November 24, 1998 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIII No.

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to inform hon. members that government is providing

$75,000 to high school students to allow them to provide child care to meet the

needs of teenage mothers who wish to complete their high school education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: This funding has been allocated as part of the

implementation of the National Child Benefit Reinvestment Program.

These infant care programs have four main purpose. They will provide high

quality care to the infants while in the child care situation. Government is

very aware of the lifelong effect of the experiences children have in their

formative years and of the important of these experiences being positive.

They will support teenage mothers in completing their high school education.

This provides them with the opportunity to go on to further education and to

enter the workforce. The mothers then have the tools to support themselves and

their children while also being positive role models to their children. These

child care services will be provided to the mothers without personal cost.

They will support and assist parents in providing the infants with the

experiences they require at this crucial stage of their development. Government

recognizes that young parents need support in the care of their children. The

infant care programs in high schools provide such support.

They will allow mothers and children to be together as much as possible

during the school day. The infant care rooms are located in the high schools,

allowing mothers easy access to their infants as their class schedules allow,

thus strengthening the bond between mother and child.

Two centres have been funded to provide infant care. They are Booth Memorial

High School in St. John's and Queen Elizabeth High School in Foxtrap. Without

this funding, the Booth Memorial High School Infant Program would have been

forced to close. Provision of the funding has allowed the valuable services to

continue to meet the needs of teenage parents attending the school.

Schools and school boards in other parts of the Province have expressed

interest. To date, no other proposals have been received.

Government is committed to children and to their families. We believe that

investing in these infant care programs benefits the child, the mother, and

ultimately has a positive effect on the community at large. We will continue to

work hard to improve programs and services for our children throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador. That is why today I wear the blue ribbon again:

because for this government every day is National Child Day.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I thank the minister for providing me with a copy of the statement. I

compliment her on this program, and I am glad to see that we are getting benefit

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: - from the National Child Benefit without having clawed it

back from our social assistance families.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: Hear, hear!

I notice by the minister's statement that government is very aware of the

lifelong effect of the experiences children have in their formative years, and I

take advantage of this opportunity again to advocate for the child advocate.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS S. OSBORNE: I know that the Child Welfare Act was introduced without a

child advocate which was recommended by people on both sides of this house.

What we are saying here is that the minister has not taken recommendation

from members of her caucus and from 95 per cent of the people who made

presentations to the Committee on Children's Interests.

You will continue to work hard to improve programs for the children, but I

think -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS S. OSBORNE: I think that these programs can only be enhanced by

bringing in a child advocate.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi, does he

have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the minister is going to keep saying that every day is National Child Day,

I remind here that there are 365 days in a year and she may have trouble keeping

up her pace over the rest the year.

I want to congratulate Booth Memorial High School for providing the

initiative. For a number of years they have been very supportive of students who

have become pregnant, who have children, and have provided an opportunity for

them to continue their education. I am glad government is supporting it. It

seems they would have been forced to close without this funding.

I would have been happier if the government was announcing a program today

which would make available this type of program throughout the Province, rather

then waiting to see whether any proposals come forward.

It is a good initiative, Mr. Speaker, and it should be more widespread

throughout the Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, in June of 1998, our government announced a

co-operative initiative under the Canada-Newfoundland Safety Net Agreement to

develop the cranberry industry in the Province. So far, $500,000 has been spent

to do site development and road access. We have been working with the Department

of Development and Rural Renewal on this initiative and thus far it is working

quite well.

It is well known that there is an abundance of edible wild fruits growing

throughout the Province. Three such native fruits are members of the cranberry

family, and they are partridgeberry, marsh berry and cranberry. It is from the

large cranberry that today's hybrid crosses, used in the North American

commercial cranberry, were derived.

The craze for juice blends, along with recent medical research concerning the

benefits of cranberry juice, especially as it relates to urinary tract

infections, has propelled this berry into the limelight. This increase in

consumption has led to higher grower prices and in some cases a shortage of

supply. This has triggered a major response in the industry towards expansion.

Most analyses of the industry have revealed that demand for cranberry products,

particularly in the last decade, has outpaced supply. Overall, based on

historical trends and review of industry studies, data and analyses by industry

experts, the long-term demand for cranberries should be strong and opportunities

should be available to supply berries to existing handlers and processors in the

United States, and to tap into niche markets domestically and abroad.

I would like to inform the members of the House of Assembly of the progress

made thus far. This initiative is designed to establish the basic infrastructure

for cranberry production in the Province. It will also assist us in adapting

technology for cranberries to this Province's climatic and geographic

conditions.

I am pleased to announce that three of the four selected sites are now under

construction and will be available for planting in 1999.

Hopefully, work will commence at the fourth site before the onset of winter.

In Frenchman's Cove on the Burin Peninsula, road access has been completed to

the site and construction is nearing completion.

In the Stephenville area on Route 490, road access to the site has been

completed and construction of the cranberry beds and infrastructure is

approximately three-quarters completed.

In Deadman's Cove tenders have been called for the construction of the access

road and the first stage of the construction has commenced.

In the Terra Nova area the site design is nearing completion and the access

road has been completed.

Paralleling the physical development of the site is the continuation of the

plant propagation program at the department's tree nursery at Wooddale.

It is here that we are multiplying plant numbers of seven commercial

varieties which will be planted at the approximate rate of 50,000 plants per

acre. To date, approximately 200,000 plants have been produced at the nursery.

An anticipated plant population of 1.2 million will be realized by the summer of

In June 1998, we received twelve proposals from the private sector in

response to our request for expressions of interest. The department is currently

evaluating these submissions and the selection of operators will be announced as

soon as possible.

As you can see, we are making progress, and hopefully by early next summer

Newfoundland and Labrador will be establishing its first commercial planting of

cranberries. Cranberry markets look good for the future, and we feel confident

that this initiative will help strengthen the agrifoods industry and the rural

economy of our Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is a plant in Centreville, I think, in the leader of the Government's

district, that processes wild berries. Cranberries, I say to the minister, marsh

berries, bakeapples, blueberries, raspberries, well, up until now this has been

a strength in rural Newfoundland and Labrador that we have not taken advantage

of. We have been satisfied to be able to go out and pick a few berries, to make

a few domestic jams, and for the most

part it was always left at that.

I think this is an area where we could look at spending some of the post-TAGS

money very intelligently, where we can create some economic opportunities for

rural Newfoundland and Labrador so our people might be able to establish an

industry that exists right in the rural areas and provide some opportunities for

our people.

