VOL. 2 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY, MAY lL, 1983 NO. 38

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2007 SD - 1 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Alvward): Order, please! ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, could the hon. gentleman tell us if the hon. Premier is going to be in the House this afternoon? MR. MARSHALL: MR. NEARY: Period ends? MR. MARSHALL: The Premier should be here presently. Will he be here before the Question He is expected shortly. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, while we are waiting for the hon. gentleman to arrive, perhaps I could toss this at the Government House Leader, the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall), who, no doubt, might be able to provide us with the answer. Could the hon. gentleman tell the House if the Premier or anybody in the administration have sent off an apology to the delegates who attended the Fishery Council of Canada meeting in St. John's last week who were highly indignant and felt insulted by racist jokes that were told by the provincial Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan)? His remarks were crude and uncouth and, Mr.

Speaker, everybody at the conference was shocked, dismayed,_ upset and flabbergasted beyond words. Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the President of the Council could tell the House if a letter of apology has been sent to the Fishery Council ~f Canada and if the administration have gotten a list of all the delegates who were at that Fishery Council to send letters of apology to? Mr. Speaker, we are told 4281

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2007 SD - 2 MR. NEARY: there were 600 or more delegates from all over the \:'lOrld in attendance, making it one of the best attended meetings of its kind in a long time. Mr. Speaker, of particular note, at this conference were some of the largest fish buyers from the United States, our best customers. So I am wondering if the hon. gentleman could tell us if anything has.been done about that? MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): The han. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, what a cons.tructi ve. use of the Question Period!

What a matter of pressing public importance to ask a question onl I am absolutely delighted to see that the hon. gentleman has recovered physically from the ailment that keep him in his home the past few days, but I note that the han. gentl.eman' s recovery has been entirely physical, it certainly has not been mental, Mr. Speaker, or he would not ask a question of that nature. MR. NEARY: Mr • Speaker. 4282

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2008 NM- 1 MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. Leader of the OpposLtion. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I will try the question out on the hon. the Premier. As the hon. the Premier is· aware, Newfoundland's image was severely tarnished last week at an incident that occurred at the Fishery Council of Canada meeting here in St. John's when some 600 representatives attended this conference from all over the world when the Provincial Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) told a scandalous racial joke, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, could the hon. gentleman tell the House, on be -half of the administration, if the hon. gentleman has sent an apology to the Fishery Council of c~~ada and has the hon. gentleman gotten a list of the international representatives who were at this Council and sent an apology to the individual ., members who attended this Council? And will the han. gentleman also ask the Hinister of Fisheries . to apologize publicly for these insulting remarks? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I will take it all under advisement, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the han. the Premier could tell us when we could expect to get the answer? MR. SPEAKER~ The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: In due course ·, Mr. SEeaker. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary question. MR. NEARY: . The hon. gentleman is getting I the answers from ~~e backbenchers there, Because of the urgency of this matter, Mr. Speaker, and all these people, some of them 4283

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2008 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: very prominent fish .huyers, left this Province with a bad taste in their mouth ., a bad impression of Newfoundland and so forth ., and with the anti .­ seal campaign that has been going on and then to hear these racial jokes told by the Provincial Minister of Fisheri.es, Mr. Speaker, certainly does not leave a very good impression of Newfoundland and Newfoundlanders, I wonder 1 because of the urgency of the matte~ could the hon. gentleman put some time on it when he could tell us when we could get the answer in the House? MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): The han, the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think that a worse image is put on the Province of Newfoundland when the Leader of the Opposition (Mr~ Neary) and others opposite from time to 'time try to score cheap, cheap ·, low~down political points on particular issues that come before the media or other people in this Province. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition . MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I do not understand that answer. . SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, even 00 7, who is a very prominent Tory in the PrGvince,has taken the administration and the minister, to task. 4 2 81+

:...~;: May 11,1983 Tape No. 2009 ah-1 MR. NEARY: "Bigotry is unwelcome ;• he says, 11 in any decent- society. From time to time," he says, ''such bigots find it possible to crawl or slither into positions of power by temporarily camouflaging their true selves. Adolph Hilter was one such example and Benito Mussolini was another example." SOME HON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please!

MR.NEARY: Now in view of these serious charges and accusations,and in view of the fact that the people from Newfoundland who attended that conference felt pretty miserable, felt pretty bad, and the international and national representatives went away from that conference, with a very bad impression of Newfoundland left by the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.Morgan), is the Premier not going to take immediate steps to issue an apology to that group? MR.MARSHALL: A point of order. MR. SPEAKER: Council, a point of order. MR. MARSHALL: of the hon. gentleman. The han.

President of the The trivia This is an example of what happens to the han. gentlemen there opposite. Make no wonder the young Liberals want a Leadership Convention. SOME HON .MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I refer Your Honour to Beauchesne,page 129. You cannot ask questions which "multiply, with slight variations, a similar question on the same point. (

d) repeat in substance a question already answered, or to which an answer has been refused~' No one refused to answer. The han. Premier has responded. Now to save the hon. members of the Opposition from themselves, 4285

May 11,19133 Tape No. 2009 ah-2 MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I draw this point of order to your attention in the h9pes that we can get on to some kind of sensible refrain or order of questions. MR.SPEAKER (Aylward): I note that Paragraph 357 does say that questions, written or oral must not"mul tiply , with sl"'ight variations, a similar question· on the same point." I bring that to the attention of the hon. Leader of the Opposition. Opposition. MR. NEARY: The hon. Leader of the' Well, Mr. Speaker, we will see if we can get some sanity back in the Premier's answers.

I will go .back ~o what the han. gentleman said earlier , he would take the matter under advise_ment. I hope that the hon. gentleman is sincere,that he will take the matter under advisement,and will the han. gentleman assure the House that we will get the answer shortly_in this House? MR. SH1MS: ME. LUSH:. · ~1R.-'S,PE,AKE!R: Nova. MR. LUSH:· quest;i,ons, bqt th,e 4286 You already did. Hr. spe,aker ~ The hon. member fo~ Terra ~. SpeaJ<:er, I have several

May 11, 1983 Tape 2010 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: ministers to whom the questions should be rightly directed are not sitting in their places, so I will direct the question to the Premier. It is related to the present kerfuffle with respect to the drill ship Petrel. We were having some problems with respect to the hiring practices. I wonder if the Premier can indicate to the House whether he or the minister were aware that this particular rig was tied up at Argentia since sometime early Fall with a crew of non-Newfoundlanders? Was the administration aware of this? MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we have been trying to negotiate without taking drastic action to see that more Newfoundlanders were put on that rig and were available to work on that rig when it goes out to do its drilling. We have been into extensive negotiations with the company that operates the rig and we have been trying to negotiate with them. We did not wish to take court action or to cancel permits, which are two of the options that are open to government. We wanted to be able to co-operate with the company and to negotiate the problem. Now, ~~at has been extremely difficult.

The Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn), the Minister of Education (Ms Verge) and others and myself have been kept fully advised of the situation. We have indicated through our officials to the company that we are not prepared to let the status quo continue, that our local preference regu­ lations are there, they remain in effect, ~nd that they must begin hiring Newfoundlanders who are qualified in the respective jobs that are available on that ship. Over the last number of days, the negotiations at the official level have continued 4287

May 11, 1983 Tape 2010 EC -2 PREMIER PECKE:ORD: and we are in the p;cocess now of informing the company that there are at least two courses 0f action open to us, one is to· cancel the permit and, of course, the other is to use the provision of tJ1e constitution which Newfoundland was successful in getting as part of the new constitution, 4288

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2011 MJ - 1 PREHIER PECKFORD: which reads that "Any of the preceding does"not preclude any law,programme,or activity that has as its object theamelioration in a province of conditions of individuals in thatprovince are socially or economically disadvantaged, the rate of employment in that province is below the rate of employment in Canada." That is a provision in the new Constitution which Newfoundland was successful and I was successful in.helping negotiate at the time of the new Constitution.

So ~.,e have gone back to the company and indicated that we are not prepared to accept the rules and regulations uhat they want to use to govern the operation of that drill rig. Sure we were aware that it was there and we have been negotiating with them. ~'!e are not going to back down, we are going to insist. One · of the problems we have , of course ·, is that from time to time the Opposition and others in this Province have taken a lukewarm if not an opposite position to ours as it relates to local preference.

If we had everybody onside 1 perhaps we would not be into the problems we are with this company and other companies in this Province. Because when they see a fractured Newfoundland society, some saying, 'Yes, let us have local preference, '- others saying, 'You are going too far and you are being confrontational, you are doing this, you are do that,' then obviously they are able to see an opening, are able to move in and try to make stick something which is inconsistent with what we are trying to do.

So I would invite the han. member and his colleagues to fully support the government in its efforts to ensure that Newfoundlanders are put on that rig. MR. LUSH: Mr. -Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. the member for ~erra Nova. 42B9

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2011 MJ - 2 MR . LUSH :. ~tr. Speaker, what a lot of nonsense the Premier is getting on with, trying to ind~cate that the member and people on ~~is side object to the local preference policy , ~1!1at a lot of nonsense ,but I will not comment on that, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question to the Premier is , does this not indicate the poor plann~~g of the government, the fact that the rig has been in our­ Province since sometime early Fall and up to this point in time we have nothing done? Here is the drilling seas0n started and still nothing resolved. 42 90

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2012 PK-1 MR. LUSH: The Premier says that he has contacted the company. What has been the company's response? And, secondly, does this sot indicate poor planning with respect to the hiring procedures that we have had all this time and not been able to resolve up until now? MR. SPEAKER .(AYLWARD) : The hon. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I find this absolutely incredible.

The hon. gentlemen on the opposite side of the House from time to time in the last two or three years have attacked this administration for its local preference policy, have attacked us, have tried to accuse us of being confrontational every time we moved to do something. We were told to go and sit down ~nd negotiate an agreement with the federal government which would see no local preference in this Province, our local preference policy going out the window. And the hon. member for Terra Nova (Mr.

Lush) can stand in his place and innocently and angelically try to ask a question about local preference where all of his colleagues over there for the last two or three years have been trying to tear down the policy that we have been trying to put in place for the people of this Province. I find it absolutely shameful that the han. member would try to have his cake and eat it too, and would do it so openly and so blatantly in the people's House. Mr. Speaker, we brought in local preference regulations years ago. ~alk about planning! The han. member stands up, Mr. Speaker, it seems 4281

May 11, 1983 Tape 2012 PK - 2 PREMIER ~ECKFORD: to me as if the han. Premier and the government have no planning here.' We have had local preference in effect for the last several years. And it has been the federal government,spurredon by the han. member and his colleague,who tried to undermine the local preference policy in this Province, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: He~r, hear! EREMIER PECKFORD: Let them not try now to get on their hobbyhorse.

Let them come out and unequivocally say that tr local preference policy that is now in place will also be in place under any negotiated agreement on the offshore, instead of han. members opposite coming out from time to time, in lukewarm support, and sometimes antagonis~,towards the kind of policy that we have on the offshore. I have heard the han. Leader of the Opposition (~tr. Neary) from time to time say we are bad Canadians, that we want to get out of Confederation and all the rest of it becat we are standing_up and asking for fair play on a big resource like the offshore.

The han. member ~or Terra Nov~ should examine his conscience. SOME HON. MEMBERS: M.~. SIHMS: MR. NEARY: toothache. MR. SPEAKER: MR. LUSH: Hear, hear! Put that in your pipe·-:. and smoke it. You have more nerve than a The han. member for Terra Nova. Mr. Speaker, there is no necessity for me to examine my conscience, Mr. Speaker. I have a clear conscience and I know precisely where I stand with respect to the local preference policy. 4292

~lay 11. 1983 Tape No. 2012 PK -3 SOME BON . MEMBERS : Where? tfuere? MR . HODDER: None of your business . MR . LUSH: I know precisely where I stand, Mr. Speaker, we have a clear ind ication today that the local prefer ence po licy is not working . Mr . Speaker , I w ill ge t to the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr . Dinn) . 42 93

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2013 SD - 1 MR. LUSH: The Premier, of course, is on to the wrong line of what I meant by poor planning. The planning that I referred to was the planning that I was questioning the minister on yesterday about this government list and how everybody has to come to St. John's to register for the offshore. So I am wondering, Mr. Speaker, whether or not this is part of the problem,where the list that is available to companies is all here in St. John's.

