PUB approval to buy these
thirty-eight megawatts of power.
Because they are part way through the process, it
is a legitimate process done through public proposal call, following the rules
of the Province, and what Hydro was told, the four that are on the short-list is
that, we will tell you by June, whether we need your power in 1998-'99 or not.
We are presently reviewing our demand forecast - and they do this every six
months approximately - our demand forecast, right now we are thinking we will be
needing in 1998-'99 and we are going to tell you by June, so within the next
month or so, these companies will be informed and if it is yes, then we will see
them start to get on with their field work and get into the construction in the
next year or so to have power available by 1998. If that power is then developed
and available by 1998, that power would take us through to at least the year
2000, maybe 2001, depending on our growth rate at the time, maybe 2002 even.
MR. WOODFORD: Could the minister tell me the
names of the four companies that were short-listed?
DR. GIBBONS: Abitibi-Price and Star Lake is one
of them; a company in your district -
MR. WOODFORD: Algonquin?
DR. GIBBONS: - Rattling Brook is it?
MR. WOODFORD: Rattling Brook, Algonquin Power
out of -
DR. GIBBONS: Rattling Brook, I can't remember
the name of the company but it is about a four to seven megawatt project and
there is one on North West Brook, another on South West Brook in the Trinity Bay
area, so these are the four that are on the short-list. I don't remember the
exact names of the companies but these are the four areas and one of them is
your area.
MR. WOODFORD: So the Abitibi-Price one must be
a fairly big one, is it?
DR. GIBBONS: No, it is a fifteen megawatt.
Nothing is bigger than fifteen and I think we have two fifteens in this total
plus a seven and a four, but the total is thirty-eight, and they will get their
decision by June but they are on the short-list as the winners, subject to
getting a decision in June that the power should be available by 1998.
If the demand shows the power is not needed by
1998, they may have to be told: We're sorry; we don't need your power until
another year later, because they should not put the cost of any new power into
the grid, because the rate payers will have to pay, until it's needed, so this
is why the company is being cautious about it and saying: We only start buying
when we need.
MR. WOODFORD: One final short question, Mr.
Minister. What would be the excess megawattage in the Province now?
DR. GIBBONS: There isn't a big excess as such.
MR. WOODFORD: It's just the demand is not
there.
DR. GIBBONS: That's right; the growth is not
there. What Hydro tries to do is have enough to meet the demand plus a cushion,
so they always try to maintain that cushion, and I don't remember exactly what
the number is, but they try to maintain that cushion.
Even in 1998-'99 you wouldn't be down to the two
things meeting. There's still that cushion there, but they always have to keep
the cushion because when you hit the cold periods in January, February and March
you reach certain peak levels and you have to be able to handle those peak
levels. So they have energy demands and power demands differently.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr.
Tulk.
MR. TULK: I have a couple of questions for the
minister on the peat industry in the Province. The minister will recall that
last year there was an international conference in Corner Brook on this very
industry. I think it's safe to say that the peat industry in Newfoundland right
now is in its infancy; at least it's not in an embryo stage or something. That
conference was a very good conference. It is one of the best that I have
attended in the forty years that I have been alive, but I am not aware that
there is -
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TULK: Forty years, that's right.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. TULK: My grey is premature.
I am not aware that that much has happened in the
Province since, or what has been the follow-up. I would like for the minister to
elaborate on that somewhat, and perhaps outline to us in what particular areas
of the Province that the economic possibilities are, and just what he foresees
happening in the very near future for that kind of thing.
DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Tulk.
There is no question that this Province has some
huge peat resources and, as a geologist myself, my familiarity with that
resource goes back to when I was a student geologist. The first year that I was
a student geologist thirty years ago, out on a field survey for this
Newfoundland government, there was another field party out there doing a peat
survey, and I remember the book they put out in 1968 on the peat resources of
this Province. They are huge. They are still there, for the most part, and we
haven't had a lot of development.
We, as a department, participated, and as a
government, and some other agencies of government, participated in organizing
that particular conference last fall. We have always tried to promote the growth
of the industry.
I think what is unfortunate about the peat industry
is it's a low value industry for the most part, but we have had some progress.
For example, there is a high point peat company in central Newfoundland that has
had some great success with peat as an oil absorbent, because that is a high
value type end product, and they are manufacturing it and shipping it around the
world. Most of their markets for peat are down around the Caribbean, primarily
tied in with oil clean-up and some things like that, but they are exporting it
to Texas, they are exporting into Argentina, Venezuela - I think Argentina -
anyway, most of the product that is produced goes to export, and that is where
they are getting the high value for this product.
The horticultural area of peat seems to be a low
value, and we haven't made much progress in that, and we still want to promote
it, and there is also some discussion, consideration still, of peat for energy.
A lot has been in the news, of course, about the proposal at Stephenville to
have a peat burning facility there, but at this stage it hasn't been approved.
We have several permits out in our department on peat bogs for development; some
are in the operating stage and some that are just there, I think, looking for an
opportunity and I wish we could move faster.
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, I presume we have ten
minutes to go back and forth?
MR. CHAIRMAN: (Inaudible).
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, the Stephenville
project, I think it is the Stanton Group.
Those people were at that conference last year, and
I wonder if the minister could elaborate on that and tell us just what the
status is on that project without of course, endangering the project itself,
and, if any comment he makes publicly, will endanger that project, then of
course, I can understand he would not want to make it; but I wonder if he could
fill us in on the status of that project, just where it is and what are the
problems being encountered with it, because it seems to me that, that is a major
project for that area.
It is highly labour intensive and will employ a
great many people as well as add to our, I suppose, probably a surplus of
electricity in the Province, but it will certainly add to the amount of
electricity that we have in the Province and will probably lead to technological
spin off in the peat industry. I wonder if he would like to comment on all those
things about the Stanton project in Stephenville.
DR. GIBBONS: Well again, Mr. Chairman, I don't
want to get into great details on it but it is a project to burn peat, that will
be one of the fuel sources and a generator at the Abitibi mill in Stephenville.
This type of generation was not included in the proposal call that Hydro made a
couple of years ago; they were looking for small hydro as the sources, and the
Stephenville proponents have been saying that they should be considered too and
they are still talking about ways that that might be possible, but I am not sure
if there are ways in the short time, but I guess the initial message is, as I
said a few minutes ago to the Vice-Chairman, if Hydro takes the four small hydro
projects totalling thirty-eight megawatts for '98-'99 supply, then, there is not
going to be a need for any new supply to go into the grid until 2000, 2001 or
whatever the year is depending on our demand growth, so I think Stanton and the
Abitibi people at Stephenville are looking at other possible options to try to
have their project considered earlier and I don't know what will happen to that.
MR. TULK: Yes. There is one other question,
minister: Is this project with Stanton, are they requiring any public money, or
are we just looking at private money? Has there been any public money put into
that, or any assistance from government in other words I guess, is what I am
saying, at either federal or provincial level and to what extent or, are we
talking about private money and just how much are they prepared to invest in
that project themselves?
