May 19,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.

XLIV No. 27

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we call the routine proceedings, the Chair would like

to welcome a couple of groups to the gallery today. One is the Level II and

Level III students from All Saints All Grade School in Grey River, in the

District of Fortune Bay-Cape La Hune. They are accompanied by their teacher, Mr.

Terry Lavalle.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: As well, I would like to welcome forty-four

Grade V students from Eugene Vaters Academy, in the District of St. John's

North, accompanied by teachers, Ralph Cann and Jackie Pottle, along with student

assistant, Cathy Philpott, and parent chaperons, Bonnie Kavanagh and Barb

Osmond.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to inform the House of government's efforts to

make information regarding Aboriginal land claims available to the people of

this Province.

Mr. Speaker, as my hon. colleagues are aware, last week the

chief negotiators representing the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, the

Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement in Principle. This is a significant

achievement. I believe this agreement in principle represents what could best be

described as the most comprehensive land claims settlement anywhere in Canada.

As members are aware, this agreement will now be presented to the three parties

- both governments and to the Labrador Inuit membership - for ratification. In

fact, the LIA has begun it seventy-five day internal ratification process with

community meetings now taking place in Labrador.

The Province is also involved in negotiating a land claims

agreement with the Innu Nation of Labrador. This process is also moving forward

at a good and constructive pace.

Mr. Speaker, it is clear that we are beginning to make real

progress in the area of land claims. With agreements on land claims and

self-government, the Inuit and Innu of Labrador will be in a position to control

their own future. The settlement of land claims brings clarity to the ownership

of land and the management of resources in Labrador. The settlement of land

claims will bring economic and social stability, new capital, more jobs and

increased tax revenues to the Province. The settlement of land claims benefits

all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

We have reached a watershed in our negotiations with the

Aboriginal peoples of Labrador. The agreements contemplated represent a

significant new relationship between Aboriginal people and the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador - indeed with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador

as a whole. To manage our shared resources for the benefit of all, we must face

the need for change and we must all in this Province, every citizen of this

Province, understand what this new relationship will mean.

There is no question that when you settle, for all time, land

claims, and when you put in place self-government agreements covering areas for

Aboriginal peoples like health, education and justice, it means significant and

permanent change for all the parties involved. The concepts of self-government

and shared resources are new and the agreements are very complex.

It is now time to provide all of the people of this Province

with the information they will need to understand our shared future. It is for

this reason that government is launching an information campaign to create an

awareness of the value of land claims settlements and provide the people of the

Province with the information they need to understand the significant shift that

is taking place.

The information campaign - entitled: Our Land, Our People,

Our Home - will be comprehensive and wide-ranging. It has been designed to

provide individuals and groups with the level of information they feel they need

to be informed on this important issue. A householder will be sent to each

family in the Province. Information kits will be available upon request. A web

site will be launched, and a toll free number will be maintained within

government's Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs Secretariat. In addition,

government is prepared to make presentations when asked to do so to both

individuals and groups who require more detailed information.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce this initiative in the

House today. It means that we in this Province, Newfoundland and Labrador, are

moving to a new stage in the lands claims process. It means that the time has

come for all the people of this Province to engage in this very significant

public issue. It means that we are all moving forward together toward what I

hope will be a brighter and more certain future.

I want to say, in announcing the information campaign today,

to utilize all of the mediums of information to the public, on behalf of members

of the government - I think I can say with some certainty on behalf of members

on all sides of the House, given the reaction in the House from all sides a few

days ago in this place to the initialling of the Agreement in Principle; indeed,

I think the Leader of the NDP made note of this - that there is a significant

difference in the level and the quality of the debate in this Province,

Newfoundland and Labrador, from that which we have seen, for example, in the

Province of British Columbia surrounding the Nisga'a land claim.

Mr. Speaker, I believe the quality of the debate and the

tolerance and the level of understanding and comprehension can only be served by

putting as much information as possible in the hands of the people of this

Province, just as information must be made available to the members of the

Labrador Inuit Association, and providing for as much open and transparent

debate as possible.

It is for that reason that government has decided to put the

full information and the full detail of both the land claims settlement and the

self-government agreements in the hands of literally every Newfoundlander and

Labradorian by putting it into every household in this Province.

I say to members opposite, we look forward to an appropriate

debate at the appropriate time, and we look forward to their collaboration and

cooperation in facilitating a constructive dialogue and a positive environment

for forging a new relationship with Aboriginal peoples.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to be very clear here. It is very clear that the

culmination in terms of a tentative agreement, an agreement in principle reached

with the LIA, is but a first step. A very important one, but it is the

culmination of many years of negotiation and work and realities, both political

and otherwise, that not only face the Province but face this country when it

comes to dealing with Aboriginal issues.

It is also very clear that the future prosperity, economic

well-being, advancement - technological and otherwise - of our society largely

depends upon the continuation and forging ahead of significant resource

developments that lie before us, such as Voisey's Bay, such as the Lower

Churchill development, and many more future resource developments yet to come

and yet unseen. It is also clear that the negotiation process, the tentative

agreement reached in principle with the LIA, is just but one of the agreements

that this Province has to reach.

As for the Innu, which the Premier prefaced in his

ministerial statement, indicating that progress is being made, that is also

equally significant in terms of the settlement of outstanding issues with

respect to Aboriginal people and reconciliation between all people within the

Province.

I am pleased to see from one point of view that an

information campaign has started, because arming people with the knowledge of

what has taken place over a significant period of time is extremely important. I

notice here today the ministerial statement touched on it, that this is a

brochure that outlines, I guess, generally giving very surface information. It

is impossible to send thousands of pages to each and every home, I understand

that, but this is a beginning.

The Premier has also said on behalf of his government that

they will visit upon request, or make presentations upon request, to the people

of the Province. I would make a suggestion, that you go one step further. That

you take members from this House, members and officials from government who have

been very close and intimately associated with the successful conclusion of the

tentative agreement with the LIA, and once an agreement - because I'm hopeful,

for everybody's sake and for the people of this Province's sake, that we will

reach a successful conclusion and a tentative agreement with the Innu in terms

of land claims. That we not wait for requests. That we take representatives from

the Assembly, representatives who have been intimately associated with the

negotiation process, and that we take the step of holding public hearings, along

with entertaining requests, in centres right across the Province, maybe in

fifteen or twenty-five centres. That we take the step of holding open public

hearings -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. E. BYRNE: By leave, just for a moment, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you.

That we take the step over the summer, or when the House

closes, when all members have some more time, to hold public hearings so that

anybody who wishes to come to get information regarding these fundamental

agreements have the opportunity to do so, as opposed to having to make a request

for a government official or some member of government to make the information

available to them.

Let's take it on the road in a fuller way and let all the

information, a question and answer sort of activity, occur so people are not

only fully informed, but have the opportunity to fully question what has

transpired in the process.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say that I welcome the step by government to make

the people of the Province more fully aware of the process at work in attempting

to settle the Aboriginal land claims in the Province.

I think we have an opportunity for all members of this House

to provide the kind of leadership that may be required to ensure that people

understand that these are inherent rights of Aboriginal people that we are

dealing with here. As the Premier has indicated, they are being asked to settle

these rights on paper in constitutional form or treaty form that will settle for

all time their claims. So these are very significant processes.

As the Premier has also indicated, there is a lot at stake,

not only for the Aboriginal people but for all of us, in ensuring that justice

is done to the Aboriginal people, and also that we have some clear idea

ourselves, based on these agreements, what will flow in the future in terms of

economic and resource development.

In saying that, we have made the first step of agreement in

principle, subject to ratification in this case by the Inuit people of Labrador,

and with the Innu. They too are in negotiations, but we cannot assume that these

will be smooth and easy. They may have very different objectives in their

negotiations -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: They may have some different objectives and

they live and operate in a very different part of Labrador. So it is not an

automatic assumption. There may be some rocky times. If, again, they are being

asked to settle for all time their rights, then you can be sure that they would

want to have something that they are prepared to recommend to their own people.

We also have of course the Mi'kmaw people in the Province who

are attempting to pursue their land claims as well. We know that part of what is

is the potential for immediate or relatively immediate development in Labrador.

The fact that this is not necessarily the case in lands on the Island that may

be claimed by the Mi'kmaw should not prevent that kind of negotiation from

starting as well, because they too have an inherent right to pursue a land

claim. We hope the government in pursuing this will include them as part of the

ongoing process, in the hope that we can perhaps lead the way in this country by

settling all outstanding Aboriginal claims in a very reasonable period of time.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Human Resources and

Employment.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Through the Strategic Social Plan, government made a

commitment to invest in the people of this Province and to work with community

organizations to help us better understand the needs of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians. Today I would like to update members on two programs which

demonstrate government's commitment to removing barriers to employment that may

exist for individuals, particularly women.

The Single Parent Employment Support Program and Women

Interested in Successful Employment are two initiatives aimed at helping

individuals, particularly women, in their transition to employment. I would like

to welcome members of both organizations, the Single Parent Association of

Newfoundland, SPAN, and Women Interested in Successful Employment, WISE, to the

gallery today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: They are joined by twenty women who are

currently participating in the current WISE session.

The Single Parent Employment Support Program is a pilot

project which helps single parents on income support obtain full-time employment

and work towards becoming financially independent. To date, sixty-nine single

parents have participated in four sessions. I am happy to announce that

thirty-four participants are now working and three have left income support

completely. That is, they are no longer receiving any form of assistance,

including drug card or other forms of support from government.

Several participants are pursuing further training and

twenty-nine are actively job searching. Several of the participants who have

found jobs, have moved on to higher paying jobs. It is most significant and

encouraging to note that some participants of this program had been out of the

labour force and on income support for up to twelve years.

The fifth group of single parents began the program in April.

Of this group of eighteen, five are working full time and one is working part

time. In this year's budget, $500,000 was allocated to support the program and

we anticipate that close to 120 single parents will participate in this pilot in

1999-2000. Thanks to the innovative partnership between Human Resources and

Employment and SPAN, single parents are realizing their potential and are

overcoming their barriers to employment.

Women Interested in Successful Employment is a

community-based organization that offers career exploration programs for women

to help them re-enter the workforce. In this year's budget, government committed

over $331,000 to WISE to offer programs that allow women to explore a variety of

career and educational opportunities.