I am wondering how detailed this . list i·s, what qualifications are required to be acknowledged . on this particular list, whether it has anything to do with language, the language that a person can speak, because we have people in Newfoundland who speak other than English. We have people who speak French, we have people who speak Inuit and the Natives of Labrador speak different languages. So if they have an application in ,does the minister have it indicated on the list what language they speak 1 whether they are fluent in English or whether they are fluent in some other language?

Particularly since this is an international thing, do we have these kinds of things on the list, the qualifications and language,sindicated as to whether people speak languages other than ;Engl.ish? MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, this, as r say, is incredible. The han. member came off just now with a tirade again about where he stood,yet he did not say where he stood. He talked about negotiations, whether we left it since early last Fall and why we did not negotiate and get this settled before now. Mr.

Speaker, I will have the han. member know that we negotiated the Pacnorse and we got a crew on there, we negotiated the Pellerin and got a crew· on there, we negotiated the 4294

.. May 11, 1983 MR. DINN: SOME HON. MEMBERS : Tape No. 2013 SD - 2 Neddrill 2 and got·a crew on there. Hear, hear. MR. DINN: We negotiated the West Venture and SEDCO 706 and the Zapata Ugland and we got crews on there. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. DINN: We are negotiating the John Shaw and we are negotiating the Bow Drill 2 and we will get crews 'on there. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. DINN: We are having a little problem with the ~etrel. And, Mr.

Speaker, we do not, in our registery have.it listed as to whether a fellow speaks Norwegian or French or German or English because they wou~d make it a preference next time that when a Norwegian ship came in here that Newfoundlanders would have to speak Norwegian and if a West German ship c~~e in we would have to speak German. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, we do not operate like that here in this Province SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. DINN: - narrow and parochial. And, Mr. Speaker, did we go to other parts of the Province to get people to register for the offshore?

I will have the han. member know that we have over 11,300 people registered for the offshore. Harvey's Offshore, for the supply vessels for the ~et:rel _ went out to the Port au Port Peninsula and advertised, went to Western Labrador and advertised to find out whether they had the '4295

May 11, 1983 Tape 2014 EC - 1 MR. DINN: qualifications, whether they could speak fluently bilingual French/English and so on, Mr. Speaker, so that we could comply with this rig so that we could get Newfoundlanders on there and so that we could spread it around for the hon. the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder). What I am getting a little bit sick of in this Province, Mr.

Speaker, are people like the hon. member opposite who decry our regulations at every turn and then have the gall to stand up in this House arid ·'I pose a question to the Minister of Labour and Manpower: What is he going to do about the unemploy- ment situation in this Province?' SOME HON . MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker~ a supplementary, MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): The hon. the member for Port au Port.

SOME HON, 1-mMBERS; Oh, oh! . ~. - MR., 'SPEAKER: Order, please: MR , H:ODDER,; I ~ ~skipg t~e m~nister; is he telling me that he could not find forty French-speaking Newfoundlanders in Western Newfoundland to man that rig, where we have 90 per cent unemployment? Is he telling me and is he telling the House that he did not ask of those 11,000 people who are waiting whether they were French or English? And is he telling me right now - since I happen to know that on that list of 11,000 there are French-speaking Newfoundlanders who are qualified is he telling me that he does not know who they are?

PREMTER PECKFORD: Yes, we do know. MR. SPEA.KER: T~e pQn, the Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DJ:NN: For the information of the hon. me;mber opposite, wh.o seEm)s to be a l;i,ttJ.,e pit exercised 4296

May 11, 1983 MR. DINN: SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. DINN: Tape 2014 EC - 2 and probably should.be exercised­ Hear, hear! - the problem with respect to the Petrel is this, that we do not go along to a drilling company and say, 'You will hire John Jones.' That happened in the old days when we had a Dr. McGrath or someone else who told people who to hire and when to hire. We do not do that. We say to the drilling company, 'Here is a list of Newfoundlanders. Here is a registry. These are the qualifications they have. We would like for you to hire from that registry.

If he is a driller with eight, ten or fifteen years experience, we would like you to hire a Newfoundlander.' Now, Mr. Speaker, to assist us, most of the drilling companies not only comply with our regulations but go out .of their way to~ast year they were up in Labrador attempting to get people to work in the offshore Labrador. Harvey's Offshore, who are responsible to supply Canterra in offshore Labrador this year, went to the Port au Port Peninsula and advertised. They did not go out and say, 'John Jones, you are listed in the registry. We have your telephone number. Are you . 4297

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2015 NM - 1 MR. DINN: ready to work?' They could not do that, they have 11,000 in a registry. But what they did do, the same as they do when they are hiring here or hiring in Labrador, because there were some requirements for French, and because they wanted to be conciliatory and try to assist all Newfoundlanders, they advertised out in the Port au Port area in the local newspapers. They advertised in Western Labrador. They did not get a big response 1 T.hey got some, but they did not get a big response. The response that they did get they attempted to get these people jobs.

I do net know what else these companies can or have to do. We certainly do not direct them as to who to hire, nor should we. We supply the information and they hire based on the fact that they have the qualifications to work in the specific job. MR. HODDER: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): The hon. member for Port au Port, a further supplementary. MR.

HODDER: I listened carefully to what the minister said. :ts the minister telling me that when the applications were first offered there was no consideration given to the fact that there might be rigs coming into the area _whose crews might speak French, since we have a ).(!rge Fre.nch speaking population· in this Province?

And i.s the minister telling me that -you know,today my phone has not stopped ringing since the minister made his statement on television last night.-is the minister telling me that because of the advertising that was done on the West Coast, ~ne ad in one newspaper, that he considers that to be sufficient?' Furthermore can the minister say or can he ~ot whether we have enough 4288 ·---

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2015 NM - 2 MR. HODDER: Frenc~ speaking qualified Newfoundlanders for that rig? MR. SPEAKER (Aylward)·: The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DI.NN: Now, Jl1r. Speaker, we nearly have the h,an. member from Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) say that he agrees with the local preference policy.

He had not agreed with it all the way along 1 but now that he is getting a little bit of pressure from his constituents for jobs on the off~hore, now he is asking, what the minister is doing about getting his constituents jobs on the offshore, •Does he not know that we have some French speaking people in Newfoundland who have qualifications?" We ne.ver ask what religion these people are, we never asked whether they were French, Norwegian, Portuguese, or English. we never asked any of these questions. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.

D'INN: 'I'Te sent out the application forms, they filled in the application forms, they stated their qualifications. Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the r han. member said, the company, which was hiring for this particular area - now we are talking about supply vessels, not the rig,because the rig would rather hire from Quebec or from wherever rather than 4299

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2016 MJ-1 1-l:R. DINN: Newfoundland. They would rather ,hire from-anywhere but Newfoundland. What they are doing, it appears to me, they are co~fronting our regulations. Mr. Speaker, we are fairly solid with respect to the regulations.

Section 124 is fairl~ clear and

Section 6 of the Constitution is clearer. It enforces

Section 124 of our regulations. And, 1-1r. Speaker, we intend to enforce those regulations. Now, we went out and advertised -we did not, the companies did -to-assist the people of this Province, went out to Port au Port and advertised. Nmv, is one ad enough? Are two ads enough? Are three ads enough? Is advertising enough? I do not know if it is enough, but they · certainly attempted to get French speaking Newfoundlanders to work in these supply vessels; they went to Western Labrador and did exactly the same thing. Mr. Speaker, all of a sudden the member for Port au Port (Mr.

Hodder), who stood in his place in this House and decried local preference, and the hon. member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush), who the other day made a speech in this House decrying the local preference regulations, now that there is a little pressure from a few-constituents and we have had a conversion. The hon. member should have been converted in 1979 when we tried to d6 it. He should have been supporting this governmentin its effort to get Newfoundlanders employed long before now, but all of a sudden he wants to jump on the bandwagon because we ar€ having a little problem with Petrel and Canterra, one company.

We did not wait until just last Spring to get into this, we have been negotiating since last year. We have at least thirty people on a permanent basis on the Pa.cnorse, Pellerin and Neddrill 2 since last year. And they agree that, when they come back this 4300

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2016 MJ-2 MR. DINN: year they will hire at least another thirty or forty Newfoundlanders and one or two of the hon. member's constituents may get jobs there. I want the han. member .when he stands up to ask another supplementary question to say, 'I support the Newfoundland preference policy in the offshore.' SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. HODDER: MR. SPEAKER (AYLWARD) : MR. HODDER: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The han. member for Port au Port. Mr.

Speaker, for some time .now, for the last two years, I suppose, or perhaps for the last three or four years since this list started, I have been directing French Newfoundlanders and telling them whom they should get in touch with in order to get on that list. Now, is the minister telling me that he has a list of Newfoundlanders and he does not know if they are French or English speaking, yet we have a drillship out there that wants forty French speaking Newfoundlanders? Does the minister consider that to be good administrating? 4301

May 11,1983 Tape No. 2017 MR. HODDER: Would the member allow me to have a ·look at the list and I will tell him by their surnames who are qualified Newfoundlanders, ah-1 MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR.DINN: Mr. Speaker, this is May 1983 and the list has been available since 1979 and it is the first time the hon. member asked to have a look at the list. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.DINN: He just happened to wake up in May of 1983, a wide-a\vakening for the hon. member for Port au Port (Mr.Hodder). He gets a little bit of pressure from his few constituents and he wakes up.

SOME HON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.DINN: That list is a public list. We hide it from nobody. The press, the people of the Province, anybody can get a copy of that list . Every company in this Province can have a copy of that list free of charge, free 1 gratis. And, Mr. Speaker, it is like this, the information that is provided to that registry - SOME HON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.DINN: The hon. member does not like the answer.

The information provided ~n that registry is provided the hon. member might want a registration form himself-but the information provided - . on that list goes like this, your name, occupation, what occupation youhave for offshore, all the different items, and any other information that you may wish to provide. So if a person wished to provide the 4302

Cl May 11,1983 Tape No. 2017 ah-2 MR.DINN: fact that he was ~rench, the fact that he was Norwegian and the fact that he mightbe of Portuguese an.cestry means nothing to me. What I am here to do is attempt to get jobs _ fo _r Newfoundlanders. If they _want to supply the 1nforrnation that they are French speaking Newfoundlanders,that can be put at the bottom of the list under 'Other; French, they can be put - - - at the bottom of the list as Norwegian, they can be put at the bottom of the list as Micmac or Indian. We do not go out and tell them how to fill out a simple little list. MR. SPEAKER (AYLWARD) : MR.

MARSHALL: MR. SPEAKER: President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL : Order, please: A point of order. A point of order. The han. The han. gentleman is trying to respond to a question, Mr. Speaker, The han. gentlemen there opposite might like to substitute their shouting and their yowling for their laughing or exulting at the loss of the court case and the consequences of it. But the fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, the han. gentleman has been asked a question and he is entitled to be able to respond without having to shout over the han. gentlemen. SOME HON .MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! .