DR. GIBBONS: I think for the most part, most of
these small energy projects that I have talked about including Stanton and the
small hydro, are presently using private money. Some of them may have had access
to some money from, maybe ACOA, in doing their assessments initially, but
certainly after selection of the project whichever it should be, it would be all
private money, it would not be government's money, it would be outside money.
MR. TULK: Okay. It could turn to another aspect
though. When we talk about what is happening with the peat industry in
Stephenville, I think we are talking about the fuel side of things, however that
fuel is converted, and in this case I think it will be converted into
electricity, but we are talking about the fuel side of the peat industry. There
is the other side as the minister mentioned and that is the horticultural
industry, peat industry that is possible.
There was a great deal of interest in that
conference last fall. There were people from Ireland, people from Germany,
people from all over the world actually at that conference, who expressed some
interest. Has there been any developments in those fields from, let's say,
foreign countries, expressing any interest in coming here and getting into the
horticultural peat industry at all or, are we still where we were before the
conference, because I say to the minister, I think it is a shame if there is no
follow-up to that conference. I think it's a shame, because I think there's
great potential particularly, I might say to the minister, in my own area, in
the Gander to, shall we say, Lumsden area, in the Bonavista North area where we
were told, I think, at that conference, or led to believe, that of the
inventories that have been done of horticultural peat, the peat in, shall we
say, the Bonavista North and Gander area is probably the highest quality of
horticultural peat that you could find in Newfoundland, and certainly has the
greatest amount. I am not sure about the quality, but I think it has probably
the greatest amount.
Could the minister comment on that whole area to
say what is happening? Is anything happening, or is this another conference that
was just held and that will be the final end of it? Because it was a great
conference and it's a crime if somebody doesn't follow up and try to get those
people interested in this thing.
DR. GIBBONS: Certainly, Mr. Chair, our
intention is to continue to follow up wherever there is an economic possibility
and, as Mr. Tulk said, we do have great resources on the peat side, but the
problem seems to come down to the economics of taking this type of resource and
getting it out for export, and a number of companies have looked at different
options to do that so that it could be done in an economic way.
We unfortunately have a problem with the cost of
transportation if we're trying to take low value product a long distance, and a
lot of competition on it, unless you're dealing with a high value product like
the stuff at High Point where they're dealing with advanced products, Oclinsorb
(?). The value doesn't seem to be there unless you find some way to take it out
in bulk, and that's still being looked at, so there are still those who want to
do that, and we want to encourage it, and I want them to find a way to do it,
but transportation costs seem to be our biggest negative factor. There's no
problem with the resource. We are not bound by the quantity and quality of the
resource; there's plenty.
MR. TULK: Thank you.
Just one other question, Minister: How big a
problem - you might want to get one of your officials to answer; no, the
minister is probably an expert in this as well - is the weather conditions in
Newfoundland, because peat demands a fair amount of dry weather, I believe. I'm
not an expert. How big a problem is weather itself in Newfoundland in terms of
the drying of peat and turning it into either a fuel or a horticultural product?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chairman, I'm not an expert in
that either.
MR. TULK: Aren't you?
DR. GIBBONS: No, not on the weather.
MR. TULK: I thought you were.
DR. GIBBONS: I have been told -
MR. TULK: You're too modest.
DR. GIBBONS: I have been told that our weather
is one of our problems, that we have so much rainy weather that we are limited
in terms of the number of drying days - or drying hours, even - that are
available to get peat available for energy or otherwise. That is one of our
problems. I don't know if Paul Dean or Martin Sheppard might want to add to
that.
MR. SHEPPARD: Just to confirm what the minister
says in terms of the drainage problems we have, there has been some work done
into a procedure for draining the bogs, called mole (inaudible) -
MR. TULK: I saw it last year, yes.
MR. SHEPPARD: - which is a specific technique
that seems to get rid of the moisture better than conventional techniques but,
as you say, the drying season is very limited in Newfoundland, and that is one
of the severe constraints that we are faced with in terms of peat development,
either for horticultural purposes or as a fuel.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Okay, we will go to Mr. Shelley.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have a few questions to start with relating to
the mining, just one specifically to the estimates, on page 157, 2.1.06. That
has to do with the MDAII, of course, the Canada-Newfoundland Cooperation
Agreement. That is the whole reason for the increase from $682,300 in total, to
$92,100?
DR. GIBBONS: Okay, page number is 157.
MR. SHELLEY: I realize that that has ended, the
Canada-Newfoundland Corporation Agreement, the mineral development. That $92,100
that is there now for the estimates, is that the same amount that was there
while the agreement was in place?
DR. GIBBONS: No.
MR. SHELLEY: For the provincial allocation?
DR. GIBBONS: No, this is some carry-over money
to help with some reports and to get some maps done because anything that is
approved by March 31 and not spent, can be carried over into this fiscal year.
So that is some carry-over money under the agreement and you can imagine that
people who have been working on reports and maps and doing field work for the
last four years have a lot of reports to do, maps to complete, so there is some
carry over this year for them to complete that work.
MR. SHELLEY: Okay, that is the carry-over - the
question I guess basically is that there is no money from the provincial this
year that has gone into that?
DR. GIBBONS: Yes, but if you look at a
different page, on the next page you will see Mineral Resource Management -
MDAII, here is where we have approved some carry-over money in that particular
category. On the field survey side, Geological survey side, the field work was
finished as of last year. So now it's just a matter of reports and maps that
(inaudible) but if you look at that next page, you can see that we still have a
fairly significant amount being carried over this year under the agreement and
you see some big numbers there. For example, under Grants and Subsidies, under
Mineral Resource Management, you see $175,500, that is for the prospectors
grants and training programs. We have a course that is starting next month, May
28, for example where in the fourth year we do the prospectors training program
at Stephenville. This year we are going to have forty prospectors grants, in
previous years we had given out twenty-five a year, this year we had enough
money to carry over, in the final carry-over year of the agreement, that we can
give out forty grants. So we are still trying to stimulate that sector.
MR. SHELLEY: Okay, well that is a good answer
because that was the question I was leading up to and that's the courses for
this year and if it rolled into this particular part.
DR. GIBBONS: Yes, that is covered because we
approved it and carried the money into the Budget.
MR. SHELLEY: Are you saying Stephenville, those
courses -
DR. GIBBONS: We have held them every year in
the Stephenville Community College because it has some excellent facilities. It
is an excellent base because it is only a short distance from various types of
geology and mining opportunities that people can study.
MR. SHELLEY: And of course to tie this all
together with geological survey - I think I read in your book that there are
something like 96 per cent, 96.5 per cent actually, have their provinces
available for mineral exploration and of course exploration will take place - of
course a big incentive is to have good work done in geological surveys and that
is the whole reason behind all of this, right? That is what I was leading up to
just then in the estimates.