Between May 1998 and March 1999, 141 women participated in

nine 12-week programs. Of this group, fifty-six are working and thirty-three are

pursuing education and training programs such as: information technology,

petroleum engineering, and many others. An additional thirty-three are

conducting active job searches.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Forty-seven more women started the program

this month.

This is very encouraging news. The results show that with the

proper supports, individuals are building self-confidence and are overcoming

barriers to employment. With more families working, children and adults will be

better off financially and can live and grow in healthy environments.

Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the continued success of these

programs and the partnerships, I might add, and I will continue to update the

members regularly on their progress.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would also like to welcome the people from SPAN and WISE to

the galleries today. The workers and the participants are to be commended -

these women and the single parents who are taking the initiative to get out into

the work place. These programs are indeed good, but I notice a definite

disparity between the number of people who are interested in entering the work

place and the number of people who have actually found jobs. I would therefore

put the onus back on the government to promote economic development to create

more jobs for these people who are out there; put the onus back on the

government to take advantage of our resources so that all of the people, all of

the single parents in the Province and all of the women who have been out of the

workforce for so many years, who take the initiative to take these programs,

will, at the end of their programs, have a job available for them.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, would like to welcome the women from the Single

Parent Employment Support Program and WISE to the galleries, and congratulate

them on their initiative and effort in improving their circumstances.

I say to the minister, if this is a pilot project and is

being praised as it should be, why is it not implemented as a full project of

government and not just treated as a pilot project? A pilot project is to see

whether something works. If it works, and I think it does, well where is the

program that supports that? Why does this government still continue to create

barriers for single women going to university, for example, by forcing them to

borrow the living component from student loans?

There is a long way to go. It is very good to say we have a

pilot project that works, but where is the real program that follows up that

pilot project and makes it available to all women who need it in this Province?

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

Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that government will

publicly release today the report of Commissioner John Roil, Q.C., who was

appointed to review the boundaries of the C.A. Pippy Park.

The public release at this time will provide key stakeholders

with an up-front opportunity to make their final views and opinions known on the

recommendations and conclusions contained in the report.

The public release will also enable government to determine

the level of support prior to a final submission to Cabinet for boundary

changes.

Mr. Speaker, it is important to state that no decisions have

been taken by government yet with respect to the boundaries of Pippy Park. While

there is general support for the direction of the recommendations, government

will not make any decisions until the residents and the stakeholders have an

opportunity to respond to the Commissioner's recommendation. Government will

also take due care with respect, of course, to the wetlands in the park.

Stakeholders will be given a period of thirty days to submit

their views in writing to the Pippy Park Commission. Copies of the report can be

obtained at the Pippy Park Headquarters and stakeholders will also be afforded

an opportunity to review the enlarged maps which detail the specific

recommendations of Commissioner Roil with respect to proposed changes in the

boundaries.

Mr. Speaker, our objective in conducting the review is to

ensure that the integrity of Pippy Park is kept intact and that this attractive

area is maintained in the overall best interest of all stakeholders.

For the information of hon. members, I am attaching to my

statement a copy of Commissioner Roil's mandate, a

summary of the

recommendations and conclusions, as well as the name and telephone number of the

person to contact at Pippy Park for public inquiry purposes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: I thought it was a confession coming today,

but we will wait until later.

I want to thank the minister for a copy of his statement.

Certainly we will get a chance to review some of the recommendations. We just

received it here today. I thank Commissioner Roil for the review.

Also, the minister has noted that he will give stakeholders a

fair chance to have their say. I guess at the end of the day we have to be

cautious any time we change boundaries, of course, of expansion to Memorial

University and so on, that lies within those boundaries.

I guess what we will watch for is that stakeholders are given

a fair chance to make their presentations, that government listens to those

presentations, and that at the end of the day whatever changes occur are for the

best interests of all stakeholders, including people in the park.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for a copy of his statement. Pippy Park

is a very important part of - I suppose it is equivalent to our national capital

region in Ottawa. Here in Newfoundland we have an area around the Confederation

Building and the University. It is a very important open space area that we have

to make sure is subject to proper scrutiny and study and maintain maintenance of

that area as much as possible for the public use.

This type of review - I know there have been some individual

problems.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: I do not know if thirty days is enough, I say

to the minister. Perhaps you could consider extending the period of consultation

on the report before Cabinet makes a decision. I would suggest that to the

minister. If he has individual suggestions from people to do that, I hope he

listens to them and waits for awhile so people can have a full chance to study

the recommendations.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: My question today is for the Premier,

regarding Voisey's Bay. I was shocked to hear this morning your Minister of

Mines and Energy say in an interview, and I quote: The Province's view has

always been that the smelter refinery system proposed by Inco was always too

large. That was the Province's view. Quote, unquote, this morning.

Yet, one-and-a-half years ago in August the view articulated

by the Premier, by government and its officials, was, and I will quote again:

Even with a full-fledged smelter-refinery at Argentia, Inco shareholders stand

to make a reasonable dollar by the Province, says chief negotiator Bill Rowat.

Premier, why the apparent about-face and contradiction? Why

is it today that your Minister of Mines and Energy says it has always been the

Province's view that the smelter originally proposed by Inco was too big, and

yet a year-and-a-half ago that was the only view and the only thing that was

going to happen for the people of this Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the

Leader of the Opposition has been for the last couple of years on this debate.

Because if the Leader of the Opposition were paying any attention to what has

been in the news, what has been in The Telegram , what has been on NTV,

what has been on CBC, if he paid any attention to the representation of the

Province before the environmental review panel, he would know that the position

of the Province has always been that we are not prepared to see the ovoid

exhausted in six or seven years.

If you have a mining development that takes 270 million

pounds a year of nickel out of the ovoid, the ovoid is done and finished in six

or seven years. We have said repeatedly - I have said it in the House. I do not

want to embarrass the Leader of the Opposition, but I am sure I can find many

press clippings. I am sure I can find many references in Hansard. I can probably

even find, if I look far enough, questions from the Leader of the Opposition or

members of his party in which I have given that exact answer.

To pretend there is something new this morning in saying we

want, at minimum, a twenty or twenty-five year development and not a six- or

seven-year high-grading - there is nothing new about that, and nothing will

change. We are not prepared to see the resource scraped up, torn out of the

Province in six or seven years, and processed somewhere else. I am surprised

that the Leader of the Opposition would want to see that kind of development. I

do not know why he is on the side of Inco instead of being on the side of the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The problem with this Premier is that if you wait long enough

he will come to answer one question. Whose side is he on? He is here, he is

there, he is everywhere, on every issue.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Would you like me to explain it to you?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Really? Here we go. If you would like a

discussion on the facts, we will have a discussion on the facts.

I'm trying to clearly understand where the Province's

position is. The Premier wraps himself in the flag and says that the proposed

smelter-refinery complex in Argentia is the one that this Province will accept

and no less. Then we hear the Minister of Mines and Energy saying that it has

always been the Province's view from the beginning that the proposal was too

big. The question is: If that is the case, where were we? Right here in an

article it says: Inco would also consider exploring the concept of a smaller

unit but that idea was rejected by the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the question is this. I want to have a

discussion about the facts to fully air, from a public policy point of view -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: No. I mean, we have him here. The reality

is that when the former chief negotiator for the Province, Bill Rowat, indicated

that the current proposal, the one that was originally proposed, was viable,

that it could put a return for investment on Inco's shareholders, and that also

- public statements he said, not me, your negotiator, not mine -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: He also said that the project with the

current proposal, the large smelter-refinery complex, that it was viable over a

twenty to twenty-five year period. The question is: Has there been a shift? If

not, could you at least try to explain the perception - many people have talked

to me this morning since the minister's interview - of a change in the

government's position.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition

is trying very hard to create a perception of a change of position, but that is

because the Leader of the Opposition either does not know the file, has not been

paying attention to what has been said - and not only said in this House, but

actually said by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador when it appeared

before the environmental review panel.

One of the recommendations of the environmental review panel

is that there ought not to be high-grading of the ovoid. That the ovoid, if it

is to be developed alone, if the subsequent underground reserves are not proven,

should be developed over a twenty- or twenty-five-year period of time. Both the

Minister of Mines and Energy and I, in responding to the panel reports, welcomed

the panel report as good news, because we said the panel had agreed with the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. That was headline news in the Evening

Telegram at the time. I should go on to say that it was carried by the radio

and television networks of the Province, private and public.

So for the Leader of the Opposition to say that he has only

heard, for the first time today, that Newfoundland and Labrador stands opposed

to high-grading the ovoid is a great shock to me. We have always taken the

position that we are not prepared to see a development - and the Member for

Labrador West knows what I am saying - where you high-grade a deposit. We have

said: Go ahead and do the underground exploration at the appropriate time. Prove

or disprove the total amount of the reserve there. Then have a project that is a

blend between the ovoid and the underground. To take 270 million pounds out of

the ovoid, and the ovoid only, as was proposed last summer by Inco, that is a

non-starter, always has been a non-starter, always will be a non-starter,

remains a non-starter. I don't know why the Leader of the Opposition is trying

to stand here and be an advocate for Inco's position! I am quite shocked by it!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, nobody in this Province, no

matter how you want to spin it out, is prepared to see high-grading. That is

clear. Not only from your point of view, not only from our point of view, but

more importantly from the people of this Province's point of view. It is very

clear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: Secondly, it is also very clear that the

questions this afternoon are to clear up what is perceived to be a change in

government policy.

Let me ask you this: Is government still fully committed to

100 per cent of the ore being mined, refined and processed in this Province? Yes

or no?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, that is the position of

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is my last supplementary with respect to the issue. It

is clear again, if that is the case, that we are committed fundamentally to that

principle -

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you?

MR. E. BYRNE: Absolutely. I said it during the election.

Read it in the Blue book. You have read enough of it over the last three or four

weeks.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: You have read enough on taxes! You have

read enough about accountability! Talked about hospital boards! Read on,

Premier, read on!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Read on! We will see more ministerial

statements reflecting our policies coming from that side if you read on.