To that point of order the han. Leader of the Opposition. MR.NEARY: Mr ~ Speaker, we would be highly amused at what is happening on the other side today. If it were not so serious it would be funny. If there is any shouting going on in the House, Mr. Speaker, it is from the Minister of Eabour and Manpower (Mr.Dinn) 4303

May 11,1983 Tape No. 2017 ah-3 MR.NEARY: and the Premie~w~o seems to be beside himself today, he is rather testy. If I had known he was going to be in such a bad mood today I might not have come in. He is scaring me over there 1 4 3 0 1+

May 11, 1983 Tape 2018 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: pointing his finger .and shouting and bawling and roa~ing. Mr- Speak~r, there really is no point of order. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): To that point of order. There was considerable noise corning from both sides of the House. The time for Question Period is over. SO}ffi .HON. MEMBERS: Shame! Shame! HR. SIMMS: We will get back to it another day. PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES DR. COLLINS: MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON • MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Minister of Finance. Oh, oh! Order, please! Order, ple~se! Mr. Speaker, in accordance with

Section 51 of the Financial Administration Act, I have to report on the details of guaranteed loans of trade in whole or in part since the last sitting of the House and I table that report. ANSWERS TO QUE STIONS FOR WHICH NOT ICE HAS BEEN GIVEN MR. YOUNG: ·Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Public Works. MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the answer to question number 68, asked by the han. the member for Eagle River (Mr. Hiscock) • ORDERS OF THE DAY MR. SPEAKER: Today being Private Members' Day, we are discussing Order 8. Before I introduce the hon. the member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan), on our last sitting day, 4305

May 11, 1983 Tape 2018 EC ~ 2 MR. SPEAKER (A ylward) : the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) raised a point of order concerning the reading of articles and he quoted Standing Order No. 332 from Beauchesne, Page 117. I have to refer hon. members also to Standing Order 328: "A Member may read extracts from documents, books or other printed publications as part of his speech provided in so doing he does not infringe on any point of order.

" And the point of order which could be infringed upon would be that the reading of documents are not to refer to any proceedings in the House, and in this case, there was not an infringement on a point of order. SOME HON . MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Bellevue has three minutes left. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker - PREMIER PECKFORD: Three minutes to (inaudible). MR. CALLAN: Yes. Mr. Speaker, we saw today one of the obvious reasons why we have no offshore oil agreement. We are speaking here today, Mr.

Speaker, on the amendment tc this resolution,number 8 on the Order Paper,by the member for Carbonear (Mr. Peach). And what we are saying, Mr. Speaker, what the amendment to that resolution says is that both levels of government, the provincial and the federal governments, should get back to the negotiating table and 4306

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2019 JV - 1 MR. CALLAN: let us have a negotiated settlement to the offshore dispute, let us have a negotiated settlement so that people can get back to work, so that the ·infrastructure which must come as it pertains to getting ready for offshore oil development, all of these things will naturally follow.But they will not come about, Mr. Speaker, until there is a negotiated settlement between this Province and the Federal Government in Ottawa. Now, it is obvious,as I said last day, what the Premier is doing. Watching the Premier in his display during the Question Period, Mr.

Speaker, he displayed what I have been thinking for a long time, that he was wrongly named;he should have been christened 'Mary Pickford' because as everybody knows, Mary Pickford was a great actress and in his daily dealings with everybody, Mr. Speaker, all the Premier does·is act, ~ -~ - 4 - - - puts on

an act. The same Premier who thinks that it is terribly wrong for people to arouse other peoples emotions, like, for example, the anti-seal protestors who get millions and millions of dollars contributed to their cause because of the emotional way they conduct their affairs , the Premier condemns that and ' he condemm anybody else who accomplishes what they are trying to accomplish by emotional tactics But here we have the very same Premier of this Province, Mr. Speaker, who last spring purely on emotional issues, purely on emotions won an election.

There was no logic to what the man was ( saying and now we see, over a year later,that · there was no truth to what he was saying either. He asked the people for a mandate to negotiate with Ottawa and here we have negotiations broken off. rhe only man who could possibly negotiate with Ottawa was forced to resign from the Premier's 4307

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2019 JV - 2 MR. CALLAN: Cabinet - he just came into the House a minute ago - the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) . MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) Order, please . MR. CALLAN: I support the amendment to this resolution. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, the original motion was brought in by the member for Carbonear (Mr.

Peach) I had forgotten ror the moment-and that was approximately a week ago,and as far as I recall he put forward the offshore situation very clearly, very succinctly and with great ' conviction and I would like to congratulate him on doing such a fine job. Since that time, Mr. Speaker, there havebeen some strange things happen in this debate and before getting into the body of my remarks that I am sure my .hon. colleague the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) will listen to most avidly - MR. MJRGliN: I am sorry, colleague. DR.

COL:LINS: ;r just like to mention h,i.m, For instance,the han. member for Eagle River (Mr. Hiscock) went against his own party as far as they have stated their position,when he stood up in this House in this debate. He stated uneqivmcally that in his view Canada owns the offshore. Now, hon. members opposite any number of times have claimed that they believe that Newfoundland owns the resources of the offshore. They have made that claim any number of times but their actions have not backed up 4308

May 11, 1983 Tape 2020 PK - 1 DR. COLLINS: their claimr But at least in words _they have said that yes, we believe Newfoundland ,. ' owns the offshore resources. The han. member for Eagle • II River (Mr. Hiscock) last week unequivocally zaid , I believe that Canada own ·s the offshore:' So apparently there is some break in the apparent facade across the way, and I think we should note that break and ask the han. members opposite to clarify their position once again.

And we would hope that they would clarify it, not only in words, but also they would clarify it in actions and in declaration and in advice and recommendations to their Liberal colleagues in Ottawa. Now,there wasanother peculiar thing happened, Mr. Speaker. The han. member for Bellevue (Mr. Callan) who just sat down, he said last _week that the offshore question is purely a legal question. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is a very strange statement to make.

Because their own amendment here says, "BE IT RESOLVED that this House demands that both the provincial and federal governments negotiate an agreement such that our moral and historic claims with respect to the sharing of offshore management resources are recognized." Again is this a break with his colleagues? According to the amendment here his colleagues seem to think that there · '3.re moral and historic claims bound up in the questl.cm of the offshore, -~ the hon. :rrerrber for Burin says, No, it is purely a legal question, just settle the legalities and that is the end of it.

So again there seems to be d~sparity between what one member thinks and what the whol~ group opposite claim that they support. And, of course, it is just a reflection of the fact _that they do not really know, they have not made up their minds in any way. No matter·~t ~ 4309

May 11, 1983 Tape 2020 PK - 2 DR. COLLINS: say . and how much they purport in public to support the Newfoundland people in trying to get its just rights offshore, in actual fact they have no settled policy on the thing. They are all over the shop. At any one day of the week they will say one thing and another day of the week they will say something else. Now, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a few comments in regard to this debate; and the first point that I would like to bring up is that the outside world has a very strange view of Canada.

I had the honour and the ·occasion to meet with a person, a statesperson, ·from the European Continent recently, and this person was very knowledgeable about how governments work in the world and how federations work and all that sort of thing.

And this_. :;erson very subtly and diplomatically brought up the point that, you know, people in other places have great difficulty in understanding how Canada works. :For instance, it h:; · well known that there is regional disparity in Canada , There are areas of great wealth, and areas of wealth that have bee _n there for many, many years, even generations, and particularly in Central Canada, but then in other areas of Canada, particular~y in Eastern Canada --although it was not always in Eastern canada, there are other areas of Canada too that were very much less ~wealthy but 1 anyway,in Eastern Canada it is well known that there are areas of considerable poverty and of diminished opportunity.

And the outside people say we wee this here- and we wonder why a country like Canada allows that to exist? And,in particular, they have difficulty in understanding this,when in areas where there is relative poverty, very definite relative poverty 4310

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2021 NM - 1 DR. COLLINS: and lack of opportunity for individual advancement, nevertheless there are great possibilities of turning that thing around with just the right approach to things.

And they look at Atlantic Canada and they see the great resources down here, especially the offshore resources, and th.ey scratch their heads and they say, "Why is Canada a country which has these great disparities, nevertheless has the way to correct them in areas where the correction is needed, yet their system just does not work to allow t.hat to happen'2" And this is said by people who understand the federal system.

They understand that Canada is somewhat of a unique country in that certain things are given to the provinces and certain things are given to the central government. .il.nd they understand that resource development is given to the provinces. There is nothing strange, weird or wonderful about that. The whole world knows that Canada is made up that way and not all countries are made up that way.

In some countries the authority and the jurisdiction to deal with natural resources is controlled centrally, or if it is not controlled centra~ly at leaat a central government is so authoritarian and so autocratic that it takes these responsibilities and these jurisdictional prerogatives onto itself. But they know that in Canada that is not the case. Right from the beginning, in the BNA ~ct, there was this division of responsibilities and jurisdiction, and in the new Canadian constitution, in the Canada Act, that is also brought forward. It is very clear, the high school student who has any knowledge of.

Canadian history knows that the provinces have the responsibility for deveioping natural · resources in their area. And this is what people outside do not understand. You have poor areas of Canada; in those poor areas you have natural resources; the natural resources 43i1

May 11, 1983 Tape- No. 2021 NM - 2 DR. COLLINS: should be developed by those local areas but it does not happen and they say "What is wrong with Canada And, of course, I think that IJIOSt of us can clearly po _int out what is wrong with Canada, and it is a recent thing that has happened to Canada. Previously the same things happened. There were poor areas in We :stern Canada, the provinces were as poor as church mice.

Th .ey had natural resources out there and the two, one should have offset the other, and at that time the Canadian Federation worked ~o that that happened, those natural resources were allowed to be developed by those poor provinces out there . The need was there, the resources werethere so the authority was given and the arrangements were set up so that the thing could happen. And that is the Canadian way. People can understand that. What they cannot understand is how come in the last ten or fifteen years Canada does not work that way.

We have the poor area down here, we have the natural resources down here, why are not the arrangements allowed to let the local area develop the natural resources? Why have things 4312

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2022 SD - 1 DR. COLLINS: changed in the last ten or fifteen years? And one can only say that they have changed because of the present administration in control of the federal government. There is no other change. There is a change in attitude of the central administration in this country which will not allow to happen what should happen in Canada and historically what did happen in Canada. Now-, how you can rationalize that, of course, is another matter. Now, Mr.

Speaker, there is another problem that is connected to this thing and it sort of flows out of it and the problem is this: Who speaks for Can~da 1 and I talk of the central authority in Canada, who speaks for Canada? Or, I suppose, you can put it another way, does Canada speak with a forked tongue? to use the old Indian expression •. _ Does Pierre Trudeau speak for Canada? If so, was he speaking fqr Canada when he visited our university here and said, 'We want to develop the resources down here in conjunction with you.

We want all the benefits to a maximum degree to_go to you people down here until you become equal with the rest of Canada.' Is that the person who speaks for Canada? Because if so, he has· not delivered on those words. Does Mr. Lalonde speak for Canada? When Mr. Lalonde sat down with the offshore negotiating team welf over a year ago now, did he speak for Canada when he said, 'You will get no more than what we gave Nova Scotia in the agreement we have with them' even though, of course, the agreement with Nova Scotia did not relate at all to the sorts of situations off our coast.

It was a totally different situation. Historically it was totally different, the nature of the resource was totally different and the benefits that are going to flow from the resource are totally different. But he says, 'No, 4313

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2022 SD - 2 DR. COLLINS: you are going to ~et the same thing'. Was Mr. Lalonde speaking for Canada? Was Mr. Chretien speaking for Canada?Because he had a different story when he sat down sometime later \'lith the hon. President of the Council (Mr. Marshall), when he was finally enticed to come to the negotiating table0 4314

Hay 11, 1983 Tape No. 2023 ,MJ - 1 DR. COLLINS: Because clearly the Lalonde approach was so ridiculous that it was scoffed <:~t essentip,lly, and,of course,at the same time C\S he put forward his ridiculous approach he would not respond to the reason9,ble approach that we put forward not only at the table but we actually published it an·d circulated it. Hr.

Chretien,on the other h.and, sat down and said, 'Alright, I will abandon the Lalonde approach and now we will set up a more reasonable app_roa.ch, 1 And was he speaking for Canada when he said that and then when they actually came to putting it in writing he reneged on the whole lot that he discussed with the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall)? Or,finally, do those officials speak for Canada who apparently took the whole situation away from Mr. Chretien 1 said, 'No, if ~tr.

Chretien agrees with that we are either goin 'g to ignore him,or he does not know what he is talking about, we are the ones who are going to set up. this agreement with you?' And what did they comeup with?

They came up with a rehashed Lalonde thing that everyone had discounted, So, not only do we have th!s problem, of it being very difficult to know why the federal government is ruining the Canadian Federation at the present time, we do not even know who to go to to find out who has the authority, shall we say,or who has been given the authority - - . . -- -- -·. _, - - to speak for canada so we can try and straighten it out. we do not know if the Prime Minister is the person 1 because if so he says one thing and nothing happens - as a matter of fact,the opposite happens - we do not know if it is Mr.

