May 11,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 22

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, much has been said recently

about the decision by Cabinet to award a contract to Trans City Holdings for the

building of three health care centres in Burgeo, Port Saunders and St. Lawrence.

Because of a letter that I received from the hon. Member for St. John's Centre,

in which he asked for answers that I could not readily provide at the time I

asked the Government House Leader and the Assistant Clerk of Cabinet, to address

each of the questions raised so that I could report back to the hon. member, who

was a member of Cabinet at the time the decision was taken to award the contract

to Trans City.

The attention this matter has received, and the practice of

the Opposition to repeat totally unfounded allegations, make it desirable that I

not only convey this information to the former minister who asked for it, but in

addition make it public, and I do so today.

The assessment and record of the Cabinet decision make

several things clear:

1. This build lease proposal approach did not become into

being for the health care centres, as popular comment would have you believe. It

was being implemented to speed up governmental capital works at the onset of the

recession in order to generate economic activity and to achieve more suitable

public buildings at lower cost, and was not in any manner focused on health care

centres. I am not even sure they were part of the first consideration.

2. The proposal call for the three health care centres was

ineptly handled by government in that confusion was created by failing to give

adequate direction at the time of calling for proposals and by using the word

"tender" in some instances and "proposal" in others.

3. The decision to award the contract to Trans City was made

solely on the basis of the best deal for the taxpayer in terms of both cost and

benefit and for no other reason.

4. All Cabinet ministers had all the information available at

the time of making the decision and nothing was withheld from anybody.

5. The additional appendix, that has been so much the topic

of conversation, appears to be an opinion drafted by a civil servant, that was

probably intended to be a suggested position for the committee but which the

members of the committee state categorically did not reflect their views, and

which in any event contained no information that was not already available to

and discussed in Cabinet.

6. In the end the people of this Province benefited by

getting the best durable quality facilities at the best overall cost.

Mr. Speaker, it will be clear to anyone who takes the time to

read the report that in taking the decision it did, government acted

appropriately and that all who were involved in making the decision had access

to all of the information available enabling them to make a decision that was in

the best interest of the people of this Province. That, Mr. Speaker, was and is

the main concern of any decision taken by this government.

If there is anything for which the government should

apologize it would be for the degree of ineptness with which the proposal call

aspect of the process was handled. That was recognized in October, 1991 and

direction was given to ensure avoiding such results in future proposal calls. I

am totally satisfied, Mr. Speaker, that it is only that aspect of the entire

matter about which I have any regrets whatsoever.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are many things for which this Premier should apologize

starting with breaking the law as has been found by the Supreme Court of

Newfoundland. The Premier should apologize for incurring an unnecessary cost to

the taxpayers of this Province, for absolutely no benefit for unemployed workers

or patients of many millions of dollars including the $3 million ordered by the

Supreme Court the government pay to the unsuccessful bidders and, Mr. Speaker,

what a farce. The Premier today presents as an investigative report a document

produced by the suspended Minister of Justice, who holds his office at the

pleasure of the Premier and a civil servant holding his position at the pleasure

of the Premier.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the Premier says he should simply apologize

for ineptly handling this affair. Well, I suggest he apologize for corruptly

handling this affair.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is not allowed to accuse another member of

corruption and I ask her to withdraw the remark.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I withdraw any language which contravenes the rules of

parliamentary debate.

Mr. Speaker, to continue: The Premier, essentially in this

document, trumped up by the suspended Minister of Justice, is accusing the

Member for St. John's Centre and other former Cabinet ministers -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has expired.

MS. VERGE: - of lying.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have questions for the Premier about his

preposterous conspiracy theory about the Cabinet paper signed by the Minister of

Finance dated October 31, 1991. I would like to begin by asking the Premier if

he got his idea for the conspiracy theory from the O.J. Simpson trial?

Yesterday, the Premier began to advance the theory that he and the Minister of

Finance were framed by some poor unknown civil servant, the way O.J. Simpson's

lawyers are claiming that poor O.J. was framed by the police. Mr. Speaker, the

Premier is trying to say that some civil servant fabricated the Cabinet paper,

that some civil servant tricked the Minister of Finance into signing it, that

some civil servant then imprinted the document with an official stamp purloined

from the Executive Council office and then, that this amazing civil servant

planted the incriminating document - planted it - in three places; in the

Cabinet files of the Premier himself, which the Premier disclosed for the first

time yesterday and then in the Cabinet files of Treasury Board and Works,

Services and Transportation. Now, I ask the Premier, how did this superhuman

unnamed civil servant possibly manage to get a judgement out of the Supreme

Court of Newfoundland ruling that the government broke the Public Tender Act?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I know it won't make any

difference to the Leader of the Opposition because she is going to say what she

thinks will further her position on it in any event but the simple fact is, not

only did I not put forward a conspiracy theory, I specifically denied it. I have

no basis whatsoever for suggesting any such thing and I said so yesterday.

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

Opposition.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to ask the Premier to admit that there is a

simple and logical explanation for the existence of that Cabinet paper, namely,

that the Minister of Finance wrote it or had a senior official write it under

his direction, that the Minister of Finance signed it, and that the Minister of

Finance was simply summarizing the advice and warnings of John Cummings and

other senior public servants and was simply giving the only sensible

recommendation, namely, that the contracts be re-tendered. Won't the Premier

admit that the paper's warnings came true and its conclusions were validated in

the Supreme Court decision? Won't the Premier confess that that paper, if

anything, understated the legal problems? The paper said proceeding to give the

projects to Trans City would violate the spirit of the Public Tender Act and

would run the risk of legal challenge when the court in fact ruled that the

Trans City deal violated the letter of the law? Won't the Premier admit to all

that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, of course not. It is all

preposterous wishful thinking on the part of the Leader of the Opposition. I

know that the Opposition has nothing to offer to the people of this Province by

way of substance so they have to -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: Once that becomes clear to the people of

the Province they have to try to make up for it, and this is the way the Leader

has chosen to do it. That comes as no surprise to me.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board has

told me that what was in that document was not his opinion; he never ever gave

any direction to write it; he never ever gave any direction to anybody to write

it. The other members of the Committee to whom I have spoken have indicated to

me they never saw it; it was not their opinion, it didn't reflect the view. And

I know from reading, myself, that document and the opinion of Mr. Cummings that

it is not a

summary of Mr. Cummings' opinion. It is directly the opposite of Mr.

Cummings' opinion. So, clearly, the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board could

not have given a direction to write it as a

summary of Mr. Cummings' opinion.

I can only ask the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board to

state for himself what his view of it was. I can't speak for it, but I can say

to you that he has told me these things, and I can tell this House and the

entire Province one thing, I have absolute and total confidence in every word

that hon. member has said to me. I've known him for a great many years and I've

never known him to be anything other than totally and completely honest, totally

and completely frank, and totally and completely dedicated. I accept without

question every word he said.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I ask the Premier:

Isn't the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board dedicated in a consistent

effort to cover up for you?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Treasury Board.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Starting, I guess,

back in 1992 when these questions were asked, again last Fall when the court

case was on, many questions asked, the former Leader of the Opposition also

asked the same questions, and the answers have always been the same.

Everybody understands what process we went through. It was a

logical process, different from some processes that had been used previously,

and we recognize that there were problems with the process. In the final

analysis, we got the best financial deal for this Province, and we also said

that if we were to take that route again, we would change the early stages of

the process to avoid the problems that we ran into in terms of analysis, and

that is a sensible process to take.

Mr. Speaker, that was always my attitude. My advice was

always that we should proceed with this process. The only consideration, aside

from the fact that we did a public call for proposals, and an analysis was done,

my greatest consideration at that point was that we get a deal that was the best

financial deal for the Province, and we did that and we have these three

hospitals.

I would like to remind members opposite that this great

concern for the Public Tender Act comes rather late to the Leader of the

Opposition, who sat in Cabinet, who authorized an expenditure of $24 million

without public tender, simply gave the contract to somebody, no advertising, no

nothing, and we end up with a hole in the ground and no jobs. Her concern comes

rather late.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for

the Premier.

How can the Premier say with a straight face and expect

anyone in this Province to believe him when he says that the Trans City deal was

the best for the people of this Province, when the Supreme Court has ruled that

in giving the contract to Trans City the government broke the law, and the court

has ordered the government to pay about $3 million of scarce taxpayers' money in

damages to the unsuccessful bidders?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the court has not ordered the

government to pay $3 million in damages. There is a claim for damages. The court

has not ordered the government to pay $3 million, in damages. The whole matter

is on appeal before the court, and I will let the court aspect of it rest there

until the appeal is completed.

Let me also say, Mr. Speaker, it is entirely financially

possible that even if we did have to pay $3 million or $13 million, it could

still be the best of the alternatives available, so the two have no relationship

whatsoever.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, more fairy stories

from the Premier - yesterday the story about the alien civil servant planting

the documents, today the preposterous claim of saving the taxpayers money.

I have a question for the Government House Leader, the

suspended Minister of Justice. It is a question about his personal role in

manipulating the electoral boundary revision process. Now the government

appointed a five-member independent electoral boundaries commission Chaired by

Mr. Justice John Mahoney of the Newfoundland Supreme Court, Court of Appeal. The

government spent some $400,000 of taxpayers' money for the Mahoney Commission to

do its work. After the government got the Mahoney Commission's report - this

document here - calling for forty-four districts, and suggesting the House of

Assembly make amendments to allow for a maximum total of forty-five districts,

did the Government House Leader, did the suspended Minister of Justice, ask Mr.

Justice Mahoney to come up with yet another proposal for a greater number of

districts, more than forty-five? And did Mr. Justice Mahoney refuse?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, let me first of all simply note

for the record that the alien - the hon. lady has obviously been watching either

too much O. J. Simpson or too much soap opera - but the alien who raised this

conspiracy theory was one of her fellow members over there during Question

Period yesterday; I just wanted to say that. The hon. lady obviously subscribes

to the school of political thought that says if you tell a big enough lie often

enough, people will believe it is the truth.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I think it applies to both sides of the court; I don't think

the hon. Government House Leader can accuse the hon. member of belonging to any

school that propagates lies, so I would ask the hon. member to withdraw it.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I did not accuse the hon.

member of telling a lie.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has to withdraw. I ask the

hon. member, if your intent was to infer that the hon. -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: What I heard, and I stand to be corrected,

was that you said the hon. member belonged to a school of -

MR. TOBIN: Of thought.

MR. SPEAKER: Of thought - thank you - the hon. Member for

Burin - Placentia West. But it struck me as being unparliamentary and I would

ask the hon. member to withdraw it.

MR. ROBERTS: If Your Honour judges it unparliamentary, of

course I withdraw it, no question at all.