My final question is this. Publicly your chief negotiator - I

am not sure if he is still on the file or not; I believe he is not - while at

the time this was a publicly and hotly debated issue amongst the public

indicated that according to government's own financial analysis, he said: We

have reviewed - I have it here - hundreds of scenarios - and the consultants

that the government has hired - that it is clear that Inco can make a reasonable

rate of return with respect to the further processing and production of Voisey's

Bay.

I would like to ask the Premier this question today. In view

of the fact that we are talking about awareness and making people aware of the

issues, are you in a position to release any, some or all of those documents

that clearly indicate that we are standing on a solid position?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I would like the people of

the Province to reflect upon what the Leader of the Opposition is asking now.

The Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is in the middle of a negotiation with

Inco. The negotiation is around whether or not the company is going to be

permitted to do what it proposed to do last year, which is to take all of the

ore from Voisey's Bay, at a rate of over 270 million pounds a year out of the

ovoid deposit, put it on a dock, put it on a boat, ship it out of the Province,

and process it somewhere else, or whether or not we are going to have additional

benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador.

I have been saying on behalf of this government, and it is

the position of this entire caucus, because that is where it got discussed, that

you do not negotiate a resource development like this at the low end of the

price cycle. As it happens, the price of nickel is beginning to increase.

Several years ago when the price was higher than it was

today, Inco itself announced a smelter-refinery process. They wanted to build a

two-line process out in Argentia and there was not a problem in the world. The

price began to decline and Inco finally said: We need the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to forget any benefits for Newfoundland and Labrador,

allow us to ship all of the ore, raw, to Ontario. We said: We are going to stand

calmly, quietly, firmly. We are not going to make a deal in the bottom of the

price cycle. If we have to wait one year, five years, fifty-five years, we will

wait. We have been criticized in the National Post , we have been

criticized on Bay Street. We have stood our ground.

The price of nickel is beginning to come back up, and the

Leader of the Opposition wants me to stand and give away our negotiating

position in the middle of the negotiation? Not a chance, Mr. Speaker. We are

going to stand patiently until we get the right deal for Newfoundland and

Labrador. That is the mandate we have.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

They were quick to give away or send out a document when we

shipped ore from Labrador to Sept-Iles, Quebec. You were quick to drop a

document which referenced and enforced the point of view that the company said

was otherwise unfeasible, yet completely disregarded statements and other

examples and the study that showed a reasonable rate of return could have been

accomplished if that facility has gone ahead in Labrador West.

The only thing I have asked of the Premier, the only request

that has been made, based from my point of view as Leader of the Opposition, is

simply this. Obviously, you have said no, you are not in a position to release

any of the information. You are not in a position to counteract any of the

statements made by Inco. Recently on April 27 or April 29 they have indicated

publicly that their position have not changed. It is a very important public

policy issue.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: The question I am asking is: Do you see at

any point, in dealing with Voisey's Bay with Inco, when you will be able to

release that information to the public?

I asked the Minister of Mines and Energy yesterday, after a

proposal was received, after due consideration was given, would government

release to the public all the information surrounding this significant resource

development. Because it belongs to all of us. Not just to government, but to

each and every one of us.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: At what point do you see yourself being in

a position to fully inform the people of the Province what the status of these

negotiations are?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, no, there is not much danger

of that.

The Leader of the Opposition has asked the question: At some

point, will this information be made public? The answer is yes.

When we have a proposal that we think meets the objectives of

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to full and fair benefits from the value

of our own resources, I would not have any hesitation at that point, but

remember that the information we have right now, and all the modelling we have

right now, much of it is contained in the confidential corporate information of

the company itself, and we do not have the consent of the company to release

that information.

Secondly, let me say this to the Leader of the Opposition,

and I say this to him very seriously. I would ask him to consider what I am

saying. When you have one of the political leaders in this Province - in this

case the Leader of the Opposition - on the news, as you have been sir, in the

last few days, saying: She is just about gone, we are down to the last chance,

if we do not make a deal with the company now the project is just about

finished, we are just about to leave the Province, we have to sign the deal now,

that sounds like the kind of talk that was around when we signed the Upper

Churchill contract.

I say to the Leader of the Opposition that your job is to

support the Newfoundland government position, not to undermine it, and not to be

a spokesperson for Inco!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: Be patient, be calm, be strong. We will

get the right deal.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

The Chair has not recognized the member yet. That was the

final supplementary. Other members want to get on to ask questions and the Chair

will have to go to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair will permit one more supplementary and that is

final.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my job to stand here and hold government accountable in

the best interests of the people in this Province and I will not apologize for

doing that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: It is also my job to get the information

out so people understand clearly what your government has been up to. Clearly,

that is what the job of the Opposition is. That is what my job is. I will not

fail to do it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I will ask the Premier a final

question with respect to Voisey's Bay. This has been an issue that has been

ongoing for a significant period of time. Public statements made by both

representatives from the Province, officials from the Province, and from Inco -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get to his question.

MR. E. BYRNE: - have led to this point in time where

questions need to be answered.

Here is a final question, the question I asked the Minister

of Mines and Energy yesterday. Premier, when and if you receive a proposal, and

after due consideration, will you publicly talk about and lay before the people

of the Province what that proposal was coming from the company? Yes or no?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I said earlier that the

Leader of the Opposition would probably be embarrassed once some research was

done. I now have newspaper clippings that go back months in which the government

- I myself am being quoted -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am being quoted very

clearly in all these clippings going back to January and February and going back

to 1998. Quote:

Tobin has insisted there will be no mining lease without full

benefits to Newfoundland and Labrador but did not agree the project can only go

ahead with the massive 270 million pound a year smelter and refinery originally

proposed by Inco in 1996. He said Newfoundland would welcome a smaller

operation, half the size for example, that would extend the life of the Voisey's

Bay mine.

That was several months ago, so I do not know where the

Leader of the Opposition has been. In the presentation we made to the

environmental review panel, the federal-provincial panel, copies of which have

been distributed to every member of the House including the Leader of the

Opposition, here is what we said:

Our view is that if, as the company argues, there are

inherent risks and conditions which may lead to the underground portion of this

project to go undeveloped, then the scale and production leaves for the ovoid

should be re-configured to lengthen the period of production over fifteen to

twenty years on this base of known reserves.

In other words, we have said forget 270 million pounds a

year. Go to a smaller level of production, spread out the benefits, give a

greater advantage to Newfoundland and Labrador, don't give away the shop.

If the Leader of the Opposition has not heard that repeatedly

over the last year, we will tell him again today. We are glad he is listening to

the Minister of Mines and Energy on CBC radio, because obviously that is where

he gets his inspiration for Question Period everyday.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for

the Minister of Education.

Minister, you certainly have completed your about-face as

well, going from, I might add, a complete denial of a problem with programming

due to teacher cuts to a final admission that cutting 182 teachers for September

1999 will have a drastic impact on programming. You have gone from just checking

with directors to listening to everyone except, I might add, the members on this

side.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Yet the parents are still not convinced.

They continue to protest because they are concerned that the assessment you have

said you are going to do to determine the number of teachers required to assure

programming needs of all schools in September 1999 -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: The question to you, Minister, is: What

exactly are you doing? You have said you would make sure you would address it

quickly. What are you doing and when can we expect an answer?

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I have no idea why the hon. member

opposite would question the fact that I have said: Yes, additional teachers will

be put back into the system.

I said from day one that if there were to be any detrimental

impact on the quality of the program that is being offered in this Province,

then we certainly would seriously consider adding teachers back. All I asked for

were examples.

Let me say that in the meetings we have had with the

directors of education, with the comments that have been coming forward from

parents, from principals and from students, we have listened very carefully and

we will be doing a thorough analysis on everything we have heard to determine

the number of teachers that will go back in the system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, once again I address to the

minister that time is running out. The school year is winding down, and if you

are going to wait until June that is totally unacceptable. We need answers right

now. We need it done right now. When is the minister going to do it so that we

can get on to make sure that in September of 1999 the schools are up and running

and ready to go?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, when we do it, we do it right.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: We listen very attentively. We do not play

games. What we do is, we listen to the serious concerns that are being expressed

and we will act on those concerns.

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

Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are also for the Minister of Education.

With the announced teacher cuts for September of 1999, my District of Placentia

& St. Mary's will be losing 11.5 teaching units from St. Anne's Academy in

Dunville to Dunne Memorial Academy in St. Mary's. This reduction is going to

have a major negative effect on programming.

Last week, the Premier stated that there is a need to look

differently at rural school teacher allocation as it relates to programming.

My question for the minister is: Are you going to take into

consideration the rural nature of these schools this year to ensure that the

students of these schools have equal educational opportunities, regardless of

where they live in the Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his

question because it gives me an opportunity to spell out exactly what we have

done in the past in terms of rural Newfoundland and what we intend to do in the

future.

I am not sure if the hon. member recognizes, but two years

ago we instituted a policy where we looked a Small Necessarily Existent Schools.

In fact, of the 350 schools that exist in the Province today, 25 per cent of

those are NES schools. That is ninety-three of those 350 are Small Necessarily

Existent Schools. What that means - it means enhanced programming in those

schools where they in fact are given extra teachers.

That is done between department officials and the education

director of the school board, and done directly to the school, not given to the

school board themselves to allocate but done in consultation with the

department.

We have done that to ensure that in those areas of rural

Newfoundland where there is no school immediately accessible, where busing would

be very difficult and where the numbers warrant, we have made sure that there is

good enhanced programming in that school - in all of those NES schools. If there

is a decline in student enrolment, there may be half a unit or a unit that will

go by the wayside. Having said that, we meet with them and we discuss with them

what their needs and their concerns are before allocating teachers to those

schools.

In terms of what we want to do with rural Newfoundland, we

want to make sure that the students in rural Newfoundland have a quality

education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: That is why we have chosen to ignore the

allocation formula for allocating teachers. Even ignoring it this past two

years, in allocating teachers based on the student enrolment of 97,000, there

will in fact be 93,500 students in the system this coming September. Even the

number of teachers that have been allocated have been based on the premise that

there will be more students in the system than there will actually be.