Lalonde,because he comes up with something that was patently ridiculous, we do not know if it is Mr. Chretien who says one thing and even the officials ignore what he says,and we do not know if the officials are running Canada. And 1 of course 1 4315

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2023 MJ -2 DR. COLLINS: the officials, God bleps tnem, and no doubt they are good souls, but they are not elected representatives of the people of this Country and they have no business to be running Canada. They should be taking instructions as any good official recognizes he must take, from the elected people,because the elected people are the voice of the electorate. So that is another problem. Now, Mr. Speaker, I say it in sort of charitable terms when I say that th.e officials either ignored Mr.

Chretien or that they just paid he did not know what he was talking about,so they did not pay any attention to him. Hr.

Speaker, as the hon. members of this House know we have been engaged in collective bargaining recently and I can say, rn:M'fhat I have had some exposure to it on behalf of government,. that if we sat down in collective bargaining and came up witn positions that both sides agreed to.-both sides agreed to those particular points-they agreed to them and there was a meeting of minds over them,and you put your honour and your word behind them.and then when you went and got some people in to actually put in writing what you had agreed to, if then you pulled back from those what would be the attitude there?· ·.

The attitude would be, 'This is total bad faith•' And this would not be something that you would have to argue,there would be an absolute uproar. If you sat down with a union and said, 'Now, look 4316

May 11, 1983 Tape 2024 EC - 1 DR. COLLINS: here is what we agree to. Now, are·we all agreed to that?' 'Yes, we are all agreed to that.' 'You stand behind that?' 'Sure, I stand behind that.' 'You put your word to that?' 'Yes, I put my word to it.' 'Alright, now let us call someone in and have him put it down in something that we can sign. Put it down in written form.'- and when that happened, what came back in written form was entirely different from what you agreed. I mean, there would be such an uproar, certainly if govern­ ment did it, there would be editorials for about fifteen years condemning government.

The whole labour movement would be up in arms and we would be ridiculed in the eyes of the world, as we should. But, Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what happened when Mr. Chretien and the han. the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) sat down. They came to a community of thought on how we should resolve the issue offshore. It was verbal, as all these negotiations are verbal.

It should have been translated into writing - perhaps the words might be a little bit different and so on and so forth, but nevertheless, the meaning and the substance and all the rest of it should have been transferred into writing exactly as per what was agreed verbally. And, of course, when it did not happen, there was consternation in our camp. We could hardly believe what was going on. We said, 1'God bless us! Surely, these people came to an agreement. Here is a minister of the Crown putting the federal government behind certain things · he has agreed to.

Surely, there is some strange difficulty with communications here. 1 So the han. the President of the Council went back and clarified this. And Mr. Chretien said, 10h, yes, what we originally talked about and agreed to is right. I will tell the officials to get on with it and stop fooling the thing up.' And what happened? Again, the 4317

May 11, 1983 Tape 2024 EC - 2 DR. COLLINS: officials came back with exactly the opposite position. So what recourse did the hon. the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) have? Could he go back again and get the same old line from Mr. Chretien? No. No sensible man, no man in his right mind would do that. So what he did was he went bac:k and said, ''Now, look here, Jean, put the darned thing in writing so that the officials cannot fool it up.

If you put it in writing in your own little hand, they will not fool it up, because we can go and ge:t a handwriting expert to say, 'This is what Jean Chretien has put his hand to.'" And what happened? Mr. Chretien refused to put it in writing. Now, why do you refuse something like that? If you say, 'Yes, we agree' to something and someone else says, 'No, you did not agree to it,' and then you insist you did agree to it, why do you refuse to put it in writing and say, 'Look, here in black and white for everyone to see, is what I agreed to.' Well, why do you not do that? It is very strange, is it not?

This is a very strange country, Canada. Mr. Speaker , there are other very strange things in Canada at the present time, and one of the strange things that I find particularly disturbing is all this talk about Canada lands. What on earth are Canada lands? If you look at the BNA Act that set up our constitution originally, if you go through that, you will not find any comments about Canada lands. If you look at the new constitution that we have, the Canada Act, if you go through that, there is no such thing as Canada lands-mentioned in _ that.

Yet the central government in this country is relying for its case on the Canada lands, whatever they are. Now, one can only assume, if you talk of lands, something like that, that sort of means that you own those lands, that you hold them tightly, th~t no one 4318

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2025 SD - 1 DR. COLLINS: else has any claim to them. If I say,my name is Smith and I say this is Smith's house, it means that no one else owns that house, it is mine and no one else can take it away from me. So even though the Constitution of Canada never did or does not now mention Canada lands, the federal government is implying by using that term that we own something that no one else can claim. They have no apparent authority to say that,because if you read the BNA Act and our new Constitution the parts of our setup that have ownership rights are the provinces.

They own the lands they occupy and the parts of our country that are not occupied by provinces, it has always been implicit that they were held by the federal government until such time as they would be turned into provinces. And, of cours.e, this happened, say, in Quebec.

Quebec had certain Northern p'arts of this country given to them because by this time the population of Quebec had gotten to such a size,and its government structurally had become sophisticated enough that they could take in other than just the part of Canada which was called - what was it called, Upper Canada1, Lower Canada?- I never get these things straight rm.. SIMMS: Right. DR. COLLINS: - whichever, anyway. But it was extended to take in these Northern parts into their provincial area of jurisdiction.

And this is implicit, I mean, everyone understands that at some point in time the Yukon and the Northwest Territories, when they b.ecome populated enough and so on and so forth,- that they will turn into provinces. And in the meantime, the Government of Canada, the federal Government of Canada will only hold these in trust,essentially,until such time arrives.. In other words, there is 4319

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2025 SD - 2 DR. COLLINS: nothing to su-ggest the Government of Canada itself should own territory and it would hold it tightly and it would be exclusively the Canadian government~ and not' the provincial governments'. That is not the way that Canada is structured. Nevertheless, this is where the federal government now, out of the blue, has decided to lay claims to the offshore areas, and there is no-doubt that these offshore areas are a prolongation of the landmass.

Every court of substance:" the I'nternational Court of Justice, for instance, clearly recognizes the __ .. __ ---·---- Continental Shelf as prolongations of the landmass and,therefore,those prolongations should be considered the same as the above-water landmass. That is quite clear in international law.

But the federal government is changing things without actually changing the Constitution,or is making a claim, apparently, to change things to its own benefit without any constitutional authority in making this statement that there are such. things as Canada lands, and by making such a statement implying that the provinces will never own them, the provinces must be excluded from them, the federal government has cornplete•and utter authority over them and that is the end of it. Now that is a unique idea in Canada, as far as I can understand.

And I think my understanding of that is pretty correct·, I have discussed it with people. And again this is something new that has come into place in the last ten or fifteen years. It is something that carne in,coincidentially,with the present administration in Ottawa. MR. SPEAKER (_McNicholas}: Order, please! The hon. gentlernan1s time has elapsed. The hon. member for :Fogo. 4320

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2025 SD - 3 MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I want, first of all, in speaking to this amendment to congratulate the hon. membe~ for Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warren) on a most excellent speech. I was out of the House last Wednesday afternoon when he spoke but he gave a most excellent 4321

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2026 NM - l MR. TULK: speech, pointing out some of the faults with the case that the government was trying to make, that the government member for Carbonear (Mr. Peach} was trying to make, and obviously he brought in what, in roy opinion, is a very excellent amendment to that political resolution that had been put forward by the member for Carbonear. Mr.

Speaker, as I understand the amended resolution now reads, "BE IT RESOLVED that this House demands that both the provincial and federal governments negotiate an agreement such that our moral and historic claims with respect to the sharing of offshore management and revenues are recognized." Mr. Speaker, if you look at that amended resolution, look at it very closely, you will see that the member for Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warrenl has introduced what can only be considered one of the most states­ manlike resolutions ever to be introduced into this House. Because what he has said, Mr.

Speaker, is "Let us not play partisan politics with an issue that i.s so important to Newfoundland." What he has. done, also, is bring in one of the platforms of the Liberal Party and lately, since August 1981, lately the provincial government has been ---. . . ·-· - ' . saying as well. The han. IlEilber has said that -we Ill.lSt negotiate an agreement. Mr. Speaker, .there has never been any disagreement on this side of the House with thau, and since August 1981 I think the Province ·aE · least has been trying to move in as much as they know how, they have been trying to move to that position as well. Mr.

Speaker, before continuing to perhaps praise the~ for Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warren) and to point out why this resolution is so important and why all sides of this House should :vote for it, I would like to perhaps say why the resolution itself is so important and what it can do for Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt in anybody's mind in this H.ouse, there is no doubt on either 4322

May 11, 1983 Tape No . 2026 NM - 2 MR . TUL'K: siqe of this House~ 1rt is an obvious fact that ~.,e have the highest rate of unemployment in Canada and obviously the offshore oil ' COuld do a great deal to benefit us . There is no doubt either that we ha .ve in ~ this Province the highest cost of living of any of the provinces of Canada . Now, Mr. Speaker, :i,f you l"ook at th~APEC report which was just put out this month.-. the Atlantic. Province Economic Council are a very important group _of people in this Province. ThE!y are pretty good economists. They are pretty good barometers of the econ~y. MR.

BAIRD : Who are they? MR. TULK : APEC~ In that APEC report for April you can see :that one of :the real concerns that that council has is that while the rest of -Canada, an~ 4323

May 11, 1983 Tape 2027 PK - 1 MR. TULK:. indeed while the rest of the Atlantic Provinces are starting to come out of the recession that none of us have enjoyed over the past number of years- we in Canada are starting to come out of that recession but, indeed 1the prospects for recovery in Newfoundland are uncertain, they are very uncertain. So, Mr. Speaker, the effect of that uncertainty if we do not recover from the recession, if we do not recover ;from the recession in the same way that th~ rest of the Atlantic Provinces do, it will logically follow- MR. STAGG: MR.

TULK: Sit down and let John get ~F· I would not ~:;i.sh to, J1r. Speaker. Because one idiot just spoke,I would not want to hear another one. Mr. Speaker, while it is fairly certain that the economic recovery is taking place in Canada, it is not at all certain that it is taking place in Newfoundland. ·That is the basis and the basic point that APEC is trying to make. It is still rather uncertain. Now, Mr. speaker, as I was saying before I was ·interrupted by the han. meii\be ·r for steJ?henville Ct1r.

Stag9'l i;E that is the -ca.Se then we will see ourselves again falling behind 1the _ gap between us and the rest of Canada will become even wider. Mr. Speaker, as I said the rate of unemployment in this province is the highest in Canada anc no doubt will,if we keep the present t:t;end goi~g in government that we now have, probably remain one of the highest in Canada itself. Mr· Speaker, one of · the other things that APEC talks about is educational f.inancing. Mr. SJ?eaker, we know that it is not this government l s bent that you · educate people 90 that they can go out and develop the 4324

May 11, 1983 Tape 2027 PK - 2 MR. TULK: resources. I th~nk we had a primeexample 0f it this afternoon. The Premier does not realize that one of the real ways that Newfoundlanders can take advantage of the offshore, and perhaps the only way that they will get full advantage from the offshore ,is if the right educational institutions are in place . And they are not in place in this Province. I think you can look and find something like - how many thousands are there? There are a number 0f thousands of people 'who are trying to get into the MED course bef0re they can even get on 'the offshore.

But this gove.rnment has that bent,that you develop the resources and then you develop your education system rather than perl}aps the other way around. 4325

May 11,1983 Tape No. 2028 ah-1 MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, in the Hinister of Education Is u~ .S. Verge) statement recently on student aid in this Province she says we have the best in Canada.Well , whoop-de-do~ So we should.And we should have a student aid programme in this Province that is better than any student aid programme in Canada. MR. STAGG: Relevan.cy Jlir. Speaker. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if the member for Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) can be quiet and keep a few facts in his mind long enough,! will connect , it up for him in a few minutes. I would like for him to be very quiet. Mr.

