December

3, 1997

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIII No. 43

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I understand that we have - in

discussions between myself and the Opposition House Leader that the Premier

wishes to introduce a resolution, speak to it for two or three minutes and the

Leader of the Opposition will speak to it as well.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, first of all I thank the

Opposition for the cooperation in this matter.

Mr. Speaker, as I am sure you are aware, Canada is hosting

the Heads of State of over 100 countries in Ottawa today, who have gathered to

sign the historic global ban on land-mines. This is indeed a time for all of us,

including the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, to celebrate a move

negotiated internationally to end the horror of land-mines.

Mr. Speaker, land-mines have maimed millions all over the

world and continue to maim millions all over the world. Many of those, indeed

most of those injured are children, Mr. Speaker, and they are innocent

participants to the conflicts that have given rise to the mining of vast tracts

of land.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen as well many combatants or

non-combatants, in some cases, peacekeepers who have been maimed or injured by

these land-mines. Indeed, we can recall in this Province Canadian UN

Peacekeepers, including some from Newfoundland and Labrador, who have been

grievously injured as a result of land-mines.

So, Mr. Speaker, this week all across Canada,

non-governmental organizations, including those like Oxfam and indeed Oxfam here

in Newfoundland and Labrador has taken up a petition campaign. I know many

members will sign the petition here outside the Legislature - have taken up the

cause and have asked Legislatures all across the country to join in reflecting,

by way of resolution, our support for the total ban on land-mines.

Mr. Speaker, also our support for joining the call of all of

those who say it is imperative and important that the government of the United

States and the President of the United States and indeed, the President and

Government of Russia join too in this treaty.

So I move, Mr. Speaker, the following resolution, seconded if

I may, by the Leader of the Opposition.

WHEREAS the use of anti-personal land-mines have caused

untold harm to innocent people and countries that have been torn by war; and

WHEREAS the issue of banning the use of such land-mines has

gained worldwide attention; and

WHEREAS Canada is this week hosting an international

conference of the Heads of State of over 100 countries; and

WHEREAS more then 100 countries are expected to sign a land

mark treaty aimed at implementing a global band on land-mines; and

WHEREAS Canada has been the leading proponent among those

countries;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House unanimously endorse

Canada's leadership and position in bringing about the convention on the

prohibition of the use, stock piling, production and transfer of anti-personal

mines and of their destruction. We urge all other nations of the world to follow

suit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We, too, on this side of the House certainly endorse this

resolution here to prohibit anti-personal mines. They have caused devastation,

they are not just a weapon, basically, of war or to maintain peace, it is also a

weapon that has inflicted considerable injury on innocent people; on men, women

and children. Children in particular who are innocent victims of this.

It is estimated that one person every twenty minutes is

affected by anti-personal mines and I certainly endorse, and on behalf of my

colleagues, this resolution to take the strongest possible action to prohibit

and prevent this type of destruction and devastation of personal injury from

occurring again in the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour of the resolution,

`aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against the resolution, `nay'.

On Motion, resolution carried.

Statements by Ministers

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I would to take this opportunity

to thank the members of the House of Commons' Fisheries Committee for taking the

time to come to Newfoundland and Labrador to hear from the people most

profoundly affected by the closure of the ground fishery.

As you know, Mr. Speaker, the committee completed its

hearings Monday. The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador appreciates the

efforts of George Baker and his colleagues, who travelled to a wide range of

communities, listening to the views of a large number of people within a

relatively short time-frame. These meetings gave the committee the opportunity

to hear, firsthand, the fear and anxiety of a people faced with uncertainly

about their future. The livelihoods of many people in Newfoundland and Labrador

have been devastated through no fault of their own.

Mr. Speaker, the federal government has a responsibility to

the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. There must be a meaningful follow-up

program.

Provincial officials, Mr. Speaker, followed the progress of

the committee around the Province. They, too, heard about the frustration and

stress of living in rural Newfoundland and Labrador without the fishery. Through

them, we know that the Commons Committee was presented with a clear, accurate

picture of the situation.

Mr. Speaker, I might just, if I could, put in some of the

comments that I understand were heard at some of those meetings when the

Chairman, George Baker, asked the other Committee members if they would give a

minute's statement to sum up their position. I don't think it is any surprise

that Mr. Baker's statement was he: Hopes and expects - and this is very

important - that the Committee will take a unanimous report, and that the report

will be public.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: The Reform Party, represented by Gary Lunn from

British Columbia, stated - and I think this is important, Mr. Speaker, that we

have all of the members of the House of Commons Committee making those kinds of

statements: It is clear that nobody wants to be on TAGS. He said to the people

gathered: I will fight for you. Government has to honour its commitment to the

people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I think it is important too to

remember that Mr. Bernier from the Bloc Qubcois, from the Gasp Peninsula,

points out in a true Canadian fashion that his riding includes Gasp and part of

the Magdalen Islands. His constituents are saying the same things he has heard

in Newfoundland and Labrador. He will push the Bloc to support what fishermen

are saying. I think this is particularly important: If they don't, then I will

no longer be a member of the Bloc.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: The NDP, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Stoffer from Nova

Scotia, his statement: Must ensure that the feds don't down load the TAGS

problem to the provinces. Of course, Bill Matthews, a PC member from this

Province: There is great chemistry in the Commons Committee. They are all

pulling together to find solutions. The PCs will definitely support a unanimous

report to the House of Commons. A lady from the Northwest Territories points

out: I empathize with the people who have attended the hearings. I understand

the rural way of life and the importance of communities, and I will work to help

resolve the problem.

Mr. Speaker, I think what is important there is that we see

that we will have, we hope, and I believe that we will have, a unanimous report

to the House of Commons on this problem that we have, on this number one public

issue in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, judging from recent media reports, as I said

before, it appears that all members of the Committee, regardless of their

political stripe, have been struck by the seriousness of the problem and the

need for an immediate response. Media reports also suggest unanimity in the

views and comments of those members who visited the Province. It is my hope that

these views will translate into a unanimous report as I believe they will, of

the committee, one which sets out the basis for a strong and effective post-TAGS

response.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the statement and I can assure you

that our views over here are not a lot different from his personal views as

well. I happen to have attended two of those meetings, the first one in Tors

Cove which the minister attended and a meeting which I fought very hard for in

my own district down in Catalina, which I think was one of the last meetings

that took place on Monday. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the federal MP was probably the

only MP who did not take

part in trying to arrange that particular meeting; I am

talking about our federal minister in Ottawa, who played a very little part,

took very little interest in it.

Mr. Speaker, the stories that this committee heard - there

was not a big difference from one community to another, and I suppose they could

have gone back to Ottawa after they had the first meeting in Tors Cove, because

the message was the same right across this Province. And I could see that the

committee was concerned. I heard them make their personal statements at the

meeting in Catalina, similar to what the minister read out.

Those people, Mr. Speaker, at least heard from the common

Newfoundlander what this Province is now going through with the moratorium on

the fishery. They saw firsthand, they recognized firsthand what the fishery

meant to rural Newfoundland and Labrador. The fishermen I heard from, and the

fish-plant workers I heard speak at those meetings, Mr. Speaker, were not

looking for government hand-outs; they were not looking for a way to go home and

sit down and watch the `soaps' on t.v. What they were looking for was somebody

to give them a signal of hope where they could get back to work and do what they

normally did to support their families.

Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that the fisherpeople of this

Province are not living in any lap of luxury today with a program known as TAGS,

but I will say, Mr. Speaker, that, the onus is on this government, the

responsibility is on our government right here to make sure that the people in

Ottawa put back what was taken from those Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, live

up to the promise that was made when our now Premier was the federal Minister of

Fisheries and Oceans, on that great May day down at the Newfoundland Hotel which

I also attended, Mr. Speaker, when that promise was made.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: The onus is on this government to make

sure that their cousins in Ottawa live up to that promise, live up to that

commitment.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

Oral Questions

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are for the Premier.

In a report to the Canadian Human Rights Commission, retired

Queen's University Law Professor, Noel Lyon, recommended that the Government of

Canada recognize the ten members of the Federation of Newfoundland Indians as

legitimate Micmac communities with established membership, and also enter into

negotiations with each of them to establish a set of objectives and a timetable

for transition to appropriate forms of self-government. I ask the Premier, does

he support giving status to those Micmac communities?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we are doing an assessment of

the report to which the hon. member refers. He knows it arises out of a

reference made by a lawyer on behalf of the Micmac people to - Mr. Lyon has

commented after a reference by the Micmac people themselves. The report has come

in. It is something that is being assessed. But on the basic principle of

self-government, I think the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador has

expressed in the clearest way possible our appreciation of this reality and our

commitment to this reality by negotiating an Agreement in Principle which is now

being finalized, as the Leader of the Opposition knows, with the Labrador Inuit

Association on a land claims settlement. Part of that settlement is an agreement

on self-government, which is now being negotiated.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Apparently, the Premier did not fully understand the

question. He accused me yesterday of not referring to provincial pensions. It is

there in Hansard, I say to the Premier today.

I will just ask him again if he is recognizing that LIA - it

is not Agreement in Principle, by the way. The other party, LIA, has not agreed

to that, Premier; I correct you on that point. I ask him: Does he support - does

this Province support - does the Premier support, giving status to those Micmac

communities to have legitimate status as Indians under the Indian Act?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I said we are negotiating an

Agreement in Principle. That is what we are negotiating; and I said negotiations

are ongoing even as we speak. I am not quite sure how a tit-for-tat commentary

across the floor does anything to give information to anybody with any of the

matters that are being raised.

On the question of Micmac communities, I am not ready today

to stand in the House and say that the government is prepared to recognize any

number of additional communities beyond the Conne River community, which is

currently in place and with whom we do have a very good and constructive

relationship. If the Leader of the Opposition wants to recommend to the House

today and through the House today that there be a variety of additional

communities recognized as Micmac communities and that land claims be negotiated

with all of the communities and that thousands of miles of land be given as part

of the land claims settlement to each of these communities, then I would say to

the Leader of the Opposition, who is asking questions, tell us which communities

he has in mind, which quantum's of land he has in mind, how much cash settlement

he has in mind and then I would be glad to take his advice under deliberation

and respond to it. So I know the Leader of the Opposition would not ask the

questions without thinking about them in advance and I await now his very clear

articulation of which communities he has in mind.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It's the Premier's tactic every single Question Period. They

have no answers. They were elected to govern and they cannot govern, Mr.