Cabot Resources down in my district has been very vigilant in going out and

trying to establish some wetlands and some bogs there in order to create some

wildberry activity. They have not met with a lot of success along the way. There

have been some road blocks there, both provincially and federally, I say to the

government members opposite. I think there is an opportunity there. I think this

is what, Mr. Speaker, we have to build on, the opportunities that exist in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador, and that will create some economic activity for the

people who might want to choose to live there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, in order to grow and diversify the economy of this

Province, and thereby generate the tax revenues needed to sustain critically

important social programs and public services, it is important that government

invest in strategic sectors of the economy, including the small business sector.

That is why government has allocated $7 million for the Department of

Development and Rural Renewal's Strategic Enterprise Development Fund in each of

the past two years. This investment fund is designed to assist small and medium

sized businesses in order to take advantage of emerging opportunities in the

provincial economy. This is especially important in rural areas where business

information, financing, counselling and other small business supports are not

often readily available through the private sector.

Almost 90 per cent of the business investments made through the Strategic

Enterprise Development Fund since the Department of Development and Rural

Renewal was formed in 1996 have been under $100,000. These 500 investments have

helped create or maintain approximately 3,500 jobs in our economy. This equates

to a cost per direct job of about $5,600, without taking into account any

repayments on the portfolio, and without taking into account the spin-off

benefits in the local economy. As well, historical write-offs have been less

than 10 per cent on average. The commercial lending sector writes off an average

of 5 per cent each year on small business loans. Individual investment decisions

are made carefully, but by their very nature they are risk investments and

developmental in nature where the commercial banks are not prepared to

participate.

It is inevitable that some investments will not succeed. However, we must not

let this deter us from continuing to provide support, in the appropriate

circumstances, to private sector initiatives that offer opportunities to expand

and diversify the economy and create new jobs for the people of our Province.

This is a wise investment of the taxpayers' money.

For every bump in the night, so to speak, there are many success stories

that, regretfully, do not always get profiled by the media in the same way the

occasional failure does. I can point to hundreds of successes: Weathershore

Windows in Trepassey, Genesis Organic in Corner Brook, United Bolero in Buchans,

Northco Forest Products in Baie Verte, Hi-Point Peat in Bishop's Falls, Woodpick

Enterprises in Wareham, Terry's Tents in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Innova

Multimedia in Stephenville, and C & W Welding in Bay Bulls are just some

examples.

This government is committed to growing the small business sector and using

its business investment resources prudently and strategically. It would be very

easy to take the safe route and not invest in the business community at all, but

that would be the surest way to failure in rebuilding the economy.

As I indicated in the House last week, Mr. Speaker, there are encouraging

signs from recent employment indicators that our efforts are starting to yield

real dividends. We need to forge ahead - one step at a time - and do so by

working together to rebuild the economy in all parts of this Province.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

There is no doubt that small business should play a big

part in this

Province's economy, especially in rural Newfoundland today. With the technology

today, of course, many businesses are built on the computer systems we have

today. They are going to continue to play a big part, Mr. Speaker. The big

question is: How much are they going to play a

part in it? I think they can play

a much bigger role as we see investment in small business.

There are still many businesses in this Province today that want to expand

that run into the red tape and the bureaucracy that turn off a lot of

businesses. Especially from young people in this Province, who we see an exodus

of, who have attempted to start businesses and have been caught up in the red

tape. The minister has admitted on occasion that of course we have to cut

through that bureaucracy and make sure there are incentives there for those

young people especially to start businesses in this Province.

The simple answer to the statement is yes, focus on small businesses. The

reality is there has to be more focus on small businesses, not on the big

harebrained schemes of the past, the big mega projects that are going to save us

all. It is to get down to reality, to the grassroots, to rural work, for people

with such industries. The minister has mentioned some here today. That comes

from the initiatives of people in local areas, that is where is all started. The

government, if they can assist them in some part - to a smaller or larger

degree, whatever -, but it has to be initiated so that they are encouraged to do

small businesses in this Province, which should be a bigger part of our economic

recovery.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair, does she

have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to applaud the minister for continuing with the Strategic Enterprise

Development Fund. It has been a fund that has contributed to a lot of small

businesses in rural Newfoundland and Labrador. I think of a couple of industries

in my own district talking about berry production earlier as one of them, as

well as other industries.

What I would say to the minister, however, is that we also need money in

other sectors, and I think directly of the fisheries development component under

your department. Last year alone the fisheries sector, the under thirty-five

fleet, as a business enterprise contributed more in economic growth in

employment in my district than probably any other sector, but the money did not

come from that department or from those programs. It came from an arms' length

approach, and through the banks and through fish companies and all the rest of

it. In order to be able to -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS JONES: - allow them to operate as independent enterprises, as

businesses, they need to be able to avail of programs like this as well.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi, does he have

leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to say that I am very pleased to see that the small business

sector is continuing to play a very important role in the development of jobs in

our economy. The money that the government is talking about here is very well

spent indeed, to generate on the average we are looking at six or seven or eight

jobs per enterprise or for particular investments. It seems to me to be the kind

of work that will spread the jobs around this Province, and particularly provide

support in rural Newfoundland where it is difficult to come by financing or

business knowledge and investment.

I am delighted this has been so successful, and I hope the government

continues it and adds to this type of investment, because it is a very

productive (inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

Before we proceed to question period the Chair would like to take this

opportunity to welcome to the gallery today a group of representatives from the

RCMP, the RNC and the Newfoundland Safety Council. They are here in connection

with the Graduated Drivers License Program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for

the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal.

Today throughout rural Newfoundland and Labrador we are witnessing the

consequences of the Ottawa post-TAGS strategy. It has turned community against

community, neighbour again neighbour. Elected officials are calling down

bureaucrats and vice versa publicly in local papers and so on.

We brought up some of these points a few days ago in the House. The minister

says he has made representation to the federal government about addressing the

crisis in this post-TAGS strategy. What did he tell them, what was his response,

and when can we expect to see an end to this crisis that grips rural

Newfoundland today?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the hon. gentleman that the minister

made no such statement in this House. What I did do was on behalf of the - the

Member for Bonavista South came up with a particular problem he was having with

the post-TAGS job creation project in his district. I told him that I would, the

next day, be meeting with the local officials from HRD, the regional director

for Newfoundland, and that I would bring that problem to his attention. I did

that. In terms of making representation to the government, there is no point in

the hon. gentleman standing and saying I made commitments to do that. I did not.

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

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I certainly understood that the minister said

he would make representation to the House, but anyway we will check Hansard to

see exactly what he said. He certainly indicated it in that way.