Speaker, we realize on this side of the House,and I think most Newfoundlanders realize,that indeed we must have an even better system of student aid to develop the skills that we are going to need to cope with the technology of offshore and other things around us. Not ·only that, Mr. Speaker, our students,if you take the cost of living again, our students in Newfoundland have the highest cost of living anywhere in Canada and,therefore,we have to have in terms of real dollars a better student aid programme. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr.

Dinn) well knows, if a student is going to university he has the least likelihood of any student in Canada,if he lives in Newfoundland,of getting a job in his own province.So, Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of Education (Ms Verge) stands up and proudly proclaims that our student aid programme is the best in Canada, is better than anywere else in Canada, then we say to her that is the way it should be,because we need those young people to do the kinds of things that the Premier was referring to this evening, that they are unable to do. 4326

May 11 ,1983 Tape No. 2028 ah-2 MR .TOLK: Mr . Speaker, as r. said , APEC on ·page 12 of its ' report points out the uncertainty of Newfoundland pulling out off the recession that we are all in across this country . It points out that the economies of all Canadian provinces faired poorly in 1982 but activity in the most Easterly province - which obviously is Newfoundland with its dependence on export oriented resource extraction was more sharply reduc ed. Recession in the indus tralized world has left Newfoundland's industries with soft markets fo-r iron ore, fish products and pulp and paper . And in the last statement, pro spects for recovery a.re uncertain . 432 7

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2029 JV - 1 MR. TULK.: · It points out, Mr. Speaker, that the unemployment figures in Newfoundland at the end of January 1983 stood at 17.3 per cent,consistently the highest in Canada,and representing 38,000 Newfoundlanders out of work, an increase of 22.6 per cent over the previous year. MR~ DINN: An increase of 39 per cent in all of Canada. MR. TULK: This is an increase of 22.6 per cent over the previous year in Newfoundland.

We are not talking about 'the - - rest of Canada, we are saying, if you want us to be relevant _, that we need a negotiated settlement on the offshore to bring those figures down for Newfoundland. We need a negotiated settlement and that is what the resolution says and that is why the resolution is a good resolution. im. DINN: Are you for local preference on the offshore? MR. TUL K: Open up your mind and realize that Newfoundlanders once given the educational opportunity do not need you or anybody else to protect them. MR. DU~N: They have got the education. MR.

TULK: They can be as competitive as anybody else in this world. Do not put Newfoundlanders down i~ the way that you are trying to. Do not try to button down their minds; Give them the education and they will compete with-anybody, they MR. DINN: MR. TULK: do not need you. There· are ··twice ·as many with the "MED course than we had before. They do not need you. You give them the competitive skills and they do not need what the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) is trying 4328

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2029 JV - 2 MR. TULK: to perpetrate in this Province. They can compete anywhere in Canada and to say otherwise is stupidity. MR. DINN: MR. NEARY: ---.· MR. TULK: You are a mugwump. Mr. Speaker, could we have silence? To say anything else is stupidity and the Minister is well able to handle stupidity - MR. SPEAKER (McNICHOLAS): Order, please! MR. TULK: otherwise he would know that in Port au Port there are enough French speaking people to occupy · a certain drill rig in this Province. He does"not even know it. MR. DINN: They only \vant 29. nn it cmd there. should be severity or eighty on it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. DINN: You know nothing and you do not want to. MR. NEARY: Ten thous.and he said last night on TV, only two speak French. MR. TULK: Yes, only two speak French. What an idiotic statement. MR. DINN: Only two were hired. MR. TULK: Oh, you can pick those out but you cannot pick out the number that can speak French. You are about as competent as most of your colleagues. ' MR. DINN: They would not hire any more. MR. YOUNG: Any man who does not know about .... _ .. - - ... .. the unemployed in his district is better off dead. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. TULK: Mr.

Speaker, what does ':this report put out by the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council of Canada say about the importance of the offshore?That is what this resolution is about. That is why the member for 4329

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2029 JV -3 MR. TULK: Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warren) has brought in a resolution which says that this House - MR. DAWE: He did not bring in a resolution, it is an amendment, boy. MR. TULK: -not the government -an amended resolution. It is not partisan politics as was trying to be played by the member for Carbonear (Mr. Peach). 4330

May 11, 1983 Tape No, 2030 MJ '"' 1 MR. TULK: it is a resolution which ~ays that it is so important to Newfoundland that this whole House should go on record as supporting it.But what does the APEC report say? It points out, Mr. Speaker, quite clearly that unless we sign an offshore agreement in this Prov;ince we are fast going down the tubes. Now, Hr. Speaker, we are going down the tubes because of the confrontationa,list attitude of this government, make no mistake about that, Mr.

Speaker, it may be too late for us already, we may see a situation in this Province where Hibernia will not be feasible to be developed, The Minister of Mines and Energy, the Minister without portfolio responsible for the offshore (Mr. Marshall), longer than eight words, knows that, He knows that. He knows that the price of oil in the OPEC countries could drop to the extent that Hibernia would be no longer feasible and yet he does not even have a development plan in place, We are falling behind Nova Scotia, APEC points that out.

And I suppose they are anti-Newfoundland, they are anti-Canadian, they are anti-Peckford, they are anti­ everything if they happen to point that out. That is the truth. HR. DINN: What are you for? MR. TULK: I am for what this resolution says, a negotiated settlement to the offshore,and the quicker the telephone operator from Pleasantville gets that through his head the quicker this Province will be off to a good start. We need a negotiated settlement.

The only thing that he can do, the only thing that he has ever been proved capable of doing is plugging in a few telephone lines and he should stay at it.Otherwise,he is out of his league. MR. DINN: wnen the people throw you out you will never get a job. 4331

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2030 MJ - 2 MR. TULK: Oh, my, my, my! Oh, my, my! Go out and plug in a few lines. HR. BUTT: They would have you carrying water, my son. They would not make a water boy out of you. HR. TULK: No. Are you finished? HR. DINN: I am waiting for your position on the offshore. HR. TULK: Are you finished or are you now ready to go out and plug in a few lines? HR. DINN: Oh, I can do that too. MR. TULK: Go on. That is all you ever could do . ... ~1R. DINN: What can you do? MR. TULK: You have the highest rate of unemployment in this Province and you are over there yapping off. MR.

DHTN: And you are against it. MR. TULK: You are over there yapping off like a child. MR. NEARY: Everyone is against something except you. MR. TULK: Yes,and you are for absolutely nothing. - MR. NEARY: All he can say is, 'You are against somet ~ MR. TULK: Yes, against it. MR. DINN: You have never stated a position in life, now you have a chance to state-cr· position for ··-·-~- employing Newfoundlanders, what is your position? MR. TULK: I just stated the.p6sition, 'Let us have a negotiated settlement on the offshore so that we can put Newfoundlanders to work .• 1 Alright? Not like your government. MR.

SPEAKER (McNichol~~~ Order, please! 4332

~1ay ll, 1983 Tape No. 2030 MJ - 3 MR. TULK: Now, Mr. Spea~er, I am not going to be interrupted by the rabbit tracks on the other side of the House, or the telephone operators. MR. DINN: State a position for a change , Stand up. MR. TULK: Can you flick him out, Mr . Speaker, or do something with him. Because all he is any good for is to interru pt. Can we have quie .t? Mr . Speaker, this resolution, as I was saying, does not say that this is the position of the Liberal Party versus the PC Party, it does not say that it is the Province versus the federal government. What this resolution says,and let it be quite clear, is that all fifty-two members of the House tell both the 4333

May 11, 1983 Tape 2031 PK - 1 MR. TULK: provincial gove~nment,of which many of the people on the other side are not part of, the government, tell thiS government and tell the federal government that indeed we must get back to the bargaining table, and that we must negotiate a settlement on the offshore. Mr. Speaker, there is no political rhetoric, no partisan politics in that at all. It is an excellent amendment, unlike the original resolution which is completely partisan and, I might say, wrong in some of its assumptions. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate my friend for Torngat Mountains (Mr.

Warren) again, because he did all of this in spite of the fact that contrary to what the Minister o~ rinance (Dr. Collins) said we knowwho was sitting in the hotel in Montreal. We know who brolte.' off the negotiations. We know what happened. We know who is responsible for putting Newfoundland's offshore resources in the courts. We know what happened there. We know it is perhaps now going to lose the greatest chance that ever Newfoundland had. We know the confrontation attitude of ' -----o I the government. We know that, Mr.

Speaker, and even some of the members on the other side, including the me~jer for Mount Scio (Mr. Barryl and·other members on that side if . . --- rumours are correct, are saying the same thing. We know that this government have to have a fight. It had to have a fight with teachers -it does not matter wllether its teachers, Micmac Indians, nurses, Nova Scotians, Quebecers, or the federal government or even,I suspect,among themselves- ---. - - MR. STAGG: The Liberals. MR. TULK: -the Premier of this Province has to have a fight, And,as I said,we know about that famous hotel seat.

The mini.ster, I believe, the Minister without Portfolio (Mr. Marshall) responsible for the offshore 4334

May 11, 1983 Tape 2031 PK - 2 MR. TULK: would certainly_have had an agreement - I believe he would have, he and Jean were getting along just great when all at once Martin pulls the plug. We know about that childish day of mourning that went on over there last year. We know all about that. And we know one other thing, and that is that the Premier of this Province has to try and win a federal election on an. offshore issue. Politics to him is more important than Newfoundland. We know that, Mr. Speaker. We know all of that. But my friend ~or Torngat Mountains (Mr.

Warren) said, No, we will accept all of that and instead of playing partisan politics we on this side of the House will say New~oundland first. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate him because it is an excellent amendment, and I am sure there is no way that anybody who has a conscience and is concerned about Newfoundland can vote against it, and I challenge every member on the other side to do the same. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Transportation. MR. DAWE: 4335 Thank you. The hon. Minister for Mr. Speaker, unfortunately

May 11, 1983 Tape 2032 EC - l MR. DAWE: I was.not able to be in the House ••hen the original motion was introduced; however, I have had an opportunity to look at the resolution and I fully agree with the original resolution put forward by the han. the member for Carbonear (Mr. Peach). Right at the beginning, I would like to go on record as saying that I think that the amendment to the original resolution as put forward by the member for Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warren) is completely irrelevant.

I think we have already discussed that particular is ·sue or the essential contents of the amendrnent,and that particular motion was passed on a previous Private Members' Day, so it seems to me to be a completely redundant amendment and one which, because it has already been voted on originally, I will certainly be voting against, and voting for the original resolution. I have sat in this House since 1979, I think,through successive Leaders of the Opposition, through successive albeit dwindling ~embers of the Opposition.

I have listened essentially to the same kind of mouthwash regurgitated over and over and over again, the kind of sent~ment that led this Province into the kind of economic chaos that we are continually paying for at the present time, the kind of mismanagement of resources instead of, as this administration proposes, management of resources.

It has caused this Province, through an attitude of going to the federal government with your tin ~up and your pencils, carrying along an organ grinder and a couple of monkeys with you and begging for the few crumbs that Otta~a condescended to place . upon · our plates from time to time. l remember, Mr. Speaker, in 1949 I was not a particularly old individual at the time, but ;I; ca,n pernember Very well kneel-ing down at a cha,ir in OU;J< 4336

May 11, 1983 Tape 2032 EC - 2 ~·· DA.WE: kitchen with my mother helping me to spell the word 'Canada' and very briefly trying to explain to me the importance and the benefits that being not only a Newfoundlander but a Canac;iian would mean to me and would pe:rhaps mean to my children. As I grew old~r, Mr. Speaker, ~der the impact of what she was . trying to say at that time, I began to realize that in fact it was very important and it was beneficial to be a Canadian 4337

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2033 NM- 1 MR. DAWE: and I sincerely consider that to be a fact today. However, there are a number of things that have changed, not with the c.oncept of what it means to be a Canadian .-nothing wrong with the concept of trying to lessen the gap between the have and the have not provinces, of developing a sense of equality .1ot only equality of the soul but also equality economically and independently across this country.- What has changed, Mr. Speaker, is an attitude that is being put forward by a particular administration in Central Canada, headed up by the hon.