Speaker. They do not have the ability to govern this Province and they are

trying to deflect attention here. Resign!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Resign and let somebody else do the job if

you can't do it, I say to the Premier!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) look at Roger over there.

MR. SULLIVAN: Don't worry; he will be doing that one in a

couple of years. When the federal leadership comes up he will be doing that I

say -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: He will be back again though, he will be

back again.

MR. SULLIVAN: Their status has been an issue since

Newfoundland joined Confederation in 1949 and the Indian act, I say to the

Premier, was not applied to this Province. Now the Conne River community was

recognized in 1984 and in 1982 the federal government gave a commitment to

negotiate the status of other Micmac communities as well.

Now I ask the Premier, does he see any difference in giving

status to Conne River and not to the other legitimate communities that would

meet the regular registration process?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

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

Opposition is standing in the House and he is asking the government - I want

members to think about this seriously because there are serious consequences to

this, this is a serious issue, the Leader of the Opposition -

MR. J. BYRNE: Give us a show now.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: When the Member for Cape St. Francis is

ready, Mr. Speaker, I will attempt to answer the question the Leader of the

Opposition has asked.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

cannot stand in the House, I submit, and ask the government to recognize ten

communities, to recognize self-government in ten communities, if he understands

what self-government means because it means land claim settlements. It means

that tens of thousands of square miles of this island, perhaps more than that,

will be settled in land claims. He cannot ask me to stand up and agree there are

ten different, distinct settlements that ought to be reached without telling us

which are the ten communities you are talking about, what populations are

involved, and what land is the Leader of the Opposition in what communities is

he asking me to give up in a land claims settlement.

Once I know that, Mr. Speaker, I will take it under

advisement, but I would say to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador,

including those who are of MicMac descent, to listen carefully to his answer. I

suspect we aren't going to get one.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Apparently the

Premier hasn't read the report. I would advise you to read it. The St. Alban's

community is a community that consists largely of status Indians who are

off-reserve members of Conne River, I say to the Premier. In fairness, these

people - and I use the words in the Lyon Report - may be entitled to become a

distinct band under the Indian Act. I ask the Premier: Will he pursue this

issue? Also, the issue of the status of the Federation of Newfoundland Indians

with his federal counterparts to ensure that federal commitments are met?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, let the record show that the

Leader of the Opposition when asked twice to give a response, to tell the House

what he is saying on behalf of the Conservative Party -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

PREMIER TOBIN: No, Mr. Speaker, that isn't the way life

works. When you get up and make a statement asking the government to recognize

ten communities, you at least have to tell us which ten communities. When you

stand up and ask the government to negotiate away tens of thousands of square

miles, you have to say where the land is, and to whom we should give it. When

you ask the government to negotiate self-government, that means the ability to

run programs oneself, that means money. How much money are you asking the

government to give? One hundred million, $200 million, $300 million, $1 billion,

$2 billion, $3 billion? How much land? Ten thousand square miles, 100,000 square

miles -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: - and what communities?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: The Leader of the Opposition must stop

this irresponsible approach to Question Period!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, it is getting really humorous.

The Premier can't answer the question at hand, and he tries to deflect attention

away from the real issue here. Anybody who has legitimate status as an

aboriginal people should be given particular status who has legitimate status

under the registration process. Read the book.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Read the book, I say to the Premier. It is

quite clear, and I will say it again, if the Premier would listen. Those with a

legitimate claim to status, while it is a federal issue, it has significant

financial repercussions on our Province. It is estimated that $20 million in

direct funding to this Province could be achieved through status with the

Federation of Newfoundland Indians, which would give this provincial government

considerable leeway. I ask the Premier: Has this government completed an

analysis of the cost savings in direct payments that this Province would save,

and confirm whether that $20 million is an accurate figure?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

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

clearly either knows how the process works - and I have to believe he does know,

because he wouldn't stand and ask questions and not know it; of course, he would

never do that - or is he pretending he doesn't know, and that may be possible.

He knows that the way in which aboriginal status is

determined is through a process that begins with the federal government through

an assessment initially by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern

Development, and finally a reference to the federal Department of Justice, at

which point the federal Department of Justice makes a recommendation for a

negotiation on a land claim, or not. Finally, once that recommendation is made,

the province does its own assessment after the fact and agrees to concur or not

to concur in the recommendation.

The Leader of the Opposition knows that. When he just stands

on his feet and says: Let us acknowledge unilaterally, with no reference to the

federal government, a status for ten communities, I ask the Leader of the

Opposition: Is he saying that Corner Brook should be settled in a land claim?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: Is he saying that Gander should be settled

in a land claim? Is he saying that Stephenville - Bay St. George should be

settled in a land claim? Is he saying that Deer Lake - St. Judes should be

settled in a land claim?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: Is he saying that Bartletts Harbour should

be settled in a land claim? Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition can't have

it both ways.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: He has to tell us -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the Premier -

PREMIER TOBIN: - what he means when he asks these

questions.

MR. SPEAKER: - to conclude his answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, I (inaudible).

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are

for the Minister of Environment and Labour.

Mr. Speaker, we have seen again this year that government is

powerless to clean up the oil from bilges of ships pumped at sea, which kills

thousands of birds off our coastlines. How much less powerful will the

government be to stop the damage of a major oil leak or an oil tank disaster?

With the traffic off our coast increasing exponentially

because of the Hibernia project, can the minister tell us what contingency plan

is in place today to handle a major oil spill or oil disaster of the magnitude

of, say, the Exxon Valdez?

AN HON. MEMBER: Good question.

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

Labour.

AN HON. MEMBER: Same question as last week.

MR LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As far as the offshore oil is concerned and the Hibernia rig

and the Amoco drill rig that is out there, there is a plan in place that they

had to submit to C-NOPB and with other government agencies, of which our own is

a part, which has been approved. As I said, it is a federal jurisdiction and

approved by C-NOPB. We have had a part to play in it, but it is not our

jurisdiction, it is theirs, and we assist in helping them make sure that the

rules and regulations are carried out.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, given the large number of participants in the

Atlantic Clean-up Strategy here in Newfoundland, provincial Environment, federal

Environment, the City, Coast Guard, other Emergency Measures personnel, and so

on, how often are these various participants brought together to plan for a

disaster? How quickly can they be brought together, if needed, and what

facilities and equipment do we have at our disposal right here in Newfoundland,

in the event of such a disaster?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Well, Mr. Speaker

MR. J. BYRNE: No confidence in the minister.

PREMIER TOBIN: I have full confidence in this minister.

This minister is an extraordinary Minister of Environment and Labour.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: This minister has already taken the steps

to reduce by 14,000 metric tonnes a year, emissions from Come By Chance by going

out and sitting down with the company and firmly telling them to deal with it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the question that has been

raised refers to a matter that is under federal jurisdiction. Indeed, in a

former life as the minister responsible for the federal Coast Guard, I helped to

put in place, as the minister of that department, the contingency planning under

comprehensive agreements between the proponents of the various fields in

operation - in the case of shuttle tankers, the operators of the shuttle

tankers, in the case of Come By Chance, the operators of the refinery, the

Canadian Coast Guard and Emergency Response Program which is there. I would be

very happy - because I know the hon. member is serious about these questions and

I know he is serious about the environment - I would be very happy to arrange a

full briefing for the hon. member on the measures in place now to deal with

land-based facilities, to deal with shuttle tankers and to deal with offshore

production and exploration platforms. It would be my pleasure.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's South, a

supplementary.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Newfoundland, which is becoming a major

player in the international oil industry, has to rely on generic federal

legislation, Mr. Speaker. I have the legislation. Does the minister know the

legislation?

British Columbia, which do not even have an oil industry,

have their own comprehensive emergency plan and contingency plan in place. They

are not even in the oil industry, Mr. Speaker.

Given that our Province is quickly becoming a major player in

the international oil industry, do you not think that we need our own

legislation, at least as good as what British Columbia has, to ensure that we

are ready to handle, and to perhaps even prevent, the kind of oil disaster that

has taken place in other parts of the world?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the member clearly does not

understand the fundamental difference between British Columbia and Newfoundland

and Labrador.

British Columbia does not have an offshore oil and gas

industry, we do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: Industry - you are not listening. We have

an industry in place and, as a consequence, we have a C-NOPB board and, as a

consequence, we have an Emergency Response program already negotiated with the

Federal Government and with the private sector.

Mr. Speaker, if the member would do his homework - and I

would be glad to arrange a briefing - he would know that all of the measures he

has described are already in place, and know the Province will not take over

from the Federal Government and will not take the cost from the Federal

Government of taking over federal jurisdiction, it is already there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's South, a supplementary.

MR. T. OSBORNE: You are absolutely right. British

Columbia does not have an oil industry but they have an emergency plan. We have

an oil industry here, Mr. Speaker. When is our Minister of Environment and

Labour and our Premier going to get real on this issue and put in place measures

to make sure that we are ready to handle a disaster?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we have now just had a

declaration from the Opposition that British Columbia has a plan in case they

ever get an industry so that they might, one day, have an emergency. Mr.

Speaker, we have an industry, we have an emergency plan, it is already in place,

it is administered through the C-NOPB, the Federal-Provincial Government, the

private sector, the offshore oil and gas industry, the Come By Chance Oil

Refinery, the equipment is here in Newfoundland, the costs are already covered;

we should be happy the work is already done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

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

I would like to ask some questions related to the oil and gas

industry with respect to Occupational Health and Safety Standards.

In the last couple of weeks, a lot of concerns have been

raised as a result of an evacuation from the Bill Shoemaker, which is a drilling

rig off the coast, by Amoco, and certainly with the evacuation that took place

on Sunday past with respect to Terra Nova.