Okay, some more specifics now and a lot of it
happens to be in my district so I guess I have to ask them from that
perspective. The first one I will mention - and it has not been talked about
very much lately but I would just like to have an update on it - is C-Core and
what they were doing at the bay there in Baie Verte? I think there was some
scuba diving, some dragging going on there and some problems with the fishery
for a little while but I think that is cleared up?
DR. GIBBONS: Paul will probably be able to give
me an update on it but you are right, C-Core did some contract work for us in
the Near Shore area because we wanted to work on the Near Shore where we know
there are gold prospects. So we wanted to do a little bit of surveying and they
found some interesting gold numbers in the Ming's Bight area, around Baie Verte.
They wanted to do some dredging to see if it could be economically done but from
the test sampling that they had done, they had some very interesting numbers. I
don't recall the details, I have not talked to anyone recently, so maybe Paul
Dean could -
MR. SHELLEY: That is what I was wondering, if
it is to be continued.
MR. DEAN: Thank you, minister. Within the bay
of Baie Verte itself, there are several small placer gold deposits. C-Core
identified one at Deer Cove and they wanted to do a test marine mining project
on that site. They consulted with local fishermen's committees in the region and
the fishermen felt that there would be a conflict, there would be a potential
disruption of fish habitant with this. So they said: no, we are not in favour of
this.
There were a couple of other sites, one in Gander
Bay and another site near Pine Cove within Baie Verte, which appeared to be more
acceptable. So some test work was done at Gander Bay site by C-Core last year
and my understanding is that C-Core is proposing to do some further work at the
Pine Cove site in Baie Verte in 1994 and 1995.
MR. SHELLEY: There is no conflict with the
fishermen at the Pine Cove site though, is there?
MR. DEAN: None that I am aware of.
MR. SHELLEY: I thought that when you consulted
with the fishermen on the first site, wasn't that resolved after? Didn't they
agree that it wouldn't disrupt the habitat?
MR. DEAN: If there was a resolution, Mr.
Shelly, I am not aware of that.
MR. SHELLEY: Okay, because I haven't heard
anything about this particular one since, and I don't know where it's been
going. That is why I thought I would bring it up today. Is there any outlook for
this summer of them continuing in the Pine Cove area?
MR. DEAN: Yes, there is a plan to do some
further test work in the Pine Cove area, and then move forward somewhere in the
Province, likely Baie Verte again, with a full scale test mining in 1995. That's
the plan. C-Core, I don't think have the funding in hand yet to proceed with
that. They're still applying to research organizations for funding for the test
mining.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you.
Just a quick update and, I guess, a few comments on
Pine Cove. As the minister said earlier, we're all hopeful of that. Of course
like everybody the media ask you every day, especially locally, my local people,
what's happening with Pine Cove?
As far as I understand it, and I would see if the
minister would elaborate on it, is basically they have some positive reports
back from ACOA which they were looking for assistance to get started with the
new system that they call the (inaudible) (?) of course, and environmentally I
think everything is pretty sound. Is it basically that the problem lies with
Pine Cove itself now, and its own cash flow? Is that where the problem lies
right now, and that is why we are held up?
DR. GIBBONS: We have all been waiting for a
final decision on financing. This particular project has been approved through
the environmental assessment process, and there are no hold-ups on that side,
and everything now is financing. They have been dealing with their banks. They
have been dealing with ACOA relative to guarantees, and frankly I expected it
all to get approved last year some time, and now I am hoping that it will all
get approved before you and I are in Baie Verte at the mining conference on June
17. I certainly hope that this year when we go there we can say that it's done
and it's under way.
We, in our department, have done a rather detailed
assessment of this particular prospect as well, looking at all of the drill hole
results, all of the numbers on the analysis, and we like this prospect, we feel
comfortable with the tonnage and grade, and we would like to see it move
forward.
MR. SHELLEY: The next one I will jump on is in
the same area, of course, as the Nugget Pond. I would just like for you, if you
could, from your professional view, or one of your officials, is the phases now
that this is going through. Is this right in saying that basically what the
Nugget Pond people are going to do this summer is sort of a combination of
mining and exploration, because they're actually doing bulk samples; is that
right? Then, if I am right there, what are the next phases before it actually
turns into full-fledged mining?
DR. GIBBONS: You're right. Have they said
publicly how many dollars?
MR. SHELLEY: Seven million, yes.
DR. GIBBONS: They have said publicly it's $7
million, yes. They would like to spend about $7 million in the next ten months
on going underground and testing this prospect underground. They have to build
an access road to the site. They have received approval from environment for
that access road, and I assume they are getting ready to build it. They are
waiting for approval from environment on the underground development work, and
it's going to be some time this week, if not today.
MR. SHELLEY: I think it was the 25th, wasn't
it, of this month, that they were supposed to give the final.
DR. GIBBONS: It's pending any day. I don't
think it happened yesterday, but it's pending this week as to what will be
required by the environment department. If nothing significant is required, they
should get their release some time this week and then they can move on towards
planning the underground development work, and by going underground they are
going to, as you said, do some bulk sampling underground. They have been testing
the quality of the ore, and again the soundness of the rock for underground
mining, and if all of this turns out to be positive then I think very quickly in
the next year or so it can become a mine. I am not sure. Maybe Paul Dean can
speak more specifically on that, because he has been dealing with them very
closely. I will ask Paul to speak on it.
PAUL DEAN: If the exploration project as
proposed at Nugget Pond proceeds this year then by, say, February of 1995 when
it should be complete there should be extensive underground development done on
the deposit. The ramp, for instance, should be basically to the bottom of the
ore pond, so mining could proceed relatively rapidly after that.
It will require further environmental assessment.
In other words, the mining project itself is a separate registration under the
Environmental Assessment Act, and that registration would have to describe in
fair detail the nature of the mining and the milling, and I think that's an
important point there, that the company has to decide what size mill, what
format of mill, and what final product is going to be produced on the site. So
there will have to be a further environmental assessment on the production phase
itself, and the timing of a production decision will rest on, I guess, the
timing of that environmental assessment process and how fast the company can get
through.
MR. SHELLEY: I guess it's fair to say, too,
that just on those two sites, Pine Cove and Nugget Pond, that the surrounding
areas also have some major findings and that actually these mines, if they get
started, could be the catalyst to start some other sites to be developed. Is
that right?
DR. GIBBONS: There are a number of prospects on
that peninsula, and I think annually for several years about 25 per cent of the
mineral claims held in this whole Province have been on the Baie Verte
Peninsula. It is one of the most prospective areas you have geologically in the
Province.
As you say, with one development proceeding it
would stimulate more exploration activity in that area and you could get more,
especially if you get that gold milling complex centred in the middle of that.
MR. SHELLEY: You lead right into the next
question, I guess, because we're all on the same wavelength here, but the next
one leading up to that, of course -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
Mr. Shelley, as you are asking this, I remind you
that this will be your last question of this
section of your time.
MR. SHELLEY: Okay, I will get time to come back
hopefully, but the central milling aspect that has been mentioned out there, and
with relation to the Rambler properties, can you just elaborate on what the
potential is for that, and how you see that working?