Now, as I was saying, the question of the electoral

boundaries thing, the hon. lady, when she got through her pejorative and

accusatory comments, asked if I had asked Mr. Justice Mahoney to recommend an

increased House of Assembly? Her question was as convoluted as the logic, and as

twisted as the thinking that underlay that logic. I have not asked Mr. Justice

Mahoney to do anything by means of increasing or decreasing anything. Mr.

Justice Mahoney and his fellow commissioners produced -

AN HON. MEMBER: No wonder you are in trouble; tell the

truth.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, we hear hon. members opposite

saying: Tell the truth. I am. I wish they had the courage to stand in the House

and make these remarks, given Your Honour - and I am looking right at the

gentleman from Baie Verte - White Bay, who feels that if he makes a nuisance of

himself often enough he will gain some attention.

Now, Your Honour, let me come back. Mr. Justice Mahoney and

his fellow commissioners produced a proposal. That is not required by the

legislation, but it is quite consistent with the way in which the two

predecessor commissions have approached their work. The Cabinet requested me, on

behalf of the Ministry, to make a presentation to the commission with respect to

that proposal, and I did so. It was a written presentation, so we know precisely

what was to be said. The commission then produced their report, and the report

was tabled here in the House.

The government moved to implement that report, and will

debate this at some length, I would hope, in the next little while, but the

implementation of that report required a House of at least forty-eight seats.

Now I cannot demonstrate that during Question Period because I do not have time

enough, but when the time comes I will demonstrate even to the satisfaction of

the hon. lady, assuming she can get her numbers right for once. We know she has

trouble getting her numbers right, but with the help of the gentleman for

Ferryland perhaps she will. Now, if she has some specific question, Mr. Speaker,

I would be delighted to try to answer it.

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

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be very clear

and I would caution the suspended Minister of Justice to be very clear and

precise in his answer. When the government got this report of the Mahoney

commission, this report calling for forty-four districts and suggesting House of

Assembly amendments to allow for a maximum total of forty-five districts, did

the suspended Minister of Justice go to Mr. Justice Mahoney and ask that judge

to come up with another proposal calling for a number of districts greater than

forty-five, and did Mr. Justice Mahoney say no? Did the minister then go

judge-shopping until he found a judge to do his bidding?

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. lady may be referring

- may be, I don't know. She has a bit of tavern gossip. Let me try to set her

straight. After we got the commission's report, the one which she is holding

there, and after we tabled it I took lunch with Judge Mahoney -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. ROBERTS: I don't see what is wrong with that. I took

lunch with Judge Mahoney. In fact, the public chest paid for lunch with Judge

Mahoney, his lunch and mine. I said something like this: John - I called him

John. He and I have known each other for thirty years. He calls me Ed, I call

him John. I said: John, we want to implement this report. The problem is the

report is two reports. It says a House of forty-four, and then it says plus

Labrador plus a number of other seats which are well beyond the 10 per cent

tolerance. I said: I have to come to grips with this. Would you be prepared to

help us? He thought about it a bit and he said no. There is no more mystery than

that. What is the mystery with that?

Your Honour, I don't like revealing a private conversation. I

will call Judge Mahoney and explain what happened. Asked a direct question by

the hon. lady I have no trouble making a direct answer. There is nothing

dishonourable, dishonest, or reprehensible.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, hon. gentleman opposite should

learn that if they open their minds and close their mouths they will learn more

than if they go the other way around, which is what they are doing. When we come

to debate this matter in the House, as I hope we will shortly, I would be

delighted to go through this in whatever detail the rules will permit so as to

help to lay out the full story. I don't expect to convince hon. members

opposite, I don't expect too, but I do say that any fair-minded person looking -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I think the member has gone a bit beyond the question.

MR. ROBERTS: So soon. Thank you, Your Honour.

MR. SPEAKER: If the hon. member has a supplementary I

will....

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for

the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology. Lately the Newfoundland Dockyard

- and by lately I mean within the last year - has been going through difficult

times, mainly because of the private hidden agenda of Marine Atlantic to scrap

that yard and throw hundreds of Newfoundlanders in this region of the Province

out of work. My question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology is

this. What representations have your department or government made on behalf of

the Newfoundland Dockyard and on behalf of the hundreds of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians who are employed at that Dockyard?

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

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, this is something of great

concern to the government. We have an investment, as the hon. member knows, the

previous government has an $8 million investment there. I know that the member

for the area has met on at least one occasion with the federal minister. I've

met with the MP for the area on this matter as well. I've also met with the

union on this matter.

MR. TOBIN: Who is the MP?

MR. FUREY: The hon. Member for St. John's West, Ms.

Payne. I've met with her. She is very concerned, as are many people concerned

about it. The hon. member knows that this is a federal government Crown

corporation. It is not something that the Province has a direct involvement in.

However, we are looking at other areas - in fact, I had a meeting this morning -

looking at other areas and other opportunities for the Dockyard. I'm not at

liberty to make those public at this time.

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

Kilbride.

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

government is intentionally, through its Crown corporation Marine Atlantic,

about to scuttle the Newfoundland Dockyard. Mark it down. Last year they

scuttled the contract, a bidding process that the Newfoundland Dockyard was

positioned to win in Peru; recently on the radio, the CEO of Marine Atlantic

indicated that Newfoundland Dockyard is not allowed to bid on contracts in

Ontario, not allowed to bid on contracts in Quebec and is only allowed to bid on

contracts in Atlantic Canada.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the direct involvement that this government

should be taking is to stand up for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians and I ask

the minister: when will he do that, when will you stand up and make

representations and hold the federal government accountable for what they are

doing to the Newfoundland Dockyard and the hundreds of workers who will be

thrown out of their place of employment within the next few months?

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

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I agree with some of what the

hon. member said. There is no question that the federal government has a

responsibility through Marine Atlantic to direct as much work as possible into

the dockyard. There is no question as well that the equipment in that yard is

antiquated, it is thirty and forty years old and it ought to be recapitalized if

in fact, Mr. Speaker, the agenda is to continue with the dockyard and give it a

chance.

What I am told is that they want to move towards

privatization; they have tried this a number of times, we have tried it at the

Marystown Shipyard. There are no takers of substance I am told. I think the hon.

member makes a good point. The federal government should be very clear with the

people of the dockyard; either put the money in it, recapitalize it and direct

the work from the Marine Atlantic into the yard or be honest enough to close it.

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

supplementary.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, what is very clear to me is

that this government is not standing up to the federal government in whatever

happens in this Province, the dockyard is only one example and that is what is

very clear to me.

Now let me ask the minister this: Is he aware of the

statements made by Mr. Morrison, the President of the Newfoundland Dockyard,

where he was asked specifically: is there a possibility that this dockyard will

be dismantled? Yes, there is he said, and in the same breath he was asked: are

you bidding on any other work?... well, we are trying to bid on some Hibernia

work. Is he aware of that, and how does a dockyard on one hand, go after work

and bid for work when the CEO of the company at the same time is saying, there

is a distinct possibility of dismantling it? Is he aware of that and, what is

he, as Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology going to do about it on behalf

of the hundreds of people in this Province who will be thrown out on their

backsides?

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

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I am aware of some statements, I

am not aware of every statement that the CEO makes on behalf of Marine Atlantic

or any of its subsidiaries. My statement is quite clear; they should be very

clear to the people, to the workforce and to the dockyard generally. Either

recapitalize it, get rid of the antiquated equipment, put it in a position where

it is first class state of the art, and they can bid on contracts around the

world or be honest enough to tell people, we can't privatize it, there are no

takers and we are going to move to divest and close it.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will direct my question to the Minister of Health.

Since 1992, we have seen a drastic decline in government's

commitment to provide dental services for children twelve years old and under,

and since that time we have seen a drop in government's commitment from $7.1

million down to $4.8 million, a 32 per cent decrease since 1992.

Now this year alone, your department has slashed another

half-million dollars from the dental services budget. Will the minister tell

this House where the cuts are going to occur in the program this year?

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

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

Some of the figures that the hon. member quotes are not quite

accurate. The factual information is that at this year's level there will still

be $5.2 million going into the Child's Dental Health Program. There has been

some reduction over the past number of years in terms of the funding we have put

into the direct dental services if you will, in the dentist's office, but I

should also remind the hon. member that we have taken some other initiatives

that we anticipate will more than offset any negative impact that that will

have.

One of the things we have started this year is a fluoride

mouth-rinse program into the schools such that we will be able to catch,

hopefully, some of the negative aspects of dental health caused by improper

eating and that sort of thing and things that normally happen with young

children, catch it at an earlier stage, so that they won't have to go to the

dentist. So while we take money from one aspect of the dental program we put

money into another aspect of prevention, and health care today as the hon.

member would probably know is, more and more being focused toward the wellness

model of health, not the illness model.

We talk more these days in terms of prevention and education

and that sort of thing as opposed to trying to cure something that in the first

instance, if we didn't get ourselves involved in it, we wouldn't have to deal

with it. We have illnesses that we cannot cure but in the first instance we can

prevent if we do the proper things, and education and prevention is the way to

go and education and prevention is one of the aspects of the Child Dental Health

Program.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister didn't answer my question. I asked him: where

they are going to make the cuts in the program this year from the 5.3 down to

4.8? There are regular check-ups every six months. Is the minister going to have

them now every twelve months? Is that going to improve the dental health of

children in this Province? I asked the minister for an answer but he didn't give

it. He avoided that. I am sure the minister is aware that MCP only pays a

portion of the regular fee for many procedures. For example, an extraction is

$41 and MCP only reimburses the dentist for $24.00 out of that fee and the

dentist must collect the rest from the parents or not collect it all.

Now, many practices are operating on overheads of 50 or 60

per cent and higher. That is only equivalent to what MCP pays. I ask the

minister: Is it his intention, and his department's now, to completely eliminate

a dental program for children in the future?

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

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

It is not our intention to eliminate the child dental health

program. If that were our intention there would not be $5.2 million in the

Budget for it this year, so I think the answer to the question is quite evident

in the Budget.

To answer the other aspect of the question, one of the areas

that we are dialoguing with and collaborating on with the Newfoundland Dental

Association is just the question of where they think it is most appropriate to

make adjustments in the program. The hon. member wants to talk about things we

are cutting out. We are not cutting out. We are making appropriate adjustments

in certain services so that we can dedicate resources in a more appropriate way

in other areas, so as we talk to the Newfoundland Dental Association about these

things their input is very much valued and very much a part or the process.

I would remind him also that he is right, the program never

did cover the full cost of getting a filling or that type of thing. Dentists

have the right and the ability to top up and they have been doing it regularly

for many years. That is nothing new and it is no different from what has been

going on for many, many years in the child dental program, and in the dental

program generally.

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

for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If we are going to follow the minister's logic we have gone

from over $7 million now down to about $5 million, if that is going to improve

the dental health of children in this Province I guess the minister will

eliminate it, and immensely improve the dental health if that is his logic.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: I can't see how stripping a program is

going to improve dental health. Now, over the years, this program has been very

successful, not only in improving the oral health of children in this Province

but also in the recruitment and the retention of dentists in rural practices in

this Province.