Peter Waterhole and other individuals in the Federal Cabinet who have determined that they are the ones who have the answers to Canadian performance, they are the ones who have the answer to what Canada should mean, they are the ones who in all their documentation in dealing with line departments now refer to Canada by regions and ignore the word 'province~· In their documentation as they deal with the federal/provincial mineral strategy .. .i:t does not say federal/provincial mineral strategy, it says regional mineral strategy.

And this also transcends into other departments as well, where they continually "'~-- ignore the fact that the provinces are a legislative authority in this country and they are the ones who can determine, "whether a particular region of Canada is to receive economic benefits." Well, Mr. Speaker, there is no question,as the original resolution points out, that N~wfoundland brought the offshore, the Continental Shelf, into Confederation·. There is no one can doubt that.

There is no court of law, there is no constitutional expe.t:t in Canada which will refute the fact that had Newfoundland not joined Confederation and had,perhaps, gone its own route , or 1 as the former, former Leader of the Opposition advocated at the time, in 1948,that we join with the United States in an economic union 4338

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2034 SD - 1 MR. DAWE: he flew over the c.ity of St. John's dragging a banner behind him advocating economic union wi.th. th.e United States. Perhaps if we had done that - no question, not perhaps at all - no question if we had taken either of those two other options then the offshore, the benefits from the offshore, the opportunity to derive economic income thatwould result in an opportunity for this Province to develop other resources.

Members in the Opposition just about each. time they :get on their feet, talk about the single­ issue· election of last April, the April before last. · Well, Mr. Speaker, the people of Newfoundland and Labrador knew that it was not a single issue. They realized, and the results bear this out, they realized that the electi,on was ·not a single issue. The issue of the offshore and the importance that a sensible and equitable agreement would mean to this Province would transl~te itself into other resource sectors, into an opportunity to improve our social programmes, our educational progranunes.

It would enable this· Province an opportunity to further develop _ ~ albeiti!,_. that we are making significant financial contributions to our fishing industry, but even more so it would allow us the economic freedom to be able to determine and promote some of the things in other resources that this Province sees as being beneficial. So it was· not a single issue, Mr.

Speaker, it was an issue that meant to·all other sectors of our economy, to all. other sectors of our social activity the chance for this Province to be what in 1949 my mother tried to explain -I· to me1 being able to craw~ up to the Canadian standard. Well, Mr. Speaker, almost thirty-four years later the per capita income in Newfoundland and Labrador is a whopping 3 per cent higher than it was in 1949. 4339 :.

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2034 SD - 2 MR. DAWE: Compared to other Canadians, compared to other Canadian provinces as individuals in this Province compared to other 4340

. May 11, 1983 Tape 2035 EC ,... 1 MR, DAWE: individuals and other provinces across this country, then we are only a marginal 3 per cent above what we were in 1949. And what were we in 1949, Mr. Speaker, were we at 90 per cent of the Canadian average? Indeed not, we were an abysmal .49 per cent on a per capita earned income basis with the rest of the country. AN HON. MEMBER: Right, MR. DAWE: In 1983, we are hovering in the magnificent area of about 52 per cent. It really does not speak well for what has happened to this Province in the Canadian nation.

The promise of our becoming equal to other Canadians in our social services, in our educational oppor- tunities, in our health care and in the ability to be able to infuse a lot of capital dollars into other resource areas if the Province saw the need, has not come about. Something has gone wrong. I think history - and for those members opposite who like to ignore the past and deal in some theoretical world and never come down to the crunch - the ~inister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) has asked repeatedly what is the position of the member for Fogo (Mr.

Tulk), and he continues to waffle, he continues to batter about, never getting to the is~ue, never tal~ing directly to the issue. MR. D:I:NN: Sitting on the fence. He i:> a, - mugwump • ...... MR, DAWE: Sitting on the fence. MR. DINN: His mug is on one side of the ·- .. ~ . .. fence - he is a ~ugwump. MR. DAWE: Is 'mugwump' unparliamentary? MR. STAGG: No, definitely not. MR. DINN: , His mug is on one side of th.e fence and his wump is on the other. 4341

Hay :u, 19!!-3 Tape 2035 EC ~ 2 MR. DAWE: ! would agree with the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) that the member for Fogo (Mr. Tulk) is a mugwump, because he is definitely incapable of making a decision. All members of the Opposition are incapable of making a decision. The only. member of the Opposition that I have seen -and this is on a particular issue, Mr. Speaker, -who was consistent with a point of view that he put forwazrd at one point and subsequently under pressure did not change at another point, was the hon. the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder). SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR;.

DAWE: I r,e£er back to the flag ~ssue. When other members of the hon, member's party dec~ded to do their waffling routine, unda~nted by pressure from within and without, the member for l?ort au Port stood his guns. I cannot say, Mr. Speaker, that he .h,as be.en consistent in doing that r and he .h,as fallen pack into th.e mire of waffling and ~nto a category of mugwumps. 4342

May 11, 1983 Tape 2036 PK - 1 MR. DAWE: The issue of the· offshore and whether we should sit down and negotiate an agreement I think goes without argument. Everyone in this Province, everyone on this side of the House, everyone I am sure,albeit they would hate to see it happen,wishes to have an agreement. In order for the development of our offshore resources to go ahead,it is agreed that there has to be a political settlement, a political agreement. The question, Mr. Speaker, is one of degree.

It is very simple to adopt the old Liberal philosophy of trotting off to the federal regime with your tin cup and pencils. MR. STAGG: That is right. MR. DAWE: 'and accepting whatever they will offer you, albeit that it may be less than cost that you paid for the pencil, to say nothing about the receptacle that you carried them in, but that is not what we want, Mr. Speaker. That is not what the people of Newfoundland and Labrador want. They indicated that very, very forcefully just a few short months ago.

There are those who would like to cause them to weaken, there are some who just those few months ago supported the administration, supported the Premier, supported the members on this side of the House, who said, yes, go to it, get an agreement that is fair to Newfoundlanders, that is fair to Canadians, an agreement that this Province can live by, no more Upper Churchills , no more agreements that see the resources of this Province given away. There are some, ·Mr. Speaker, who are weakening under pressure but, l4..r.

Speaker, the principle is still the same, the principle that this administration and the people on this side of·the House will be supporting and continue to support, and that principle, Mr. Speaker,is an agreement that is laid out in some detail, an agreement that was agreed upon by the federal minister and by the provincial minister, but then waffled on by the 4343 -

May 11, 1983 Tape 2036 PK - 2 MR . DAWE : federal government. They would not put in writing , Mr . Chretien or Mr . Christian, whatever you want to ca -ll him, would not put in writing -whatever was said to him , Mr . Speaker, whateYer influence , whatever outside pressure was 43 44

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2037 NM - 1 MR. DAWE: 'placed on Mr. Chretien to change his mind, we can only suspect. Perhaps Mr. Chretien was only acting throughout the whole process. Perhaps it was well · planned. Perhaps · he knew exactly what he was doing.

Perhaps he knew that if he spoke positively enough to the Newfoundland people, perhaps if he just made little hints to the pregs, perhaps the hype, the excitement, the anticipation of an agreement would be so great that the Newfoundland Government would bend, would be forced because of public pressure to enter into an agreement that it knew very well was not the kind of agreement that was best for this Province, that .we would be forced to sign an agreement that was contrary to the principles that we put forward, that were put forward to the people of this Province, that they voiced an opinion on.

And those are the principles, Mr. Speaker, that will allow this Province a substantial and meaningful and equal say in a management of a resource that is morally and legitimately and historically ours. Mr. · Spe.aker, I feel confident, the members on this side of the House are quite capable of speaking for themselves, but I feel quite confident in saying that I would be voicing the opinions of ' each and every member on this side of the House ·, and the very, very vas:t majority of Newfoundlanders if I said that we do not want to sign an agreement for agreement's: sake.

The nonsense that is being put forward that somehow Nova Scotia, because they signed a bad deal, is further ahead in offshore development and in exploration and in economic benefit than this Province, that the MR. NEARY: MR. DAWE: absolute tripe. · What nonsense! It is certainly nonsense. It is There is more . drilling going on off the Coast of Newfoundland now. than ever before. The stores: in Halifax, in Nova Scotia, through the malls and t~ough the 4345

May 11, 1983 Tape No . 2037 NM - 2 MR . DA{VE : various establishments that you go through are closi~g up daily, gbing ·hankrupt. The international economic community has decided, through various financial insitutions who do ratings, that the Nova Scotian Government have not managed their affairs 4 3lt 6

Hay 11, 1983 Tape No. 2038 MJ - l MR. DAWE: well and have downgraded them accordingly. On the other hand,it spoke very positively about the way that this Province through a good Tory administration has managed the affairs, and we have a consistent credit rating. And there is also, Mr. Speaker, in the economic community well-founded opinions that this Province hasa very bright and active future. Mr.

Speaker, as I said previously, people of this Province want an opportunity to be equ~l Canadians, they want an opportunity to enjoy the benefits of employment, the self-esteem, the appreciation of oneself, of being able to contribute to raising a family, contribute economically to the community, contribute economically and productively to the Province and subsequently to Canada. The,people in this Province want that opportunity. My fear, Mr.

Speaker, is that if we do not reach a l,egitimate, honest and fair- settlement on the offshore "'e will be forced into further generations that will have no more opportunity, unless they travel to other parts of Canada, unless they travel to parts of North P..merica to work, to raise a family, to be productive citizens in this Province. There is, Mr. Speaker, an insidious erosion of self respect when the only thing one has to look forward to is going from an LIP project, a NEED project for -six weeks or ten weeks or twenty weeks because, Mr.

Speaker, the weeks are important because · you have to have enough stamps so that your next stage of development through the year is to go on UIC and, hopefully; that you will not have to go to the third stage for very long, and that is social services. Are we subject to that? Mr, Speaker, the !1inister of Public t·!orks (Hr. Young) brought into this House a couple of booklets ·and he said 43'4 7 ~

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 203.8 MJ -2 MR. DAWE: there were a lot of them gathering dust, and I can see why. But he wondered if any hon. members ' . wished to. have some copies of them. One of them was a small booklet, and I am sorry I do not have a copy of it with me, but one page in that booklet talked about the benefits of Confederation and it sho~ed a mailbpx and it showed a se.nior citizen standing up with a smiling face looking at his cheque; it showed a little boy, a child, happy they received a cheque in the mail, the baby bonus,and it showed another individual,obviously someone who was receiving ore benefits.

Mr. Speaker, those things are valuable, th,ey are important and it is a responsibility of 4348

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2039 MR. DAWE: - society t ~ _make sure that those who are les -s fortunate have an opportunity to work, have an opportunity to be productive. SD - 1 'Mr. Speaker, if this Province does not take the opportunities that are before it now , if this Province does not forcefully, in a very dedicated way put forward the legitimate concerns of this Province/ of the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to develop the resources to provide an opportunity for Newfou -ndlanders and Labradorians to be productive Canadians, then, Mr .. Speaker, I would very sadly say that I am a Canadian. But, Mr.

Speaker, if we can convince through being dedicated, through being straightforward that we only want for this Province what is the birthright of Canadians - an equal opportunity, an opportunity to develop our resources for the benefit of Newfound],anders ­ and Labradorians and subsequently Canadians. Mr. Speaker, I will, be voting against the amendment and for the resolution. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER (A ylward).: MR. LUSH: Hear, hear. The hon. member for Terra Nova. Mr. Speaker 1 I just wa _nt to make a few brief comments on the speech that the ·member just made.

The member talked about all he hear~ from this side is regurgitation. Well, Mr, Speaker, the regurgitation, of course, is contingent -upon the intake and the intake has been so gaseous and poisonous that that is what one can exp~ct, of course, regurgitation. It is the intake that produces the regurgitation, and all we have gotten in this han. House for the past two years is gaseous and repetitive items and discuss -ions from the other side• So, Mr. Speaker, obviously one can 4349 -=

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2039 . SD-2 MR. LUSH: only expect regurgitation after that. It is they who decide the intake, it is they who decide what members over here have to respond to. And, Mr. Speaker, a clear indication of that is to look at the numbers of motions, private members' motions on the the Order Paper and as I count them I get sixteen private members' resolutions, sixteen -seven of them by members on this side and nine by members from the government side -nine and seven make sixteen. HR.TULK: You mean you have it figured out, you did not know how to count to 389 last week. MR.