DR. GIBBONS: I don't know what might happen to
that.
MR. SHELLEY: Is that the best alternative?
DR. GIBBONS: The group that has ownership of
that particular property right now, the best stimulation for an operating gold
mill is an operating gold mine, so if you have a mine operating with a modern
mill in place, then that's the best option, I think, for a central complex,
rather than going out and developing a complex totally separately.
At the Rambler site we do have the tailings which
have significant gold in them, and if there were some appropriate rehabilitation
of the mill there you could put the tailings back through and then you could
bring other things to that site as well, but first you need someone to move
forward, and the one that's closest to moving forward is Pine Cove, and Nugget
Pond second.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Whelan.
MR. WHELAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Minister, I have a special interest in the head
of Conception Bay. There are some sites in there - some old excavation sites -
and I noticed in the estimates here that you have regional mapping which
provides geological maps and reports on all areas of the Province. I believe the
old sites, however, inspectors at that time were interested in copper and zinc.
Has there been any recent exploration or any recent study done into that
particular area?
DR. GIBBONS: As you said, Mr. Whelan, we do
have maps of most of the Province. We have a huge one of this particular part of
the Avalon that was put out a couple of years ago, and we have some maps for
your area, but I don't think we put out one specifically in the top of
Conception Bay, the head of Conception Bay. There has been interesting gold in
that region from what we call the Holyrood granite and the Holyrood belt that
goes right down through the Avalon. There have been mineral claims staked in
search of gold, associated with the pyrophyllite mine that's out there at
Manuels, that same geological belt.
Since I am not on top of the details of that, maybe
I will ask Paul to tell us a little bit more about what he knows about what is
going on there.
MR. DEAN: Yes, Mr. Whelan, there are regional
geological maps available for basically the entire Avalon Peninsula. It's fairly
well known geologically. The department doesn't get into doing really detailed
geological maps and geological assessments. In most cases we leave that to the
private sector, to mineral exploration.
In the case of the Conception Bay area there is
renewed interest primarily for gold at the present time, and some of the old
prospects, for instance around Turks Gut, have been staked by local prospectors,
and they are evaluating and sampling some of these old prospects for gold at the
present time, and we have been encouraging them and providing them with
geological support information in that assessment.
MR. WHELAN: Thank you.
Mr. Minister, several years ago there were
officials from government, I believe, and officials from some oil companies, who
approached one or two municipalities in the head of Conception Bay, had
meetings, and the meetings concerned the possible construction of an offshore
supply base some time in the not too distant future. Has there been anything
ongoing? Has that been called off, or is there something still in the works on
that? I haven't heard anything about it for a year or two, so it's sort of -
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Whelan, there certainly hasn't
been much discussion of the offshore supply base. One of the decisions that the
Hibernia management company will have to make, I guess in the next few years, is
what port they will use as a supply base for Hibernia, whether they will use St.
John's or some other site. Whether there's a need to develop a new port I don't
know; I doubt it, but I certainly agree there was a lot of action on the
possibility of a number of big port developments a few years ago. Right now
there is a small amount of activity in the offshore. I am not sure that anyone
needs to move vigorously on that.
Hibernia, for example, is talking about three
supply boats. It's not a lot of port activity with three supply boats. They will
have to have a lay down area as well, and I don't know if it will be St. John's,
Bay Bulls or some other site around, but they have to make a decision. Maybe my
deputy minister will have more on that.
MR. WHELAN: I think this may have been in
anticipation of some development other than Hibernia.
MR. GRANTER: I think it may have been connected
with the concept that was being promoted by one company for the construction of
a concrete floating production rig. They did look at one particular site in the
head of Conception Bay. That was about three or four years ago at least, as I
recall it, but to my knowledge there has been no further activity on that. They
were promoting a concrete floater as a possible production system for Terra Nova
and other oil fields offshore.
On the supply base side, quite a long time ago
there were a large number of areas identified as having the potential for
development for that purpose. You may be aware that there were land freezes and
so on put in place at that time.
MR. WHELAN: I believe they are still in effect.
MR. GRANTER: Yes, if not all of them, certainly
some of them are still in effect. That was premised, I think, on the expectation
that there would be a lot more exploration activity offshore than has actually
materialized.
MR. WHELAN: Thank you.
You have a
section here dealing with alternate
energy sources. I was wondering if you could probably elaborate on the number of
alternate sources that you were talking about there. I was wondering if there
was any consideration given to wind energy, considering the fact that I believe
most of Hawaii is powered by wind energy. I know in California there are
actually farms of wind generators. When you compare the two places, I would
assume that we get at least as much wind as Hawaii or California, and I was
wondering if there has been any consideration given to that type of energy, or
is there anyone in the Province now who may be involved with research into that
type of resource?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Whelan, in the past
Newfoundland Light and Power has been involved with wind energy research. They
have had wind turbines tested. I think they had one on Bell Island for a number
of years. As you said, there are places in the world where there are some wind
turbines and this could be an answer for some of our remote sites if the
technology can evolve and could be put in a place where you never expect to get
on the grid but do have high wind regime. It deserves continued research is my
view on it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is it the wish of the committee
that we recess for five or ten minutes? Normally that is what we would do at
this stage of the proceedings. In view of the fact that the government caucus
room is being occupied with a caucus meeting right now we do not really have the
luxury of being able to invite the minister and his officials back there for a
cup of coffee, but if it is the wish of the committee that we take a five or ten
minute break just to stretch our legs the chair will accommodate that.
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, it is usual, as you
say, for the committee to break and I have a couple of things that I intended to
take care of in this break as it is the normal thing to do.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, the chair recognizes it is
the normal thing to do.
MR. TULK: The government caucus room is not
free but there are other places in the building where people can go if they want
to pick up a cup of coffee. I am sure the Opposition might invite somebody if
they wanted a cup of coffee. Mr. Chairman, I would like to see the committee
take a break because there are a couple of things I have to take care of.
AN HON. MEMBER: It is the general practice.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will let the committee decide
that.
Carried.
We will resume at 10.48 a.m.
Recess
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
It is now 10:50 a.m. and we will resume deliberations
of the Resource Estimates Committee.
The Chair would like to officially recognize Ms. Lynn
Verge the Member for Humber East as replacing Mr. Ed. Byrne the Member for
Kilbride for the purpose of this meeting this morning. I will now turn the
questioning to Ms. Verge.
MS. VERGE: Thank you, Chair.
I would like to ask the minister questions about
Hydro. Earlier this morning in answering questions put by the Vice-Chair of the
Committee, the Member for Humber Valley, the minister said that a year ago when
the estimates committee last met government had not completed an analysis of
Hydro privatization, but in the past twelve months or so `we have done that'. I
would like to ask several questions about the analysis that government has done.