The Premier and the minister have both indicated at certain times that they

have been right there with their federal counterparts in Ottawa seeing this

through with committees and so on in the House. If that is the case, Minister,

don't you share some of the responsibility for the crisis that has erupted in

rural areas right now today in this compensation program, and how it is being

administered today in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the hon. member opposite

is talking about. Because if the hon. member opposite were doing his homework he

would know that the Canadian Council for Professional Fish Harvesters was in

Ottawa for the last two or three days having their annual meeting, and that

extensive dialogue took place the Canadian Council of Professional Fish

Harvesters, notably the FFAW in this Province, Mr. Earle McCurdy and his

executive board, and with representatives of the federal government on all of

these questions.

As for myself, I was in Ottawa yesterday and indeed sat down with the

regional minister for Newfoundland and Labrador to talk about this program. In

particular, to talk about the need to ensure that the $68 million for post-TAGS

economic development is targeted towards, as we have insisted, rural

Newfoundland and Labrador. We do not want to see those funds end up in

institutions based in urban parts of the Province, be it any urban part of the

Province. We want to see those funds targeted for economic development

opportunities in rural Newfoundland and in Labrador.

I can tell you that I had a most constructive meeting with the hon. Fred

Mifflin, our minister in the federal Cabinet, and he shares our commitment to

seeing 100 per cent of those funds being delivered in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador. I was very pleased with the meeting.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I can say to the Premier there is no great

comfort to know they talked to the hon. Fred Mifflin to see if they can

straighten out some of this mess.

I will ask the minister again. There have been squabbles among communities,

among people within the communities. There has been a lot of problems. Is the

minister or the Premier aware of some of the problems with the criteria as they

exist now with these projects? There are many fights among people within the

communities, from community to community, and so on. Are you aware of those

problems, do you acknowledge those? Were some of those discussed in the meetings

you have just talked about?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, anybody listening to these questions, anybody

listening to the hon. member opposite who wants to hold himself up as some kind

of an expert concerned about the welfare of rural Newfoundland and Labrador

putting forward constructive questions, is still waiting - it has now been three

questions - for an example of what it is the member is talking about.

By the way, there are about 5,000 people, I think, today in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador who are employed in the projects which have been

brought forward. There is probably another several thousand placements that will

yet occur. I know that many members of the House, including members on the other

side, have worked with the Department of Human Resources Development and made

representation to see some of these people employed. I would congratulate

members on both sides of the House for doing that

Let me give you an example. In the Straits-White Bay North area there are 538

persons now employed. In Bonavista South there is 427 members now employed. I

know the member opposite has been involved in trying to make representation.

Maybe the Member for Baie Verte hasn't been doing his job. I do not know, I will

get to the list. In Twillingate & Fogo, 345 persons; in Burgeo & LaPoile,

339 persons; in St. Barbe, 279 persons; in Fortune Bay-Cape la Hune, 224

persons. The list goes on. I think we have to acknowledge that there has been a

substantial start both on the Island and in Labrador, and members on both sides

of the House have been working constructively to try and provide benefits and

assistance to those who need it. You will not provide benefits or assistance

just by getting up and making generalised statements that all is in crisis,

nothing is working right -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier to finish his answer.

PREMIER TOBIN: - without coming specifically to points that we can

address. We would be only happy to address them if we get concrete questions.

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

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I do not need the Premier to tell

me if I am doing my job or not. I am in my district day after day.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: People come to my house, and phone me on a daily basis. I do

not need the Premier to ask me if I am doing my job. I am not in Vancouver or

Toronto, talking at fundraisers.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SHELLEY: The question is directly from people, so when you hear this

question, Premier, it is directly from constituents in my district and other

parts of the Province who have called me to say: Do you believe that the

criteria has been right? Do you believe that the people getting on the projects

are the right...? The criteria for getting on the projects - are you aware of

those problems? I asked the minister yesterday and he said he was not aware of

them. Do you believe the criteria is proper? Do you believe the whole program is

being administered properly? Is that a fair enough question?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: First of all, Mr. Speaker, we are dealing with the federal

program, and the criteria which has been established is federal criteria. Is the

member suggesting that the thousands of people now on these projects should be

removed? That they are on there because of improper criteria? I am not

suggesting that. The member opposite is suggesting it. Are you suggesting -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: The member cannot have it both ways. If you disagree with

the criteria, are you suggesting that the $23.9 million spent so far on 399

projects, employing 3,899 people, that these projects be shut down? Are you

suggesting that those who have been hired be dismissed? Are you suggesting that

there be a restart of the program and a new criteria?

If you are suggesting that, I would ask you: What criteria ought to be

applied? And which individuals, on what basis, ought to be removed from these

programs?

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

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, if the Premier is so close to his federal

counterparts, he is on a daily basis in Ottawa bringing up the slack for

Newfoundland, he would not have to ask if I am suggesting those things at all. I

am dealing with them on a daily basis out in the district. I have asked you

about the criteria. You have not answered that one.

The truth is that the post-TAGS program has given us more of what has been

failing in the past. We certainly do need those for the short term.

Now I want to ask the question to the Minister of Development and Rural

Renewal. With the end of the post-TAGS projects, what is the long term for rural

renewal when it comes from the minister's department?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman wants me to go through the

list there - yes, I have one here that I could give him - what is the future for

the Department of Development and Rural Renewal. There are millions and millions

of dollars that we have spent under various agreements, trying to rebuild the

economy of this Province, but for me to stand up during Question Period...

I will tell him what. Tomorrow is Private Members' Day and there is a

resolution on the order paper dealing with exactly what we have done. I will

take fifteen or twenty minutes then and go through the whole spiel of what the

Department of Development and Rural Renewal has done.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TULK: Last year I walked into this House with a list of projects, a

list of jobs that had been created by the Department of Development and Rural

Renewal, and I offered to put them on the Table for him. He refused to read

them. He would not even bother to read them. He said: I do not want that.

No, we know what he wants. He would like to paint the image that rural

Newfoundland is either dead or dying. That is the image he wants out there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: That is what he wants to get out there so he can gain some

votes in the process.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, what I am doing is dealing with the reality,

not what the minister is trying to do: to come in and gloat every day about the

great revival that is going on in rural renewal in Newfoundland and Labrador.

That is what he is trying to paint; he is trying to paint a picture that is

not real. He goes around the Province and talks about the statistics of 20 per

cent (inaudible) on the South Coast, 21 per cent on the Northern Peninsula.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question.

MR. SHELLEY: Is the minister satisfied with all of these programs, that

they are addressing the problems correctly in rural Newfoundland and Labrador.

Are you satisfied?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, it is very clear to anybody who is listening

carefully that the time of the people's House, insofar as Question Period is

concerned, is being wasted today. There is not one substantive, specific

question coming from the member opposite who is leading off on behalf of the

Loyal Opposition today.

There are generalized statements about criteria, generalized statements

saying that the Province in rural Newfoundland in this regard has some kind of

problems; no specific questions to an entire government who is sitting here

waiting to answer questions.