It is my understanding, I say to the minister, that there are

only draft regulations in place for Occupational Health and Safety standards

with respect to the Province. Can the minister confirm that, and while he is

confirming that, can he indicate when those regulations within the department

will actually become law?

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

Labour.

MR LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to tell the hon. member that there are draft

regulations in place and we are working with the C-NOPB to make sure - and with

the oil rigs I should say - to make sure that this particular plan is carried

out. I visited the rig about a month ago, and had Occupational Health and Safety

meetings with the personnel on the rig.

They carried out one of their drills while we were there and

it worked very, very well; and basically, I think it shows as well that the

company is well-prepared to show what happened when there was, what they

thought, a pending disaster and were able to operate so quickly. Within twenty

minutes they had the personnel and everybody at the site ready to be evacuated

to the Amoco rig.

So I think things are well under way; nevertheless, we want

to ensure that we are on top of it to provide the best possible Occupational

Health and Safety regulations for people who work at the industry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, a

supplementary.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt, and let it be

clear that I have no doubt, this is a serious matter and I have no doubt that

the company acted in the best interest of the employees. As a matter of fact,

caucus is meeting with the company next week to go over their plan. But what I

am concerned about here in the Province is the Province's role and the lack of

regulations and what impact that may have.

The question of jurisdiction arises and I would like to ask

the minister this: The Amoco rig, the Bill Shoemaker is in the exploration

stage, not the production phase as is the Hibernia production platform. Does

jurisdiction fall within the Province's Occupational Health and Safety

regulations with respect to that rig? It is a question that needs an answer, I

say to the minister.

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

Labour.

MR LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, on the Amoco drill rig, as the hon. member just

mentioned, the company has its Occupational Health and Safety programs in place

which are very high-standard, but we want to make sure that in the draft

regulations that are being prepared by us and the Federal Government, that will

be in place within the next couple of weeks, it will cover off to make sure that

the highest possible Occupational Health and Safety standards are met in the

exploration, as well as in the industry itself.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, a

supplementary.

MR. E. BYRNE: So what the minister is saying is that we

have an industry that is ongoing - I do not doubt the company has standards in

place, but that is not our concern, I say to the minister. What we should be

concerned about are our own occupational health and safety regulations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. E. BYRNE: The standards that we set for the industry

are what we should be concerned about, so that any company coming into the

Province to operate in this industry must adhere to the standards set by the

Provincial Government, and they should be of the highest nature.

I would like to ask the minister this question, or any

minister who would like to respond, actually: Could you inform the House of what

meetings have taken place since the evacuation of the Hibernia production

platform? What have been the, I guess, discussions of those meetings, with one

final result: What level of assurance can be provided, not only to the employees

but to the people of the Province, that the standards that we have in place for

evacuation are the highest they can be so that lives off our coast may not be in

jeopardy?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Labour.

MR LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to assure the hon. member that the department and

myself have been in contact with the Hibernia Group and Harvey Smith, and the

Premier and I have been invited to go to the rig over the next couple of days to

make sure that the standards that are there are what we expect. The standards

that are there now are already approved by the -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR LANGDON: The standards that are there on the rig right

now have been already approved by the C-NOPB. We are confident that the

Occupational Health and Safety standards are in place, but we just want to make

sure that the pending legislation will enhance what is already there.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Premier.

A couple of days ago in the House, I tabled a document that

showed that the Federal Government in Ottawa accepted an extremely large sum of

money as a political donation from the IFAW. Mr. Speaker, the Premier at the

time seemed to slough it off. He knew very little about it. I understand that

the Premier was back here probably at that time; because it was in 1996 that

political donation was made.

I ask the Premier today: Is he aware of any other

contributions that were accepted by the federal party, the federal Liberal Party

of this country, prior to 1996, from this same group of people, the IFAW?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted that the

member has stood up now and has corrected the statement he made a few days ago

when he said that I had accepted a contribution -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: Oh, no, but listen. You have to expect

that when you ask questions you get answers, even when you do not like the

answer.

Mr. Speaker, the member, a few days ago, suggested, and Mr.

Jim Morgan suggested on radio, that I had accepted a contribution from the IFAW.

That is absolutely false. Mr. Speaker, this leadership campaign is getting just

ridiculous - all kinds of crazy allegations.

Mr. Speaker, I have not accepted any contributions from the

IFAW. I never will accept any contribution from the IFAW. My only contribution

back to the IFAW is to say that they are a bunch of frauds.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South, a

supplementary.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I certainly did not say that the Premier himself accepted a

sum of money. What I did say was included in the

preamble of my question.

Mr. Speaker, today I will table page 274

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, on tabling documents, I have to bring to the hon.

member's attention that it has been ruled in this House on many occasions that

private members do not have the right nor the obligation to table documents.

That has been ruled on a number of occasions. It is a precedent in this House. I

just want to remind the hon. member that he cannot table documents here.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will provide a copy to the House after Question Period

which will clearly show another large - extremely large - amount of money

donated to the federal Liberal Party in 1994, Premier, when you were the

Minister of Fisheries and Oceans.

I ask the Premier again: Was he aware that this political

donation was made? And if he was, does he accept it as acceptable behaviour from

a group of people who are trying to destroy a way of life right here in this

Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, with all of the issues in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador today, it must be very clear to the people

of the Province - he doesn't have a single question on how to provide work

opportunities for people who live in rural Newfoundland and Labrador; not a

single question on how to add value to our forest sector or create more

employment or value added in the forestry sector; not a single question on what

we are doing to develop an IT sector, Information and Technology sector for

Newfoundland and Labrador; not a single question on bio-technology or what is

happening in that regard;

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: - not a single question on when we are

going to have final approval of Terra Nova; no questions on contributions to the

federal Liberal Party four years ago! Ridiculous, Mr. Speaker!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. H. HODDER: On a point of order,

section 408, the

rules clearly state that the answers to questions should be as brief as

possible, should deal with the matter raised. In this particular case, the

Premier's answer is totally irrelevant to the question asked by my colleague the

Member for Bonavista South.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

No point of order. The Chair cannot dictate what the answer

will be. Hon. members ought to be brief in their questions. They ought to be

equally brief in their response. That is why we have these orders in place so

that Question Period is not a period for debate but a period for questions and

answers and I ask hon. members to keep that in mind.

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I want to assure the House

that my answer was as relevant as the question.

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

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I say to the Premier,

Premier you can't have it both ways. You can't sing with the angels and sleep

with the devils, I say to the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: You can't have it both ways Premier. A

very serious question, Premier, you are the first minister of this Province. I

ask you once again if you have ever personally accepted a political donation

from the IFAW or have you ever had a donation made to a bank account that you

control in your own political life from this same group of people?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: No, Mr. Speaker, I have never personally

accepted a donation from the IFAW and if the member is suggesting that I have

taken a donation from the IFAW, I would ask the member to stand now - because

this is a serious issue - and to make his charge, Mr. Speaker. If the member is

alleging that I have taken a contribution stand now and make the charge. If you

are not prepared to stand and make the charge then the people of Newfoundland

would be right in assuming that you are engaged in scurrilous rumour mongering

and have not the backbone to stand up and repeat that allegation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Baie Verte.

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I see time is running out but I will try to get one question

in here today, Mr. Speaker. Just recently of course the North Limited from

Australia took over 60 per cent of the IOC development in Labrador City. I would

like to ask the minister, as an option of this company, part of this takeover is

to reactivate the mothballed pellet plant in Seven Isles, Quebec, to further

process the ore reserves in Labrador. I would like to know, what has the

minister done to inform this new company that this Province is sick and tired of

these resources going out of this Province? Can the minister commit today, that

they have told this company in no uncertain terms that if there is any

pelletizing of this ore reserve in Labrador that it will be done in Labrador

City and not in Seven Isles, Quebec?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to answer that

question. The Member for Labrador West and myself met with the President of the

Iron Ore Company of Canada, Mr. LeBoutillier and we examined the whole issue of

the pelletization plant. There is currently a study underway now, I think being

done by Bechtel, who are studying the new pelletization plant, whether the

reactivation at Sept Isle which was a plant that was built many years ago, can

indeed even be activated.

Secondly, we pointed out to him that it is in the Province's

best interest to pelletize any future requirements at Labrador City, in Labrador

City. I think we even went a step further, Mr. Speaker, and talked about

providing very inexpensive power which would be generated to produce this new

pellitization plant. So the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador has told them

quite clearly it would be in the best interests of this Province -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FUREY: - to pellitize in Labrador City.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

MR. FUREY: We want the jobs to stay in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, and we have made provisions on the power side to

ensure that that happens.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

The Chair would like to welcome to the gallery today on

behalf of all members Mayor Fred Best and Councillor John Pickett from

Clarenville, from the District of Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: Pursuant to the provision of

section 273(3)

of the Elections Act, 1991, I enclose herewith my report for the election

finance period January 1, 1996, to December 31, 1996, for tabling in the House

of Assembly. The Chair would like to table this report from the Office of the

Chief Electoral Officer today.

Petitions

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

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

I stand to read into the House record a petition to the House

of Assembly.

To the hon. House of Assembly of Newfoundland in legislative

session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of Newfoundland and

Labrador;

WHEREAS the provincial government has stated it will

introduce legislation to tax the sale of used vehicles based upon their book

value and not the sale price; and

WHEREAS Newfoundlanders should not pay taxes on an amount

they did not pay; and

WHEREAS we believe taxes should be paid only once, when the

vehicle is purchased new;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador not to proceed with the legislation that would tax the

sale of used vehicles based upon their book value.

Mr. Speaker, this is an issue that has arisen with respect to

this session. The Minister of Finance tabled yesterday, I believe, some 201

examples of what he talked about in terms of where the Province was losing

taxation.

Mr. Speaker, it is pretty clear that what is taking place

here, and what government has originally intended, and what they have

recommended, needs some modification. It is an indirect form of taxation. There

are many questions that need to be answered.