First of all, what were the terms of reference for the
analysis? What exactly was analyzed? Secondly, who did the analysis? Did the
firms or people carrying out the analysis stand to profit from Hydro
privatization, or was there any party which analyzed Hydro in a truly arms
length position, in a truly objective position? Number four, what assumptions
were made in the analysis? For example, what assumptions were made about
interest rates? Interest rates have been changing lately and that may be a
significant alteration from assumptions made when an analysis was done sometime
within the past twelve months. What assumptions were made about a change in the
debt equity ratio? Currently the Crown owned Hydro quite properly has a very
high debt equity ratio since the interest requirement on debt is always
considerably lower than that on equity. What assumptions were made about tax
breaks, federal or provincial, that would be provided for a privatized Hydro?
What assumptions were made about subsidies that would be provided to a
privatized Hydro, what assumptions were made about arrangements for a privatized
Hydro having water rights? The next question: was the analysis or analyses in
written form, is there a written document setting out an analysis and, what does
that document contain, and will the minister make it public? I will pause here
to allow the minister to answer those questions about the analysis of Hydro
privatization.
DR. GIBBONS: Chair, Vice-Chair, I would first like
to make the comment that I know this can be a wide-ranging debate and it
generally is a wide-ranging debate, but we came here this morning to debate the
estimates before us and there is no line item in the estimates of the Department
of Mines and Energy that either gives money to Hydro or receives money from
Hydro, and I think anyone can look at the book and see that; and as I said in
the very early response to the Vice-Chair of the committee when he noted that no
one from Hydro was with me today, and that he thought they were with me last
year and we corrected him. They were not with me last year for the same reason
that they are not with me this year because they are not part of these
estimates, and we would just as soon debate the estimates of the Department of
Mines and Energy, where we spend our money and how we justify spending our
money, but I would not mind making some comments on some of the questions.
MR. TULK: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tulk, on a point of order.
MR. TULK: Before we move to do that, it is one
thing for the minister to want to make comments but it is another thing for him
to be in order to make comments. I would like to know if it is in order to
discuss Hydro in this estimates committee; I would also like to know if the
minister is going to make those comments and is he making them by leave of the
committee.
MS. VERGE: To that point of order, Chair.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms. Verge, to that point of order.
MS. VERGE: There are many precedents for this
particular estimates committee asking the Minister of Mines and Energy about
Hydro. It happened earlier this morning but more importantly, all our budget
estimates committees typically have wide-ranging discussion about general
policy, as well as the specifics of estimates figures. I am Vice-Chair of the
Social Services Estimates Committee and so far, this year, we have examined the
estimates of three departments and in all our hearings, we ask wide-ranging
questions to the applicable ministers and they were the Ministers of Health,
Justice and Environment and Lands about general policy, so it is clear,
according to the precedence of this committee and the other committees that
questions about Hydro are perfectly in order for the Minister of Mines and
Energy.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tulk.
MR. TULK: To that point of order, I would just say
to the hon. Member for Humber East, that while she may allow in her committees,
things to be wide-ranging - and we can do it here by leave - that does not
necessarily make it right that you debate anything that you want. How
wide-ranging will you get, will you debate the state of the fishery, with the
Minister of Mines and Energy? Will you debate the state of forestry here with
the Minister of Mines and Energy or, do we do those things by leave?
These committees are not designed to be a
free-for-all, they are not designed to be wide-open affairs, they are governed
by the rules that govern the Legislature and anything that we do, other than
that, is done only because the committee, and I say the committee, wants to do
it, not because the chairman of a particular committee, the social services
committee believes that if she is doing it in her committee, therefore it should
be done here, that is not a good point of order, a good point for the lady to
make.
I don't know. If we are going to operate these
committees and operate them right, then we operate them according to rules, and
what I have asked the Chairman to do, is to establish for us, if indeed we
should discuss Hydro under this, and as the minister says, it is not in the
estimates, we are in an Estimates committee. There is no mention of Hydro in
those Estimates committees. I'm not trying to block the hon. lady. She will get
lots of time to debate. She has had lots of time to debate in the Legislature.
But is it - just how wide-ranging can the debate be? I would ask the Chairman to
make a ruling on it. Then if the minister wants to make some comments by leave,
well the Committee - I might, I might not, as a member of this Committee, be
willing to give that leave. That is how this Legislature operates. It doesn't
operate according to the whims of the Member for Humber East or my whims or
anybody else's. It operates according to set rules.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any other submissions on
that point of order?
MR. WOODFORD: To that point of order, Mr.
Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Woodford.
MR. WOODFORD: The fact that the minister is
responsible for mines and energy - "energy" is the broad word here. What does
energy encompass? The first page of the Estimates on energy says: "The
Department of Mines and Energy is responsible for the management of the
Province's mineral and energy resources...." It goes on to say: "The Department
is responsible for formulating policy and providing advice to Government on all
matters associated with onshore and offshore oil and gas,..." and so on, and get
down to the other one, "...conversion from conventional energy resources to
specific alternate energy resources. The Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro
Corporation supplies and distributes electrical energy in the Province."
The Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro Corporation is
even mentioned in the first page of the Mines and Energy Estimates, and
furthermore, part of the minister's salary which encompasses 1.1.01 of Executive
and Support Services, the minister is getting paid for having the right, the
responsibility, of looking after the Crown corporation Newfoundland Hydro. Is
the Minister of Finance not able to answer for the Newfoundland Liquor
Corporation? Is the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs not able to
answer for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation?
I would say, Mr. Chairman, there is no point of order.
The minister has already said that he would answer some of the questions. Then
why not get on with it?
MR. TULK: There is a point of order. I'm asking
the Chair for a ruling so that we have something established. I don't
particularly care which way you rule.
MR. CHAIRMAN: In the five years that this member
has been a member of the House of Assembly and has sat on estimates committees
precedent has suggested and has dictated that questions are permitted from the
Committee on policy. That is the reason we have not permitted Committee members
to question any of the officials who are here today. Only the minister is
permitted to be questioned on policy. I would also suggest that the minister is
under no obligation to answer any of the questions that are asked of him.
If members are not satisfied with the response that
they get from the minister then it can be brought to the House of Assembly. Our
Standing Orders state quite clearly that any disorder in this Committee can be
censured by the House upon receipt of the report. Any member who is not
satisfied with the way that the proceedings are carried out here can in fact
report back to the House of Assembly.
I would ask members though if they could to restrict
themselves to the items that are here in the Estimates, but members are
permitted to ask questions on policy as we always have done. I would remind the
minister that he can answer as thoroughly as he wishes. If his answer is not
acceptable to the Committee members then they can take the issue up in the House
of Assembly.
Ms. Verge.
MS. VERGE: Chair, I asked several questions and I
would like the minister to answer them.
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, on a further point of
order. Is the Member for Humber East a voting member of this Committee?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes, the Member for Humber East is a
duly acknowledged voting member of this Committee.
MR. TULK: What has changed since 9:00 this
morning, sir? I have in my possession here a note that I wrote to you, Mr.