I want to say to the gentleman who is acting on behalf of the Leader of the

Opposition today that the Opposition has a responsibility to come to the House

prepared to ask specific questions and to help the public policy process, not to

engage in negative commentary for the sake of negative commentary. That does not

give rise to good government or a good Opposition.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the Premier to take his seat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am on my feet now and I say to

the members opposite: Don't panic; I have a few simple questions for a simple

minister. My question today is for the Minister of Finance.

Government has intervened or committed to intervene in several of the

Province's pension plans; very recently the teachers' pension plan, the Public

Service Pension Plan and so forth. Is the Minister of Finance now confident that

the Province's pension plans are on a sound footing or have we simply postponed

the crisis? When does the minister expect that new interventions will be needed

to shore-up the plans in the future?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The pension plans are on a much sounder basis. At the rate that we are

funding the Public Service Pension Plan, which affects the majority of

employees, that will steadily increase over time. We can foresee in the next

probably fifteen- to twenty-year period, that would be funded to the extend of

about 60 per cent. It is now funded at 40 per cent.

With the teachers' pension plan we have not solved the problem. We have

probably bought more time. Right now it is funded at about 16 per cent to 17 per

cent. The changes we have made, plus money we are putting in, will achieve sort

of an inverse bell. So what you will have is. it will become better funded and

then in about the year 2020 it will fall off again. However, we have bought

sufficient time for us to deal, over the longer period of time, with the

prospects of demographic changes because one of the problems with the teachers'

pension plan is different than others in that many teachers retire much younger

than civil servants. So it gives us time to look at the demographics of the

current teacher population, to analyze changes with people who choose it as a

profession, who may perhaps stay longer. As well, it also gives the government

an opportunity to see what sort of long-term assumptions we can make about not

only retirement but also rates of return on the investments we made, and the

balance in our portfolio.

I might say that some of the other pension plans, the uniformed services and

pension plans of this House, are not funded at all, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Mr. Minister, in recent years, with escalating out-migration, school

enrolments have declined to the point that the government and its boards are

eliminating far more teaching positions than might have been estimated even a

decade ago.

When the government acted this year to shore-up the teachers' pension plan,

what were the working estimates of how far the Province's population and

enrolments will decline in the decade ahead? And how much pressure will the

consequent reduction in teaching positions have on the plan?

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

MR. DICKS: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the first observation of the hon.

member, the Province has actually not reduced teachers. We have increased them

this year by approximately 400. Is that the correct figure?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: I am sorry, 200, close to 300.

We have lowered the student/teacher ratio so that for every student in the

Province there are in fact more teachers rather than less. Last year we had the

lowest student/teacher ratio in the Province. Now we have an even lower

student/teacher ratio in the country. Now we have, by far, the lowest

student/teacher ratio in the country.

The second thing to realize is that whether or not the demographics of

existing teachers changes, from about 1990 forward all of the pension

entitlements were self-funded. The problems with the teachers' pension plan

really stemmed from the changes that were enacted and the liabilities incurred

prior to 1990. The recent changes we have made, the recent amounts of money we

announced that would be put into the pension plan, are monies to deal with past

unfunded liabilities, not currently accruing ones.

So the pension plan with respect to benefits that we are now accumulating,

whether it is teachers who were teaching prior to 1990 or will afterwards be

hired, are positive and in fact help the pension plan rather than being

detrimental to it.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: The teacher/student ratio may have increased but, you know,

you can make stats do anything you want. You can twist them whatever way you

want. In the meantime, I think in actual reality there are fewer teachers in the

Province today than there were a few years ago.

Now, many public service pensioners in this Province are struggling to

survive on pension benefits that have not kept pace with the rising cost of

living. When, if ever, does the Province intend to act to bring those pension

incomes up to a reasonable level that reflects the contribution these

individuals made to the public sector of the Province during the formative years

of Confederation? What would it take for the Province to afford a fair and

reasonable increase in pension benefits for these struggling veterans of our

public sector?

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Pension plans are based on contributions. The simple truth that a lot of

people do not like to hear is that many civil servants who retired in this

Province contributed far less than was sufficient to pay the benefits they are

currently receiving. There are only one or two pension plans in this Province,

if not this country, that receive automatic increases that are inflation

protected.

What we would look to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DICKS: Oh, no, Mr. Speaker, we can have all kinds - but these are

gratuities. You are giving money to people. Really what you are doing when you

say: Let's give it to people because they worked for government - what about the

people who worked as loggers? What about independent people who had to provide

for their own pensions? What about people who retired as fishermen and fish

plant workers in the Province?

It is inequitable to take tax dollars from pensioners who do not have an

indexed pension and use that money to give to people who work for government on

a pension increase. It is unfair.

If it is going to be done, and if there is a manner in which it could be

done, it is that we could work with the unions for a plan, that we would

increase the contributions of our current workforce to fund an indexation for

people who are retired. So far the unions and their people and their personnel

and current working population have not indicated willingness to do so, but we

are prepared to enter those discussions.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture.

Minister, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization, commonly know as

NAFO, is the regulatory body that sets rules and regulations for fishing outside

our 200-mile limit. Two months ago, NAFO held its annual meeting with

participating countries in Lisbon, Portugal. I ask the minister if he, himself,

attended and participated in this important meeting? If not, was there a

representative there from this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister for Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: No, Mr. Speaker, I did not. Yes, there was a representative

from this Province.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Immediately after this annual NAFO meeting held in Lisbon, Portugal, the

minister gave a glowing report of how pleased he was with the policy agreed to

by the seventeen countries that constitute the makeup of NAFO.

Minister, you were excited about NAFO agreeing to the extension of the 100

per cent observer coverage on all fishing vessels on our Continental Shelf. I am

told that those same observers that the minister is so excited about sometimes

file their reports only after the catch is landed and sold.

I ask the minister if it is any great comfort in knowing that those same

observers on those same foreign boats are observers from the same countries, and

sometimes from the same ports, that those boats sail from?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister for Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I realize that. In fact, it was only a second

ago before the question came that I turned to my colleagues and said (inaudible)

a question in this sitting of the House of Assembly; but I did not expect to get

the question that was asked last year, and two or three years ago.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: I thought I would have gotten something relevant to the

fishery today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: If the hon. member is trying to find fault with the observer

program that is ongoing today, he should go back five years ago, ten years ago,

twenty years ago, and take a look at what was happening outside the 200-mile

limit. Take a look at what was happening inside the 200-mile limit twenty years

ago compared to what is happening today.

Where are the observers coming from who are aboard our own ships? Where are

the observers coming from who are aboard the 65-footers inside our own waters?