Now, I ask the minister: Is he concerned that this erosion in

this program over the past three years is going to have a detrimental effect on

the` future oral health of children in this Province and is going to be a severe

hinderance to the retention of dentists in rural and less populated areas of

this Province?

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

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

The effect that it might have on dentists' practices and on

children's health is somewhat two different things, but let me remind the hon.

member - let me inform the hon. member, and this House, of some of the good

things that preventative actions taken by this government have caused to happen.

As a result of the program we have had in place for so many years we no longer

need exactly the same level of service, and the same thing applies to other

things. That is why, when I visited a hospital in Northern Newfoundland last

fall I was told by the medical director that twenty years ago we always had two

wards filled up with children with whooping cough and measles in the fall. He

commenced to say that thanks to government's immunization programs we hardly

ever see a child for these reasons in hospitals now.

What has happened in the health care sector is that as a

result of smart spending of scarce resources by this government we have brought

in immunization and preventive programs that have required less necessity for a

larger global budget for programs per se.

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

MR. CAREEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today, my question is to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, most of us

last Saturday learned through The Evening Telegram that Argentia was

dropped from the pre-qualifying list at Hibernia. The matter was addressed here

briefly on Tuesday. I am asking the Premier today, Mr. Speaker, did he meet last

week with the Hibernia officials and agree to the dropping of Argentia from the

pre-qualifying list? And if he did agree to Argentia being dropped, did it not

weaken the letter that went from officials of ITT this week asking for a full

review of the pre-qualifying tenders?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker, I didn't meet but it is

not enough to say that. That is a truthful and complete answer. I have received

a telephone call from Mr. Ken Hull of -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER WELLS: If the members are interested in knowing

the full explanation I am quite prepared to do it but if they just want to

natter on, I am quite prepared to sit down, too, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I had a phone call from Mr. Hull - and I have

forgotten when it was, it was probably Thursday or Friday. I have forgotten when

it was - and he said to me: I wanted to advise you that we are now prepared to -

we are now going to make public tomorrow, I thought he said when he called me.

So I received the telephone advice whatever was the day before.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WELLS: Alright, whatever it was. He said, We will

be making a statement tomorrow indicating that we have considered all eight

applicants and I have to tell you that we are proceeding with four. We have

qualified four of the applicants. I asked: Would you tell me what four were

accepted for consideration and what four were not? He told me - I think there

were three separate proposals in St. John's Harbour and one in Bay Bulls that

was pre-qualified to make proposals. Then he said - there was another one I

think in St. John's Harbour, another one or two, one at least in St. John's

Harbour, Argentia and there might have been - Bull Arm and I think the other one

may have been St. John's Harbour, too. So I think there were two in St. John's

Harbour, one in Argentia, one in Bull Arm that were rejected. I asked: Would you

mind telling me why they were rejected? He said, `No, and he went over all of

them and explained why they felt they could not propose. I said: I appreciate

your calling and telling me in advance. I give no approval or rejection. I

simply thanked him for calling me and advising me in advance.

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

Training.

MR. DECKER: (Inaudible) audited financial statements of

Memorial University Pension Plan ended March 31, 1994. (Inaudible).

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a petition

signed by 194 residents of Green Bay district. The prayer of the petition is as

follows; A petition to the House of Assembly:

Whereas our communities have been in Green Bay district for

many years; and

whereas a recent government proposal would see some of our

communities assigned to Baie Verte district;, therefore, we, the undersigned,

petition the hon. House of Assembly not to entertain or approve any proposal

that would see our communities removed from Green Bay district.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Wells Government tabled its fourth

proposal to change the Province's electoral boundaries. First it set up an

independent commission which came back with a forty-seat proposal. The Liberal

caucus did not like that so the government sent the commission on the road

again. The commission then made a forty-four seat proposal but the Liberals did

not like that one either. Then, just before Christmas, Mr. Speaker, a government

official briefed us on a forty-eight seat House of Assembly which would have

seen Green Bay changed to the district of Green Bay - Buchans. This meant losing

Sheppardville, King's Point, Rattling Brook, Harry's Harbour, Jackson's Cove,

Little Bay and Beachside, in the Baie Verte district and picking up Badger,

Buchans and a small chunk of what was the former town of Windsor.

Then, Mr. Speaker, after Christmas Judge Noel was given a

mandate to draw up the boundaries for a forty-eight seat House of Assembly. I

expected his proposal would be reflective of the briefing that we received

before Christmas. However, in my case, this latest fourth proposal sees the

creation of a new district, Windsor - Springdale. Except for Sheppardville, the

same communities are dropped from the current Green Bay district and almost all

of the former town of Windsor is added. This time, Badger and Buchans are lumped

in with Grand Falls in a new district called Grand Falls - Buchans.

Mr. Speaker, this petition is from residents of Green Bay who

don't want to be put in with Baie Verte and other residents who don't want their

friends and neighbours to be put in with Baie Verte. The communities in the

King's Point to Harry's Harbour area and in the Little Bay - Beachside area have

been in Green Bay for as long as I can remember. They have a community of

interest whose largest local service centre is Springdale, not Baie Verte. They

have nothing against Baie Verte, but to get there you have to go out to the

Trans-Canada Highway, drive west for twenty minutes, and then turn off onto the

Baie Verte Peninsula highway. Simply put, Baie Verte is a separate political and

economic unit. It even occupies its own peninsula on the map of Newfoundland.

Similarly, while I yet haven't heard from people in the

former town of Windsor, I'm sure many of them are not keen on being put in with

Green Bay, a coastal seat. This is especially so in light of the time and money

spent to amalgamate Windsor and Grand Falls as one municipality. Therefore, I

would ask the Liberal Government to consider carefully what they are going to

do. This makes four times they have treated the voters like pawns in the drawing

and re-drawing of the political map. If this government goes ahead with this

proposal, then the only thing I can advise people in Green Bay who are being

dropped, or the people in Grand Falls - Windsor who are being split up again, is

that they vote against the Liberal Party in the next election.

For my part, I regret losing a number of towns that I

previously served. Gaining Windsor is something that I can only regard as a

political challenge. I've got a lot of new doors to knock on, starting this

summer, in all likelihood. To any citizen who doesn't like the idea of the

district of Windsor - Springdale, I can only say: Send me your petitions and I

will present them here in this House of Assembly. As I stated earlier, if this

doesn't stop the Liberal government you still have the option of voting them out

in the next election. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to stand and support the petition presented by

my colleague, the Member for Green Bay. The request of the petition that has

been brought to the House today by the Member for Green Bay on behalf of his

constituents, I think speaks volumes.

The government put in place in this Province a system. It put

in place Mr. Justice Mahoney and other members, I believe a five-person

committee, to go across this Province and to seek out and ask for input, to have

public input, as to what they think or what they believe the changes should be.

That process was put in place and that process worked quite well, I might say.

That process was doing quite well.

MS. VERGE: How much did it cost?

MR. TOBIN: That is right. At a cost of several hundred

thousand dollars, if not in the millions by the time it is all brought back. The

government came in here with this big announcement as to how it was going to

reduce it back to forty seats, wanted the public to know of all the money it was

going to save by reducing it back to forty seats. Mr. Speaker, it went to a vote

in this Assembly and the forty-seat proposal was what was voted upon. So in the

midst of all that, and the public hearings and people having input, the

government decided they didn't like what was taking place, so they got the

Minister of Justice and packed his suitcase and sent him off to Clarenville to

make a proposal to change it then to forty-four seats.

When all of that took place -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) directed (inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Directive, Mr. Speaker, a directive. I would

suspect that all the copies weren't shredded. I would suspect there are still

some copies of the Cabinet paper around. They probably weren't all shredded.

What happened then when they didn't get their way? After the public input and

government didn't get its way in what it wanted, it decided it was going to

change it again. They wanted forty-eight seats.

Today, in this House, we had a shameful admission from the

Government House Leader that he again tried to get Mr. Justice Mahoney to

participate in basically what was a scam. Mr. Mahoney said: No, I'm not having

anything else to do with it. You've given me a mandate, I went out and lived up

to the mandate, I brought back the recommendations, and no. Mr. Justice Mahoney,

Mr. Speaker, of the Supreme Court was not about to be used further by this

minister, I would suspect. So I hope all the members opposite -

MR. SULLIVAN: Even though he called him John.

MR. TOBIN: Pardon?

MR. SULLIVAN: Even though he called him John.

MR. TOBIN: Well, I wouldn't expect him to call him

`Loyola' if his name is John.

Mr. Speaker, what is happening here is that the minister has

decided to participate fully and to involve the government and the Cabinet fully

into one of the greatest gerrymandering systems we have every seen in this

Province; that's what has happened.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TOBIN: The Member for Green Bay - his constituents,

who had the opportunity to speak to Mr. Justice Mahoney's commission, had the

opportunity to make their calls, were totally ignored because all of that was

basically thrown away. Then they go to a retired judge, a fine gentleman - I

don't know him, I understand he is a fine gentleman - a retired judge who is

also doing work for the government in other areas -

MR. SULLIVAN: Who is that?

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Justice Noel.

MR. SULLIVAN: But he asked someone else before that, you

know. They said no, too; didn't you know that?

MR. TOBIN: He shopped around, judge shopping.

Mr. Speaker, what we have here - and I hope the members from

the districts that are going to be affected, like the Members for Fortune -

Hermitage and Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir, like the Members for Fogo and Twillingate,

and Stephenville, and Port au Port, and St. George's, like the Members for

Carbonear and Harbour Grace -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I support the

petition.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, if there was either truth or substance in

anything said by my friend, the Member for Burin - Placentia West, I would reply

to it, but as there was not, I won't.

What I would say to my friend, the Member for Green Bay is

that I think I can understand the concerns he enunciated on behalf of his

constituents. I would be delighted to address those during what I suspect will

be a very long and perhaps a very heated debate if indeed the government decides

to proceed with an electoral boundaries bill during this session of the House.

Whether or not we do is a matter that has not yet been decided, but I say to my

friend, the Member for Green Bay that he and I can discuss the issue then at the

appropriate time in an appropriate way.

I say to my friend, the Member for Burin - Placentia West

that I enjoy his theatre; I enjoy his theatrics. I enjoy his comical theatrics,

and I would encourage him to do more of them, because given the calibre of most

of the speeches on his side, his are one significant improvement; so I encourage

him to go at it again, and I look forward to the next one.

Thank you, Sir.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Burin -

Placentia West have leave of the House?

AN HON. MEMBER: No, of course not.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I say to my friend, the Member

for Burin - Placentia West, it is not leave of the House he needs; it is leave

of the senses he has.