Having said that, we want to ensure that again we have a

quality program in rural Newfoundland, which is why I have gone on record as

saying: We will amend the teacher allocation formula, we will do away with the

existing teacher allocation formula, and we will look at programming to ensure

that rural Newfoundland -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS FOOTE: In looking at programming, Mr. Speaker, we will

look at programming for exceptional students, programming -

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. minister to conclude her

answer.

MS FOOTE: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

- programming for exceptional students, programming for

students with special needs, and programming for children in the regular stream.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Two of the schools in my district are what the act calls,

Small Necessarily Existent Schools, which also, under the act, are staffed

directly by the Minister of Education. In response to questions on Monday, the

former Minister of Education stated: We are not hearing any complaints about

schools that are staffed directly under the control of the Ministry of

Education.

In light of that statement, I want to inform the minister

that Fatima Academy in St. Bride's, which is a K-XII Small Necessarily Existent

School, is losing one-and-a-half teaching units this September. They are losing

their music program, which they only received two years ago, plus major

reduction in other programs.

I ask the minister today, in light of what she just said:

Will she review the teacher allocation for Fatima Academy to ensure that these

students receive equal educational opportunities that students in larger areas

of Newfoundland and Labrador enjoy?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: In fact, Mr. Speaker, not only will we review

the teaching allocation for that particular school but for every school in every

district in this Province, to try and determine how the teachers have been

allocated and what the impact has been on programming.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the President of Treasury Board. Madam

Minister, the salary scale for nurses in Newfoundland and Labrador is

substantially lower than that for the Maritime Provinces and our neighbours. We

acknowledge there have been some conversions of casuals to permanent, and we

acknowledge that some new positions have been created, but the steady flow of

nurses out of this Province has not been stopped, Madam Minister, and until that

tide is stopped our health care system will continue to face uncertainty and

inconsistencies in services.

What is your government going to do to address the wage

disparity between our Province and other parts of Canada? When will your

government do more to stop the continued erosion of health care in Newfoundland

and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In response to the hon. Member for Waterford Valley, I would

have to say to you that coming from the Budget exercise just a few weeks ago you

can see this government's commitment to health care.

In relation to the negotiation for nurses, this Province paid

what we had the ability to afford. The government, in dealing with nurses'

negotiations, in the positions that we created as permanent there were 125 that

came out of the Budget. There were 200 casual positions that were converted to

permanent, and since then there has been a total of 540 casual positions, in

all, converted to permanent.

Now, what does that cost this government to commit to the

Province in our health care sector? It cost $7.5 million for the 125 new

permanent positions; $2.3 million to convert 540 casual positions; and $4

million - just a couple of weeks ago the Minister of Health and Community

Services stood in her place and announced how she would address the support

staff. We have heard from nurses all over the Province saying that they need

help in doing the work that they have now been asked to do, which is not their

work. As a result, we have answered that concern by putting $4 million of

additional support staff into the system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford Valley.

MR. H. HODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Madam Minister, your statements are inconsistent with what

was said this morning by the Human Resources director from Central Newfoundland.

I want to ask the minister: How many beds will have to close in Newfoundland and

Labrador before you realize there is a need for new and creative solutions to

stop the government's mockery of the collective bargaining process?

Madam Minister, nurses are taking the ultimate sanction. They

are taking their belongings and moving right out of the Province. I say to the

minister: How many beds will have to close? What will have to happen before you

and your ministry decide you are going to do something about the crisis in

health care in Newfoundland and Labrador, and do something to negotiate a fair

agreement with Newfoundland nurses?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Mr. Speaker, how long does it take to get the

message through to these people opposite?

AN HON. MEMBER: A long time.

MS THISTLE: It takes a long time. The questions you are

asking today, my hon. colleague, are the same that have been asked here for the

past two months. Did government answer? I say yes, government answered.

Government answered with the employees that have been just converted from casual

to permanent. I just mentioned over $16 million of new employee benefits and

initiatives that we have put forward as this government to address a nursing

shortage in this Province.

In addition to that, if you were listening to the Budget just

a few weeks ago, $40 million went into eliminating the regional hospital boards'

accumulated deficits, $21 million went into additional funding for hospital

equipment, $15 million in additional funding for board budgets, $4.1 million to

recruit salaried physicians -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to conclude her answer.

MS THISTLE: - $1.8 million in new drug therapies, $1.3

million is included to implement the new Child, Youth and Family Services Act,

and a new initiative announced just a week or two ago by the Minister of Health

and Community Services -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer quickly,

please.

MS THISTLE: - to provide $900,000 over three years for

tobacco reduction strategy. In other words, health care prevention.

So all in all you can see we have quite a commitment. When

you look at the total budget of this Province, you will understand that over

one-third of it goes to the health care sector.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a

petition to the House of Assembly on behalf of some of the representatives from

the Avalon West School Board.

To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative

convened, the petition of the undersigned parents/students of schools in the

Avalon West School District in the Province of Newfoundland;

WHEREAS we the parents/students of schools in the Avalon West

School District are totally dissatisfied with further teacher cutbacks; and

WHEREAS when teachers get cut, programs and courses available

to students get cut as well;

THEREFORE we the parents/students in schools in the Avalon

West School District call upon government to take action to guarantee current

levels of programming in our schools, and as in duty bound your petitioners will

ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, there are 4,800 names attached to this

particular petition and it is brought forth by the parents and -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It is now 3:00 p.m. on a Wednesday. Unless there is -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has leave.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again as I draw attention to

this petition, this is the second largest board in the Province. The petition

that is brought forth certainly has been brought forth with a message. The

message to the House is that when it comes to educational programming it is

absolutely necessary to hold the line, that enough is enough. That programming

cannot afford to be cut any more. That the programming in this particular year

has to hold through for next year as well.

The restructuring has caused a lot of pain and sacrifice for

the parents and students in this particular district. The restructuring is

pretty much complete, except perhaps for one or two more schools, but the

restructuring was to give way to better programming. Programming was to be the

focus. Unfortunately, that has not been the case. With the cutbacks that were

proposed for this particular year, it cut programming to an extent that students

in this particular district are going to get less of an education than they have

in previous years.

Teacher cutbacks, again, mean program cutbacks. The Minister

of Education must realize what has to be done now has to be done quickly. The

school year is coming to an end. These parents and students who sent in this

petition want action now. They are making plans for September 1999. The

administrators know how difficult it is, at the last moment, to turn around

everything in schools. They have to know soon. If you wait until close to the

last day of school you are going to cause more turmoil. It is time for the

minister to stop dragging her heels and to move forward with this, and it has to

be done now, absolutely.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: The programs that are getting cut are not

frills. We do not consider phys. ed. frills. We do not consider French frills.

We do not consider art, we do not consider drama, as frills. We look at these as

core to the curriculum. It is most important these be protected. The government

must guarantee that the current quality of programming continues into the next

school year.

Again, the parents are determined, as is evident today by

them showing up at the House of Assembly. They are in the gallery today, and

they are listening. They want assurance that they do not have to continue this

protest, that they can close out the school year.

Do you realize the students now are coming to a very crucial

time in the school year? They do not have the luxury of continuing to be in

dread of what is going to happen in September 1999. These students want to be

able to finish out this school year and look forward to begin in September 1999

with a program that totally caters to their particular needs. As it stands right

now, in the education system as it is out there in the schools, there is too

much upheaval, there is too much in the way of uncertainty. This uncertainty has

to be stopped now. We have had two months of this, of trying to convince the

government to make changes and do it quickly, to move forward -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to stand today and support the petition put

forward by my hon. colleague for Harbour Main-Whitbourne. I echo some of the

comments he has certainly made here in the House over the past couple of days

and weeks as to the concerns of the people not only in this district of Avalon

West, but indeed from people right across this Province, that we have come here

and put forward on behalf of the parents, students, and I guess the complete

school community of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I think back on a little bit of history out in my own area on

the Cape Shore, when the government came to amalgamate the schools at the time

in the communities of Branch, Point Lance and Patrick's Cove. It said to us:

Move your classes, move your schools into a central location at St. Bride's, and

we will be able to offer your children extra programs. We will be able to offer

your children music, industrial arts, we will be able to offer your children a

host of programs they cannot avail of because of the small school they are in.

It was a very important push. It was one of the major planks the government used

at that time to get the people in those communities to go along with moving

their schools out of their communities.

What has happened? Here we are in 1999, supposedly moving

into the new millennium with more emphasis on education. Now they are telling us

that music, industrial arts and phys. ed. programs are not needed in our

schools, that these extras that were so important ten years ago are not

important today. Really, a major concern is out there with people in rural

Newfoundland.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MANNING: I say to the Member for Bellevue, get up and

speak to the people who signed the petition from your district.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MANNING: They are out there looking for you, I say to

the Member for Bellevue.

It is very important that we talk about school reform. We

went through two or three years of school reform, and the major plank of that

program, the major plank of that selling job -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MANNING: - was that the dollars saved were going to

be put back into education and programs. I say that this government has

miserably failed on delivering on that promise also.

It is important that we get our priorities straight. It is

important that this government get its priorities straight, that the money has

to go into programs, and that people who have chosen to live in rural

Newfoundland do not receive a lesser education than those who have chosen to

live somewhere else. That is the problem that we have here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MANNING: That is the problem we have in this Province

today, and that is causing the turmoil in our students. I raised a situation

today of my home town, in Fatima Academy, a Small Necessarily Existent School

that I thought, when this new act came in 1997, would have protection because of

where the location was. Still we are losing one-and-a-half units, still we are

losing the music program that we only got two years ago, that we were promised

ten years ago. Now they are taking that away.

I ask: Is that reforming education? Is that what the people

voted for in this Province? Is that what the government promised when they were

selling the reform package to this Province? I say, no. This government has

miserably failed on school reform in this Province, and they will pay a price.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have had the opportunity on quite a number of occasions in

debate in this House to talk about the good things that are happening in

Newfoundland and Labrador. I think it is all of our responsibility to get a

good, positive message out on all sides of the House of Assembly.

In debate in the House of Assembly last night, the Member for

Labrador West was up giving his ten-minute speech about his district, about the

employment conditions in his district, and he quoted some numbers that I think

shocked both sides of the House as to the actual employment and lack of

employment in his particular district. In fact, he went so far as to say that

there were in excess, and I quote: It is mostly young people who do not have any

jobs. There are no job opportunities for them because service is stagnated - 400

young people on social services.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) point of order.