From the communities in Newfoundland. Are we saying that because they are coming

from the same port, from the same community, they are all crooks, they are all

not doing the job? Is that what you are saying?

Are you aware that the enforcement agency of DFO, of the Coast Guard of the

200-mile limit since the observer program was put in place - 85 per cent?

Now there was an agreement at the most recent NAFO meeting to extend the

observer program outside the 200-mile limit aboard those foreign ships.

If the hon. member wants it scrapped and wants no observers on the boats,

then he should stand up and say so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister that it is not our own

ships we are worried about. I say to the minister, if they repeated the question

from last year, it is still a question for which we have not gotten an answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Minister, in your praise for NAFO and their new policies,

you also stated that a continuation of a moratorium on shrimp outside our

200-mile limit, in area 3L, was also an important objective achieved. The great

concern here was that a shrimp fishery in this area could compromise the

recovery of flatfish stocks.

I ask the minister if he is aware, or is he at all concerned, that part of

this very same area, area 3L, which you said would not be fished for shrimp, is

now being allowed by the establishment of a new area, area 3Ma? Minister, this

decision comes from the very same meeting which you were so quick to embrace.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: I think I am going to take the advice of my hon. colleague,

the Minister of Development and Rural Renewal, and set up a consulting business

and write some questions for you over there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Because it is absolutely unbelievable.

My praise for NAFO and the results of the NAFO meeting was in the best

interest of this Province and the fishery.

Let's take about the shrimp fishery that is taking place in Newfoundland and

Labrador today, where some $85 million worth of shrimp has been landed, where

some $60 million has been invested into shrimp processing plants and another $20

million to $30 million invested by fishermen in the equipment on their boats.

Why would we be agreeable to extending the moratorium for another year,

another period of time, outside the 200-mile limit? To give Canada a chance to

do some exploratory work inside and outside the 200-mile limit to establish its

presence in NAFO, to make representation, to get the advantage of the greater

percentage of that shrimp which will be fished commercially in the near future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: I would rather see Canada having time to do the proper

exploratory work and get 80 per cent or 85 per cent of that quota than to see

the foreign countries get the 80 per cent or 85 per cent of the quota sent

outside.

So, yes, we agree to the extension of the moratorium -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: - until we can position ourselves to make presentation to get

the best advantage of that fish which belongs to us.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are to the

Minister of Health and Community Services.

I was asked to attend a meeting last night with families of residents of the

Agnes Pratt Nursing Home. They said they appealed to you months ago, and in a

letter they indicated - of which I have a copy - they appealed to the Premier on

November 2 to intervene in this matter, the current lack of medical coverage

they have there.

Only 19 per cent of the 134 residents there are able to speak on their own

behalf. The families there are gravely concerned for the welfare of these

families, and especially members they have entrusted into the care of those

nursing homes under responsibility of your department; and, I might add, at a

cost to some of up to $2,800 a month. They feel they are not getting the medical

services that they bought into when they entered into those homes. This matter,

as the minister knows, has been going on for many, many months, closer to a

year.

As the chief individual who is overseeing health care here in this Province,

why have you procrastinated in giving these people the services they require?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Just by way of information, all of the St. John's nursing homes now come

under a board, the St. John's Nursing Home Board. Also by way of information, we

have recently negotiated a collective agreement with the Medical Association for

$32 million.

Part of that process, as the member may or may not know, is that you have to

actually work out the details of an agreement of such a magnitude after the deal

has been reached.

In terms of what is happening at the Agnes Pratt Home, the member opposite, I

am sure, is aware that as we speak the micro-allocation process is occurring

with the Medical Association, with the physicians, and with Treasury Board of

government. They are trying to work out the details of the micro-allocation.

However, I have great confidence in the physicians of the Province who are

professionals, and I know that they will not withdraw their services to our

frail elderly until this process is completed and at least until they have an

opportunity to see what is being offered.

In the meantime, it is also very important to inform the public that within

government we have administrative physicians who are now providing services

there, as well as the other physicians who are currently there working.

Again, I am not prepared to panic and I am not prepared to fearmonger. What I

am prepared to do is to allow the process to work, to trust in the professionals

and physicians to do the services that they are very equipped to provide, and to

have the confidence in our own administrative positions, Mr. Speaker, to see

that the services required are rendered.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is not the nursing home board that is taken to task by these people, and

it is not the doctors that are taken to task. They speak very highly of staff.

Back on April 21 the concerns were first addressed to you, and the people

(inaudible) concerned. On October 1 you allotted some money, and the money has

not been distributed.

I say to the minister that I was told yesterday a lady spent ten days with a

dislocated spine, in agony, before she could see a doctor. I was told of a

person who spent three weeks with an infection, on repeated requests from the

family to have a doctor, and they could not see him.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. I ask him to get to his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: I say to the minister that your own deputy minister

apologized last week to one of these, that it was inadequate care. As minister

you have a responsibility, not just the nursing home board, not the physicians,

not the staff -

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

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

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: When are you going to exercise the

responsibility that you have to these people that are in need of care in our

Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have to say again, because I think it is important, that I do have

confidence in the process and I have confidence in the physicians. I also have

to inform the member opposite that we live in an urban centre where we have a

number of hospital, acute and tertiary care centres available to us at any

particular point in time. I have great confidence in the nursing staff who are

able to make the assessment that is required. If one of the residents requires a

trip to the emergency department for care, that can easily be arranged.

However, I also want to note that a nursing home is not a hospital. It is in

fact a home, and we are providing the services there through our administrative

staff. Again, I will say that the micro-allocation of fees that are going to be

required to be paid in this particular instance has not been completed. Unlike

the member opposite, I would prefer to see the process completed before I

instill panic in people. I think it is important to reassure people services are

available, and the coverage will be granted to the people that need the

services.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Services will be provided, either

through the hospital system or through the physicians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister was in this House yesterday complaining that too many people are

using ambulances, and now she expects people to go from those homes by ambulance

to emergency departments. Now she is saying today: Use an ambulance, take an

emergency (inaudible). They could not go in an ambulance because they were not

considered an emergency, I say to the minister.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: In light of the fact that this issue has been going on for

almost a year, and frustration, Minister, is setting in, I have been informed

that as of November 30 - after waiting for several months and given notice

before and agreed to stay, that this matter still has not been settled - most or

all of the physicians in this City serving people at these homes will be

resigning. I ask the minister: Is she aware of this pending crisis that we have

been waiting since April to get settled? What is she doing to get it resolved?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I feel compelled to respond to the

preamble before getting to the question

because I think it is really - I cannot describe the word. To try to make some

sort of a correlation between abuse of ambulance services and nurses making the

assessment that a resident would have to be transferred to an emergency, well, I

think, quite frankly, it is really a despicable comparison to make. I have to

say it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, in response to the question, the

reason we have been waiting for intervention is because, as I previously

mentioned, we were in the process of negotiating a $32 million package for

physicians in this Province. In all fairness, as I pointed out before, we have

to work through each of the areas that require the micro-allocation or the

allocation of that particular amount of money to provide the services for

long-term care.