Your Honour, would you be good enough, please, to call motion

No. 1, the Budget Debate. My friend, the Member for Grand Bank was flaying us

hip and thigh when we adjourned, and I assume he will carry on flaying us as

before, and we look forward to that with pleasure. I say to him, if I leave it

is not because of his speech. I have to attend a meeting for a little while, but

I shall be back and I look forward to reading his remarks because they are

always witty and to the point.

Motion No. 1, Sir.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1, the Budget Debate. The hon. the

Opposition House Leader.

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

I want to say from the outset to the Government House Leader

that he can leave with comfort, that he will not be viciously attacked.

MR. ROBERTS: And I won't be missed.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, you will; in some ways you will be

missed, but I will keep things under control while you are gone, as I usually

do, and hopefully, before the end of the day we will make some progress.

Mr. Speaker, I want to make a few remarks in the Budget

Debate. I was into a few preliminary remarks the other day which were very

wide-ranging, a lot in response to the speech given by the Member for Eagle

River. I see the member looking. I say that most of what I said when I adjourned

debate on Tuesday was in reaction to what the hon. member had said, and how he

went out and had, in essence, called a press scrum himself to break the news

from Spain about the arrest of the Spanish vessel by the Canadian Government. He

went out and tipped the news himself. Thank God, there was only one news outlet

that bought into the hon. member's story of this great arrest on the Nose and

Tail of the Banks, and taking the vessel back to Spain, and the Spanish

Government stripped the licences. It was unbelievable what he did.

MR. SULLIVAN: Just temporarily suspended the licences.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, you know; and I haven't heard a

sound about it since. The only thing I heard about it was the hon. member on NTV

making the big announcement, and then NTV called me out for a reaction, of which

I wasn't sure I really should react to it because I wasn't sure how authentic it

was - because you always have to wonder about the Member for Eagle River, when

you look at his performance with the Saltfish Corporation.

MR. SULLIVAN: The big press conference, the news

conference they had. Do you remember the news conference they had on that?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The news conference - and how he behaved

with the former federal fisheries minister, Mr. Crosbie, what he used to do to

him, how he fabricated stories; and how he now supports Trans City and the

scandal. On and on it goes with this member, so you have to be very cautious.

MR. SULLIVAN: Does he agree with free trade now, and all

that?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, you have to be careful. And then,

there is the novel that will be written soon on how Danny threatened Harry. That

is going to be the next

chapter in the book, how Danny threatened Harry, Mr.

Speaker.

I want to have a few remarks to the Minister of Health

concerning the questions raised today by my colleague, the Member for Ferryland

about the children's dental program - a very serious matter, I say. I see the

Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture looking over here, a man who prides

himself on his knowledge and his concern for nutrition, and the well-being of

all of us, and here he sits as part of a government that is now cutting the

children's dental program in the Province. A budget item, a budget matter.

I don't know really what is government's intention when it

comes to the children's dental program. It makes you wonder if the government

really believes that our children should have teeth. Sometimes I wonder, I say

to the Minister of Health - he is talking to the Member for Lewisporte. I'm

wondering if the minister sincerely believes that our children, Newfoundland

children, should have healthy teeth, or does he believe that they should have no

teeth. Does the Minister of Health support the philosophy that they should be

soaking their bread in their saucers, in the tea, gumming their pap. Is that

what the minister is all about? Soaking their bread so it is not too hard on

their gums. Is that what he is up to doing in this Province?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: I know people who (inaudible) soak bread

in their saucer.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes. Even with good teeth, I say to the

minister, there are still people in the Province who soak their bread in their

saucer.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, but seriously, it is a serious

matter, I say to the minister, to cut a couple of million dollars from the

children's dental program.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Your what?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) school milk program.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Your school milk program. The two of

them should be connected, it should be connected. There is no good in your

promoting a school milk program and then have the Minister of Health chop up the

dental program so that we don't have proper hygiene and care of teeth amongst

our children, I say to the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture.

It is a major concern, and it is a concern out and about by

parents of small children. It is a very serious concern of the dental community.

It is. I know that. I have a daughter who works in a dental business and I know

it is a very serious concern. I say to the minister, he should have a serious

look at this and look at reinstating that funding. In 1995 we shouldn't be going

backward the way we are.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the Budget. We are into a

budget debate. We look at lay-offs in some of our departments in the public

service, lay offs of which the effects are not yet known, I say to the Minister

of Finance and Treasury Board. Every now and then, every second day, we hear of

a few more being laid off here, a few more jobs going to be lost there. The full

effect won't be known yet I would suspect until five or six months' time, just

what the fall-out of this latest Budget will be, how many jobs will be lost

again in the public service.

All of this happens while the government in its lack of

wisdom has given contracts to Trans City Holdings to build those hospital health

facilities around our Province, costing the taxpayers millions of dollars more

than they should have cost, millions of dollars more and yet we cut the

children's dental program. We lay off people who are providing essential

services for the people of our Province; we see chauffeur-driven cars still in

this Province. It has been confirmed that there are two chauffeurs being paid by

the public purse.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Just one now.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: One now, says the Minister of Health;

they have laid off one chauffeur since the Budget Speech was given in the House

by the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board because since that, the Minister

of Works, Services and Transportation confirmed for us in this House that there

were indeed two chauffeurs, I say to the Minister of Health. Now he is telling

me that one has been terminated since then? Is that what he is telling us?

MR. L. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) check (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: That I should check? You shouldn't make

statements across the House that you cannot substantiate, I say to the Minister

of Health. You shouldn't make statements that you can't substantiate.

So there are two chauffeurs, two chauffeurs. The Premier has

his garden cut and groomed by public employees; his flower garden, his grass cut

that taxpayers pay for; $20,000 entertainment allowance for running his home for

food and whatever, but yet, in addition to all that he charges hundreds of

thousands of dollars off to departments such as Industry, Trade and Technology

and others. The Minister of Finance and Treasury Board shakes his head, but I

want to remind the Minster of Finance and Treasury Board -

MR. BAKER: I was listening so far (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, I say to the Minister of Finance

and Treasury Board, we know he has a problem with remembering at times, we

witnessed that in the court when he forgot about certain documents on Trans City

and I can forgive him for that. I can understand why he would lose his memory on

some of those issues. But just to refresh his memory on this one, a few short

weeks ago, in debate here, we were asking the question when the Premier was

absent, Where are these various trips, who pays the transportation costs and

hotel costs, and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology being as

forthcoming as he usually is, verified for the House that indeed a number of the

Premier's trips, world jaunts, were paid for by the Department of Industry,

Trade and Technology.

MR. BAKER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Hundreds of thousands, I say to the

Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, so a few days after the Premier came

back and the debate was ongoing. Of course, the Premier denied any such thing.

He said: all my travel, all my entertainment and all my hotel bills are covered

under the appropriate subhead of the Premier's Office. That's what he said, and

of course, not knowing that a few days before, the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology had told us the difference. So the Minister of Industry, Trade

and Technology had to inform the Premier of what he had said two or three days

before; so my point is, all of this is going on in very difficult times.

We have a Premier who travels worldwide, staying in $500 and

$600 a night hotels, chauffeurs, flower garden looked out to, $20,000 for

supposedly entertaining at his house.

AN HON. MEMBER: No airplanes (inaudible) furniture.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No airplanes that carry furniture, the

Minister of Health says. Now, I don't know what the minister refers to but I can

assure you, I say to the Minister of Health, that I have never flown any

furniture by airplane; I have flown a few times myself, but furniture, I don't

know what the minister is getting at. I know a few ministers opposite who have

flown their spouses in and out on airplanes, flown them in and out from certain

locations when they were coming in to the city I say to him, but I won't get

into that because the minister I am talking about is not present and you

shouldn't talk about a member who is not here so I will leave that for another

day, but furniture, I don't know what he is talking about.

If some member or minister over there has flown furniture

into the city, I say to the Minister of Health, we will find out who it is,

there is no doubt, as a result of today, we will find out which minister over

there has flown furniture into the city; but, Mr. Speaker, all of this is going

on in very difficult times.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible) won't be here much longer.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, the Member for Eagle River says I

won't be here much longer, he may be right; he may be correct; I may not be here

for very much longer.

MR. DUMARESQUE: You should have resigned a long time ago.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, I should have resigned, yes.

Perhaps I should have resigned ten years ago, I say to the Member for Eagle

River, perhaps I would have been a lot better off, but I didn't. In my wisdom or

lack thereof, I didn't resign.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I say to the Member for Eagle River,

that is not how I do things, I am not like him. I don't make threats, I say to

the Member for Eagle River. I am not like him. When he could not get appointed

to Cabinet, the Premier said he was juvenile and immature he could not appoint

him to the Cabinet. Then when all the months of speculation about a Cabinet

shuffle was going rampant throughout the Province the Member for Eagle River was

so afraid he would not get a promotion.

They all were invited to the Premier's house for a Christmas

reception and poor old Harry the Premier's dog was there, poor old Harry the

dog, and the Member for Eagle River went as far as to threaten the dog. He

threaten the dog and to harm the dog and then blamed it on the Member for St.

John's South who he thought would get into Cabinet before he would. Yes, can you

imagine? So the Member for Eagle River now should just sit -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, the Member for Eagle River should be

careful of who he tells his stories to. He should not even think those things

today because when you are a government in trouble, I say to the Member for

Eagle River, when you are a government in trouble two or three things happen.

When you are a government on the run and a government in trouble, two or three

things happen. First of all, Mr. Speaker, all they do is revert to the past.

They reflect on the past and they bring up to the Opposition Party things that

happened so many years ago. That is their first defence. Their first defence is

to talk about the past, talk about how bad we were when we were in government,

how bad we were, how awful we were. That is the first sign of a government in

trouble when they do that, the first sign. I want to say to members opposite the

people of the Province dealt with us in 1989. They rendered a verdict, I say to

the Member for Eagle River, they rendered a verdict. They were not pleased with

us.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, could I ask the Member for

Eagle River when he is recognized to get up, but he has not been recognized yet

only by me and that does not give him the right to speak. That does not give him

the right to speak because I recognize him.

So the first sign is you go back to the past and you knock

the Opposition Party for being such a terrible government when they were there.

In 1989 the people of the Province rendered a verdict on the PC Party of

Newfoundland and Labrador and said: We don't want you to govern us any more now

out you go, get!

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am learning from you, you are the

political scientist I hear. You are the great political scientist over there and

make no wonder they are in trouble, make no wonder Clyde Wells is about ready to

go, make no wonder Ed Roberts is ready to go with him and make no wonder that

the Minister of Finance is ready to go behind him, if they are taking advise

from the political scientist, the Member for Eagle River.

Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the first sign. The first sign is

going back to the past. The second sign of a government in trouble is when there

are no secrets. There are no secrets at all that the government can keep.