Chairman: who are voting members this morning? It says: Tulk, Whelan, Barrett,
Shelley and Byrne if he comes. That is signed by you.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
Since that time there has been a notice duly signed by
the Government House Leader and filed with the Clerk stating that the Member for
Humber East, Lynn Verge, will replace the Member for Kilbride, Ed Byrne, at the
meeting of the Resource Committee to be held on April 27 at 9:00 a.m. in the
Confederation Building. That one is dated April 27 and filed with the Clerk.
MR. TULK: When was that filed, Mr. Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That was filed since the proceedings
began.
MR. TULK: I would ask, if there is not some
precedent in this House - and I would ask if you do not find somewhere in
Hansard when those committees were established, I believe it was in 1982 - I am
wrong on that I guess, but when they were established - I am not wrong I don't
think on this, when they were established, I think you might find somewhere in
Hansard, that twenty-four hours notice was required. You will certainly find in
Beauchesne, that unless there is a list of substitutes given by the party whips
that there is twenty-four hours notice required to change the membership of a
committee. I think, as I said again, you will find - and I ask you, why wouldn't
you let the Member for Humber East go ahead this morning? I ask you, for future
clarification, if we could have the Clerk check that out, if she doesn't know
already and see if there is not indeed some period of time that you have to give
notice because otherwise, willy-nilly, we could walk out, the four of us here
now and have four more people sitting here five minutes time.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
MR. TULK: I don't care what my colleague did. I'm
just asking that this Committee be kept in some order of decorum. Decorum is not
only shouting back and forth across the House, it is to how you operate your
business as well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair is prepared to rule on
that point of order but are there any other submissions prior to the Chairs
ruling?
MR. TULK: Is there a period of time required?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair has reviewed the Standing
Orders of the House of Assembly and it states: any member of the House who is
not a member of a standing committee may, unless the House or the committee
concerned otherwise orders, take
part in the public proceedings of the committee
but they may not vote or move any motion nor shall they be part of any quorum.
It also goes as far as to say: changes in the membership of any committee may be
affected by a notice, signed by the Government House Leader to that effect being
filed with the Clerk. It is my ruling that the notice to which I have referred,
meets the requirements of Order 87 of the Standing Orders. If any hon. member is
not satisfied with that, I remind him again that he has the option of taking it
to the House of Assembly.
MR. TULK: I am not talking about taking it to the
House, I am asking the Chairman if he would check and see when those committees
were set up, if it was not indeed said, at that point in time, that we should
give twenty-four hours notice to the Clerk. I am asking you to check that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Very well, I will ask the Clerk if
she would check on that and report back to the Chairman of the Committee. Until
such time as we have been notified of some precedent otherwise, I will have to
rule in accordance to the way the Standing Orders read.
MR. TULK: I understand that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ms Verge.
MS. VERGE: Mr. Chairman, I am waiting for answers
from the minister. I have asked several questions about the analyses he claims
the government did within the past twelve months about Hydro privatization.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I will remind the minister that the
ruling of the Chair is that the minister may or may not answer any of the
questions addressed to him and it is up to the members of the Committee, if they
are dissatisfied, to take it to the floor of the House.
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well that question, I will give the
minister time to respond.
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chair, I will make the comment
that I made earlier, that we have a lot of good things that we can talk about in
the budget estimates in the Department of Mines and Energy that have not been
addressed. We would like to continue to discuss these things that we are doing,
to spend the government's money and the people's money.
There is a line item in the budget of the Executive
Council which would provide the hon. member opposite with an opportunity to ask
questions about expenditures that we are making on that and I think she is well
familiar with that particular item. The Minister of Finance, who is responsible
for Executive Council, deposited a document a few days ago detailing some
expenditures that had been made. Maybe she should put it to the minister who is
responsible for that line item but there are a number of things that she has
raised here, a number of things that she keeps raising in the House of Assembly
and elsewhere and - on water rights for example, we have had debate on water
rights, ad nauseam since March 3 -
MS. VERGE: I asked about the analysis -
DR. GIBBONS: - and I started at the bottom -
MS. VERGE: - the terms of reference, who did the
analysis -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
MS. VERGE: - whether they were in a conflict of
interest position, what assumption did -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
MS. VERGE: - they make about interest rates, debt
equity ratio, tax breaks, subsidies, water -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
The Member for Humber East has asked the questions, I
will now allow the minister the time to respond.
MS. VERGE: (Inaudible).
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chairman, I wrote down a number
of the subjects that the hon. member mentioned and I started at the bottom and
was going to work upwards and probably cover some of them in the time available.
MS. VERGE: I asked if the minister would table the
analysis. If it exists.
DR. GIBBONS: I'm not going to table an analysis
for the hon. member. No, not at this time, but there may be an appropriate time
to table anything that we would consider appropriate to table. I'm not tabling
anything today.
MS. VERGE: Is there an analysis -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
DR. GIBBONS: And -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
The Member for Humber East has had her allocation of
time. I am going to go to another member of the Committee who has not yet asked
any questions of the minister if the minister is finished with his reply.
DR. GIBBONS: I will stop there instead of having
this continuous debate on Hydro which we can have at any time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Barrett.
MR. WOODFORD: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Point of order.
MR. WOODFORD: The Member for Humber East started
asking her questions at 10:51 a.m. She concluded at 10:53 a.m. There was a point
of order then. It wasn't finished till 11:05 a.m. Now the minister had two
minutes to answer the question. There is absolutely no opportunity for the
minister to answer. He didn't say yes and he didn't say no. He started to answer
some of the questions, but now because of the time being taken up in points of
order her time is gone. As far as I'm concerned, Mr. Chairman, it is
intentional, furthermore.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tulk.
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, to that point of order.
MR. CHAIRMAN: (Inaudible) point of order.
MR. TULK: There obviously is no point of order.
The Member for Humber Valley, the vice-chair, knows better. Or he shouldn't be
sitting where he is.
MR. WOODFORD: But I don't know that.
MR. TULK: The truth of the matter is that he has
no right to question the ruling of the Chairman any more than anybody else here.
He is now questioning your ruling that indeed the time was up. Secondly, he
knows full well, just as well as I do, that if the minister chooses to he could
say to the Member for Humber East: I will take the question under advisement,
and that is it.
MR. WOODFORD: He didn't do that.
MR. TULK: He didn't do that, but he answered it.
He stopped his answer where he felt he should stop it. There is no point of
order, Mr. Chairman. He is only using his own member's time, or somebody else's.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
It is the well-established procedure of the House -
MR. WOODFORD: (Inaudible) bullying tactics, that's
all.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
It is the well-established practice of the House of
Assembly that any time used in points of order and debating points of order
comes out of the time that the member has for debate or for questioning. It is
the ruling of the Chair that that is the same procedure that we will use here
today. Once we have finished with Mr. Barret's time and we go to some other
member, then we will go back to Ms. Verge as often as she wishes. We will
continue to go back to Ms. Verge and give her the time to ask the questions she
wishes. At this time the Chair recognizes Mr. Barrett.
MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to
make a few comments and I want to ask the minister a few questions. Of course,
representing a district I guess that is considered by some to be the golden
isthmus or the oil capital of Newfoundland and Labrador I guess most of my
questions will be directed in the area of the oil refinery and the Hibernia or
the Bull Arm development.