Mr. Speaker, I have confidence. I find it very difficult to believe that

physicians in this City would withdraw services in the middle of a negotiation

process.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It is like going on strike before you know what the deal

is. Quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, they are in the process of negotiating that. We

are working very quickly to try to come to some resolution, and I have the

confidence in our physicians as professionals.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Question period has ended.

Petitions

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

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

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of the students who attend

Lawrence College in St. John's.

The prayer of the petition reads:

We petition the hon. House of Assembly to not discriminate against students

who attend private schools in Newfoundland and Labrador. We ask that we be

eligible immediately for the Awards Program. We also petition the Minister of

Education to contact Ottawa to ensure that private college students are included

in the Millennium Scholarship Fund.

Mr. Speaker, this issue has been raised in the House. It was raised

yesterday. Again I say, as I said during question period, we support the Awards

Program. We believe it is a good, positive thing and we compliment the

government on that particular initiative. However, as we pointed out during our

questioning in the House, we want to say to the minister that it is

inappropriate the funds be available only to those students who are attending

public schools, namely Memorial University and the College of the North

Atlantic. We say that the minister should examine the double standard of

eligibility. As the minister knows, there were two criteria established. These

criteria are that the students have financial need and that they have a proven

record of scholastic ability.

I want to say to the minister that he should establish another criterion,

namely the type of school that the student attends. There are approximately, in

this Province, 7,000 students who go to private colleges. In fact, that is more

than the total number of students attending the College of the North Atlantic.

We want to say to the minister that we acknowledge that there has been some

discussion between the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Career Colleges,

the national association, and the committee set up in Ottawa to develop

regulations under Bill C-36. The view is, of course, that these students may be

able to be included. In fact, the Canadian Education and Training Accreditation

Commission has a seat now on the board or the committee that is setting up the

criteria. We want to say to the minister that if the federal and provincial

governments permit students in private colleges to avail of the student aid

programs, it makes commonsense that they should also be able to avail of any of

the initiatives.

We also point out to the minister that many of the programs that are offered

in private colleges are not available in public colleges. Therefore, I guess

that for the minister to be fair and reasonable he should take steps today to

make sure that the Awards Program he has just initiated be available to students

in all post-secondary institutions.

I say to the minister that in my dialogue with the Newfoundland and Labrador

Association of Career Colleges they have said that if the issue for the minister

is one that talks about the eligibility as far as the programs are concerned,

they are quite prepared to enter into dialogue with the minister and his

department to make sure that if he has concerns about eligibility, as far as the

content of programs or the longevity of programs, they recognize that not all

students in these schools spend the same length of time in their studies as

students at the University or at the College of the North Atlantic. They are

willing to dialogue on that.

It is fundamentally unfair. Since the minister, and the governments

nationally and provincially, take the money out of the taxpayers' hands to make

those awards, then we should say to the minister that it is incumbent upon him

as the minister to make sure all students are eligible on the same criteria to

be awarded a fair share of those scholarships.

Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister that the methodology should be transparent

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. H. HODDER: - it should be available to all students, and they should

take steps today to do away with the double standard of eligibility.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to support the petition as read and as commented on by my

colleague, the Member for Waterford Valley, as it relates to this issue of

scholarship funding, and where this scholarship funding is directed.

It is my understanding that the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation,

which I understand was created under Bill C-36, has not specifically excluded

private colleges, and in fact included private college representation in its

dialogue on the Millennium Fund preparation and the Millennium Fund scholarship

provisions.

Therefore, it appears that it was certainly the intention of the federal

parties, and the federal association put together for the scholarship plan and

program, that private colleges would in fact be included. Therefore, it is

somewhat surprising that in our own Province of Newfoundland and Labrador we see

some 7,000 private college students essentially being discriminated against,

because this is an issue of discrimination. It is obvious that there are

thousands of students in our public system who can take advantage of the

provisions of this scholarship program and this scholarship fund. However, we

must not exclude those 7,000 young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who have

seen fit to enrol in private college programs.

Therefore, the question has to be asked: Why isn't the minister taking a more

proactive role in ensuring that the interests and the concerns of students who

are enroled in private college programs are protected?

The petition today is from one particular college, namely, Lawrence College,

and the particular petition is signed by some twenty or twenty-five individuals

who have expressed concern - pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. OTTENHEIMER: That is, I understand, one of many petitions which are

to be forthcoming in this Legislature.

Clearly, we have a representation here of a number of students, private

college students, who are saying to this minister and who are saying to this

government: Please include us. Do not exclude us. We ought to be eligible. We

ought to be able to have access to this particular programming.

It is indeed a shame that this government has seen fit, for whatever reason,

for whatever unknown reason, to simple exclude the 7,000 Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians who have elected quite voluntarily to enrol in the private college

system.

I would ask the minister to accept seriously the plea of these students and

to give some consideration to the directing or redirecting of many of these

funds to those students who are enroled in such private colleges.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would just like to make a few brief comments with respect to the petition

which has been presented by the education critic and supported by the Member for

St. John's East.

Mr. Speaker, I happened to spend ten or twelve minutes earlier today on the

telephone with one of the petitioners, and I think I had to spend a little bit

of time correcting some of the information that he indicated to me he had gotten

from Mr. Hodder's office.

I would suggest that when members opposite are assisting people with

petitions, that at least they give them the facts. Because the conversation I

had with the student who was quite concerned, because it is a student of a

private college who would like to be included in the Newfoundland Awards

Program, and would like to be considered for the Canada Millennium Scholarship,

although the student did not know a lot about it and actually thought it had

already started because he had been told that by somebody from the Opposition

critic's office. I have to correct that, Mr. Speaker.

The notion that the students have bought into, which is in the language of

the petitions, they feel they are being discriminated against. I indicated to

the student that, while to claim discrimination makes for a good speech, there

is nothing discriminatory about this program.

Discrimination applies in a case where there is a program of general

application available that for some reason is then denied to a certain group of

people. The program that is in Newfoundland and Labrador, the Newfoundland

Awards Program, was never introduced as a program of general application that

any and every post-secondary student could have access to. It was introduced as

a targeted specific program. That happens in government all the time.

The student that I spoke to also had it somehow confused. He said that he was

discriminated against under the Canada Study Grants - again, which are not

generally applied programs but are programs through the Student Loan Program

that are available for single parents who are post-secondary students. He

admitted that he had no children. He was single, but he thought he should get

money too because there is a program to assist single parents pursue their

post-secondary education. He also described that as being discriminatory because

he was using some language, I guess, that he had heard in conversation with the

hon. member's office. At least that is what he ascribed it to.