Cabinet papers get leaked, they don't know who put Cabinet papers in certain

files. I think the Premier referred to them as moles was it back in - remember

when someone gave information back a few years ago and he publicly threatened

the mole, if he could find out who it was, remember? But imagine how many moles

there are now, I say to members opposite? Now that they know the government is

in a nose dive, a tailspin with the three top officers of the Gestapo about

ready to exit. The three top members, the Premier, the Government House Leader

and the Minister of Finance, the three top honchos now ready to go through the

door whenever they can but they really cannot go when they want to go now

because they are sort of in a corner, Mr. Speaker. Things are so hot and so

tight that they have to be careful now of when they go and how they go. Mr.

Speaker, that is the problem.

So the second sign of a government in trouble, Mr. Speaker,

is when there are no secrets. Before the Cabinet meeting is finished now there

are people in the Province who know the contents of the Cabinet papers, that is

what is happening. I can attest to that, I experienced it myself. Before we

finished a Cabinet meeting the Sunday Express would be printing the contents of

the Cabinet papers. Now that is the truth. Mike Harris went out in the Sunday

Express before we finished the Cabinet meeting. The same thing is happening now

with this government, and very justifiable I say.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) leak.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Not quite as many leaks as the

government now has I say to the Minister of Health. That is what is happening

over there.

MR. TOBIN: Who is your contact over there?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: For what?

MR. TOBIN: The Sunday Express.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: My contact, I never had one, but, oh,

how the wheels turn I say to members opposite. That is what is happening over

there. She is falling apart. The Premier cannot govern the Province anymore

because there is so much dissent in his own caucus.

When you listened to the Government House Leader a few

minutes ago talking about the electoral boundaries report did you notice what he

said, that very important word `if', if the government brings forward the report

to be dealt with in the House, `if', not that it is going to be dealt with,

`if'. Not that it is going to be dealt with, `if', the electoral boundaries

report that was tabled yesterday, and the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation will be so relieved if it is not dealt with. A sigh of relief

from the minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. W. MATTHEWS: With this report? Absolutely, not. You

cannot because you have interfered in the process too much. You had his nibs

there, the Government House Leader up today blowing off how proud he was to call

the judge, John. He said, I call him John. It is like my colleague for Ferryland

said, well, you did not expect to call him Chuck. His name happens to be John.

He was so proud to tell us that he had lunch with John, imagine, at taxpayer's

expense on top of the $400,000 or $500,000 that you wasted in the process, and

to try and get a report that would satisfy the majority of the Liberal caucus

and they are still not satisfied on the fourth attempt. This is the fourth

attempt. Forty seats or fifty-two seats I say to the Minister of Finance. Forty

seats or leave us alone.

MR. DUMARESQUE: You are against saving money.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am in favour of saving money I say to

the Member for Eagle River, but a reduction of four seats is going to save us

nothing. Let us not be hypocritical about this. The cost of running this House

is going to be the same whether it is forty-eight or fifty-two, so what are we

talking about. Four salaries we are taking for members and four secretaries.

MR. DUMARESQUE: What about travel and all this stuff?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, if we could do away with

one member, the Member for Eagle River, we would save more on travel than ten

other members in this House. He is the most expensive member in this House, and

at every second meeting of the Internal Economy Commission there is a letter

from the Member for Eagle River, can I do this? Can we do this?

Seriously, if we are serious about saving money by reducing

the number of members in this House, if we just do not want to put up a front to

the people and say, yes, we are reducing the number of seats and saving money,

let us do what the first Judge Mahoney report recommended, forty seats. Do away

with twelve. Let us have forty seats. Knock it back by twelve and then we will

save the taxpayers of this Province money.

That was an independent report, and that is what they wanted

to do I say to the Minister of Finance who asked the question, but it is no

longer an independent report. It has been tampered with so much, and, of course,

the Government House Leader admitted -

AN HON. MEMBER: Would you support the forty?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Of course. I would support twenty.

AN HON. MEMBER: If you supported twenty you would never

get back again anyway.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: That could be. Perhaps I won't be back

here, but there will be someone else back in my place and you would still have

to pay their salary. There maybe someone back to whom you would be paying a

bigger salary than you are paying now.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Lynn is going to flick you right back

over here.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I don't care where Lynn flicks me, I say

to the Member for Eagle River. I am not like him. I am not beholding to anyone.

I don't have to threaten Lynn's dog like you threatened Clyde's.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I don't, so the Member for Eagle River

now should be quiet. I have beaten him into the ground enough. He should just

stop. He should stop while he is ahead.

I say to the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, whose

Budget I am debating, who has wasted all this money on this electoral boundaries

restructuring mess, if you are serious about saving money, let's not just put up

a front about saving money on the number of members in this House. Let's be

serious. If you are serious about it... Of course, what do we expect from this

government?

AN HON. MEMBER: You wouldn't save as much (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Now, the Minister of Finance and

Treasury Board, who I respect -

MR. TOBIN: Until now.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I have always respected him. He has

now just agreed with what I was saying about cutting the number of seats by

four. He says we won't save that much now if we cut twelve, so why did we

initiate a process here - which we were required to do after the election, after

every ten years I think it is - and pretend -

AN HON. MEMBER: Public relations.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Precisely - want to be able to say: I

cut the number of seats in the House - and save nothing.

I told the commission, back when I appeared before them down

in the District of Grand Bank, that what we have to be careful of here, if we

reduce the number of seats to forty, or forty-two or forty-three, we are going

to place greater workloads on a lot of members. A lot of members are going to

have more work, not the urban members. The urban members are not going to get

any more work. You can give them another 5,000 or 6,000, but what we find here

is that we have the Member for Mount Pearl and others whose seats have been cut

by 5,000 to 6,000 people. They have been cut by 5,000 or 6,000 people, but the

rural members, you are increasing the size of their seats and they are going to

have more work.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What do you know? I remember asking a

former Member for St. John's North: I suppose you are busy. He said: Yes, I had

one phone call this year. So it is not apples and apples; there is a big

difference.

What I said to the commission is: If we cut the number of

seats, let's say to forty members, then twenty-five or so of them will have a

greater workload. There is no doubt about that, they will have a greater

workload. If you give me another ten communities, I am going to have a greater

workload. I am going to have to do more travel, have more phone calls, more

letters; and you know what is going to come one of those days from those forty

members who are left? Mark it down; we are going to need more staff. We are

going to need an assistant. I only have my secretary now and the two of us can't

keep it going, so I am going to need an assistant now, or a junior secretary.

AN HON. MEMBER: Danny will be the first.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Precisely. Who will be the first to want

it? The Member for Eagle River. And what will we end up with? We will have cut

the number of seats, the members in this House, by four or twelve, whatever we

decide, and we will end up with another forty people on the payroll. Mark my

words what is going to happen here in the disguise of saving the taxpayers

money. That is what we are going to do, and I told the commission that. I felt

very strongly about it. That is what we are going to end up with. So if we are

serious about saving money, let's be serious. Let's not be hypocritical about

it.

Those are my worst fears about all this, but we will deal

with that another day. I didn't mean to get sidetracked on that, because that is

a debate we may have, I say to the Leader of the Opposition. I don't know if you

listened to what the Government House Leader said.

MS. VERGE: No, I didn't.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The big word was `if' - `if' we deal

with it.

MR. TOBIN: If, indeed, we decide to deal with it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: If, indeed, we decide to deal with the

report. So that sort of tells me a lot about this whole process, and I don't

know if the government has enough support in its benches to pass it. I think

that is the big worry and that is why the big `if' is there.

Mr. Speaker, I will get back to the Government House Leader,

the suspended Minister of Justice, my colleague, the Opposition Leader says. I

was just looking at the letter, the report that he gave the Premier. I don't

know what it is. What I see looks like Elizabeth R, it is a lot like it, he

signs it somewhat with Roman numerals after; that's what it looks like, it looks

a little royal, the signature and the Roman numerals after it, E R R the 4th.

But in his report, Mr. Speaker - I told him I wasn't going to attack him while

he was gone but I am sure he is listening out there - on page 2, can you imagine

now, the Premier asking him first of all to investigate it? I mean, what I find

funny, Mr. Speaker, -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: By leave?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. member have leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

By leave.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What I find absolutely amusing is that

the Premier would ask the Government House Leader to investigate this matter, a

man who is under investigation himself by the Premier, I don't know, but

whatever agency there is, Mr. Speaker. He is under investigation, isn't he? His

companies are under investigation. But he says on page 2, in reference to the

Member for St. John's Centre, Dr. Kitchen, he says: the only rational conclusion

that one can reasonably draw from the review of all the available evidence is

that Dr. Kitchen's concerns are unfounded and without substance. That is what

the Government House Leader said in his letter to the Premier, that is what he

said, that Dr. Kitchen's concerns are unfounded. Now I doubt very much if the

Member for St. John's Centre wrote a letter such as he did -

MR. SULLIVAN: He was wrong about -

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Who?

MR. SULLIVAN: Dr. Kitchen.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, but I don't think he is wrong about

this. He was wrong about the tax formula too when he said we weren't the highest

taxed people in Canada and then when he was pressured by the media he said he

didn't understand the formula, but I think with this matter here he knows what

information he was provided with and what he wasn't, I really believe that; but

seriously, this is very serious stuff here, the government, there is no doubt,

this government -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No. He is always viciously attacking me.

I can't go to sleep at night unless the Member for Eagle River has attacked me

some time between two and five o'clock; I can't. I just don't feel right about

it all, Mr. Speaker, but, Mr. Speaker, the signs are there for members opposite.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Fish? You want to call another press

conference and say there are more Spanish vessels arrested?

MR. DUMARESQUE: You are going to be embarrassed again.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, I wasn't embarrassed. I found it a

little difficult I have to admit to the Member for Eagle River to say that I

thought this was wonderful. It took a lot out of me, I have to be honest, Mr.

Speaker. When the interviewer poked the mike in my face and said: Mr. Matthews,

what do you think of this? I must say I was a little - I haven't verified the

story yet, I say to the Member for Eagle River; I haven't verified that story

yet. Has anyone else heard of it? It is the story that he broke about the

Spanish vessel. Did anyone else hear of it, that the Spanish arrested one of

their own vessels and took it back to Spain and stripped it. Did you hear it

somewhere?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Was the source of the news story, him?

MR. DUMARESQUE: Oh, no, no. The Spanish Government

released it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: But no, I have not seen it anywhere in

the newspapers, did you see anything?

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh yes.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Where? Will you provide me with copies

of it?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Would you, seriously? No, no. The member

is stretching it now.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh that does not surprise me. He was on

CBC from New York. He is on CBC from the waterfront St. John's, looking up at

the Coast Guard vessels with the tears in his eyes for the captain and the crew,

crying and the Premier behind him with the box of tissues saying: Here Brian,

have a tissue, have a Kleenex, it is not nice for the tears to be running down

your face because I went through that once myself Brian, when I returned home

from Meech Lake, at the airport I broke down and I cried and we all thought he

was crying for joy at that time because the crowd was there to welcome him but

we all know now why he cried, Mr. Speaker; he felt so badly for what he had

done. His nerves got bad and he almost had a nervous breakdown.