LUSH: The significant point, Mr. Speaker-the Minister of Education (Ms. Verge) does not know how to count to forty-seven. Eighteen vocational instructors laid off last year and twenty-nine this year that makes forty-seven, the minister says it is thirty­ five. Eighteen and twenty-nine make forty-seven. MR. TOBIN: MR. LUSH: MR. TULK: MR. LUSH: forty-seven. MR. TULK: - MR. LUSH: MR. TULK: MR. LUSH: (.Inaudible) hired out? That is right. Eighteen and twenty-nine are what? Eighteen and twenty-nine are In hers? Thirty-five. They call that Tory arithmetic. Now, Mr. Speaker~ out of tQe sixteen resolutions, nine are 4350

'~ May 11,1983 Tape No. 2040 ah-1 MR.LUSH: submitted by government members-and out of that nine, Mr. Speaker, it is interesting to note the content, to notice which agency or which level of governmen~ all of these are directed .·towards, the nine. MR.TULK: Let me guess. MR.LUSH: How many of these do we think are directly directed against the federal government - out of the nine? MR.TULK: Eight. MR. LUSH: The member is right on. It is eight. As a matter of fact,the ninth is aimed indirectly at the federal government but out of the nine eight are aim~d directly at the federal government.

And,as I say, the ninth is aimed rather indirectly because it is the member for Bay of Islands (Mr. Woodrow) and he is talking about the park there, of course, which is a federal projec~so, ,I guess,although he does not mention the federal government,he is encouraging more spending there on that park,to enhance that park and, of cour .se, he does not say it has to be federal money. May be he does not know that the money for that park has to come from the federal government. But anyway eight out of nine are aimed directly at the federal government and , Mr.

Speaker , that should illustrate the complete motivation of this government.· In an attempt to get the heat off themselves, · in an attempt to try and take away public attention from their own lack of performance , from their own failure,they get all of these private member's resolutions, at least on Wednesdays,and try to get the heat off, and hopefully that will fall over into some other days of the week, Mr.Speaker, to get the public 4351 ;

May 11,1983 Tape No. 2040 ah-2 MR.LUSH: attention away from their lack of performance. No doubt that is the game. But, Mr. Speaker, this amendment puts this resolution in its proper perspective. It does not ask that the provincial government be responsible for getting negotiations going, it does not ask that the federal government alone be responsible for getting negotiations going,but it asks for both , Mr.Speaker, and that puts it in its proper perspective. Nothing partisan about this, Mr. Speaker, nothing small about this, nothing parochial about this, nothing narrow about this, Mr.

Speaker, but a statesman­ like resolution, a resolution that recognizes how we operate in Canada, the federal level of government and the provincial level of government. That is where it is, Mr. Speaker, and anybody who does not recognize this, anybody who fails· to come to grips with this is just simply playing parti9an politics with this resolution. That is all they are doing, Mr. Speaker, and the people of Newfoundland recognize it for what it is. And, Mr. Speaker, that is the truth and the truth hurts of course. ~o, Mr.

Speaker, talk about regurgitation, the minister should be the last to talk about regurgitation. Now, Mr. Speaker, we have talked about the negot~ations here, why they have not succeeded. Mr. Speaker, it is strange but just about everything this government have put their han~s to has failed, blown up in their faces. Just about everything they have attempted to do ,Mr. Speaker, has ended up in utter failure and that is what has happened to the negotiations on the offshore. I will come back to that a little later. I have dealt with the regurgitation issue. MR.TULK: Can they think of any successes they have had? 4352

May 11,1983 Tape No. 2040 ah-3 MR.LUSH: None at all. If !_could think of any ~-well,this is a 9lear indication of how ' successful they have been. Just about every member on the other side when he gets up to speak,he revels in the past. 4353 =

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2041 NM - 1 MR. LUSH: ~. Speaker, if your present record was so bad, if anybody's present record was so bad, they would have to do that, to revel in the past. That is the only thing they can do,is to talk about the past. MR. TULK: How far back do they · go? MR. LUSH: Well,they take selected periods, selected periods of the past. They leave out the period of the former premier. They do not include that in their past. That is left out. But they go back to selected perio~s, either to condemn or to praise. But the present and the future is left out and well they mi.ght.

Because the future of this government is a thing of the past. MR. TULK: talk about that? MR. LUSll: What about the recent past? Do they But anyway, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member talked about people on this side again incapable of making a decision and of waffling. Well, Mr. Speaker, :there is one thing that can be said about this side, that we have been absolutely consistent on all of the major issues of this Province, On the offshore, we have been absolutely consistent. We have not waivered,not one iota. We have been consistent on the local preference policy. Absolutely consistent.

We have been consistent with every issue related to the offshore. We have said it has got to be a negotiated settlement. We said that from day one. We say it today. MR. TULK: What were they saying a couple of years ago? Complete ownership, C:Ontrol, otherwise give :me nothing. MR. LUSH: Complete ownership, that is the way it was. And then they ca:me up with some sort of a MR. TULK: In August 1981 they stole ours:. I said that, MR. LUSH:: where they made the switch They also then said that it could be 4 3 51+

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2Q.41 NM- 2 MR. LUSH: ·settled by the courts of the land, and then it could be settled by legislation. They listed three or four options but the one that they believed in was the negotiated settlement sometime thereafter. They waffled from the offshore, or the ownership,and then they came back to the negotiated settlement. Now goodness knows where they are. Goodness knows where they are now, Mr. Speaker. And the bottom line is this, Mr. Speaker, this is one thing that you cannot accuse this side of and that is being_ indecisive. We are very, very decisive.

We have known where we stood on the offshore from day one, we know where we stand with the local preference policy, we know where we stand. MR. TULK: The .member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) _ changed that because he knew what had to happen. He knew there ~d to be negotiations. MR. LUSH: That"is right. Now, Mr. Speaker, what has happened on.the offshore,of course,is that hon. gentlemen . opposite have tried to turn it into a political football. That is what has happened.

They tried to turn it into a political football to get all the political advantage, to get all of the Brownie points that they could possibly get out of it and then they got the~selves backed into a corner knowing that the people were fed up with it, they were saturated with . it, and han. gentlemen did not know which way to turn. They got themselves backed in a corner. And you talk about indecisive, Mr. Speaker, they are so indecisive now, ;·.th .ey have got themselves backed into such a position they are afraid to make a decision. They are afraid to make a decision. Now, Mr.

Speaker, one thing can be said about past Liberal Governments, -they were never afraid to make. a decision. Some of them might have been bad but, Mr. Speaker, they made decisions. They were not indecisive4 4355 ::.

May 11, 1983 Tape. No. 2041 Nlot-3 I1R.BAI.RD: ~ow they are wishi~g their cake dou~h. MR. LUSH: The hon. gentleman opposite reminds me of a situation where a young student, several hundred years ago, asked Plato \othether he should marry, and Plate told him - MR.BAIRD: Plato or Pluto? MR. LUSH : -whether he married or not he t.;ould regret it. So, Mr. Speaker, that is the position I think that hon. gentlemen are in no\o~ with 4356.

May 11, 1983 Tape 2042 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: the offshore. Whic~ever way they go now they will regret it. They have themselves backed into a corner. They tried to make such a political football out of it, now they do not know which way to turn. They gave up themselves and they gave it to the courts. Now they are waiting on that. And while that is going on, Mr. Speaker, they are just now posturing and every little issue they can 9!ab on to like the local preference policy - :1-lR. BAIRD: MR. LUSH: Do you agree with it' or do you not? Do I agree with it? Does the hon. gentleman want me to say what I have said about it?

I say· I stand on the local preference policy where I stood the first time ever it was brought up. I disagree with it in its form as enunciated by this government. I disagree with it. MR. NEARY: A 1 t-a-boy! MR. LUSH: And I am not getting on anybody's bandwagon. The Premier - talking about getting on his bandwagon - getting on his bandwagon when everybody else is getting off? No way! SOME HON. ·MEMBERS: Hear, h,ear! MR. LUSH: He is not go;i.ng to catch th.e member for Terra Nova doing that! I did not get on the bandwagon when everybody else was getting on.~ MR. TULK: That is right. MR.

LUSH: - and for sure l am not going to get on it now when everyone else is getting off. Mr. Speaker, everybody in th,e Terra Nova district knows where I stand on ~he local prefer­ ence policy. All the people down in my district working in Fort McMurray and working in other places throughout Canada know what th,is local preference policy did to the~. They know what ill-feelings it created, what bitterness it 4357

May U, 1983 Tape 2042 EC ~ 2 -f~. LUS;H: created, what conflict ' it created, when they were working on the mainland. My policy always, Mr. Speaker, wa,s every province has a local p~eference policy, but we did not go around nailing it on the doors of all Canadians, we did not go around posting it up and saying to other Canadians, 'You are not welcome down here.' We did not try to get it enshrined in the constitution. lt is an understanding, Mr.

Speaker, by all provinces, naturaily, that your own peopie get a cho.i,ce but,, Mr, Speaker, the idea of this was an .ins·.idious political thing, trying to give Newfoundlanders the impression that they would get a job on the offshore because they were Newfoundlanders. What we should have been doing, Mr. Speaker' · was training our people MR. TULK: Exactly. MR. LUSH: - training them so that they would qualify by right. And, as the hon. the member for Fogo (Mr.

Tulk) said, if our Newfoundlanders were trained, they wou:l,d, n.a.ve gotten the jobs becaupe there are no bet,te;r workers in the world, But let us not go about bluffing them and hoodwinking them into thinking this local preference policy is going to give them jobs. The thing again was a total failure, a total failure from the beginning of the set~up when the l!linister drew · up th.is i;i:.st, ,And we found out, today how r;i,d;i:.culous that list wa,s, how· inadequate it was, when there was not even a p:t'ovis;ion there to state what languages you speak. Imagine!

You cannot fill in an application anywhe~e today unless you have a 1\N EON, }!EMBER: Certainly there was, it say.s, Other. MR, LUSH; Yes, 1 other I 1 put in yoQl;' j?Oi:i, tical affiliation there too, What .shortsightedness:- here in this Province where we have . people speaking different lan9'-'asres •. Our neighbours in Labl;'ador, Inuit people, .i,s there any provision 4358

May 11, 1983 Tape 2042 EC .,.. 3 MR., LUSH: for them? I suppose_ they could not even· fill out an application in English. The member for Eagle River (Mr. Hiscock) might be able to deal with that. 4359 ~

May 11, 1983 Tape 2043 l'K - 1 MR. LUSH: I expect there are people in Labrador who could not fill out an application in English, could not even read it, because they do not understand the English language. We have every reason to have that kind of provision there, to ask which language our people speak. But that was left out, Mr. Speaker, and that shows a lack of sense. That is where that local preference policy failed from the beginning: You had to come here to St.

John's to get your name on the list, you had to come here to get interviewed, so everything surrounding this local preference policy was just nonsense. It was doomed to failure from the beginning because, Mr. Speaker, the basic assumption undergirthing the policy was that you get a job because you are a Newfoundlander, and that is wrong. We get a job because we are skilled and trained Newfoundlanders. That is what this government should have been attending to, but wha·t are they now doing when we should be training for the great oil boom?

They are laying off forty-seven voc~tional instructors, that is what they have done. That is what they have done in the past twelve months, laid off forty-seven. As a matter of fact, fifty is a more accurate figure, because there are three positions through attrition that are not being filled, so we have lost fifty positions. So,_Mr. Speaker, this is the preparation for the oil boom. What is it going to be, Mr. Speaker, is one big bang, one big bang for the unemployed of this Province. It is going to blow up in the government's face.