MR. EFFORD: The point of order is -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to get to his point of order.

MR. EFFORD: Yes, I will.

It is clear misrepresentation of the true facts in his

district. I checked with the Department of Social Services and the actual number

of young people on social services, ages nineteen to twenty-four, is fifteen

cases in Labrador West.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: That is a long way from 400.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order. It is a difference of opinion

between hon. members.

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

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for

Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, the order -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a point of order.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, the order of this House is

dependent upon people not bringing matters before the House when someone is not

here to defend the facts. The fact of the matter is that there are, in fact, 500

people on social assistance in Labrador West, and a 16 per cent unemployment

rate.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: The 300 cases of social assistance involve

young families and young people to the tune of 500 people.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: It is Private Members' Day. The resolution,

I believe, is that of the hon. Member for Burgeo & LaPoile.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the matter of Marine

Atlantic Incorporated has been mentioned several times in this House before, but

hopefully I can add some enlightenment to that situation and I will have

everybody's rapt attention, I am sure. There is little time and much to say, so

I will proceed quickly.

Mr. Speaker, as Member for the electoral District of Burgeo &

LaPoile, it gives me great pleasure to move the resolution regarding Marine

Atlantic Inc. presently before this House.

There are many issues in the District of Burgeo & LaPoile

which warrant urgent consideration, but the matter of Marine Atlantic and how it

is managed and operated is certainly one of the most important and more complex

issues affecting my district. I would like first to place the issue of Marine

Atlantic Inc. in its proper historical context.

The cornerstone of the Gulf ferry service is found in Term 32

of the British North America Act, when Newfoundland joined Confederation in

1949, specifically enactment number twenty-one which reads: Canada will

maintain, in accordance with the traffic offering, a freight and passenger

steamship service between North Sydney and Port aux Basques which, on completion

of a motor highway between Corner Brook and Port aux Basques, will include

suitable provision for the carriage of motor vehicles.

This clause of the Constitution, when examined in greater

detail, makes several issues very clear and unequivocal. Number one: The use of

the word "will" in this clause makes it mandatory on the federal government to

maintain the service.

Secondly, the service shall be for both freight and passenger

service. Hence, the concerns being raised today concerning commercial truckers

as well as passengers and tourists are both legitimate concerns which must be

dealt with by the federal government in its provision, implementation and

maintenance of this service.

Thirdly, the service is to be operated between North Sydney

and Port aux Basques. Let there be no doubt about where the constitutional

gateway between mainland Canada and the Island is situated; it is the Town of

Channel-Port aux Basques.

Fourthly, it is also clear from this clause the parties

contemplated a highway being constructed between Port aux Basques and Corner

Brook. Although there were limited facilities between Port aux Basques and

Corner Brook from 1949 to 1965, with the hon. Premier Smallwood's, Finish The

Drive In Sixty-Five, this element of motor vehicle passage took on its true

meaning.

There has been an array of names for the Gulf service, from

CN to CN Marine, to East Coast Ferry Service and its current Marine Atlantic

Inc.; but regardless of the name, the Gulf service between North Sydney and Port

aux Basques has always been operated by a federal government Crown agency. Since

1949 the federal government, through these Crown agencies, have had a variety of

ships involved in the Gulf service, from freight carriers to passenger carries,

to a combination of freight and passenger carriers. Many of those ships bore the

names of individuals who sat in this hon. House, such as: William Carson,

Ambrose Shea, Patrick Morris, Frederick Carter, Robert Bond and, most recently,

Joseph Smallwood.

Gone are the days when trains from mainland Canada came

across on these vessels, had their wheels changed from mainland wide-gauge to

narrow-gauge to fit the Newfie railway. Gone in fact is the railway itself.

Since 1988, all freight entering our Province through Port aux Basques has been

of the roll-on, roll-off rubber tire variety.

The other significant historical occurrence with respect to

Marine Atlantic is that it no longer operates anywhere else in Atlantic Canada.

Marine Atlantic has just completed its first full year operating only the Gulf

service on a year-round basis and the run from North Sydney to Argentia during

the summer.

To put things into perspective in terms of its current

services, approximately 40,000 passengers used the North Sydney to Argentia

service in 1998; 400,000 people used the service from North Sydney to Port aux

Basques. There were 138,000 passenger vehicles transported by the service and

71,000 commercial trucks.

With the devolution of the PEI service, the Bar Harbour main

service, the South Coast service and the Labrador services of Newfoundland, the

time had obviously come to restructure the Board of Directors and to restructure

their centre of management and operations. With the transition of March 1998,

the Vice-President of Finance and Administration moved to Port aux Basques and

the Vice-President of Human Resources and Operations moved to North Sydney.

Let there be no misunderstanding what the official position

of the Town of Channel-Port aux Basques and this MHA is with respect to the

transition of Marine Atlantic out of Moncton, New Brunswick. Marine Atlantic

Inc. exists for the sole purpose of satisfying the constitutional obligations of

the federal government to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador with regard

to the transfer of freight and people, and Port aux Basques is named as the

constitutional port of entry. Therefore, any and all benefits which accrue from

the operation of Marine Atlantic Inc. should be for the benefit of this Province

and the town principally named therein, i.e., Port aux Basques.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: Although the transition from Moncton to

North Sydney and Port aux Basques is almost complete, there is still a high

level of dissatisfaction that Newfoundland and Port aux Basques did not get its

just rewards as a result of this transition. There are also some major

unresolved management issues. For example, since March 1998 we have had an

acting president who continues to reside in New Brunswick and who has made it

quite clear he is not prepared to make any definitive decisions with regards to

the management and future direction of Marine Atlantic.

A caretaker president and CEO has not been and will never be

in the best interest of Marine Atlantic or this Province. The vice president in

Port aux Basques and the vice president in North Sydney appear to be more

concerned in aspiring to be the next president than they are with the operations

of the company. Even if they are genuinely concerned with the day to day

operations, they are limited in what they can do because they have no direction

from a president.

The vice president of finance and administration at Port aux

Basques, Mr. Don Newman, works diligently to minimize the federal government's

subsidy for the Gulf service. It was announced just recently by Mr. Newman that

he was sending back $7 million from the 1998-1999 subsidy. While Mr. Newman's

actions may be quite pleasing to the federal treasury, it does nothing for

Marine Atlantic in terms of its proper staffing, and certainly does nothing in

terms of allowing them to have the funds available to upgrade their existing

ships or purchase new ships.

Yes, there is a board of directors which should give

direction to vice presidents, but this board itself has gone through

restructuring since 1998. Instead of having representation from all four

Atlantic Provinces, the board now has three representatives from Nova Scotia and

three representatives from Newfoundland and Labrador. You will note these six

directors are evenly balanced between Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. A seventh

and deciding board member, and a vote, is held by the president-CEO. Today that

president-CEO is a caretaker who resides in New Brunswick and has not taken an

active role in the company affairs since March 1998.

You can see the board itself is not solidified at this point.

One of the voting members of that board, namely a permanent president and chief

executive officer, is not in place to give the board the required direction and

guidance.

It is incumbent upon the federal Minister of Transport to

rectify this situation and complete the board organizational structure to have a

proper decision making process. As recently as last Friday when the minister,

Lloyd Matthews, and this member met with Mr. Collenette at Ottawa, he indicated

the president's job should be filled by the end of this summer. I submit that

this is too long to wait. This board and this company have been without

presidential direction and guidance for more than a year. It should not be

permitted to continue throughout another tourist season.

I go further and submit it is in the best interest of

Newfoundland and Labrador that this president be a Newfoundlander who will live

and work here in this Province -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: - and direct Marine Atlantic for the best

interests of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the major sources of concern at the present time

with respect to Marine Atlantic operations are reflected in the wording of the

resolution. I would like to make a few brief comments with respect to each of

these issues.

Anyone who has watched the news in Newfoundland and Labrador

for the past twelve months has heard the ongoing concerns of the travelling

public and commercial users with regards to Marine Atlantic. The issue comes

down to two words: capacity and service. The service presently operates with the

Caribou , the Smallwood , and the Atlantic Freighter .

The Smallwood and the Caribou can carry both

passengers and commercial vehicles, but the Freighter is basically

equipped for commercial truck usage. There are a few cabins on board the

Freighter but she is not designed to carry passengers, and the truckers are

certainly not pleased with the accommodations.

During the summer season, Marine Atlantic has the Caribou

and the Freighter working the Gulf run to meet the demands of the heavy

tourist season. They also have the Smallwood plying the North Sydney to

Argentia route. The Smallwood also supplements on the Gulf service as and

when required throughout the summer months.

Although the two super ferries may adequately deal with the

passenger demand, it is quite evident that the Atlantic Freighter is not

suitable or capable of handling the commercial traffic. The company has

experienced record levels of passengers and commercial freight movement in the

past year. With this additional overflow in tourism and passenger movements,

commercial truckers were left on the docks in North Sydney and Port aux Basques.

One can appreciate the concerns of the commercial trucking

industry, which is trying to run a business in an expedient and cost-efficient

manner. One can also appreciate the effects this slow down in commercial traffic

has upon the businesses on this Island who must wait for products every time

there is a delay in the Gulf bottleneck.

The problem is really exacerbated if the weather is bad for a

few days and Marine Atlantic tries to catch up on its backlog with its already

limited capacity. Add to this the compounding effect of having one of your super

ferries tied up during the winter months for refit, and one gets a clear picture

of how the travelling public and the commercial users become totally frustrated

with this service.

I understand the chairman of the board went to Ottawa on

April 1 of this year and made a pitch for a new vessel. Apparently, there wasn't

sufficient detailed statistics or justifications to convince the federal

minister to agree. He has asked the board to do some further homework to justify

the major expense of a new vessel. With all due respect, this matter does not

have to be studied to death. The problems of lacking capacity and efficient

usage of the vessels they do have are quite obvious on the Gulf service. The

Atlantic Freighter is simply not adequate, either as a supplementary

passenger ship to the super ferries Caribou or Smallwood , or as a

suitable method of carriage for commercial trucks and their drivers.