The student also erroneously thought that the $4 million that is being

provided in the next two years by the Province while we are waiting for the

Canada Millennium Scholarship Program to begin in the year 2000 and beyond, that

the money was part of the Canada Millennium Scholarship; that it was sent to

Newfoundland by the federal government and we were passing it out early.

Mr. Speaker, there was some clear misinformation. I hope that when hon.

members opposite are speaking to students they will give them at least the

correct information, because it is an important issue. We have stated, as I said

yesterday, that if and when the federal government decides that the Canada

Millennium Scholarship, in which they have not developed the full criteria yet,

will apply to students in private training institutions rather than just the

publicly funded schools across the country, then we would certainly look at

revising the criteria for our interim program, the Newfoundland Awards Program,

which we announced yesterday has just dispersed the first $1.2 million. The

grants range from a minimum of $500 to a maximum of $1,000.

In fact, the students who were on the committee wanted to make sure that we

didn't send out a few dollars - five, ten, eight, seven, twelve dollars - to

5,000 or 6,000 students, but that we would give meaningful debt relief to

students; and meaningful means at least $500 dollars.

Because the program is so small, when we announced it in the Budget, we

indicated to the whole world that it was not a program of general application

for every student, but was a program targeted at the students with the greatest

indebtedness who, over the period of their full post-secondary careers, are

students in the public colleges and in the university, because they have longer

programs, longer borrowing periods, and greater debt. Because most of the

programs in the private training institutes, while they have higher tuition

initially, are only of a year's duration or less, so the students do not end up

with the debt levels that are in the public system.

As I stated again yesterday, and as I stated to the student this morning, if

and when the federal government decides to change the criteria for the

Millennium Program in the year 2000, and they specify the criteria includes

private schools, we will certainly look at it with our program as well.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Order No. 16, "An Act to Amend The Highway

Traffic Act (No. 2)", Bill No. 29, the Minister of Government Services and

Lands.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Motion, second reading of a bill, "

An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic

Act". (Bill No. 29)

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am very pleased to be here today to move second reading on Bill No. 29, An

Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act. This is a very significant bill.

I would also like to acknowledge the members of the police forces in the

gallery, along with the Safety Council representation, and members of our

department as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: Mr. Speaker, as members of this House are aware, the intent

of this bill is consistent with the unanimous recommendation made by the Select

Committee of the House of Assembly on property and casualty insurance.

In this report, the Select Committee said that the novice drivers, regardless

of age, were significantly over-represented in motor vehicle accidents, and that

teenage drivers were involved in a disproportionately high number of accidents

compared to other age groups. Graduated licencing, the report said, is the

solution.

I can assure the House that the Chair of the Select Committee, along with the

other members of the committee, that government is extremely pleased with the

work that the committee has done and that government expects to act on other

recommendations in the very near future.

There is widespread public support for a graduated licensing program from the

community at large, from our police forces, our health and safety organizations,

the insurance industry, and I welcome representatives of these organizations. As

I said, they are in the gallery here today to witness this.

This bill calls for the new Graduated Drivers Licence Program to be

introduced effective January 1, 1999. Also, I understand that all of the

mechanisms are in place. The police forces have their equipment; they have the

training in place. Our department has everything ready to go, so we are ready to

move on this as of January 1.

Other Canadian provinces have already taken such action, with remarkable

results, and I would like to speak briefly of the Ontario experience. The

program that was implemented in Ontario in April, 1994, and an interim report

that tracked data from 1993 to 1996 showed that overall collisions by novice

drivers went down dramatically by 31 per cent, and that the fatality and injury

rates among novice drivers went down by 24 per cent - very significant figures.

According to a study of Newfoundland and Labrador accident statistics, 16.5

per cent of all fatalities in this Province over a six-year period involved

drivers with less than two years of driving experience.

I am confident that our proposed program will save lives. It is designed to

help novice drivers acquire, on a gradual basis, the knowledge and skill needed

to safely operate passenger vehicles, light trucks and motor cycles. This

program enables new drivers to gain experience in conditions where the risk of

having a collision is low. For example, there is a

section in the bill which

requires Level I novice drivers to be accompanied by a licensed driver with at

least four years' experience. There is a

section which does not allow Level I

novice drivers to drive between midnight and 5:00 a.m. Under this bill there is

also zero toleration for alcohol for novice drivers.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. McLEAN: I look forward to the introduction of this program. It is

undoubtedly a move in the right direction; a move that will provide our novice

drivers, as well as our other drivers, with a greater degree of safety when

travelling on our roads.

The clauses that are very significant in this particular bill as well - I

will just draw your attention to these at this time because we can get down to

discussion in clause-by-clause situations in the committee stage.

At issue in this is that we will now allow teenagers at sixteen years of age

to do a test and begin to drive on our highways under very restricted processes.

This is a significant change because prior to now you had to be seventeen before

you could get behind the wheel of a car or light truck.

Also, I think the zero tolerance in the alcohol situation for novice drivers

is a situation that we should really, really stick to and ensure that when

novice drivers are getting behind the wheel, they will not be looked on in a

very favourable light. The penalties are very stiff for any novice drivers who

are tacked with a smell of booze on them anytime they want to get behind the

wheel.

These are a couple of very significant issues in this particular bill. As I

said, I would like to certainly congratulate the Insurance Committee of the

House, the Select Committee of the House, and all its members, for bringing this

forward and ensuring that we take it in. I would also like to say thank you

again to the police forces, the Safety Council, and our department staff who

worked very hard to ensure that we get this in place and have this ready to

enact on January 1.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Today, I am certainly pleased to rise in my place and support this

legislation. I think this is a very important piece of legislation that is going

through the House of Assembly in the very near future. Obviously it has been

supported by the RNC, the RCMP and the Newfoundland Safety Council. I believe

some of their representatives are here today.

As I say, any legislation that deals with the possibility of saving lives has

to be considered to be a very important piece of legislation. There is no doubt

about that. I think this will go a long way to save lives, not only of younger

people, though the stats have shown they are involved in more collisions and

more deaths and what have you than the percentages should be. Again, how many

lives will they save if they have an accident with any individual? It could be a

senior, it could someone in their middle age, or whatever the case may be. It

could be young children that they may have in the car with them.

I was amazed at this though, I have to say, when I read some of the

literature, that there have been approximately 10,000 young Canadians killed on

our highways within a ten-year period. It is really amazing. Again, this

legislation I think is long overdue. Certainly on this side of the House we

support it. That works about to be approximately, in a given year, over 800 per

year killed on our highways.