For example, if a car is purchased and the book value is

$7,500 or $8,000 but clearly the value of the car, the real value of the car, is

far below that because of the necessity of work that could be required on the

engine, or could be required on the body, whatever the case may be, clearly the

onus should not be on individual taxpayers themselves to pay taxes on something

that is really not worth the value that has been assessed to it.

Other questions come to mind. Who determines what the book

value will be? Is the book value of cars determined by the companies themselves

out of central locations in North America that do not take into consideration

variances in terms of weather? It is a well-known fact, for example, that the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and I could purchase the same car.

If he lived in Ontario and I live here, nine chances out of ten the car he would

buy would probably get 50,000 to 100,000 kilometres more mileage and more wear

out of it because of the difference in climatic conditions. As a result of that,

the values are decreased. Certainly, the value of what the car is essentially

worth, and should be worth, is decreased, not some predetermined book value by

North American companies outside; so it is a legitimate question.

Mr. Speaker, people have continuously called. I know that

members opposite are getting calls on this issue. We all are, because it is an

important issue, and I think that government should do the honourable thing and

remove this regulation because it begs the question: What is next? What is next

in terms of the private sale of merchandise? What is coming next? What other

form of indirect taxation may be levied on the people of the Province?

Mr. Speaker, the petition is fairly clear. What it requests

from government is very clear. I can only say that for the names that are

attached here, some thirty-five to forty names, that I, as the Member of the

House for Kilbride, certainly endorse the petition and support the request by

the residents who have taken the time to sign their name to it.

Thank you very much.

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

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

I rise to support the petition put forward by my colleague,

the Member for Kilbride. This issue has been in the House of Assembly now for

several weeks. We know that the Minister of Finance has been reviewing the

situation, and the prayer of the petition is that they pay their taxes on what

they pay for the vehicle, and that they should not pay taxes on money that they

do not spend.

It is a funny kind of world, an upside-down world, a twisted

world, when we ask people to pay taxes on the value of goods that they never

spent. Therefore, the prayer of the petition is: Be fair, be reasonable, be

honest.

We suggested yesterday in the House, through my colleague,

the Member for Cape St. Francis, that we would have an affidavit system put in

place. We believe that is very reasonable. We believe that when people sign an

affidavit, if they should then perjure themselves, there are recourses through

law.

Consequently, we are hoping that the minister, in his review,

will try to make sure that the people who pay the taxes, pay the taxes on the

value that is reflected in the purchase price, but they should not pay taxes

that do not reflect the real value of a vehicle, or take into account, for

example, vehicles that have been driven excessively or have had damages or, for

some reason, they might even have been defective at some point in the assembly

process.

So, we say to the minister, let us do the review; let us be

honest with people. Let us not go out and blame everybody. Let us not say, all

people are committing fraudulent acts when they buy a vehicle. Let us have it on

the basis of an affidavit.

That was a good suggestion, put forward so well by the Member

for Cape St. Francis. I am looking forward to the occasion when the Minister of

Finance will be able to inform the House and inform the citizens of this

Province that indeed he has listened to that, and treated people honestly and

fairly and reasonably, and that he has adopted a system that will assure that

the value paid is the value reflected in the amount of taxes that are due to the

provincial Treasury.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

Transportation, in response to the petition.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I think we should just take a

minute from this side of the House to acknowledge the hearing of the petition

that was presented by the hon. member in connection with this issue. It is an

issue that has risen of late, or at least it has gained some public attention,

and the Minister of Finance has spoken quite clearly about why the proposition

of regulations to give effect to book value taxation policy being brought in -

what the reasons are for that.

I think the hon. members on the other side of the House would

acknowledge that any time, as an example, I believe, if they were to look at

even what was in The Evening Telegram today and see some of the comments

that are directly attributed to the Minister of Finance, they would understand,

and I am sure they would appreciate, that a vehicle worth $10,000 that has been

sold for $100 and is in reasonably good shape, is a situation that is not

acceptable. It is not acceptable on principle and it is not acceptable on behalf

of the people of the Province.

The issue has been brought forward for our attention by the

hon. member who presented the petition and we, on this side of the House, on

behalf of the minister, who is absent today, want to acknowledge that we have

heard that petition. We are also hearing the other representations that are

being put forward by members on the other side of the House.

As the hon. member said correctly, we on this side of the

House represent constituents as well, and we hear from our constituents

expressing their concerns about matters of taxation policy that they may feel is

not entirely the appropriate way to address a given situation.

The Minister of Finance, I am sure, will take under

advisement and under consideration all of the representation that he had heard,

particularly during this sitting of the House with respect to the issue, and he

will factor that into what I am sure will be, on behalf of government and on

behalf of the people of the Province, by him, a fair and equitable resolution to

this issue.

If there are changes to be brought about then, of course, the

Minister of Finance will be the first one to advise the House and the Province.

I am not suggesting that there will or that there will not, I am just saying,

the minister has already said that he has heard expressions of concern. We

acknowledge those expressions of concern, and I can tell you, on behalf of the

government and the minister, that we are undertaking to do diligence to the

concerns that have been raised and the basis on which they are being raised.

Thank you.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I present yet another petition on behalf of Voices for

Justice on Housing:

We, the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador, wish to

petition the House of Assembly regarding the rate increase at Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing Corporation on a sliding scale from 25 per cent to 30 per cent.

We are apposed to this increase because of the hardships that may be endured by

tenants and therefore ask that this decision be reconsidered.

Mr. Speaker, over the past week or so, I have been presenting

petitions almost on a daily basis on this housing issue, as they are available.

Quite simply, it is evident to me and evident to most of the people on this side

of the House, anyhow, hopefully evident to the minister - the minister has

indeed asked to have the decision put on hold so that they can reconsider - that

it is affecting seniors, it is affecting the working poor, it is affecting

single parents. Some of these tenants are having their rent increased to the

point that they have to compromise on their food budget. They have to compromise

the care and the activities in which their children partake.

Mr. Speaker, what kind of society are we promoting here in

this Province by making people's rent and social housing such that they would

perhaps even be better off if they were living on full government subsidies?

We, on this side of the House, Mr. Speaker, wish to represent

the people of this Province in every class, in every walk of life and, in this

particular instance, undoubtedly, the working poor and single parents are the

hardest hit.

Mr. Speaker, we, on this side of the House, ask that the

minister very seriously look at and very seriously reconsider this decision and

ensure that the working poor, ensure that the single parents and ensure that

seniors are not put out of place, are not put through unnecessary hardship as a

result of this rental rate increase, to ensure that they are indeed comfortable

living in government-subsidized housing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MS S. OSBORNE: I would like to add to that petition, Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of the many working poor who are in Newfoundland and Labrador

Housing and who are suffering hardship as a result of the rent increase.

Yesterday, the minister asked the Member for St. John's

South, if he knew how many people on social assistance are living in rental

units. Now, there is no denying our concern is for the people on social

assistance as well as for the working poor who are represented in the prayer of

this petition.

The minister stated that there is a husband and wife team

living in one of the units, making $36,000 a year. I would like to say to the

minister that if they are in that income category, they are paying almost $900 a

month for rent and that is fair market value. And that is actually good, that is

making a good contribution towards Newfoundland and Labrador Housing if they are

paying $900 a month for a unit.

Incidentally, to dispel any myth that higher-income tenants

are taking up units that could and should be used by - the words of the minister

- the mother who is living downtown in squalor, to be eligible to apply for a

unit with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing, the maximum that Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing will look at, is $21,500 for two adults; $25,500 for two adults

with one child; the very, very maximum is $29,000 and that is for two adults

with at least five children. So I would say that the people who are living in

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and earning $36,000 a year, their income was

probably increased after they moved into Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and,

as I said, they are making a significant contribution by paying about $900 a

month for rent.

I would like for the minister to reconsider the rise in the

rent to 30 per cent and have consideration for the working poor who, I would

say, are probably the majority of those living in Newfoundland and Labrador

Housing.

Thank you.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER: It being Wednesday, it is Private Members'

Day and I believe, today, it is the hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

Private Members' Day

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

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to rise and put forward this private

member's motion. I will read the motion in its entirety:

WHEREAS the sealing industry in Newfoundland and Labrador is

an important and integral part of the economy of rural Newfoundland and

Labrador; and

WHEREAS seals are consuming an estimated 800,000 tonnes of

caplin and over 100,000 tonnes of small cod and countless other quantities of

fish per year; and

WHEREAS coastal and native people have an historical

attachment to the seal resource that has become part of their culture; and

WHEREAS the sealing industry has the potential to grow in

importance as new markets for seal products are identified; and

WHEREAS the people who are involved in the seal hunt utilize

humane harvesting methods and the seal carcass to the fullest extent; and

WHEREAS the people of this Province have been inaccurately

portrayed as barbaric in recent anti-sealing propaganda prepared by the

International Fund for Animal Welfare;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly condemn

the actions of the IFAW and those who would support their misrepresentation of

the nature of the seal industry; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the House of Assembly reject

these misrepresentations and act collectively to dispel the notion that the seal

hunt is a cruel and unnecessary part of our rural economy; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Provincial and Federal

Governments act together in a joint effort to repudiate these misrepresentations

of the seal industry by developing a promotional campaign directed towards the

general public that explains the true nature of the Province's sealing industry.

Mr. Speaker, I am glad today to stand and put forward that

motion, for a very simple reason. It is all related to discussions I have had in

this House over the last several days. I am a firm believer and have always said

that in order for Newfoundland to recover, rural Newfoundland has to recover. In

other words, as goes rural Newfoundland and Labrador, so goes Newfoundland. I

will say that 1,000 times, I say to the minister.

With that in mind - that is nothing new that I have said in

this House - I really believe that the sealing industry and the potential for

it, especially in the last twelve to eighteen months, has really come to light

in this Province. Personally, I have read and got information, as much as I

could, about the sealing industry, not just around our Province, not just in our

country, but around the world. I have seen correspondence, I have seen news from

China, Taiwan, Korea, and all over the world, talking about the potential for

the seal industry.