You need not be a rocket scientist to figure out you need

extra capacity on the Gulf. All the contingencies of weather, increased traffic,

refit, and breakdowns have been known to the people of Marine Atlantic for

decades. It is their responsibility as managers, and the federal government's

job as owners and operators, to have the appropriate contingency plans and

infrastructure in place to handle these matters.

The people of the Island portion of our Province deserve

better. The travelling public who visit our Island, and Newfoundlanders who

leave this Island, deserve better. The commercial trucking industry and the

businesses they serve deserve better. The people who work on board these vessels

want to do a good job but they can only work with what they have. If they are

not given sufficient vessels with sufficient direction the problems will

continue. Our economy and expanding tourism industry demands efficiency from the

Gulf ferry service, not disruptions and impediments.

There are many more facets to this complex issue of Marine

Atlantic, but the limited time today will not permit the proper analysis and

consideration. For example, just what benefits ought to accrue to Newfoundland

and Labrador from Marine Atlantic but are not being realized. What about the

reservation system used by Marine Atlantic and how it is not working? The

purchasing practices of Marine Atlantic and how they negatively impact the

businesses here in this Province, and the level of service being offered on the

vessels, are all issues which need to be addressed. This is not a cattle boat.

This is supposed to be a first-class conveyor of people and goods with service

that will enhance our businesses and tourist industries, not impede and restrict

them. If it takes managerial changes, infrastructure improvements, and policy

adjustments to create a first-class service, it should be done without further

delay.

The ship called Marine Atlantic is, no doubt, going through

rough seas at this time, but if we can get a good competent Newfoundland skipper

in place by way of a president, and the capacity issue solved, we will have made

a first move to smooth her waters.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, it is submitted that the hon. Mr.

Collenette and his federal colleagues have a constitutional obligation through

Marine Atlantic to provide an efficient ferry service for our residents and

users of the Gulf service. That obligation is not being properly and adequately

fulfilled at this time.

Therefore, "BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly urge

the Federal Government, through Marine Atlantic Inc., to provide an adequate

replacement for the Atlantic Freighter that will, in addition to the

M.V. Caribou and M.V. Joseph and Clara Smallwood , adequately meet the

demands of the travelling public including tourists and commercial carriers"

alike.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Smith): The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly delighted today to stand and talk to this

particular motion. Of course, questions I have asked in the House of Assembly

over the last couple of weeks certainly reflect a lot of things the member said

here today. I commend the member for bringing forward this motion and pointing

out a lot of points that I have been pointing out for several weeks now. As a

matter of fact, a lot of people in this Province have pointed out these points

for years I say to the member.

It is really funny, if you think about it. Here we are in our

fiftieth year in Confederation, our fiftieth birthday as the newest province in

Canada, and our Trans-Canada, our link to our country, is what is at stake here.

As the member talked about in our constitution, he used the word "will"; it will

provide a service. With that in mind, we have to ask ourselves many times what

years, through different parties, through different governments in Ottawa. That

is what we have to ask and be fair about. I will be fair about that, because as

an individual who has used that marine service many times my family - and I am

sure most members, if not all members here, have certainly used it at times.

The first impression of Newfoundland is not when you get into

Port aux Basques. It is when you get on the boat in Sydney to leave to come to

Newfoundland. That is when your first impression is. We have all heard it in

this House, from our own experiences, of people telling us what they feel like

when they get on that service.

Not so long ago, and I suggest to the member - I do not know

if he already has - that he should read - we will even go back in history -

The Night of the Caribou , the Caribou that was sunk in the Second

World War off Port aux Basques. Even in that book, which I read a little while

ago, they talked about, at that time, conditions on the ferry service at that

time even. They were very similar to what we see today. We talked about it ten

years ago and we talked about it twenty years ago. We talk about people coming

to this Province and how they have to be impressed with what happens when they

first step on the boat in North Sydney. So we talk about a level of service, but

really what we are getting to, the crux of it, is the adequacy of the service.

I want to point out something. I have already spoken to

Marine Atlantic officials. I have several groups lined up to speak to them now,

and I will be in the member's district to talk to people in Port aux Basques,

like he has. I think that is only fair, that if people ask me to come to talk

about it openly I will do that. Certainly I will go to any part of the Province

that requests that, as the critic for transportation for this Province. I will

do that in an open and constructive way, I say to the member, to hear what they

have to say. If they want to invite me there, that is fine. The trucking

association has certainly asked me to speak with them.

Marine Atlantic officials have said to me: There are two

types of passengers who come on our boat. There are some people who make

long-range plans and who, when they are making their plans for business or for

pleasure, for tourism and so on, they book ahead. We get those kind who book

ahead and they do that type of thing.

There are hundreds of thousands of tourists who come to Nova

Scotia, who get to the eastern part of Canada every year. He told me the other

type, the type that at the last minute, that day, the day before, or a couple of

days before, will call Marine Atlantic and say: We are this close now to

Newfoundland. I just came all the way from British Columbia or I came all the

way from Colorado or California, and we are this close and there is another

island.

For one thing, they do not know there is an island. They come

from all parts of the country and when they get to Nova Scotia they make a

decision: I think I will go a little bit further to see this Island of

Newfoundland. If there are any people who have travelled throughout the States,

especially, you will find out that many people do not know where Newfoundland

is, but once they come to the East Coast of Canada they have made that decision.

The Marine Atlantic official has told me that on many occasions they reject

people at the service, or they call from Halifax and say: I am coming, can I get

on tonight?

What I would like to find out - and I could not get the

answer from officials so far - is how many rejections have we had.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hundreds of thousands.

MR. SHELLEY: Hundreds of thousands is right, Mr. Speaker.

Can you imagine? Not only that, the people who do line up are the people who

have to get here. Maybe they are coming home to visit their family, they have

been away for so long or whatever. They have to get here, so they have to go

down and get in that lineup.

Remember this point, that all of these people who have left -

the thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians that have left that are in the

Fort McMurrays and Grand Caches and all over this country and also throughout

the United States -, when they come home and they get to the ferry service they

do not know how long it is going to take them to get across the country, but

they know they are going to come home for a visit. Or maybe some of them are,

hopefully, coming back to work again one of these days.

A lot of these people that make the last minute check in to

see if they can come to this Province find out: No, you have to wait five days,

six days. I will give you one little experience. Last summer I was in Cape

Breton waiting to come over. I had reservations, thank God. Whenever I am in a

situation like that I go around and I talk to everybody possible. If I see a

licence plate from Colorado or British Columbia, wherever it is, I have a little

chat with them.

I was talking to this couple that was up from South Carolina.

They asked me where I was from and I told them. They said: Gee, we were thinking

about going to Newfoundland. I said: You should. Icebergs and whales I said, oh

yes, all of that stuff. They said: We called over and we were told we had to

wait for four days, and then some people told us it might take eight hours. They

were told all kinds of things.

The point I am getting at is that it is not just that it is a

service that you get on, to use, to get here, that is a necessary service which

it is, but it should be promoted and it should be an attraction. I agree with

the member. It should be five star. When people come to Cape Breton, to North

Sydney, they should see this ferry service to Newfoundland as five star and an

attractive thing to take the opportunity as a tourist to get on that boat and

come to this Province. It should be an attraction, not a deterrent. That is the

point. That is why we believe that the crux of this whole matter is that this

system in this Province for our Trans-Canada, our link to our country, is

inadequate. As a matter of fact, I will go a bit further and say it is an proper

insult.

I agree with the member on another point. The fact that they

have said that they would continue to study is an insult. Imagine, after fifty

years of inadequate service, they are going to study us once more. I join with

the member and the government in being very aggressive in telling this federal

government, this federal minister, Mr. Collenette, that we do not want any more

studies. We know that after fifty years of being a part of this country that

this service has been inadequate. As a matter of fact, at times it has been an

insult to people coming here, to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have lived

here for years, but also to many people who want to visit this great Province of

ours so that we can brag about it and promote it.

That is what it is all about. That is why in the Terms, our

constitutional right for this service, it says: It will.

I just have a few points to make. I will not go on all day.

It is important that we speak on this. Although I am the new critic for this

portfolio, I always had a sore spot for this particular issue. The Member for

Burgeo & LaPoile talks about it, and I commend him for that, but the member

always has to remember that it is for all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. It

is our Province. That is the gateway that comes into this Province. We all have

to take a responsibility for that. The people in Port aux Basques we support.

The first impression when people come to the Island portion of the Province

should be that the service is, of course, five star.

There are two points I want to make. The fact that the CEO,

the president, is still an acting one tells me that this federal government, the

people responsible, have not got the commitment. This should not have gone on

this long. We still have an acting CEO in this Province, living in Moncton. It

is an insult to the people of this Province, that with a population of 500,000

people we cannot provide a person in this Province who can be the acting

president.

Another point, I say to the member, and he has not mentioned

it - but maybe he did, I did not get all of your points. Maybe you will mention

it in your concluding remarks. What I understand - and you can correct me if I

am wrong - is that at least 60 per cent of the personnel from Marine Atlantic

still reside and work out of Nova Scotia.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. SHELLEY: The ferry service for this Province is in

place because we are here. Because we are an island, that is why that ferry

service is in place. It is not in place because Nova Scotia built an island. It

is in place because we are here as an island.

I would like for the member to correct me if I am wrong

because I had not had it confirmed yet - over 60 per cent of the personnel that

runs the Marine Atlantic service is still situated in Nova Scotia. The ferry

service for this Province is in place because we are here. Because we are an

island that ferry service is in place. It isn't in place because Nova Scotia

built an island. It is in place because we are here as an island. I would like

for the member to correct me if I am wrong, because I haven't had it confirmed

yet, but over 60 per cent of the personnel who run the Marine Atlantic service

is still situated in Nova Scotia.

Our stand is clear and straight. Our House Leader has

articulated our point before, and I will articulate it again. I've always

believed that the only jobs that should not be in this Province connected to

Marine Atlantic are only the ones that are absolutely necessary to be on the

other side. Otherwise every single job that can be here should be here, right

down to the last man or woman, somebody to catch the rope and let her go.

Otherwise, I do not know what other things are necessary. I am not a specialist,

Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: They don't use chains.