Crab fishery, dockside monitoring programs, that is another

farce, I suppose.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I say to the Minister of Education, now,

there is only going to be one of the corporal's guard left in the front bench.

The Premier is going soon. The Government House Leader will go out on the tail

of his coat, right behind him. The Minister of Finance is finished; he is going,

too. I don't believe the Minister of Education when he told me yesterday he was

going to run again. I think he is trying a little diversionary tactic; I don't

believe he is going to be there. So the only one left from five is going to be

the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology, who I expect is going to move up

two seats. By next year this time we will be calling him Premier Furey. The

Minister of Health is all geared up, went down to Florida and got his suntan. He

thought it was going to be called now. The Minister of Health was a little

premature. He is going to have to go back to Florida again next Easter. He will

just come back in time, then, to get into the race.

AN HON. MEMBER: Premier Bud (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I don't think so. I don't think the

Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture will seek the leadership of the

party; no, I don't believe so, but the Minister of Health will have six more

suntans by the time the leadership is called, I say to him. You were premature

in going down there, so don't go down too often and end up with skin cancer or

something. Use lots of Panama Jack, lots of screen.

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that a plus or a minus, though?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: What?

AN HON. MEMBER: Getting a tan.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, in my district it would not be a

plus. In your district it may be a plus. The nice suntan and the Jaguar just

might be a plus in St. John's North but, I will guarantee you, if I was seeking

the leadership of any party I wouldn't be driving around Grand Bank District

with a suntan and a Jaguar or a Cadillac.

AN HON. MEMBER: No?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No. I would put it away that long before

that they would forgot I even owned it, I say to the minister.

The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation has it

going over there - he has the wheels turning - but I have a word of warning for

the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

AN HON. MEMBER: Not to go flying around in a helicopter.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I don't mind that. That is fine as

long as he doesn't pull the trick that the Minister of Education, when he was

Minister of Health, pulled in St. Lawrence. He kept the old props going, and the

dust was coming up from the helicopter, and he ran into the hospital and ran

out, and they don't know who landed down there yet. He said: Keep her running; I

am into hostile territory. He darted in and out, and off he went.

AN HON. MEMBER: He didn't even shut her off.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: He didn't even shut her off. I know all

about it. He got down close to the ground so the prop wouldn't hit him, and he

went in for about thirty seconds and back he came, and up she went and they

said: Who was here? Who was in St. Lawrence? We saw the helicopter. You know

what it's like in small communities when they see a helicopter, most of them

rushed to the site.

Getting back to the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, I have a warning for you. I know you are ambitious. I know you

think you should be Premier. You think you are the best person in this Province

to be Premier.

MR. EFFORD: I know it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: You know it? Conceit doesn't run in your

family; it gallops.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Conceit doesn't run in the minister's

family; it gallops, Mr. Speaker.

I have a warning for you. You have been lured into a false

sense of security by some of your colleagues. They go to lunch. I have seen

them; I have watched them operate. They are at his table, and they are nice to

him, and he thinks he has the support of some of those colleagues. I stand back

and watch.

AN HON. MEMBER: No delegate selection (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No delegate selection for what? For you?

You mean you won't get any?

Seriously, I say to the minister, be careful. In some cases

it is like sleeping with the enemy. They are there picking your brains, yet they

are all huddled up with somebody else, I say to the minister, so be careful. I

have watched them.

AN HON. MEMBER: One has my head, another has my heart.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: That is not how it goes. No, you are

thinking about the song -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, he is all mixed up. You are thinking

about the song about the one who has my heart will also have my name; I think

that is what he is talking about. He is mixed up. He is confused.

Who else over there - the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs is sneaking out now. He should come back. You are on the list

too. You are on the short list for the leadership. Where it is that you are off

in secluded places with influential people.

AN HON. MEMBER: Does Loyola have any money left over that

you can give us?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, no I have to tell you, poor old

Loyola did not have any money left over. I made sure of that. One thing that I

made sure of is that he would not have any money left.

MR. EFFORD: He probably don't owe any money (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well we won't get into that either but

the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs won't be owing any if he keeps

up his contacts, his secluded meetings and his little get togethers with certain

people. So he is in the race. I can name his fund-raising chairman, I say to the

Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. The network is already -

MR. EFFORD: I don't need a fund-raiser.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, not you. I am not saying you do. I

know, you are going to sell your Rolls-Royce shares.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much is it going to cost anyhow?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well I would say a good run -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, Sir, I would say there will be some

sales out there in the next six months to get the cash flow.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) we don't have a cap.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: You don't have a cap on yours. Well then

you better be prepared for $250,000, I say to the Minister of Health if he does

not have a cap, $250,000 if you don't have a cap.

MR. DECKER: More than that.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well more than that says the Minister of

Education. Now word is this morning that he was going to seek - I said not a

chance, he will never seek the leadership, for a number of reasons. There is

only one person over there who would get less votes than the Minister of

Education and that is the Government House Leader and the Government House

Leader, knowing him, if he ran for leadership he would probably spoil his own

ballot. So the only person over there who would get less votes than the

Government House Leader is the Minister of Education.

MR. SULLIVAN: You can guarantee that, the Government

House Leader will be voting for himself, you can guarantee that.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, he would vote for himself. He would

not be a gentleman.

AN HON. MEMBER: He would probably be the only write in

ballot anyway.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, he would want to put his name on

it, Mr. Speaker. The Government House Leader would be so anxious to tell himself

that he voted for himself he would probably write his name on the ballot and

spoil it. Who else have we got over there? Oh, the Minister of Tourism, Culture

and Recreation, the front runner as somebody said. The touted front runner

amongst the Caucus.

AN HON. MEMBER: The pretty face.

MR. SULLIVAN: He was up to several months ago but I think

he is after coming down a few notches.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, he has been set back a bit. Of

course his campaign manager has been away now for awhile, the Member for St.

John's South. He has been absent -

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible) that vote is not going to help

him.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, and then the old golf club trick

where he had to take the keys of the blazer from him. All of that stuff will

come back to haunt him. All that stuff will come back to haunt the member -

AN HON. MEMBER: Who would make the best leader over

there?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The best leader, no doubt over there, is

the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology in my view. He would be the best

leader, the best Premier - for a short while of course, you have to remember

that. It is not hard to be a good Premier for a short while and then the

Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture jumped to his feet. He does not want

to be left - and turned his pockets inside out. I tell you it is shaping up

though. It is shaping up over there. The Minister of Fisheries, Food and

Agriculture might run to position himself to hopefully be a king maker. He might

want to be a king maker but I don't know. I don't think he would garner enough

support to be a king maker. You wake up a king or queen or you wake up a pauper,

I say to him in a two person race.

AN HON. MEMBER: Two of them would wake up paupers.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, that is a good point, two would

wake up paupers. That is what I said, both would wake up paupers. But the

Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation over there, look at him now, look at

where he is now, just look where he is, trying to sew up the southwest corner. I

don't know where the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations is but I am

sure he is somewhere in the Province trying to sew up another

section of

delegates for his brother-in-law is it?

Now who else? I thought for awhile that the Minister of

Finance was going to end up as the interim leader when the Premier left, which

he is going to do now any day. There he comes, he comes back in the House now

when he hears his name, he rushes back in. He is not going to seek the

leadership. He did that once, he is not doing it again.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, but the Minister of Finance I

figured was going to be sitting in that seat over there for awhile which I would

have been so pleased with. I might have been so pleased that I might have even

went over with him. I would have seriously considered going over with him and

spending a few months with him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) is the Leader kicking you

out?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, it does not do with that. It is just

that we are friends, we go back a long time, we taught school together and all

that stuff. I thought for a while he was going to end up in that chair for six

to ten months, interim premier. Not acting premier.

MS. VERGE: Not deputy premier.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Not deputy premier. Parliamentary leader

of the Liberal Party, interim premier. We could have said `Premier Baker.' It

would have been nice for him, he deserves it. Any man who would take the flak

that that man has taken for the Premier deserves to be in that chair for a

while. He has run the Province the last three or four years, with all due

respect to him. I compliment him. He has run this Province. That man has run

this Province.

The only thing he has done wrong, I say to the Minister of

Health, and I can't understand why he continues to do it, is to take the blame

for the Premier on Trans City. Why has he done it? Again today, the man didn't

want to get to his feet. Clyde was there nodding at him: Winston, get up, Wins.

He didn't want to get up. The poor man, he finally got up. The two of them

looked so bad. I don't mind the Premier looking bad but I feel bad when the

Minister of Finance and Treasury Board looks bad because he doesn't deserve it.

AN HON. MEMBER: When he becomes premier you are

definitely coming over.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I didn't say that, now. You are jumping

to conclusions. Don't jump to conclusions. I'm not going to feel that bad for

him. I know he needs all the help he can get if he ends up in that chair. He

hasn't got much hope over there, so I know he will be calling me, saying: Bill,

come over and see if we can keep it together for another six months or ten

months. Come over, let's try to keep it together, you know I haven't got much to

work with. I will say: No, you haven't. We will agree on that.

AN HON. MEMBER: You made your commitment, now, you can't

get out of it. Hansard has it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, if I made the commitment - I always

keep my commitments, I assure you. I keep my commitments. So I'm disappointed.

First I thought he was going to be in the race. Then I said: No, he is not in

the race, he is going to be an interim premier for awhile. Now he is not even

going to be that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, there is no doubt. My money is on

Furey. Yes sir.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Where would I get money to buy shares in

Voisey Bay, Art? Think about it. I mean, the love of God. What are they today,

$53?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Sorry? More credit to him. Anyone who

has shares, more credit to him, but where would a poor pauper like me get money

to buy shares in Voisey Bay at $50-some a share? I suppose I could buy four or

five. My good friend for Menihek got excited this morning. See, he was talking

yesterday about -

AN HON. MEMBER: I bet he has a million bucks in there.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: If I had a million dollars. If that is

all he had. But what I have to tell is the story this morning. Yesterday we were

talking about of course the hype about Voisey and all the other companies, the

junior companies, and who is going to strike and who is not. Of course, the

names were being tossed around as a result of the Board of Trade luncheon or

whatever it was. Of course, His Nibs was down there with a few others.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, what are they called?

MR. A. SNOW: No, you don't have to say the name, you

shouldn't say the name.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Okay. There was this one that he

strongly recommended, you see. Of course I said: I'm going to buy a few shares

in that, you know.

AN HON. MEMBER: Castle Rock.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, I'm not going to say who it was. I

don't want them to buy it and to be rich. We don't want all the House rich.