I've been aware for some time that there is a group
that has been interested in the purchasing of the oil refinery in Come By
Chance, Vitol. I don't know that the minister can make public how close are we
to that deal being finalized. As we all know, the oil refinery is very important
to the economy of the area. It employs roughly about 400, over 400, permanent
employees. Next week I guess there will be another 300 to 400 people called in
for seasonal work in terms of the shutdown. Actually, the whole oil refinery
there has more impact on the local area than the billion dollar development of
Bull Arm - in terms of the actual economic spin-off from the oil refinery it is
more important than the Bull Arm activity. Because of the collective agreements
it doesn't have very much impact on the local area, so I would like to ask the
minister: How close is Vitol to actual purchasing of the refinery?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chairman, they are continuing to
make progress towards that. They have been negotiating with the current owners
now for over a year, and the last time we talked to them they were still
seriously interested and making progress. They could not put an exact time on
it, but I think they expect to do it in 1994, and I hope that is correct. I hope
it happens in 1994. We continuously stay in contact with those companies.
MR. BARRETT: I guess the other question is: Is
everything that needed to be done by government being done in terms of
facilitating the sale and the process being done in terms of the environmental
conditions and all these sorts of things?
DR. GIBBONS: I can't remember the exact word that
was used on it now, but we reached an agreement on an environmental document on
the operation of the refinery, and that is satisfactory to all sides, so there
is no hang-up there.
There are some issues that they have not yet resolved
that are not - I don't think any of them are provincially based - not associated
with us, between the companies and elsewhere. They are still working on those
issues, so let's hope it gets done in 1994 because Vitol is a major
multi-national company that trades oil and petroleum products around the world,
and I think will guarantee a long future for Come By Chance oil refinery.
MR. BARRETT: Okay. I guess about a year or so ago
there was a company that was interested in using the burn-off from the stack of
the refinery to generate electricity. I know that I had some discussions with
the company at the time and they seemed to be very enthusiastic about starting
that. Can the minister tell me, or is he aware, what has been happening with
that company?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chairman, they have registered
the project with environment, but I don't believe they have taken any action on
the project. It's a co-generation project. They were talking about approximately
sixty megawatts time, but that number is variable. It seems like a good project
because you are using a product through the refinery to produce fuel. The
problem right now, though, is that it would have to be new electricity going
into the grid and there is no demand.
The proposal call that is in process is the one we
talked about earlier today. That would be the small hydro proposal. I don't know
where this one would sit. It's behind the small hydro proposal, like we talked
about the Stanton proposal for Abitibi earlier. It's one of the proposals that
would compete with the Stanton proposal or others for the next source of supply.
I did say earlier that we are not constrained
provincially in terms of sources of supply for electricity in the near term.
This is one type of project, Stanton is another type, small hydro is another
type, and there are others that are possible.
MR. BARRETT: How much time do I have left, Mr.
Chairman?
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have five minutes, Mr. Barrett.
MR. BARRETT: Recently I heard that with regard to
the Bull Arm development, with the increase in the work force during the summer
- I think it's going up to 3,500 - that accommodations are not available to
accommodate the increased work force, that there are not enough accommodations
at the site. I wonder if the minister is aware of this. Is there any backup
arrangements being made to accommodate the extra work force?
DR. GIBBONS: I am aware that they only have about
3,000 beds at the site. They used to have 2,995. I am not sure if that is the
exact number right now. As the number grows there could be a little bit of a
problem on site in terms of the number of beds.
I have been told that the company is looking at how
the beds can be used most efficiently. They are evaluating that, and whether or
not they might have to get some more bed facilities on the site temporarily or
otherwise. I don't believe any final decision has been made. Some have talked
about the possibility that they might have to consider sort of like a hotel; you
are there for your shift but then you are gone. When you look at the profile of
how the beds are used on a daily basis, there are times of the week when it is
not as crowded, depending on how the shift work operates. They are looking at
all the various options for that and I believe they will have no problem
addressing it because we are getting close to the peak even though we are not
there, and they should not have any problem.
MR. BARRETT: Right now for example, there are
people on the site who are being accommodated who are from other areas of
Newfoundland and are in the catering and housekeeping units which is very
unskilled labour, and to alleviate that they could look more at hiring local
people in terms of the increase in their catering and housekeeping.
DR. GIBBONS: Well hiring on the site as you know
is regulated through the union contract, and anything that would happen on that
would have to be done with the full co-operation of the unions involved.
MR. BARRETT: But since there are no people in that
particular union they could concentrate and alleviate the problem rather than -
we all know that the - or at least from the reports - that the whole project
itself has gone over budget and if we have to bring in extra emergency
facilities and accommodations, which means that it is going to add more to the
cost in terms of a management plan, it makes more sense to hire local people to
do some of this, sort of, not very skilled labour.
DR. GIBBONS: You may well be right but as I said,
I am aware that the company is looking at its options for when it may have a
problem, looking at the various options - to see what they do. We are not too
far from what we would say to be peak employment in terms of numbers.
MR. BARRETT: Okay. Those are all the questions I
have, Mr. Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Barrett. Mr. Shelley.
MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will at
this time defer my time to my colleague for Humber East. She may continue with
her questions.
MS. VERGE: Chair, I have questions for the
minister. The minister is accompanied here this morning by the senior officials
of his department, the Department of Mines and Energy, and I would like to ask
the minister whether any of those officials or any of the other-
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
Mr. Tulk, on a point of order.
MR. TULK: They will use all the cute tricks that
they like, to try to get the Member for Humber East to get on her pet peeve,
Newfoundland Hydro.
Now, Mr. Chairman, when did you ever see somebody in
this House, recognized by the Chair, and without the consent of the Chair, defer
to another member? I mean, the truth of the matter is, once you are recognized
and you sit down you have lost your turn, unless by leave you are allowed to
defer to someone else. Mr. Chairman, if you want to go ahead and do that, fine,
but I say to you, that nobody stands in any place and defers to somebody else.
If we do, then we will have three or four members and I could defer to the
member for -
AN HON. MEMBER: Pre-arranged.
MR. TULK: Pre-arranged, Mr. Chairman, totally
pre-arranged. It is an abuse of this committee. She is not satisfied to wait her
turn.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Shelley, to that point of order?
MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Chairman, I find it so
hypocritical. I don't know which way to describe it. They are talking about the
abuse of this, I mean very simply, what I have seen here - and I have not been
here years as the hon. member here - but I can tell you that, we usually had a
chance, we usually co-operate pretty good in these committees and we have done
so so far, even with the hon. member present, but it was quite obvious that the
hon. Member for Humber East had some questions; she asked the questions and as a
matter of fact the minister was co-operative and said he was going to make some
comments on it but since then we have seen the abuse of points of order to cut
into that time and not give that opportunity, and because I thought she was
mistreated by the member on his points of order, and took advantage of them in
his tactics to delay those answers, I felt that the only thing that I could do
was yield my time to the Member for Humber East so that she could ask the
questions and the minister could continue to be co-operative in saying that he
was going to make some comments.