My point is that any job that can be in this Province because

of that service should be here. Not shared, as some people have said. They

should be in this Province unless it is absolutely necessary that they be in

Nova Scotia. That is our stand on it.

To clue up, I will say this. Simply put, we do not need any

more studies. Simply put, it should be a five-star attraction, not just an

necessity of a ferry service. It should be an attraction for tourists, and

something that Newfoundlanders who are away can be proud to come back and get

on, and say: This is our link to our country and we are proud of it. That is

what they should be able to say.

In fact, in the clause it does not say - one more point

before I go on. I cannot leave this one out. I will make it as quick as I can.

It is about the truckers and a point they made. That is I thought about when the

Minister of Fisheries walked back into the House.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) trucker?

MR. SHELLEY: No, but if you listen you might learn

something. Just listen for one second.

The minister brought a good point to mind, and I would say it

is a positive point. The minister always talks about the quality of our fish

products and so on, especially when it comes to crab. I know, too, from being

around the industry, that is the key, especially these days in the Asian

countries and so on, and from the Boston Seafood Show, they look for quality.

They do not look for quantity any more - there is lots of quantity - they want

quality.

Truckers have talked to me, of course, with situations with

their trucks and so on. A lot of times when they are backed up and they are

trying to get the crab resource that goes out of this Province, after so much

processing here, if they are held up, sometimes for days, then they could be

putting in jeopardy the quality of the resource. They have said that to me and I

think it is an important point.

That is the economic reason, and that is just one of them.

The produce to this Province and so on - we can go on with a list of them. The

bottom line is the service to us, but the main bottom line is that the adequacy

of the service has been a dismal failure for years since we joined this country.

That is why we should bring it to a head.

We are not going to let - and when I say we, I mean the

Province, and I hope I am talking for all members - the federal government drop

the ball on this one again. It has been dropped for years. It is time to pick it

up and get a direct action on it once and for all.

With the words the member used that it will - in the clause

it says will - I am going to put forward an amendment, an amendment seconded by

the Member for Lewisporte.

I would move, Mr. Speaker: That the resolution now before the

House of Assembly be amended by replacing the words, "urge the Federal

Government through Marine Atlantic Inc. to provide..." with the words, "demand

the federal government through Marine Atlantic Inc. provide...".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: We are tired of urging, we are tired of -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, and we are urging when it comes to...

I think it is quite straightforward. It is time to demand

that the ferry service to this Province be a five-star, adequate service that

all -

AN HON. MEMBER: Change one word.

MR. SHELLEY: Yes, that is basically it, change "urge" to

"demand", that we demand -

AN HON. MEMBER: It strengthens the resolution.

MR. SHELLEY: That is all it does. I certainly do not want

to take away from the members. I think we are on the same track with it and so

on.

Why I say "demand" is the time. We are not going to urge you

for another five years; we are going to demand that you do it immediately.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: The other word I have not put it in the

resolution, demand immediately that we do that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to conclude by saying this: We want a five-star,

adequate service for every Newfoundlander and Labradorian because we deserve it

and it is long overdue.

I want to commend the member for bringing this resolution to

the House. I want to say to the government that as long as this tact is taken

aggressively and there is some action taken immediately, we support it

wholeheartedly. The day that it is dropped or dies out again, we will pick it up

again. It will not die this time until we get what we deserve in this Province,

and that is a five-star class ferry service to this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

First of all, the Chair would just like to point out that the

amendment is in order.

The Chair recognizes the hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to address this resolution currently before the

House concerning the Gulf ferry service. Certainly the amendment makes it clear

that we have a serious problem.

What I am wondering out loud here today is: Why are we

required in this House of Assembly, fifty years after Confederation, to quote a

meet its obligations to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? Why are we here

in this House of Assembly doing that, fifty years later, having to do that? This

government has been sitting here for the last ten years, two governments in a

row.

We have a new Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. When he

was a backbencher, he used to be outspoken. Now he is the Minister of

Intergovernmental Affairs.

We have a new member who has been in Port aux Basques,

working and living in Port aux Basques for many, many years, who knows the

problem, who knows what the problem was. The previous Member for Port aux

Basques, representing the same political party, knew what the problem was. We

have people all over this Province who know what the problem was.

The Acting Minister of Works, Services and Transportation was

in the House last week and he had the answer, Mr. Speaker. He had the answer. He

said that we were being treated like second-class citizens by the Government of

Canada. He had the answer. I do not know where he came up with it. He did not

say anything about it until questions had been raised about the ferry service

from this side of the House, but all of a sudden he discovered last week that we

were second-class citizens of Confederation. Who used those words in the House

of Assembly last week?

MR. J. BYRNE: Who?

MR. HARRIS: The Acting Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, the hon. Lloyd Matthews. He talked about Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians being treated like second-class citizens with respect to the ferry

service. It is a discovery. Where has this government been? The Premier, up in

Ottawa since 1980, a minister of the federal Crown, I never heard him say that

in Ottawa. I never heard him say that here since 1996, when he became Premier of

this Province.

There is no doubt we can support the resolution, but my

question is: Why does this House of Assembly even have to deal with that

resolution? If there is a conviction on the part of the people of this House, if

there is a conviction on the part of ministers of the Crown, if there is a

conviction on the part of members opposite, that we are being treated like

second-class citizens with respect to the ferry service, why are we not doing

more as a government and as a people to insist that we get better ferry service?

Why are we not doing more than passing a resolution asking for a replacement of

the ferry?

This is almost like a petition, Mr. Speaker. If the people of

a particular district need their road upgraded, they petition the House of

Assembly. Somebody gets into the House of Assembly and raises a petition. We are

recognize their obligations under the Terms of Union.

I say, Mr. Speaker, that is not a proper way for an

independent, forceful people to seek their proper rights in Confederation. This

government has to take action. This government has to do more than have a

meeting, as they did last week, along with - not a special meeting; it was a

meeting of all the ministers responsible across the country for transportation.

We have to do more than bring it up at a meeting. It was called for some other

purpose. There ought to be a better plan, a better objective by this House of

Assembly, by the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, in pursuit of a proper

ferry service on the Gulf.

The Member for Baie Verte had referred - and I am sure the

Member for Burgeo & LaPoile knows full well, as he has met and I have met and

everyone in this House has met dozens and dozens, personally, people from across

this country who come to Eastern Canada, who would love to come to the tenth

province. I always wanted to go to Newfoundland, they said. Got as far as Cape

Breton but could not wait in the lineup to see if they could get on the ferry.

They could not wait six, seven or eight hours just to see if they could get on

the ferry. They could not afford the extreme cost of coming across to spend a

couple of days in Newfoundland and Labrador. They could not do it because of two

reasons: the inadequacy of the ferry service and the prohibitive.

I know I was heckling the member when he was dutifully and

diligently reading out the Terms of Union, as is proper for a person with the

legal training that the hon. member opposite has. The Terms of Union do not say

anything about cost, I notice. They talk about providing a service for the

traffic operating.

They do not say whether they should be charged an exorbitant

fee. They do not talk about what level of subsidy ought to take place. They do

not say whether it should be free, or whether it should relate directly to the

cost or similar cost of the Trans-Canada across this country, because it is our

access to the rest of Canada by road, and it is the rest of Canada's access by

road to this Province. The cost should bear a relationship to that.

A lot of people talk about essential service, how essential

the Gulf service is, and they use that as an argument to try and take away some

bargaining rights of individuals.

If it is such an essential service, why isn't is free? If it

is such an essential service for the people of this Province to be able to get

back and forth to the rest of Canada, and to allow the people of this Province

to have visitors and tourists, and to have transportation of goods and services

travel over the Gulf, then it should be free, or as close to being free as is

possible, considering the fact that you would have to travel over ninety or 100

miles of water to get here.

That is the kind of thrust that I would like to see coming

from this government and coming from this House, not merely what it appears to

be here, not merely being some kind of petitioners asking for a replacement

ferry, asking for a new boat. That is all we are doing, asking for a new boat.

That is, I would say, certainly necessary, but I would almost go so far to say

that it is not worthy of this House to have it sight set so low in terms of its

obligation to the people of this Province.

There is a level of acceptance. Despite the comments of

members in this House, there is a level of acceptance of the kind of treatment

service.

We had debates in this House a couple of years ago, or last

year, or the year before, when the issue of the movement of the headquarters of

Marine Atlantic was at stake. What happened? They shifted around some positions

from St. John's to Port aux Basques, but they left pretty well intact the

workforce outside the Province. The president and chief executive officer of

Marine Atlantic still operates out of or lives in the Province of New Brunswick.

It is not acceptable. It is not acceptable that a ferry service designed to meet

the needs of this Province should be operated out of somewhere else.

A lot of hay was made about the issue of moving people from

St. John's to Port aux Basques.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Totally unnecessary, I say to the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture. These were administrative positions. The crux of the

matter here was the management and operation of the ferry service, the people

who make the decisions being close to the travelling public, being close to the

needs.

Why don't we have statistics showing the number of people who

are turned down by Marine Atlantic, who cannot come to this Province because of

cost or because they are not prepared to wait in line for six, seven, eight or

nine hours to see whether they might get on a ferry boat to come to the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador, the tenth Province of Canada? That is what I want

to know. Why don't we have a service that is designed to meet the needs of the

people of this Province and to meet the needs of the travelling public who want

to come to this Province for tourism or other purposes?

That is what we need to be taking here, a far stronger

position on behalf of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, not being the

Where is the boat going to be made? Is it going to be made in

Marystown? Is it going to be built in Marystown or is it going to be built

somewhere else and built of a size that cannot even be repaired in the Province

of Newfoundland?

AN HON. MEMBER: Korea.

MR. HARRIS: That is what we are going to have, if they

have their way. It will be built in Korea or somewhere else. Where is this boat

going to be built? What about the 29 per cent unemployment rate in the district

of the Member for Burin-Placentia West? Twenty-nine percent unemployment.

We need a new boat - sure, we need a new boat - but we need a

shipbuilding industry. We need a policy that supports the people of our Province

and the needs of our Province. We need a more nationalistic government; that is

what we need. We need a stronger voice than we have on behalf of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

AN HON. MEMBER: Good NDP policy will do it for us.