Right here at home - and I commend the Minister of Fisheries

and Aquaculture for this; I wish he was here today - commend him when we start

to talk right here in our own Province about the potential for seal oil

development. Besides the utilization of the entire seal, which I have always

thought - and this would, of course, take away from the IFAW's threats and so

on, their accusations over the years - the right way is to take this mammal,

kill it humanely, bring the entire carcass to a processing plant in this

Province, and utilize the entire carcass.

That is the answer to the sealing industry in this Province,

to utilize the entire carcass. We are talking about the oil, which has fantastic

potential, the hides - we have seen the beautiful leather that that can make -

of course, the meat, and anything else on the seal that has any value at all. In

other words, we take the entire body of the seal, bring it to a processing plant

- and here is the key. I am sure the members from Labrador, when we talk about

the culture of Labrador and what has gone on for years - we take that seal and

we utilize it to its fullest.

I saw a picture that was portrayed at the conference here in

St. John's just a little while ago, of an Inuit home, of the man and woman in

their living room with three seal carcasses, starting to skin the animal. They

take the skins and they use it, they take the blubber and they use it, and they

take the meat and they use it. In the home of this Inuit, the picture that is

portrayed, there is a man and woman there and they are doing what their fathers

and grandfathers have done right through the years. It is normal for them. That

is how they have grown up and that is how they have lived for years. That is why

there was something in the news a little while ago about the young fellow who

was hunting with his father. His father was teaching him how to hunt. That is

something these people have done for years. That is why they had sustainable

living. They looked around, they used the forest, they used the animals around

them, and so on.

That is why this is such a deep-rooted ancestral history of

Newfoundland that goes back for hundreds and hundreds of years. It is how we

survived. That is why the answer to the seal hunt is to get it back on track, is

to take this industry - and it makes so much sense. It is incredible the timing

and how much sense this makes. Here we have a mammal that is eating tons of

fish, and, at the same time, we are in crisis because the fish is disappearing.

Mr. Speaker, nobody in their right mind believes that the

seals are the only problem to the fishing crisis. At the same time, we do not

need scientists from DFO or Ottawa, or anywhere else, to tell us that the seals

are eating fish. Like one member said here in the House not long ago - I think

it was the hon. Bill Matthews - they are certainly not eating turnips.

Seals are eating fish in the water, and it makes all the

sense in the world... Here we are, with no jobs in the Province. We have a

mammal that is eating the fish, so we lost jobs in that end. We are losing on

both ends. That is what is happening to us. That is why if there was ever a loud

voice to be made in this Province on any issue by every single member here,

every single organization in this Province, every man, woman and child from the

tip of Labrador to the tip of the Avalon Peninsula, is for everybody to get

together, and not by us just standing in this House today. Because the truth is

that what we do here as a Private Member's Motion today, or if the minister goes

up and speaks to a small group in New Brunswick, that is all good, that is all

wonderful, but the reality of the media, of the technology of the day, is that

you have to fight fire with fire.

The IFAW has been called many things, and I could go on with

a long list today, but I don't need to mention any of it because the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador know what the IFAW is all about. The IFAW is all about

money. It is as simple as that. They have no regard for the seals that circle

this Province. They have no regard for that. They have no regard for the human

effect this puts on people.

If they are really concerned about humane dignity, what they

would be doing is trying to protect the native people of Labrador who have done

this for years. They would be trying to protect the fisherpeople all over the

Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador who have no way of living now because of the

devastation of the fishing crisis. That is what they would be fighting, not

bloody commercials on TV to get more Brigitte Bardot's and people to send them

money so they can go out and make money. That is all they are about, making

money and telling lies, as everybody said here before. That is what the IFAW is

all about.

Mr. Speaker, this whole motion today is all about us, as a

Province, being on the verge of a great potential in the sealing industry. At

the same time the timing is so important, because here we are, on one hand, on

the verge of potential in the sealing industry, and at the same time in a crisis

in our fishing industry, and it is the perfect complement. It is the perfect

complement for us as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, and if there was ever a

war for us to fight, it is right now. It is not next week or next month. It is

right now, and the war has to start in our own Province by sending a direct

message to the people who started the mess with the fishing crisis, which is to

our federal counterparts in Ottawa, be it whatever stripe and whatever time.

there, the timing has never been better for us to speak up fully - with our

Premier hitting a new charge - I would hit it with him - to go to Ottawa and

say: Let's take on the IFAW. Let's take them on and show them what we are really

all about. Let them know that we have an industry here ready to explode, that

makes all the sense in the world. Let's protect what this Province is all about,

our culture; and what a complement to at the same time give us jobs in the

sealing industry and at the same time help our ailing fishing stocks recover. It

makes all the sense in the world.

Mr. Speaker, what this motion really leads to, and the most

significant, I think, of the `BE IT RESOLVED', is the last one. They are all

important, and we have done the first two to a certain extent. I will read them

again: "THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly condemn the actions

of the IFAW and those who would support their misrepresentation of the nature of

the seal industry;...".

We have done that. I bet we can take turns here getting up

today and we would all make sure, in the House of Assembly, we do this, so

number one is taken care of, Mr. Speaker.

Number two, "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the House of

Assembly reject these..." - and we have done that. "...and act collectively to

dispel the notion that the seal hunt is a cruel and unnecessary part of our

rural economy;" - and we have done that. We have done that from our chairs and

standing here in the House of Assembly, and at different functions around the

Province.

The last one is the one I drive home today to the Members of

this House of Assembly, and I would like for everybody to support it. It is the

last one that is the most important for this time, and that is, "...that the

Provincial and Federal Governments, in a joint effort to repudiate these

misrepresentations of the seal industry by developing a promotional campaign..."

- for two reasons. In other words, put your money where your mouth is. I did not

say full scale around the world. We are not talking about billions of dollars.

We are saying, let's sit down and see what we can work out. I don't know how

much, but what we can do - the Premier of this Province should be in Ottawa with

his colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, sitting down with the Minister of

Fisheries in Ottawa, and the Prime Minister. That's who should be there. The

four of them, sitting in one room saying, yes, we are going to, for two reasons,

Mr. Speaker, take on the IFAW.

Number one, Mr. Speaker, there are two reasons for it and

number one is a very moral reason, that is to show Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians, the sealing industry and the people committed to the sealing

industry, that we support them, not speaking at a dinner down at the Hotel

Newfoundland. That was nice of the Premier and I commend him for his speech,

apparently it was a great speech. I commend him for that. As a matter of fact, I

have been told by many people that were there that he gave a great speech. That

is fine for the people in the hall but, Mr. Speaker, he was talking to the

converted. What he has to do is leave that hotel room, leave this House of

Assembly and get the message across this country and have Canadians back

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians on this very important issue. So that was one

reason, Mr. Speaker, to let the people in the sealing industry and our own

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians know that we support them.

The second reason why they should put the campaign out there

is to show people across this country because, Mr. Speaker, there are still

people across this country, through no fault of their own and there is a reason

for this campaign, the ignorance to the sealing industry. The ignorance of the

sealing industry, Mr. Speaker, and I am going to use an example here in the

House today. I have heard it said before, Bill Rowe, host of the Open Line show,

was in Montreal or Toronto - I can't remember the name of the city - a few years

back, walked in with a seal skin coat on and the lady behind the desk started to

ridicule and call him down because he was wearing a seal skin vest. Mr. Rowe has

told the story a few times now. He looked at the lady and noticed something,

first of all she had a suede skirt on, she had leather shoes and he named some

other things that she was wearing but he looked her up and down and said, `And

where did you get your skirt? Where did you get your shoes?' Mr. Speaker, very

simply put, it is the most hypocritical argument that a person could put

forward. It is incredible that people do this - even in our own country. Now,

Mr. Speaker, I have - like many members here - members of my family from British

Columbia, all the way across Canada and they are still - even though they are

Newfoundlanders - hearing different things as they live in other parts of the

country.

So the reason why I am asking the Premier of this Province

and the Prime Minister of Canada to come together and at least, Mr. Speaker,

show some - to what extent I am not sure that can be discussed - but to put out

a campaign to show Newfoundlanders and Labradorians across this country that we

support the sealing industry and of course, the most important thing, show a

true picture. I could even help make up the advertisement, Mr. Speaker, if the

Premier wants that. We could take a chopper and the first thing I would see is a

camera peering down on 8 million seals off our coasts. One picture. I am not a

person who makes up advertisements but I can picture this one, 8 million seals,

Mr. Speaker, the camera flying over for one minute. We are going to do a one

minute commercial. A chopper flying over the ice floes and for miles just

watching seals, millions of them. Mr. Speaker, then you look on the ice pans and

you see nothing on the ice pans so of course at the end of the one minute the

commercial would say, `Now what do you think they are eating?' They are not

eating the ice. They are not just drinking the water. They go in the water and

they are eating the fish. It is as simple as that.

Now, Mr. Speaker, that is just one example but the whole

point of this is that the provincial and federal governments should come

together now and put their money where their mouths are. To what extent and to

how much I don't know. As much as we can afford I guess is the logical thing to

say. What I am asking, Mr. Speaker, in this resolution today, I will read the

last part again;

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the provincial and federal

governments act together in a joint effort to repudiate these misrepresentations

of the sealing industry by developing a promotional campaign directed toward the

general public that explains the true nature of the problems in the sealing

industry.

Because, Mr. Speaker, we have to take this beyond and it is

not going to wait for us for too long. This is something that has to be acted

upon today because I believe, even in my own district as I speak, they are

preparing for the sealing industry. As a matter of fact I have a lot of sealers

in my area of the Northeast Coast, as most members know here, and people are

preparing today to have seals in, Mr. Speaker, in February. That is what they

are excited about and what a time for a morale boost in this Province. If we can

send out all our sealers and do a maximum quota and bring them in, imagine what

a boost it will be for this Province that this spring

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SHELLEY: Okay, Mr. Speaker, just to conclude if -

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. SHELLEY: The whole heart and soul of this motion

today, Mr. Speaker, and I just want to finish off by saying that the timing is

perfect for us as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to raise the flag, raise the

Newfoundland and Labrador Flag to say that we want help, we want to show support

for the federal and provincial governments together and, Mr. Speaker, I can

guarantee you this, that this side of the House will be there with them to

support and show Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and Canadians and the rest of

the world, that we do have an industry here that is viable and has potential and

we should support them and put our money where our mouth is and show these

people that we believe in what they are doing.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to speak on the motion put forward by the Member

for Baie Verte.