One big explosion, one big bang for the unemployed people of this Province, people who are not given the opportunity to train . 4360

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2043 l?K - 2 MR. LUSH.: Local preference policy, this list that you must come. to St. John's to ge.t your na:me on, where they do not even ask the proper question, they do not even try to find out what your language is. MR. DINN: You do not have to come to St. John's. MR. LUSH.: Well, if you changed it, you changed it only recently. You must come to St. John's to get interviewed. MR. DINN: All you need is a 32 cent :;tamp to send it in. ~llR. LUSH: You know what Newfoundlanders think of that, sending in your name.

If there is one group of people know the frustration of sending your somewhere it is Newfoundlanders. And they know right where it goes, Mr. Speaker, when you send in your name. But, Mr. S·peaker, instead of doing it through the regional Manpower Offices, which is what we should be doing, advertising those jobs MR. DINN: Applications are in every one of those Manpower offices. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. LUSH: When Pedrel - is it Pedrel? MR. DINN: P"-e-t-r-e-1. MR.

LUSH: When Petrel advertised in Western Newfoundland, did they advertise they were look£ng for people who could speak French or did you just put a general advertisement in? MR. DINN: They did not advertise. MR. LUSH: They did not. MR. DINN: That is the problem. Harvey's Offshore, who are operating the supply vessels to the Petrel, did go out there and advertise-for French speaking people who := had qualification to work in the bffshore. 4361

.Ma,y 11, 1983 Ta,pe No. 2044 SD - 1 MR. LUSH: Anywai, .Mr. Speaker,_ the local preference policy was 'ill-co~ceived because it was not built on the right foundation. It was not given the right structure from the beginning. It was not built on the right foundation, namely to train our people, and then to make the jobs available right throughout 'this Province so people in St. ~thony could go to their .M~power Centre there, people in Grand Falls could go to the Manpower Centre there, people in the Terra Nova district could go to G~de'I;' er Clarenville and they · cannot do that.

They can go to their ~a,npower Centres to get their name on this rather inadequate list that the minister has, this list of 11,000 names. I do not know what this list intends to find out about our workers, I do not know, .. Mil,. D'.C-NN: ~-r-- Wha,tever information they w~t to put on it. lllR. LUSH: Kr. Speaker, then you have to come to St. John's to get your na,me on the list, you have to come to St. John's to get interviewed, and now you have to come to St. John's to get this KED course, you have to come to St. John 1 s to get on that .• Now, Mr. Speaker, there is something strange a,bout th.is MED course.

There is something strange about tnat. The minister said in the Rou:se the othe!l;' day that th.e gorvernment have 22 per cent of the say on who gets accepted into this MED course, federal Manpower fills 33 per cent, a.nd ·45 per cent for the companies, And r have a, YQung man who has been looking for a job, 0;17 tryi_ng to get into the ~D sc~oo;t. fo;r months and he is getting the runa,J!;'ound. He goes to the companies and they say they cannot do anything.

And this young man ia t;J:;'a;i,ned, a skilled worke:J:;", worked in the Beaufort Sea,, but he ca,nnot get i~ because the company will not reco~enq hill\. 4362

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2044 IB - 2 MR. DINN: Cannot Canada Manpower get him in? MR. LUSH: He does not qualify under Manpower. He does not qualify. So anyway he gets the runaround, Mr. Speaker. That is it, he gets the runaround. So, Mr. Speaker, when it comes to preference policy, there is nobody on this side but believes that we should have every Newfoundlander out there we can get there, but let us not give it lip service. Let us set the structure up properly. Let us not try to hoodwink and be hypocritical. Let us set the structure up there properly. Let us not give lip service to all of this nonsense.

Let us set the training programmes up in our schools. Let us put the MED programmes right .through- out this Province. Let us disperse ~d expand the hiring practices through our Manpower Centres, force the companies to go out to Gander and to Goose Bay and all parts of this Island to do their interviewing. That is what the minister should be doing, not allow a company to set up its inter- views here in St.

John's, force them to go ·out around this Province so that the people - talk about equality! - so that the people of this Province will get equality, will get a fair crack at those jobs. ,, ::!& DINN :, That is the second step. The fi~st th~ng you h~ve to ~o ~s get them out of hiring French - F:t~i¥\Ce, German - Gern'lany. Y0u have to get them here first pefore you can get them out around the P~ovince. That is the p!l;'oblen'l with the Petrel: One hundred and seventy-two crew members and they want to hire twenty-nine, that is it. MR. LUSH: Twenty-nine what? .. MR. DINN: Canadians, if thay speak French.

We think that is not proper, 'not right. MR. LUSH;, I agree with the minister as well. I do not think it is proper. But the 4353 ~

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2045 MJ - 1 MR. LUSH: point of the matter is I still believe that ~f tne recruitment programme were done properly that we can find these French speaking people. MR. DINN: nine maximum thev said. MR. LUSH: MR. DINN: They will not hire them. Twenty- Why will they not hii;"e them? Because they do not w~nt them, they say. Twenty-nine maximum. Look, I can show you a letter they sent me. 1 ~·!e want twenty-nine and no more, the rest will be French from Franee. 1 MR. LUSH: But, Mr. speaker, that agaiA shows the failure of this government. There is something wrong.

It shows the failure of this government, Mr. speaker. If I were tne Minister of Labour ~nd Manpower (Mr. Dinn) I tell you there would be more than twenty-nine New;foundla.nders there. They do not know how to negotiate, they do not know how to de~l with people, Mr. Speaker, because they have tried to make a political issue out of things. They were not intellectually honest about wh .~t they were doing when :they set up this local preference policy, they were not intellectually honest when they started negotiating and that is the bottom line, Mr. Speaker.

This government have failed in everything they have put tneir hands to. They have been an abysm~l failure but, Mr. Speaker, th _e amendment to this motion puts this whole issue about offshore negotiations in its proper perspective. It lays no blame on the provincial government, it lays no blame on the federal government, it blames them both equally. And we say, 'Get to work. We got to have a negotiated settl,ement, 1 the settlement is out there, we-must find it,but we cannot find it, Mr. Speaker, as long a·s we are away from the bargaining table,. The settlement is out there and sarebocly 436ft

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2045 MJ - 2 MR. LUSH: must find it_ I cannot find it, no member on this side can find it, if we could we would have had it found. The responsibility lies with the government, Mr. Speaker, and this motion puts the thing in its total perspective 1 that both governments get down and negotiate so we can get the economy of this Province moving, so that we can create jobs for our people, Mr. Speaker, and so that we can put the business community at ease, so we can create some confidence in the economy of this Province. That is what we got to do, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : MR.

DINN: Order, please! Order, pleaser Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Minister of Labour MR . SPEAKER: and Manpower. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I got up to speak in this debate because the hon. member opposite is speaking without accurate knowledge of what the facts are with respect to the hiring policy offshore, specifically the Petrel. Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know this, that normally speaking on a drill rig,where there are in the case of the Petrel 17 2 positions , we would like to get somewhere around 60 per cent of those positions, especially since we got people qualified to do these jobs.

About 60 per cent, that is the norm. Every other company that comes into Newfoundland waters, negotiates, sits down, they have a .look at our registry and they say, 'Well, we do not want to upset the rig by replacing the tool pusher, we would not like to replace captains or officers,but we would like to hire about 60 per cent of Newfoundlanders because we know that they have the qualifications todo the jobs for which we want to hire .them. And not only that it is cheaper to have Newfoundlanders on the rigs,because if they come in here with French people from France,every twenty- 4365 ~

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2045 MJ -3 MR. DINN: oqe days they have to ship them into Torbay, out to Gander, back to Paris and af·ter twenty­ one days ship them back here·. So it it cheaper, number one, and our people can do the job and are as qualified if not more qualified than the people they have now. Mr. Speaker, it was 1979 that the first rig operating in Newfoundland waters came under Newfoundland regulations. And I tell hon. members this litt.le tidbit of information, that for sixteen years before 1979 -now that through a great part of 4366

May ll, 1983 Ta pe No. 2046 NM - 1 MR. DINN: "the former, former administrationJ which was a Liberal Government, and it went through part of a Progressive Conservative Government - but in 1979 we said, "Look, they have been drilling out here for sixteen years, we should have some people working on those rigs. After all, they are exploring for, attempting to find our resource and then will want to develop our resource and if we do not get in on the ground floor we will never get a job offshore. They will explore. ·~hey will get into development.

They will whip it out of the ground, take off from here and we will have nothing, would not even know whether it was there or gone or not." So, Mr. Speaker, as a government we decided that we have to do something about that, and we did: We brought in some offshore regulations. They are not stringent regulations. There is nobod y takes the president of an oil company or a drilling company in this country and bea~s him over the head with a stick. We just simply say to them, "Here is a registry.

In that registry are names of people, what their qualifications are, where they have worked before in the offshore." I remember on the Discoverer Seven Seas, which was the first drillship that came under our regulations, was completely crewed by people from the Phillipines. And we have nothing against people from the Phillipines but ~-~e said, "Okay, we have local preference, we have an affirmative action programme for the offshore," we said to the company.

"Now you ·have to operate under our regulations, have a look at our registry, have a look at our people, come in and have a "chat with them·, and take them out." We did not insist that they take 100 people or 200 people for that particu1ar drill rig. By the way, the Discoverer Seven Seas drilled the deepest well in the world at the time, over 5,246 feet into the ground. That is after they got down through the 300 or 500-odd feet of water. 4367 !

May 11, 1983 Tape No. 2046 NM - 2 MR. DINN: I recall now, I had a little picture of the Discoverer Seven Seas and it seems to me, it is in my memory, it was written on the back. But anyway that is about a mile deep and I do not know what the deepest one is now, but it was the deepest one at the time. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we showed them our registry and, lo and behold, without any pressure to hire Newfoundlanders, but because they wanted to comply with our regulations, they replaced 98 of the Fillipinos with 122 Newfoundlanders. And the reason there were more Newfoundlanders was because they went at that time from a one month schedule, or a twenty-eight day schedule, to .a twenty-one day

schedule and they hired 122 Newfoundlanders, of whom about 10 of them were trainees, people w·ho had never worked on rigs before, but they were willing to take them out because they determined that they would be in Newfoundland waters for some time and they wanted to see how a person who had never operated on a rig before would react to working for the first time on a rig. So, Mr. Speaker, on that first rig we had 122.

Now we have Canterra Energy Limited, the company that will operate the Petrel, who will have the capability on that rig of employing 172 people and we say to them, "Here is our registry," as we do with every company. And I say to han. members we have negotiated the Pacnorse. As a matter of fact, the Pacnorse, Peller·in and the Neddrill 2, three rigs operated off the Labrador Coast last year, each of the rigs took 30 Newfoundlanders on a permanent basis, so that 90 4368

May 11, 1983 Tape 2047 EC - 1 MR. DINN: Newfoundl~nders went to other ports, other offshore areas and will come back this year. And when they come in here this year we will have from sixty to seventy to eighty people working on each of those rigs, the thirty permanent plus those they will hire voluntarily almost~ I mean, they do not even question .what happens with respect to hiring Newfoundlanders because they are qualified. And,I tell the hon. the member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush),we have a lot of qualified Newfoundlanders who are capable of working in the offshore.

Very rarely is there a case where a company will come in and say, 'We are not going to hire Newfoundlanders,' or 'We have this condition' or 'that condition' or try to impede progress. In the case of the Petrel, which last year operated in the Davis Strait, . it happens to have two Newfoundlanders working on it. They were hired through Montreal and got a job in the Davis Strait. We did not push that because we considered it to be outside our waters. This year they are operating in the Labrador Sea and we say to them, 'Well, Canterra, you know, every company has been in now.

We would like to have a chat with you about our local preference policy, our affirmative action policy, and here is our registry,' as we did with all other companies. And, as I said to the hon. member, the Neddrill, the West Venture, the SEDCO ·706, the Zap :a:ta · Ugland have never been a problem. All the supply vessels are manned by Newfoundlanders and crewed by Newfoundlanders. But this one company, for some reason, said to us, 'No, this is a French rig.

Now, we will hire a few Newfoundlanders who can speak French.' And we said, 'Well, we have Newfoundlanders who are qualified, in t.h.e offshore and, as a matter of fact., if you want, we will 4369 ~

May 11, 1983 Tape 2047 EC - 2 MR. DINN:. assist you in trying to fi