MR. HARRIS: We need good NDP policy. I echo the words of

the minister, because we would not have ministers of the Crown getting up and

lamenting about the fact that we are treated like second-class citizens when all

he does is go and bring it up. He puts it on the agenda of a meeting of all

kinds of other ministers: We would like to have a new boat. That is all we got,

Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: They bankrupted Ontario.

MR. HARRIS: Oh, the member wants to talk about Ontario.

Well, he should -

AN HON. MEMBER: An $860 million deficit this year.

MR. HARRIS: He wants to talk about that.

AN HON. MEMBER: Ontario will never be out of the hole

again because of Bob Rae. They will never get out of the hole again.

MR. HARRIS: Well, let's talk about that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HARRIS: What about the twenty-two -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: NDP, we would be ruined for life

(inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I guess the minister should

listen to his own pronouncements in the House. He was saying in the House:

Better to have tried and lost than never to have tried at all. I think he was

stealing a romantic phrase: It is better to have loved and lost than never to

have loved at all. He started to talk about that.

I say the same thing about this issue: If we are not going to

try to make sure that we are first-class citizens of this country, we are never

going to be. If the minister can stand in his place in this House like he did

last week and say we are second-class citizens, and all they got in response was

a motion saying: Please, give us a new boat, if that is all they can do in

response to being second-class citizens, I think we do have to try something

else. We do have to stand up more for ourselves. We do have to fight harder. If

Canada and demanding our rightful place in Confederation, then I am prepared to

do it! If this minister is not, then that is too bad about him. I am prepared to

do it, Mr. Speaker, and we are prepared to do it.

I support the resolution but I say this: We should not be

petitioners looking for a new boat. We should be demanding our rightful place in

Confederation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burgeo & LaPoile.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am uncertain at this point whether the Leader of the NDP,

the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, is marked down as a doubtful in regards

to this resolution or a supporter.

AN HON. MEMBER: The NDP are always wishy-washy, boy, you

never know where they are coming from.

MR. PARSONS: Anyway, I certainly have a new meaning for

the phrase NDP. I always thought it stood for a political party but, given the

hon. member's comments, it certainly appears to be negative, depressing

pronouncements.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: My intention with this resolution was to be

none other than positive in nature for the improvement of a service that is a

constitutional obligation of the federal government.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. PARSONS: In response to the PC transportation

critic's comments, I would certainly, and wholeheartedly, endorse the hon.

members comments that we have to make a first impression, and yes, the first

impression may well be in North Sydney when you step aboard that ferry.

I would also like to comment concerning the reservation

system. It is quite true and it is quite correct, Marine Atlantic has no manner

of recording the people they turn away. They do, in fact, turn people away.

Perhaps I should not have them, but I do have the statistics. For example, from

January 1, 1999 to May 13, Marine Atlantic Inc. turned away 1,780 passengers.

They turned away 101 private vehicles, 1,519 straight tractor trailers, 2,234

drop trailers, and 3,753 commercial recreational vehicles. I think that is fact

enough for anybody to decide that we do need to deal with the capacity issue.

I would also like to comment on the member opposite's

reference to the inequality of the job situation. Since March 1998, with regards

to the inequality of the job situation since the transition, it is in fact true.

This member had the privilege of being chairperson of a committee that was stuck

by the town of Channel-Port aux Basques after the transition was announced

called the restructuring committee. As chairperson of that committee we inquired

of Marine Atlantic as to how many employees they had, where they were, where

they would be going to and living and working. This chairperson of that

committee was told point blank: You will not know and we will not discuss with

you the inequality of the employment situation between Port aux Basques and

North Sydney. That is totally unacceptable, and that again is another initiative

which should be followed up with by the Marine Atlantic management once it gets

finally intact.

I spoke with one thirty-seven year veteran of Marine Atlantic

who says there should be enough people left in Nova Scotia to tie the boat on.

Perhaps the rest of us Newfoundlanders are not quite that extreme, but there

certainly should be an equality as a starting base. We can see where we go from

there with some good, strong Newfoundland management.

With regards to the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi

commenting on whether my commitment stands, I would inform him that I have

worked with Marine Atlantic, my father was a captain with Marine Atlantic, and

all my family work with Marine Atlantic. Neither he nor anyone else should ever

question the commitment of this member to the proper resolution of the Marine

Atlantic issue, and my support for the people of Port aux Basques and what they

believe is right for them. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

All those in favour of the amendment to the resolution,

`aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!

MR. SPEAKER: Those against, `nay.'

Carried.

All those in favour of the resolution as amended, `aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!

MR. SPEAKER: Those against, `nay.'

I declare the resolution carried.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: We have such sweetness and light in this place

today, and I expect you will soon see us all out in the middle here dancing with

each other and everything.

I think we have agreement that we will spend the rest of the

day on government business.

Order 3, Concurrence Motion.

MR. SPEAKER: Order 3, Concurrence Motion, the Government

Services Committee and Resource Committee.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have to have a continuation of the type of debate that was

experienced here last evening. My colleagues for Twillingate & Fogo and Bay of

Islands, and other colleagues in the House, gave a very positive outlook on

their districts and an outlook on the Province. In fact, after they were

finished I looked across the way and all you could see was each member over

there looking at each other. Did you hear all that good news? They just could

not take the good news, can't stand the good news.

I took the opportunity today to correct the negative

misrepresentation from the member, unintentional I suspect, but it had to be

corrected, from the Member for Labrador West. When a representative of his

people stands in the House of Assembly and does not know the real facts about

what is happening in his own district, it gives me great concern as to why the

people of Labrador West put their confidence in him to carry the message forth

to the House of Assembly.

After he talked about, what really I did not notice until now

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: Just listen. I did not notice until now that

he talked about over 400 young people on social services in his district, but

then he went on to say - to show you the lack of understanding he has about his

district; remember now, this is Labrador West - this: "I am wondering when the

minister is going to announce a fish plant for the area..."

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: It is here written in Hansard: "I am

wondering when the minister is going to announce a fish plant for the area but I

do not expect that is going to happen soon." That is from the Member for from

Labrador West. Can you just imagine putting a fish plant in Labrador West? Now

there is the understanding that the hon. member has about his own district.

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: I am surprised that the minister who is the

Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture has no idea that we have a freshwater

fishing industry in Canada: Lake Winnipeg, Whitefish, Lake Ontario. There are

wonderful beautiful lakes in Labrador. You would think the minister would be

active in trying to resolve the 16 per cent unemployment problem in Labrador

West!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

No point of order.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I thought it was only one of

them but now I can see two peas in a pod over there. Where is the minister for

Labrador? Too bad he is not in the House.

MR. SULLIVAN: Did you say you thought there was only one

pea in a pod?

MR. EFFORD: No, I said now, two peas in a pod. I thought

there was only one pea over there of that kind.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is usually eight.

MR. EFFORD: It is usually eight but there are two peas in

this case.

Seriously, I just want to inform the hon. member that first

of all there are fifteen people -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: He is not listening, you see. This is the

reason why he is not learning anything. You are not listening. There are not 400

young people on social services in your district. In fact, from the ages of

nineteen to twenty-four, there are exactly fifteen.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: You said 400 young people. Mr. Speaker, the

other thing he did say last night was about the health services and that really

shocked me. Because I thought that the people working in the health care system

in Labrador West were good competent, capable people. He said -

MR. TULK: The only thing they are able to do is change a

Band-Aid, put a Band-Aid on, he said.

MR. EFFORD: He did. He said: Anything more than the

requirement for a Band-Aid, they have to fly to St. John's for medical services.

That is what the Member for Labrador West said about the people working in the

health care system in his district. We have a responsibility on this side of the

House to correct any misinformation, but we also have a responsibility to inform

the people in his district of exactly the representation that he is putting

forth on their behalf in this House of Assembly. Also, to educate members.

First of all, he said that 400 young people are on social

services. That is wrong. He said they have no health care system in Labrador

West. That is wrong, but these people know they need to be informed. I have to

ask my colleague from Labrador, will he see to it that the people of Labrador

are well informed on that issue? A copy of Hansard will go to the press down

there and to every worker in the health care system.

MR. TULK: John, all they can do is put on Band-Aids.

MR. EFFORD: Band-Aid, that is the greatest capability in

Labrador West.

Let's get onto the fishing industry. Let's get on to some

good news about the fishing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador. Let's look at

what this government has done with the fishing industry since 1996. The first

and only time there was a provincial quality assurance program brought in to

ensure that top quality products of all species of fish was landed in the

Province was after this government was elected in 1996. That was the first and

only time in the history of the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: Former ministers muddled at it for years

and could not do anything.

MR. EFFORD: Muddled is the word. What was the history of

the price mechanism before 1996? Maybe they reached agreement by June, July,

August, September. In fact, four of the five previous years the fishery was

delayed by several months starting. What did this government do? We put together

a task force to put in a mechanism that would resolve the differences in the

collective bargaining over the price of the fish. As a result of that -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: I said this government did it. What happened

in 1998? What happened in 1999? They were the first times in the history of the

Province that the prices of the species of fish that were to be harvested -

crab, shrimp, cod, and capelin - was done in an orderly manner and the fishery

started in April, for the first time in the last number of years.

What was the other thing we did? What did I find out when we

took over from the former Tory government? The Member for Lewisporte was then

the Minister of Fisheries, previous to being premier for twenty-nine days. When

he was Minister of Fisheries, how many fish plants ended up in this Province? In

total, over 300 fish plants in this Province. How much money did I write off in

the first month after I became Minister of Fisheries from fish plant owners not

paying their debts to the government from the former Tory government? In the

first month, we wrote off $28 million of unpaid debt incurred while that member

opposite was Minister of Fisheries and a previous premier. That was only part of

it. There were many more millions written off before that.

AN HON. MEMBER: John, all (inaudible) Florida

(inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: A lot of it. What do we do now? Since 1996 we

have not put one nickel into any fish plant in the primary processing on the

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Not one nickel into a fish plant, not one

nickel into the harvesting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: On a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, the minister made a statement.

He should know full well that this House approved loan guarantees for three

different operations last year. One they doubled over what it was the previous

year. The minister should know that the government is on the hook for guarantees

for three di