Mr. Speaker, the seal fishery played a very important

part in

the lives of the people who live in my district. The Aboriginal people, prior to

being resettled by government in their communities of Okak and Hebron, depended

solely upon the seal for clothing, for shelter and for food. Mr. Speaker, since

the IFAW has done so much damage to the seal fishery, the Aboriginal people are

some of the people who have been hurt the most.

Mr. Speaker, in my riding we have a limited fishery where

some people have only one specie of fish to fish, that being, for example, the

salmon fishery and, Mr. Speaker, if the market were there for the seal products,

then these people would certainly have a fishery where they would certainly

qualify for the EI benefits. The Aboriginal people usually had a harvest of

seals in the spring and a harvest of seals in the fall of the year, and

certainly, as the market shows - some people call it `blubber' but I call it

`the fat', that the seals in Labrador have the highest grade of seal oil that

comes from any seal which is caught anywhere.

Mr. Speaker, I believe it is time for the provincial and

federal governments to take a serious look as to what the IFAW has done to

damage our livelihood and our culture. Certainly, today with the failure of the

cod fishery and people on TAGS, Mr. Speaker, I find it difficult to understand

that we have such a big resource that can employ so many people and where we

could export so many of our products that today the seal fishery is very

limited.

I also find it hard to understand that, white people, such as

the IFAW and from foreign countries can come here and take away our livelihood.

They can take away from our families the money that we need to buy stuff for our

children, and in many cases for people around rural Newfoundland and Labrador,

to try and put their children through university.

Mr. Speaker, I think it is time that both levels of

government took a very strong and a very serious look as to how we can, not only

better fight the IFAW, but to put on a campaign where we can promote the seal

fishery throughout the foreign countries and most of all, Mr. Speaker, to find

ways and means to help the people in rural Newfoundland and Labrador to develop

that fishery. Perhaps a suggestion to the federal government might be that a

very serious topic today is the extension of TAGS and, Mr. Speaker, I believe if

the people in the provincial government got together with the officials from the

federal government and, through using good common sense, that if we found ways

and means to employ our people within the seal fishery, then we would have a

fishery that would last us for a long time to come.

I've talked of the Aboriginal people. I guess after the

government moved them in their resettlement in late 1959 they found it very

difficult to try and adapt to a different way of life and a different lifestyle

and different food. These people were able to hunt and harvest the seals, but

after the damage that was done by the IFAW they couldn't afford five gallons of

gas to go out and kill seals so the women could make sealskin boots, and most

important of all, meat for their table. Rather, they had to try and rely on

social services which to them was, I guess, a slap in the face when someone

could take away their livelihood.

I certainly agree with the resolution put forward. Certainly

I think the time has come for all of us to work very closely with Ottawa, that

this side of the House will work with the hon. members across the way, to find

solutions to make the seal fishery what it is supposed to be. Most important of

all, Mr. Speaker, it is a resource that will benefit the people in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador for years to come. I certainly look forward to playing

my part on behalf of this government to make the seal fishery become a reality,

and make sure that we take the right steps to make sure it will last us for

years to come.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Penney): Before recognizing the hon. member,

on behalf of all hon. members I would like to welcome to the public galleries,

from the town of St. Lawrence, Mayor Wade Rowsell, Deputy Mayor Paul Pike, and

Councillors Bob Giovaninni and Pad Brake.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to

add a few comments to a resolution brought forward by my colleague the Member

for Baie Verte that is certainly in tune -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: I say to the Government House Leader that

it doesn't matter who introduced it. It is a very important private member's

resolution. As long as it is spoken to by people from rural Newfoundland,

because I think those are the people who have a real feeling for this particular

issue, then it doesn't matter who introduces it. The main thing is who is on

side with it, I guess. That is what is happening here.

Back a few years ago, and most of us I think can remember, we

aren't talking about any great length of time, I think it happened in March,

that we would see people gather together and come to St. John's or go to Halifax

and join the sealing vessels to go out to the ice, we used to refer to it as. It

was an opportunity for many Newfoundland families at that particular time of the

year before the fishing season started to make some extra dollars, to either

clothe their children or to buy gear to go fishing with when the fishing season

started. Many of our ancestors, many of our fathers, I know many of my

relatives, took

part in this particular hunt.

Then all of a sudden we saw this animal activist group known

as the International - well, I think there is a fund in it now. The

International Fund for Animal Welfare. That is what it is all about, I guess.

The word "fund" certainly describes what they are all about. Because that is

what they are all about. They are about raising money. They are playing on

people's emotions. They go out and they take graphic pictures that show that

things are happening which are, I suppose, not pleasant. No killing is pleasant.

They take that and they play it up and they splash it across the media, both the

print media and the television channels right across the world.

As a result, they have created a lot of public sympathy. They

are preying on people with the big bucks, as the Member for Cape St. Francis

would say. They are preying on the people with the dollars, the movie stars, the

artists of the world, the people who have money. Those people are contributing

vast dollars to this particular group of people and what they are doing is

trying to destroy a way of life right here in this Province.

First when they started out, they talked about the animal not

being fully utilized, that the animals were being killed because there was a

sale for certain parts of the anatomy of the seal. Then, Mr. Speaker, when

Newfoundlanders reacted to that and built up markets they talked about the

inhumane ways that the animals were being killed. Newfoundlanders reacted to

that and changed their way of killing seals. Now, Mr. Speaker, they have gone

the extra step and I think they have created a lot of fiction in this particular

hunt themselves and are out there today portraying it as an actual happening in

the seal hunt and the way that it is carried out right here in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, the sealing industry in my particular district

is about to provide the survival of a community. The seal industry in my

particular district is presently about to hire well in excess of 100 people. A

reputable company, Seafreez, has moved down to Catalina, purchased a fish plant

that was closed down since the moratorium and even prior to that, in the year or

two before that, only employed a small number of people. They are down there

today putting in a new wharf, completely renovating the building, spending their

own money and they are going to employ in excess of 120 people.

We as representatives of the people and I am not going to

say, we as a government or we as an opposition or we as anything other then

representatives of the people because this includes us all, have to make sure

that those people that are carrying out those innuendoes, telling blatant lies

about this particular hunt, have to be taken to task. They have to be dealt

with.

We hear the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture and we hear

the Premier stand here in the House and they say, maybe the right way to handle

them is to leave them alone, do not pay any attention to them. That might be

true, but up until now that has not worked. I am not convinced that we can sit

back and be complacent and expect this to go away because, Mr. Speaker, when

somebody finds a niche they can get into and fill the back pocket, it is going

to be kind of hard to have them walk away from that.

So, I am not convinced by being quiet and being complacent is

going to work. Although, sometimes when I hear people talking about expanding

the hunt and I hear people talking about giving extra quota, I sometimes wonder

if that kind of thing should be put out in public.

AN HON. MEMBER: Extra quotas for what?

MR. FITZGERALD: Extra quotas for the killing of seals,

for the TAC, for the hunt - the total allowable catch. Last year it was

something like - I think it started off with 265,000 and then we increased it to

about 280,000 or 285,000 was the final count.

I am not so sure that we should get on and say, okay put it

right across the airwaves that we are going to now announce another 15,000 seals

can be taken. I do not know if we have to do that because

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: What he is trying to get on the go - yes,

yes, let the markets dictate on what the hunt is going to be and I fully concur

with that and that is the way that it should be. This hunt is controlled - the

fishery officers are out there today, they are on the wharves, they are dealing

with the sealers, they are dealing with the production plants and there is no

reason why we cannot go and have a hunt today that can fully fill what the

market demands. There is no reason whatsoever - there is between six million,

seven million, I have heard as high as eight million seals out there today off

our coast and here we are sitting at home waiting for the fishery to return and

having this group of people out there trying to destroy not only the seal hunt,

Mr. Speaker, but destroy any hope and dash any optimism that we ever might have

in our fishery returning.

When you see what those animals eat, Mr. Speaker, there has

been talk about 80,000 tonnes of caplin, 110,000 tonnes of juvenile fish. Mr.

Speaker, you are talking about big numbers. Especially when you consider that

this past year we weren't allowed to have a food fishery on the northeast coast.

The whole take of the food fishery in 1996 in codfish was less than 900 tonnes,

and here we are accepting the fact that the seal population, in excess of 7

million, is eating over 110,000 tonnes, and not doing a heck of a lot about it.

I read in The Evening Telegram a few days ago where a

commercial salmon fisherman on the Labrador Coast talked about the salmon catch

for the year. I'm not so sure, the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair,

which particular community he was from, but he did say that four out of every

five salmon that he caught were damaged by seals. Four out of every five salmon

that that fisherman caught were damaged by seals. They are playing a major

part

in a return of the fishery in this particular Province today.

I fear this government in its wisdom, in its approach to

trying to combat the IFAW, that it is talking to the converted. It is talking to

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Except for a few traitors in this Province who

have come on side with the IFAW, most of us I think will agree that we should

have a hunt. This particular industry can return economic prosperity to many of

our communities today.

I commend the Member for Baie Verte for bringing in the

private member's resolution. It is certainly a fitting one, in that you will

soon see this particular hunt take place. I understand there is a great rush on

the purchase of seal oil capsules now. The Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture, a great salesman, got on television one night -

AN HON. MEMBER: Roger, they are getting calls now from

stores in Alberta.

MR. FITZGERALD: I believe that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: I believe that. I take them myself.

AN HON. MEMBER: I do too.

MR. FITZGERALD: The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture

got on television one night and showed his true skills in being a salesman.