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, to that point of order,
let me say to the hon. gentleman -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tulk, to that point of order.
MR. TULK: - that I would not mistreat the hon.
Member for Humber East in any way, shape or form. She has every privilege as
every other member of this House, of this committee.
AN HON. MEMBER: But no more.
MR. TULK: But no more and, Mr. Chairman, we cannot
have a situation where somebody is going to use the recognition that is given to
a member of this House by the Chair to say: I defer to somebody else. You cannot
pass on your time to somebody else. Either you use it yourself or you do not use
it and then the Chair recognizes somebody else.
Mr. Chairman, those are straightforward rules that
we've observed since the first House in this Province was built, before we were
a province, I say to the hon. gentleman. He hasn't been here as long as I have.
But when he has he will perhaps have a far better appreciation of the rules of
this Legislature. You can't go passing on your time.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Are there any other submissions to
that point of order? Because the Chair has heard sufficient submissions to rule.
MR. WOODFORD: To that point of order, Mr.
Chairman.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Woodford.
MR. WOODFORD: The Committee is I suppose in charge
of its own destiny and its own affairs. Precedence has been set in the past, and
as recently as we met last week or so in the Estimates this year, deferring to
another member for different reasons. You can defer, give them five or ten
minutes, then they have to go on at other things. We've done that, and we've
done that in this particular Committee this year. If it is not in Standing
Orders, Mr. Chairman, precedence would dictate that there is nothing wrong with
what we are doing this morning. I would just like for the Chairman to take this
into consideration before he makes his....
AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair has heard sufficient
submissions. Do you feel under an obligation to provide another?
MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman, the Member for Baie Verte
- White Bay just says that: I did this last week in Committee. Sure. He is able
to do it as long as the Committee provides the leave and says: Yes, fine, you go
ahead and do it. Unless that is the case then it can be stopped at any point in
time. When you see an abuse come up, which this obviously is, get the Member for
Humber East in front of the podium and on her soapbox, then that is an abuse!
That has to be stopped!
MR. CHAIRMAN: Very well, Mr. Tulk. The Chair is
prepared to rule.
As the Chair of this particular Committee for the past
three years there has been sufficient precedent to establish that this is an
accepted procedure within this Committee, and as has been stated, and as is
confirmed by the Standing Orders, this Committee is the master of its own
affairs.
When Mr. Shelley said that he deferred then the Chair
did in fact recognize Ms. Verge and will now turn the questioning over to Ms.
Verge.
MS. VERGE: Thank you, Chairperson. It is perfectly
obvious that the Minister of Mines and Energy is uncomfortable having me
question him about Hydro and it is obvious that he has arranged for his
colleague, the Member for Fogo, to run interference for him. I am going to
continue to ask questions about Hydro because this is the minister responsible
for Hydro. Whether or not the Premier lets him have any say in Hydro is
questionable, but nevertheless the minister has nominal responsibility for
Hydro. The government has before the Legislature and the people of the Province
an extremely critical proposal to privatize Hydro which would be an irreversible
divestiture which would lead to great harm to our economy.
The minister earlier this morning told the Member for
Humber Valley that within the past twelve months the government had a detailed
analysis done of Hydro privatization, and I would like to ask the minister
again: What were the terms of reference for the analysis or analyses that were
done?
DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Chair?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Minister.
DR. GIBBONS: I think government has addressed that
particular question numerous times over the last months. I will go back and give
some history and some dates and (inaudible) -
MS. VERGE: Chairperson, I only have a few minutes
and I -
DR. GIBBONS: Last January -
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!
MS. VERGE: - asked a precise question and I would
like a precise answer.
DR. GIBBONS: (Inaudible).
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!
MS. VERGE: I would like to know what are the terms
of reference.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!
When the Chair calls order I would appreciate it if
the members would be silent.
We will now give time for the minister to reply.
DR. GIBBONS: Last January -
MR. TULK: Point of order, please.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Point of order, Mr. Tulk.
MR. TULK: The hon. Member for Humber East asked a
question of the minister. Then halfway through the answer, because she doesn't
like what he is saying, because he is not confessing to her, she wants to
interrupt him and interject again. I would ask the Chair to protect the minister
from the savage onslaught of the Member for Humber East and see that order is
maintained in this committee, otherwise she will take it on her back and do
whatever she wants to do with it. It is bad enough that she is allowed to usurp
the rules of this House and speak out of turn, let alone Mr. Chairman, have her
interrupting people and have her badgering the minister and any other witnesses
that might be around. I ask the Chair to protect the Minister.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The Chair has already asked -
MR. TULK: Name her.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well, in this particular case
everybody is being named in those committee proceedings, Mr. Tulk. I ask Ms.
Verge to give the minister sufficient time to respond to her question before she
asks another.
Mr. Minister.
DR. GIBBONS: The hon. member asked about our
analysis for Hydro, and I tried to start by saying that we did start some
analysis about a year ago, a year or so ago. I think I have said it publicly,
and others have said it publicly, that after we started to discuss privatization
potential we did have a proposal from the Fortis Corporation, from Newfoundland
Light and Power, Fortis Corporation, to buy part of Hydro and we referred that
report to Hydro.
I think it was in January of last year that the Hydro
board got ScotiaMcLeod and RBC Dominion Securities to do an analysis of that
proposal that came to us from Fortis, and it was suggested at that time that in
addition to just analyzing that proposal to buy parts of the Hydro Corporation
that they should look a little wider than that, and that they should ask them to
analyze Hydro as it is today, the status quo, and that they should ask those
companies to analyze Hydro's other electrical options, other structures for the
electrical industry in this Province.
It was agreed that they would analyze the possibility
of a merger and the possibility of a stand alone privatization, and that work
was done. ScotiaMcLeod and RBC Dominion Securities were the ones that did it.
They did it in great detail and over last summer government looked at the
results of the analysis in consultation with the people who had done the work
and we made a decision in August, I think it was August 5, Cabinet made a
decision that we would talk to Fortis about the possibility of a merger if they
were interested, and if they were interest in the privatization of the merged
company.
The recommendation from the people who did the
analysis was that we should not sell bits and pieces as Fortis was trying to
buy, as such, but that it would be interesting to look at other prospects,
particularly the merger and stand alone privatization, and that is why they
looked at that. ScotiaMcLeod and RBC Dominion Securities are the ones that Hydro
obtained and asked to do the detailed assessment, and do it thoroughly.
The member is well aware that in the spring, I think
it was in June, I cannot remember the exact date, we referred that report that
came from these analysts to the five person committee that reviewed the
information and also reported to Cabinet on their views of the report from
ScotiaMcLeod and RBC Dominion Securities, and it was based on information from
everybody, and advice from everybody, that Cabinet finally made the decision, on
August 5, that we would consider privatization of a merged industry, but it was
not until after goin