There is Furey and there is you and there is Rick Woodford and there is Jack

Harris, there is John Efford, there is Lloyd Matthews. We have enough rich ones

in here now. Ed Roberts. All of us don't want to be rich.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: See, the thing was this morning when I

came in he asked: Did you buy, Bill? I said: Yes, I bought 15,000 shares, right?

He was down at the end of the table with my good friend for Burin - Placentia

West with The Globe and Mail and the stock market, the (inaudible). He

started to laugh. He laughed and he laughed and he laughed. He interrupted the

meeting. Then he finally comes up and he had it underlined. He calculated that

between last night when I told him I had bought and this morning I had lost

$750. I've never seen anybody so happy that somebody lost money as this man. He

was so happy that I lost money. Of course, the final joke was on him. I didn't

buy it. He was the one who lost the money.

Anyway, I'm sidetracked a bit. Well, yes, there is a message

here for the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board. Maybe I could give him a

little advice. Because he has his good friend there, the Minister of Natural

Resources. I think a geologist by nature, are you, by profession?

AN HON. MEMBER: By nature.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, both. He likes rocks. He likes

digging rocks and knocking and hammering and all that stuff. I'm sure he is

privy to information that a lot of us are not privy to. I'm sure he can hedge a

bet now on what junior company - looking at where it is staked out down there -

is going to hit it. I bet you he can.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, you wouldn't tell me lunchtime when

I called you, but anyway.

MR. SULLIVAN: He told me.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: He told you. Perhaps you should talk to

the Minister of Natural Resources -

AN HON. MEMBER: He won't talk to me.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: But you would think he would. Perhaps

you could invest a few million dollars into one of the companies, or buy some

shares, and maybe you could put the Province on the track to recovery

financially. If one of those companies would only strike big. What do you think?

You don't kind of buy into that.

MR. SULLIVAN: They haven't got enough confidence in us to

do that, see. They would sooner give it to someone outside the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I see. It is an interesting thought to

raise - you could make a few dollars for the Province so we don't have to cut

the children's dental health program as the Minister of Health has done. The

last person in the world I thought would do that is this Minister of Health, you

know -

MR. SULLIVAN: No, he has no compassion.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: - who is so concerned about hygiene and

appearance.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Perhaps the minister has a point.

Perhaps all the teeth are up to par, all the children's teeth are up to par now.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Prevention pays off.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: There is no doubt that the minister is

right, and I know that. There is no doubt that public awareness of any kind of

health situation, prevention, awareness is good. There is a message here for the

Minister of Health that I talked about before and I want to say again, and I

want to say it to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation because the

two are tied in.

The man who could have more affect on health in this Province

than any other minister is the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. He

can have a greater effect and impact on the health care budget of this Province

than any other. If only the Minister of Finance would put some money into his

budget for sport, recreation and fitness development and awareness in this

Province, you will save this Province millions upon millions of dollars in the

future.

It is hard to get the message through at the Cabinet table. I

know. They say: what are you coming up here looking for that for? We have this

and we got that. We have too many people lined up over there for heart surgery,

but no one ever makes the connection that the reason they are over there on the

waiting list for heart surgery is because Roger does not have enough money in

his budget to promote sport, recreation, and fitness so we would have a

healthier population and there would be no lineup for heart surgery. Do you know

what I am saying?

MR. L. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) active living for pre-teens.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Active living for what?

MR. L. MATTHEWS: For pre-teens.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Good. I am glad. I am a great promoter

and supporter of that. I say it to the ministers but it will not sink in.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Of course. The Minister of Fisheries,

Food and Agriculture could give you all a lecture on it. I think, as a matter of

fact, that he should give you all a lecture on it. Seriously, it is unbelievable

the impact it would have, and the reduction in our health care costs that would

occur if only we could get that mentality developed amongst the leaders of the

Province and the decision-makers in the Province which are you people the

Cabinet ministers. But it is some battle to go up there and scrap for a few

dollars. I know.

AN HON. MEMBER: (inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I would. I would make a good minister of

anything.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: I do not know if you will live that

long.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I do not know if I will live that long

either. I may not be healthy enough to be minister by that time.

MR. SULLIVAN: You overspent the dental budget by $60,000

last year and the federal government gave an extra $50,000 over what you

budgeted so you were still $10,000 over. You spent everything and more besides.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: So there are going to be problems with

cuts to that program, obviously? You can see how seriously people take it. The

Minister of Health is listening, and also the Minister of Fisheries, Food and

Agriculture, because you are interested. The Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation was interested because his department has that Recreation, Sport and

Fitness Division, but the rest could not care less. It is so low down on the

priority list it is not even funny.

AN HON. MEMBER: They are gone off the screen.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes.

The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation points to

himself. Do you support those ministers when they are looking for money for

prevention, healthier lifestyles, I say to the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation? Yes, you do, eh?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am sorry?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Oh, you pay lip service to it is the

point I am making. Everyone nods when you talk about it, but when it gets to the

decision-making process, and the point in time where you have to make a decision

on where you are going to put your dollars, it is obvious where the priorities

are because there is not enough money in prevention, either for the Minister of

Health or the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, to develop healthier

lifestyles amongst our people. It is just not there.

You see, we can't afford to do that, but in the final

analysis you can't afford not to do it because our health care budgets are gone

through the ceiling - That's the problem. Investing a few million dollars now in

promoting healthier lifestyles will save us millions and millions and millions

in the future.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: You must be reading my speech over

there.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It's not me reading your speech - I

would say you took a few notes out of mine; but that is true.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: We will have a weekly exchange, `Bill',

just leave the last name out of it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Well, I do get calls for you, and I am

sure you get them for me. I just had a note come in a little while ago that I

thought must have been for you but it was for me.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It was what?

MR. L. MATTHEWS: (Inaudible) bald head.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: There is a lady who needed some help

with her vision, obviously; she got you and me mixed up - speaking of health

care and other things.

The Minister of Finance sits there with his hand under his

chin. How concerned is he about prevention and reducing his health care budgets?

Seriously.

MR. BAKER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am sorry?

MR. BAKER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Pardon?

MR. BAKER: I am concerned about all of it.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: You are concerned about all of it. Do

you know what impact it would have on future budgets of this Province if you

gave these departments more money for prevention and healthier lifestyles? Do

you know what effect it would have on your health care -

MR. BAKER: (Inaudible) Soccer Association.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am sorry?

MR. BAKER: (Inaudible) grant for the Soccer Association.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, not for the Soccer Association.

MR. BAKER: It is a great sport.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It is a great sport. It is the best

sport in the world. There are more countries playing soccer than any other

sport. It is the national sport of more countries than any other sport. It has

the greatest participation of any sport in the world.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I am sorry?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: You should sit down and listen. I am

trying to get you more money, but you don't care. The golf courses are not open

yet, are they? He is just back from Myrtle Beach now and he has to go up to

Pippy Park and bang around a few balls. The Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation is going to be very healthy. He will be the healthiest minister over

there, but he doesn't care about how healthy the rest of the population is. That

is the problem we have, you see, short-sighted vision.

MR. ROBERTS: Short-term pain for long-term gain.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I don't know if you said that right or

not.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Who? No one else will speak. I am trying

to get them up. I am going to sit down. I have made enough remarks for one day.

Who is due next?

AN HON. MEMBER: `Roger'. `Roger', are you ready to go?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Who?

AN HON. MEMBER: If your father was here he would be proud

(inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: If my father were here, he would say -

I'm not sure what he would say. I guess, like he said one time when I went home

from the university, he said: Bill, my son, you should come home out of it,

because I thought I sent you in there to get educated but I believe every month

you are in there you are getting more foolish.

I don't know what change he would see in me since I have been

in politics.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) at least you have a job.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I don't know what he really thinks of

this. I do believe one thing about my father; he thinks it is time I came home

out of it. With that, I will finish my remarks.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I could sit here all day, I say to the Member for Bellevue,

and listen to the Member for Grand Bank, and that is why nobody was in any rush

to get up. Because it was a learning experience and everybody sat in awe over

there listening to him because the words that he was saying, Mr. Speaker, were

true words. They were gospel and he touched a lot of nerves over there because

he spoke the truth and a lot of people listened. The Minister of Finance and

Treasury Board takes great advice from the hon. the Opposition House Leader

because when he gets up to speak he opens a lots of eyes and people open their

ears because it is a learning experience; people tap into the knowledge that he

has and then the wisdom, the great wisdom that he brings to this House.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to take

part in the Budget Debate

or I should say the `juggle' of figures that the hon. the Minister of Finance

and Treasury Board has put forward and showed a balanced Budget. In fact, there

was a surplus, Mr. Speaker, a surplus in the Budget that if we were not

experiencing cutbacks in such vital areas as health care, Works, Services and

Transportation, not laying off people, Mr. Speaker, education - if we were

experiencing good times in those areas, in those departments, we would all be up

rejoicing with the wonderful Budget that was brought forward by the Minister of

Finance and Treasury Board. There are many needs out there in rural Newfoundland

today.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FITZGERALD: I am not surprised that the Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation is so testy and shouting across the House -

that doesn't surprise me. We took him down to my district a couple of weeks ago

and he came in - the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation came in a

helicopter, afraid to drive over the roads; had him to a public meeting there

and his opening statement, because he could see that the people were riled up,

he could see that they were mad with the type of road they had to drive over, he

could see that they were mad about the waste of government money in hiring

helicopters, he could see all that, and his opening statement, Mr. Speaker, was:

Ladies and gentlemen, you will get more flies with honey than you do with

vinegar. In other words, treat me right -

MR. EFFORD: Exactly. And don't vote Tory!

MR. FITZGERALD: Don't give me a hard time, don't go

asking questions about what I am doing with my money or the money I am spending

in my own district, treat me nice, allow me to get out of here, don't upset the

helicopter, allow me to get out of here and I may give you something.

Promise them, he did. What was he going to do? He was going

to do a study on what it would cost to upgrade Route 235 - another study, Mr.

Speaker. Route 235 and every other route and every other problem we have in

Newfoundland has been studied to death, I tell the minister, and he knows that

when he looks across here with that evil smile on his face. He knows, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. EFFORD: You (inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Minister, you are not giving it to

me, I say. It is not going into my pocket, it is not going into my family's

pocket, it is going in to the district of Bonavista South, proud Newfoundland

people who will get up in the morning and drive to work and the least the

deserve is a good road to drive over. That is what we are asking for. This

government got elected on the platform of fairness and balance, but the minister

continues to ask: Which district are you from? If it is a Tory district you

don't get anything; if it is a Liberal district, maybe I will consider it. Well,

that isn't the way it should be.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible) for seventeen years.

MR. FITZGERALD: You didn't put up with me for seventeen

years, I say to the minister. Mr. Speaker, this is the sign of a government that

is hoarding all the money in their own districts because they know that it is

short-lived; they know they have to get what they can now because in a couple

years time, they will be flicked out there just the same as the Tories were back

in 1989 when they catered to themselves and didn't listen. So I call on the

minister to respond to those people and make a beginning. We don't expect that

route which extends from Southern Bay all the way down to Bonavista to be

upgraded and repaved overnight, but if you never start you never finish and what

the people at that particular meeting were looking for was a commitment from the

minister that he would make a beginning on upgrading that road.