Picked up a bottle and dumped a couple of capsules in his hands and took them,

and it was almost like somebody being born again! He walked out with no limps. I

think his diabetes was cured right there and then, instant!

Mr. Speaker, it is a good product. We are putting up a

product we are proud of. They can't keep it on the supermarket shelves. This is

an industry that certainly has great potential. I talked with one of the

business owners the other day and I talked about the seal oil capsules. I was a

bit concerned that the seal oil was being capsulized out in British Columbia.

One company is getting the capsules manufactured in British Columbia, and the

other company is in Montreal, in Quebec. I'm not so sure if it is Montreal, but

it is in Quebec. I was informed that the amount of consumption for this

particular product alone doesn't warrant having a seal oil capsulizing plant

right here in the Province, because they do millions in a couple of minutes.

Those are the only two plants I believe in Canada. I don't have any great

problem with that. If we are going to survive and if we are going to make this

into a new business, then we have to make it viable.

We have to get the government out of the business as well, I

say to the Government House Leader. We have to get government out of the

business once this industry is allowed to function and get on an even keel. It

shouldn't need government subsidization, and we won't, once we get our products

marketed and once we get this hunt capable of looking after the needs of the

sealers.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Sure they do, and we should. There is no

place for government out subsidizing any industry, any business, I say to the

minister. Government subsidization is shrinking greatly. This is not a

one-company affair. There is not one company out pushing the cause of the seal

hunt, and everybody else is saying, `Yes, we should do it', or `No, we should

not'. I would suggest there are probably in excess of six companies right now

here in this Province who are either in the process of doing seal oil and seal

meat already, or else are in the process of building a facility in order to take

part in it.

I believe that we can make it into a very, very viable

operation. It could be not only a seasonal operation. Some people are saying,

`Well, what is the point? The seal hunt only lasts six weeks of the year.' When

we are looking at some of the things and some of the products being done now by

the people in seal manufacturing, we find that this work is spread over a number

of months. Now we have companies who are looking at having their own tannery

here. Only a few days ago there was a group of people who came here from another

country who not only would tan - I am not going to say too much about that -

seal hides, but would build it into a tannery whereby they would import skins to

have a viable leather operation, and I sincerely hope that gets off the ground.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: I don't know how many of us here eat seal

meat. I say to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, the Member for

Humber East eats seal meat. I don't know about the Government House Leader. I

would imagine he did, because he did not grow up much different than I did, and

he did not get that -

MR. TULK: There is a full carcass in my deep-freeze.

MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, he said he had a full carcass in his

deep-freeze, and I can guarantee you that the Government House Leader never got

that pelt on him by eating carrots and chicken.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: There is a great lot of oil waiting to be

tapped there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FITZGERALD: The fat cat of the Liberal Party.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

As enjoyable as the debate is, I must inform the hon. member

that his time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: The fat cat of the Liberal Party would

certainly be able to supply a lot of oil.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: I would suggest that when his life in

politics is over, he might want to donate his body to the industry instead of to

science, because I am sure Seafreez and Quinlan Brothers and everybody else may

want to put in a price on that.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to take up the time of other

members, because I am sure there are other members here who want to speak.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Labrador.

MR. FITZGERALD: The member from Labrador has already

spoken, the Member for Torngat Mountains. The Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au

Clair will certainly want to speak.

I remember being down in the member's district many, many

times when the salmon season was on the go, and the trap season was on the go,

and floating all around the wharves, all around the beaches, were these seals,

because there would be no market for them. They would go down, I say to the

member, and they would dive to get at the salmon in the nets, and the fish in

the traps, and they would get entangled in the web, and the fishermen would just

- it was a nuisance. Bring them ashore and they would be left on the beach or

they would be left somewhere else floating around for months at a time because

there was no market. Now, all of a sudden, we do have a market, and we can turn

it into a very viable industry and give some of our people a great opportunity

to live in the communities they want, and to be able to survive and experience a

way of life where they can support their families in dignity.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Twillingate and

Fogo.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. G. REID: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me today to rise to speak a

few words on the resolution put forward by the Member for Baie Verte. This is my

fourth maiden speech now, for hon. members, for those who don't know.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. G. REID: Mr. Speaker, I have a big interest in the

sealing industry in the Province for a number of reasons, the main one being,

that I represent in the House of Assembly one of the largest sealing

constituencies in Newfoundland and that is Twillingate - Fogo and the other is

that I worked with the Department of Fisheries where this has been a hot issue

for the past - I do not know, twenty years - but in particular when I worked

there from '89 until 1996, we certainly spent a lot of time discussing the seal

industry, but I guess it is also because my father took

part in the sealing

industry back in the 60s aboard the old Kyle . He used to be the cook on

the Kyle when she went to the ice so in that regard I guess, Mr. Speaker,

I am the son of a sea cook.

MR. TULK: That is better than some of your relations

(inaudible).

MR. G. REID: Yes, for sure.

Mr. Speaker, the sealing industry is an important and

integral part of the economy in Newfoundland and Labrador. I know, representing

the area of Twillingate and Fogo Island, each spring, even now, we have large

and small boats geared up in February and March to head to the ice. In fact,

some of these boats, one crew on Fogo Island takes sixteen individuals; these

sixteen individuals find an income that time of the year -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. G. REID: Morely Rowe, on Fogo Island - sixteen

individuals go out at the end of February and the month of March, and not only

did they bring home a few dollars for their families, but it also gives them a

few dollars so that they can gear up for the coming fishery. That is the same on

Twillingate Island, Mr. Speaker, where you have a number of people.

But what I find ironic is when we look at, right now in the

hon. member's petition he says: and

WHEREAS seals are consuming an estimated

100,000 tons of small cod. What I find ironic about that, Mr. Speaker, is that,

working with the Department of Fisheries around 1991, we could not get the

federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans to admit that seals ate cod, and it

is only in the last year or two that they will even admit it, but we had

instances on top of instances, of fishermen coming to the provincial Department

of Fisheries and saying: Look, the seals are destroying the cod fish; and what

they would say is, even though the seals were not eating the entire cod fish,

what they would do is, they would take the belly out of them and toss the rest

of it up on the ice, take the liver.

The Minister of Fisheries, Dr. Bud Hulan, claimed that

whatever is in the liver, the seal needs in order to survive and when they

cannot get it in other species, they will attack the cod just for the liver. But

I am thankful at least that, the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans has

finally come to its senses. I have gone to many conferences; one in Twillingate

where there were about 150 sealers from the East Coast of Newfoundland, where a

DFO scientist got up time after time, as sealers got up and said they are

destroying the cod fishery, but trying to get that scientist to admit was like

`pulling teeth', Mr. Speaker.

I will go down through a few more of these: and

WHEREAS the

sealing industry has the potential to grow in importance as new markets and seal

products have been identified. Mr. Speaker, I do not know if any of you fellows

and ladies happened to turn on this fashion magazine that comes on TV, a popular

show on TV, if you look carefully, Mr. Speaker, you will realize that the fur

industry is coming back in Europe and in North America, and we are now finding

more and more markets for our fur. It is also in the meat products, Mr. Speaker,

as the hon. Member for Bonavista South was saying: We eat seal, we eat seal

products here in the Province and I am sure with a little push at all, we can

sell seal-meat products to the rest of the world. I mean, we have third world

countries where they are starving to death, and yet we are sometimes discarding

all this high protein seal meat.

The other thing we are doing is the seal oil capsule, this

Omega-3 that the hon. Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture talks about. This

has been in the process for years; people have been investigating the medicinal

properties that are found in seal oil. Other by-products that we have used is

the entrails and stuff that we mince up and use in fox-farming and the

Government of the Province, right back through - and it is not just this

government or the preceding administration but the Tory Administration before

us, spent untold dollars, Mr. Speaker, in promoting the sealing industry and

supporting it through research up at the fisheries colleague. We put a lot of

dollars into fox food a few years ago to keep the industry going.

The hon. member talks about the seal hunt and how we practice

humane harvesting methods. There have been courses - fishermen have gone around

the Province, supported by the Newfoundland government, who have taught courses

on how to kill a seal and how to clean it up.

Let me - I want to talk, basically, about the `whereas' here:

The people of this Province have been inaccurately portrayed as barbaric in

recent anti-sealing propaganda prepared by the International Fund for Animal

Welfare.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to make

something clear that affected one of my constituents last spring, an incident

that brought untold grief to this individual. The individual is Mr. Jack Troke

of Twillingate, a man who is known all along the North East Coast of our

Province, his father, Captain Peter Troke - that I had the opportunity last week

to go down and give him the award on behalf of the lung association. Captain

Peter Troke was the skipper aboard the Christmas Seal for twenty years.

Well, his son, Jack, Mr. Speaker, has always advocated that we kill seals

properly and that we do it in a humane way.

Well, last year he had the opportunity, had been asked, to

take a reporter from the IFAW - this Fund for Animal Welfare - out on this boat.

And he wanted to prove - his son had done it the year before with, I think it

was National Geographic or some magazine down in the States and they

portrayed the seal kill like it should have been done. They did it objectively,

they reported what they saw. So, Jack, last year, thinking - Mr. Troke himself -

thinking that he could once and for all, prove to the world that we are humane,

we are not barbaric in the killing of seals, took this individual out on his

boat. And everything went all right; he killed a seal in the humane way, the way

that is being laid down by federal fisheries. Three or four days later he saw a

clip on TV, the clip that all of you saw, about him hauling the seals - gaffing

seals, pelting seals that were still alive. That did not happen on his boat, Mr.

Speaker, and I want to make that clear to the public here today, that did not

happen on his boat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. G. REID: In fact, DFO did an investigation - as our

minister and the Premier called for at the time - did an investigation into this

incident and it was found that the tape was indeed doctored, that the tape was

spliced, and that the man was innocent, but we have not heard that, ladies and

gentlemen, here in the Province. So I want to make that clear today, that the

man was innocent of this. And he is taking it very hard, Mr. Speaker. He is a

man well-known in this Province, on the East Coast, and he finds it difficult

when he shows up at a function and someone is pointing a finger at the man.