I think the life of any roadway is about twenty or twenty-two

years, twenty-five years before it needs maintenance and repair again but this

particular roadway, Mr. Speaker, that I am referring to, was constructed well in

excess of twenty years and there has been very little work done on it since that

time. When you look at the price that we are paying for gasoline taxes, and when

you look at the price we are paying for motor vehicle registration and licences,

I think we deserve a sensible road to drive over. If we are ever going to create

an atmosphere, if we are ever going to allow people to come to our rural areas

to invest money and to create economic activity, then one of the first things we

have to provide to them is a decent road to drive over. That is certainly not

existing in our Province today.

What does the minister do now to save money but to go out and

announce more lay-offs in his department, another couple of hundred lay-offs -

going to take away the second occupant on a flier that goes out at nighttime in

the worst of conditions and clears snow, the man who operates the side plough.

Those people are out when everybody else is home. This is the first vehicle that

travels up and over our highways. What happens when the operator has a problem,

has to get out and do some work? If anything happens to that operator - I fear

if an accident happens he will be there probably until the next morning, until

somebody finds him.

I tell you what is going to happen - you may as well take the

wings off the salt trucks and just operate the front plough, because they would

be fools to try to do both jobs with just one individual.

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, they would never wing it by

themselves.

MR. FITZGERALD: They would never wing it by themselves is

right, Mr. Speaker. Here we are again taking away the safety of the operation of

those vehicles, no regard for safety, doing away with motor vehicle inspection -

we don't need it anymore because somebody was carrying around a book in his

pocket for writing out inspection certificates; write out an inspection

certificate and it cost them $15. The minister said: Well, we should do away

with the whole thing, we don't need it anymore.

Mr. Speaker, what we have to do is deal with the people who

are causing the problems. Somebody gets caught drinking and driving, do we bring

back Prohibition, do we outlaw alcohol in the Province? No. We deal with the

culprits, we deal with the people who are causing the problems, and we allow

safety to run its course and allow our garages and our drivers to occupy their

vehicles in the most safe manner on our highways.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I just want to announce the questions for the Late Show.

Today we have just two questions.

The first one is to the Minister of Health and it is

presented by the hon. the Member for Ferryland: I am dissatisfied with the

answer on dental services.

The other is also from the Member for Ferryland and it is to

the Minister of Health: I am dissatisfied with the minister's answer on the

procurement and retention of physicians in rural Newfoundland.

AN HON. MEMBER: What is the third one?

MR. SPEAKER: There are only two questions for the Late

Show.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, there has been no capital funding for

municipalities this year, only infrastructure money. The minister, when he comes

forward and says: We may not be introducing a capital program for municipalities

this year other than the infrastructure program. In the same sentence it says

that this infrastructure funding will only be directed to municipalities who can

afford to pay back 100 per cent. Well, I say to the minister how about the

municipalities who are trying? How about the municipalities out there who are

making an honest effort? How about the municipalities out there who have raised

their taxes, lived up to their commitment to the minister and are trying to

collect taxes? There is a great need out there for municipal funds but the

minister turns his back on them and says we will give you no credit for effort.

Unless you can come forward today with a cheque to pay in full the money you owe

to Newfoundland and Labrador Municipal Financing you will not be considered for

funding.

Mr. Speaker, that is not the way it should be. I do not know

how he can expect volunteers to come forward and offer themselves today for

municipal councils, and for fire departments and the like. I do not know how we

can expect them. I was a volunteer all my life. All my adult life I was a

volunteer in my community, always, because I believed in my community and I

believed that I could have some input into making it a better place to live and

to raise our children.

Mr. Speaker, at that time there was always a little bit of

money to encourage you, whether you were involved in the fire department,

whether you were involved in the council, or whether it was a recreational

association or whatever. That is the only reason why volunteers get involved.

They do not get involved to be accused of catering to their own people. They do

not get involved in doing municipal work or doing volunteer work to be accused

of feathering their own pockets. Mr. Speaker, they get involved because they see

a need and they respond to it.

Mr. Speaker, that is the reason why they get involved and I

think the minister realizes that. He was a volunteer himself. He was a very

active community minded person, and I know how happy he must have been when he

came in here and the government of the day allowed him some money to spend in

his municipality. The reason why he got involved was because he saw a need, he

wanted to respond to it, and wanted to contribute, but today we have everything

turned off. We do not respect volunteers, we do not give them any encouragement,

but still we talk about the wonderful things the Department of Municipal Affairs

is doing and how needed they are in our government today.

When I speak of the Department of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs I, of course, have to think about the Department of Health and the

Department of Environment. In the town of Bonavista today, the seventh biggest

town in Newfoundland and Labrador - and I have brought this to the House of

Assembly many, many times before. I stood up here and presented petitions on it,

and I finally got the minister's attention.

MR. REID: What did you say was the seventh largest town

in Newfoundland and Labrador?

MR. FITZGERALD: Bonavista I say to the minister.

MR. REID: Well, you had better go back and check.

MR. FITZGERALD: You had better go back and check.

I say to the minister that I finally got his attention about

the problem with this sewer treatment plant in Bonavista.

MR. TOBIN: The seventh largest.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I finally got his attention

on the water treatment plant. He must have confided with the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation. He did a study, a $45,000 study to see what was

happening there.

Now, when this water treatment plant was put in place the

ideal situation was that all the affluent from the water treatment plant would

flow out in this pond. They made a water reservoir, they made a water

right-of-way out to the ocean. Now, under ideal conditions the water would rise

and flush out the pond and all the affluent would go out into the ocean. It was

a good idea, Mr. Speaker, but it never worked. This water treatment plant

designed about twenty years ago has now gotten much too small, and does not have

the capacity to look after a growing town like Bonavista. Now what happens when

we have a rainfall the tank overflows and all the sewer and all the waste water

goes out over the top of the sewer treatment plant and out into this pond,

untreated. Then, of course, with no top on this particular sewer treatment plant

sludge forms.

There are students, there are children in their own homes

adjacent to this water treatment plant that have had to go to the hospital,

sick, Mr. Speaker, because of the smell and the odour coming from this

particular tank. Also, when the wind blows it takes the sludge, this foam and

blows it onto the windows of the surrounding houses. Now you can imagine what a

wonderful place that those people are living in. What a wonderful place with all

the sludge and foam coming from this water treatment plant being blown over on

the children as they walk to school, on residents cars and onto the windows of

their houses, Mr. Speaker, and we stand here, the government stands here and

says what a wonderful government we are because we brought in a balanced budget,

we showed a surplus. Mr. Speaker, those are the needs that cannot wait to be

attended to. They have to be attended to immediately before there is some kind

of an epidemic started there.

I have seen it for myself. We went down there and one

resident took a ten foot pole and poked down into the pond, nothing but raw

sewer coming from this particular pond. When the water subsides all out around

the perimeter of the pond, Mr. Speaker, it is all contaminated. This is where

the children go sometimes to play not knowing any different. This is where their

pets go and congregate and then back into the house. Doctors in the area have

raised concern, the Department of Health have raised concern, the town have

raised concern and I have. I brought it to the Minister of Environment and Lands

attention. I believe that the Minister of Environment and Lands does have a

feeling for it, Mr. Speaker, and I hope in consultation with the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs that they will see fit to provide some funding

for this problem before, as I say, it becomes an epidemic and we have sickness

on our hands or we have some greater concerns than I am expressing here today.

Hibernia, Mr. Speaker, a mega project operating here on the

northeast coast of the Province. The Hibernia Project is hiring between 6,000

and 7,000 people. I don't know what we would do today if such a project -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: - a good Tory project, I say to the

Member for Burin - Placentia West, you are right. I don't know what we would do,

Mr. Speaker, if this project was not active today. To begin with, we were not

ready for the project. We did not have enough of our people trained and we had

years to do that. Everybody said yes, we will be ready. We will be ready when it

comes. We are going to train some iron workers, we are going to train some

labourers, we are going to train some electricians. Mr. Speaker, the bottom line

is that we are not ready and most of the high paying jobs are coming in from

other provinces and other countries. It is true, yes it is true. It is a union

shop and the unions have to do the hiring there but they do not do the firing.

Many, many times we see our own Newfoundlanders sent home, laid off, Mr.

Speaker, and we see people from other union jurisdictions, from other countries

and from other provinces continuing there to work.

Mr. Speaker, I have worked around myself. I have worked

pretty well in at least eight provinces of this country. I have worked in at

least eight provinces of this country, travelled around as a union member. In

each place where I went to work when work became scarce, Mr. Speaker, we were

the people who were sent home, the people who were known as travellers, the

people who were there on work cards. We were sent home and the people from that

particular province, especially from that particular jurisdiction, were allowed

to stay. Mr. Speaker, that is not happening here. It seems like the travellers

and the people from other areas are the people who are getting preferential

treatment and our own Newfoundlanders many times are sent home to draw

unemployment insurance.

Mr. Speaker, I had a call one day from I think it was the

employment corporation in Clarenville and they asked me if I was aware - because

I worked on the Hibernia Project for two winters myself and they knew I had some

knowledge of what was happening there - they called and they asked me if I knew

of any disabled people who had found a job at Hibernia. I decided to do some

investigation. I knew that most of the accommodations there were equipped to

handle wheelchair people and people with other challenges, but do you know

something? There wasn't one disabled person, not one person with a physical

disability, who could be identified working on the Hibernia project.

Then we talk about an equal rights employer and equal

opportunities. I don't think it would be demeaning or wrong for somebody who had

a physical disability to be able to go to work there in the cafeteria or in the

office. I don't think that would be demeaning. I think that the Hibernia project

should be brought to task by this government to make sure that some of those

people were hired and their needs were looked after.

When you bring up the project here and you talk about the

people who are out there working sixty hours, seventy hours a week, thirty days,

thirty-five days without a day off, double-time for everything after forty

hours, when you bring that topic up the first thing the minister shouts out

about is: What are you talking about? We have 6,000 people or 7,000 people

working out there. Sure we have 6,000 people or 7,000 people, but what is wrong

with having another couple of thousand working out there? What is wrong with the

government saying that you can't work any more than forty hours a week as long

as you have people who are capable of doing the same job and are unemployed

today? What is so wrong about that?

I think this is what we are going to have to do if we are

going to be able to get our people back to work again and contributing to the

economy of this Province. This is what is going to have to happen. But we need a

government with a will, we need a government that will go out and fight for the

people. We need a premier who will fight to keep the jobs and the economic

activity that we have here in this Province, keep that at home first. Instead we

have the Premier going around talking about the wonderful legis