MR. TULK: Well-respected in the Province.

MR. G. REID: Well-respected in the Province. So, I want

to make this clear that this man tried to help the sealing industry and now he

is being portrayed as the villain here in this Province. I want to clear his

name.

Mr. Speaker, while I agree, for the most part, with the

resolution, I do have a problem with going out with a massive promotional

campaign.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. G. REID: Jack Troke.

I worked with the Minister of Fisheries here a few years ago,

Walter Carter, who was Minister of Fisheries with the Tory Party. At the time,

back in the l970s, Frank Moores started this campaign. It was a colossal failure

because all that did was draw attention to the issue, and that is what these

people crave - attention. Mr. Carter told me of many times when he and the then

Premier, Frank Moores, went around the world, went to London and he tells me he

remembers one particular incident that happened in New York City. They were in

an audience in New York City of 400 or 500 people and Frank was in his glee; he

was on that stage and he was pounding home the fact that we were doing this in a

humane way and that it was okay to kill seals and he said it seemed like they

were swaying the public in the audience that night to their side. He said, when

out of the back came this little old lady with a cane, waving her cane, calling

us barbarians, murderers: `Drive them out of the audience!' and with that it was

gone, we lost it.

So, I am afraid that if we start a campaign against these

individuals, we are falling into their hands. I agree with the Member from

Bonavista when he says we should not announce that we are increasing quotas.

Ladies and gentlemen, if there is a run on lamb chops we do not come out from

the federal Department of Agriculture and announce we are going to increase the

quota of slaughtering baby lambs next year. We do not do that. So I think he is

right, the Member from Bonavista, when he says that we should not advertise

these quotas.

MR. FITZGERALD: Why do they call them baby seals? We do

not talk about baby cows.

MR. G. REID: That is right, we do not talk about quotas

on cows and pigs and lambs. We have to be careful when we talk about that. So, I

would suggest - even though I support your resolution - I suggest that we have

to be very careful, because we do not want to create a platform. We do not want

to go across the country, down in the States and over in Europe saying, `Listen,

we kill seals in a humane way.' Because there are people in the world who, let's

face it, do not like to see anything killed. We have to be careful when we talk

about that.

In my estimation, as far as I am concerned, what we should do

is continue on the path we are going. Go out, kill our seals, and if the quota

needs to be increased, we increase it. We do not make a big fanfare of it. We do

not go out and give them a reason to come back at us.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and let somebody else

have a few words.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse

au Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to have a few words on the resolution put forward by

the Member for Baie Verte. I think it is a good resolution and I think it is one

that we all have to get together and support in this Province.

I listened to the Member for Twillingate - Fogo when he

talked about promotions that have been done and how people and leaders in this

Province have gone out across the country and tried to portray the image of the

seal fishery. I think we have come quite a distance from that time through the

marketing, the research, the development and the emphasis that we have put on

creating new markets for this species. But I think there is also a different

kind of image that we have to portray regarding the seal fishery and that is the

image of the people who have become dependent upon this as a way of life, as an

income, as a means of cultural identity.

I listened to the Member for Torngat Mountains when he talked

about the people of the Torngats and their dependency on the seal fishery, and

it is no different in my area. It was a vital source of income for the people

there, in all northern communities, I guess, in Canada for a number of years. I

think it was in 1987 when the Royal Commission put out the report on sealing and

even then, it recognized how the loss of income from the sealing industry had

weakened the economic base of communities and the survival of communities. I

think if we are going to do promotion, we should promote these communities and

the state that they are in today.

I refer to my district, in the community of Black Tickle, a

community that had built an industry in the seal fishery. For years and years it

was a cultural part of their identity as people, but they were barred out, they

were protested out, they were regulated out until everything closed down and

there was nothing left. Today they are feeling the impact of that loss. Their

economy has been weakened by it. Their community has been weakened by it and

their people have lost a great deal because of it.

What we have to do today is reach out to the people in this

nation and show them that the people who are funding the IFAW, the people who

come from the wealth and the riches of this world, are putting their money,

investing their money into putting other people into poverty in this country and

that is exactly what is happening. It is happening in my own district and I see

it on a daily basis. I think that if we can go out there we can portray that

image and we can portray it very factually, in a very dignified way that brings

a lot of credibility to this industry and to the people who partake in it.

Now, I guess we are launching into a different kind of

industry in terms of sealing. We have had a life-long dependency upon it as a

resource for clothing, food, oil or whatever, the skins, the furs and it was all

a source of income for people, but I guess the sealing industry has changed and

is continuing to change. It has taken on a whole new face in the country, across

the world. It is taking on a new identity and a new label. As I said, a lot of

it is due to research and development of marketings, of refining the way that we

hunt and do things.

Now we are doing a feasibility study in my district today

into the commercial seal fishery. We have just launched it in recent weeks and

we are investing money into looking at the feasibility of hunting, harvesting,

and processing these seals on the Coast to try and put some economic wealth back

into that community, to try and put an industry back into the community of Black

Tickle.

This project hopefully is going to show us and help us

determine that this industry can be feasible without netting. Because that is

the primary thing, that focus, because of the IFAW and their protest, that has

taken away the harvesting method of aboriginal people to be able to go out and

hunt and do this the way they had always done. Of course, it is a lot more

difficult to have a commercial seal hunt in Labrador without netting than it is

on the Island. Because you don't have the access to the ocean because of the

heavy Arctic ice and so on. Hopefully this pilot is going to be able to allow us

to be able to operate this fishery in a viable way once again. I look forward to

the results of that.

I just want to conclude by saying I support the resolution as

put forward by the Member for Baie Verte. I indeed think it is a good resolution

and one we have to stand by in this Province. We are going to continue to bring

wealth into it because of the sealing industry and what it can provide to us. I

thank you very much.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I understand we have agreed the

Member for Baie Verte, who is the mover of this motion, will speak and we will

put the vote, and adjourn for the day.

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

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I would

like to get up and just have some concluding remarks on this particular motion

put forward today. I must say, I must thank all the members who spoke here

today, and spoke very clearly about how we as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians

feel on this issue. I guess what I could say, and we just said to the Government

House Leader, we could spend all night here and every single person in this

House would probably get up and say the same thing. I just want to conclude with

a couple of points.

First and foremost, the problems in our Province have been

around for a long time. I guess the timing is what I've said. The timing for

this particular industry and the potential it has, that is right at our doorstep

right how, it is not a better time for us as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to

stand behind this industry that makes so much sense and logic that we have such

an argument that we can put forward to anywhere in this country or anywhere in

this world. Here we are an island of just 500,000 people with an industry that

has so much potential, an industry that - the sealing industry, the hypocrisy I

guess of it, and I mentioned it before, is that here is our fishery in crisis

from this problem, and instead of that being a problem, it could be actually

helping in a two-fold way. A double yammy, as one member used to say.

That is, that we help our fishing industry by this ecological

succession of what happens with the sealing industry and the seals eating fish,

and at the same time put people to work. It makes so much sense that we should

be making sure that we use every effort possible to put that forward.

I do want to make a note on what the Member for Twillingate &

Fogo said a few minutes ago about Mr. Troke in his district. Very well-respected

in the sealing industry, indeed, all around this Province. I'm glad the member

spoke about it today, because in one of the parts of my resolution I talk about

how they portray us as being barbaric. This gentleman in this industry has a lot

of respect and knows exactly, from a young boy, what it is like to be on the ice

floes. He knew what he had to do - Mr. Troke, who the Member for Twillingate &

Fogo talked about earlier.

The member from Labrador and the Members for Cartwright -

L'Anse au Clair and Torngat Mountains who talked earlier know full well how

important it has been to the people in their districts. Not just a job. The word

"job" is not enough. It is a way of life, that is what it is. It is more than

that. It is feeding you, it is feeding your children, it is clothing them, and

at the same time providing a source of income. It makes all the sense in the

world.

I want to say to every member here today and to the

government that along with everybody else we support this totally. We think it

is time to raise the flag on it. The last part of the resolution very simply

says "a joint effort to repudiate these misrepresentations of the seal industry

by developing" - and I say to the Member for Twillingate & Fogo - "a promotional

campaign..."

I'm not a professional advertiser. I don't pretend to be, or

nobody in this House, but if both levels of government got together with the

professional people across this country, the same way you promote when you go

into an election, the same way you try to get your message across when there is

a campaign on, we use the same people, the professionals who know what they are

doing, to sit down jointly as a group. We go together and sit down with those

people who know what to do to get a message out to every Newfoundlander and

Labradorian number one, but, number two, to everybody across this country, and

the Newfoundlanders and Labradorians across this country.

My sister, who I talked to in British Columbia just a little

while ago, gets thrown off when she sees that advertisement. She has to explain

it to her neighbours in British Columbia. She said, `It would be nice to see

something on your end say it.' That is where the idea came from.

I don't know how we do it. I am not sure, and I don't pretend

to know, but I think we should sit down together and develop a campaign of

either speeches across the country by the ministers, or some kind of

advertisement on TV or radio, or whatever, to get the message out for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, but at the same time for our fellow Canadians

who can stand up in Toronto and Calgary and Edmonton and so on and say:

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians know what they are doing. They are humane

people who are trying to make a living.

That is what we should do, Mr. Speaker, support all of those,

and we do need a morale boost.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: I will finish by saying, let's get together

on this, all for one, and do the right thing at the right time when the timing

is perfect.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question?

All those in favour of the resolution, say `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those opposed, `nay'.

Let the record show that the resolution was carried

unanimously.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, before we adjourn, I think we are

going to do some heavy legislation tomorrow that stands in the name of the

Premier, "An Act To Amend The Intergovernmental Affairs Act". Then, I think, we

will move into the Income Tax Act, the Tobacco Tax Act, and the Memorial

University Pensions Act - time permitting, that is.

I move that the House do now adjourn.

On motion, the House at its rising adjourned until tomorrow,

Thursday, at 2:00 p.m.