The minister mentioned the decrease in the collisions and the deaths when the

program was implemented in Ontario, and again, significant numbers in the saving

of lives.

There is one thing that I noticed in the legislation, I say to the minister,

and he probably could comment on this. I am thinking about younger people in

particular that are trying to get their driver's license and what have you. I

have known individuals who have gone up to Motor Registration in Mount Pearl

probably five or six times to get their license, and each time they go in they

have to fork over $50. I noticed here that when they are leaving certain classes

to go on to the next level, or whatever the case may be, I think it is going to

end up with paying a fee, probably $50. Then if they have to be reinstated, if

they do lose their license - I know there have to be penalties involved -,

upwards of $100 for reinstatement.

Another point I would like to make. This is something that really upsets me,

I suppose. Maybe it is because it is so close ,because I just had a son this

past January get his license, seventeen years old. It has to do with the

insurance rates that are charged for young male drivers. He is seventeen years

old and he has a number of friends, buddies, young women and young men he knocks

around with, and all of them have gotten their licenses. From what I can see

over this past number of months, in the past ten months say, some of them have

had accidents. It seems to me that it is the young females that are having more

accidents today than the young males. This is from my personal experience. Yet

the young males have to pay exorbitant amounts of money for insurance rates.

The point I am trying to make here is that with this new novice program and

the Graduated Driver License Program we have now, these young people cannot

drive from midnight to 5:00 a.m. When they do drive they have to have an

individual with four years' experience driving with them, so it is not someone

seventeen or eighteen years old. It is like someone seventeen and twenty or

twenty-one, whatever the case may be.

I am wondering is there any thought given to that aspect of it with respect

to the impact it is going to have on the insurance rates? Will the insurance

companies bring down the insurance rates themselves, or will there be some kind

of legislation, we would say? I doubt if that would happen, but in the meantime

it is a concern of mine.

Also, the zero tolerance with respect to alcohol, again will have a positive

impact in reducing the amount of accidents on our highways.

I do not want to belabour this because I support it, and I think most members

on this side of the House support this legislation. This Graduated Driver

License Program - and I do not want to minimize the importance of this

legislation, let me tell you that - but I have to say that if you talk about

drivers the Minister of Government Services and Lands is getting some mileage

out of this. Last winter he brought this into the House, he talked about it. He

put out a press release on September 29 where some of his facts were not

straight, from what I can read. Today he put out another release, had a press

conference, presented it in the House. Talk about somebody getting mileage out

of something.

He is bringing in a fair bit of legislation this sitting of the House, I have

to say that to him. He is keeping me busy, I can guarantee you that, in this

House of Assembly.

AN HON,. MEMBER: (Inaudible) credit union, the co-operative (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Untold. Yes, we have the co-op and the credit union bills

already done in this House, within a week. I would say to the Government House

Leader that it is a good thing we have the Minister of Government Services and

Lands or he would have nothing in this House of Assembly. He wants to keep it

open for a month. If you want to keep it open for a month it is a good thing you

have that man over there and this man right here, I say to you, Mr. Speaker!

Anyway, this is a very serious piece of legislation and I want to get back to

it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What did you say, the Member for Humber East?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The RNC or the RCMP have no reason to give me a speeding

ticket, or any kind of a ticket, I can guarantee you that. I am a well behaved

citizen on the highways, so far. The RNC and the RCMP have my full support and

they know that.

MR. SHELLEY: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Member for Baie Verte wants me to mention a certain

thing which I have already done.

MR. SHELLEY: I think you should do it again.

MR. J. BYRNE: I will mention it again. We have the Newfoundland Safety

Council in the gallery up there, and the RCMP and the RNC.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I am going to sit down to the pleasure of -

pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, I want to compliment the Minister of

Government Services and Lands. I do not do it that often, I can guarantee you

that, but with respect to this piece of legislation and the possibility of

saving lives on our highways in Newfoundland and Labrador, and in Canada in

general, it is very positive legislation. When we get into committee stage, I

will say to the minister, there may be some questions or points of clarification

but generally speaking, this is a good piece of work.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am certainly happy to rise here today and pass a few comments on the

Graduated Driver Licence Program. I commend the minister for implementing this

particular part of the Committee's report. I served on the Committee, along with

the Members for Humber Valley, Placentia & St. Mary's, Twillingate &

Fogo and the Member for Labrador West. Our Committee held in excess of sixty

meetings, if I recall. We went right across this Province and met with everybody

who wanted to meet with us and provided an opportunity in the forum for them to

come forward and express their views and opinions.

The underlying efforts, the reason why this Committee was formed, was to try

to reduce the cost of insurance. That was the reason why the committee was put

in place. In order for us to reduce the cost of insurance, the premiums we all

pay on an annual basis, we had to look at ways of reducing the payout by

insurance companies. The thing we heard most of all, everywhere we went, was to

implement a Graduated Driver Licence Program. It is nothing new. It has been

tried in other provinces and it has been quite successful, I say to members

opposite.

Everybody knows themselves, if you think back to your own days when you

reached the age of seventeen and you went out and got your driver's licence,

that it was a big event. The time that you excelled most, the time that you

picked to show how good you could drive the old man's car, was midnight or 1:00

a.m. If you look at statistics across this country, you will find that the

majority of accidents by young people happens between midnight and 5:00 a.m.

None of us were any different.

When we thought about implementing changes in order to reduce the accidents

that happen within those hours there were all kinds of concerns brought up. We

thought about the young person who was working at the service station and got

off at 2:00 a.m. or midnight. We thought about people who had to use their

vehicle to go and pick up their mom and dad, and people with one-car families.

We thought about bringing about a graduated licensing program where people would

go and take advantage of a driver training program, and we could see us creating

a bigger riff there by creating the haves and the have-nots. There is enough

disparity in this Province already without having somebody who was your buddy or

your friend who, because they came from a well-to-do family, could get their

driver's licence probably one year before my daughter or my son could go and

have the advantage of driving a vehicle.

Still, it had to be considered. We had to give some rewards to the people who

might want to go in that direction. That has been addressed right here in this

driver licensing program. Today in this Province you can go out and get your

licence at age seventeen. If you can get somebody to let you drive their

tractor-trailer, I can meet you tomorrow morning, after you get your Level I

licence, barrelling down the highway with the air horn going. That is how much

protection we give our young people in this Province today. All that has to be

changed. I think the reflection of the change will be reflected in what we pay

for insurance coverage down the road.

I say to the minister that he has been very fast acting in the undergraduated

licensing program and I commend him for that, but I also suggest that he act

expeditiously as well on our suggestion in our report regarding the uninsured

driver. That is a problem right across this nation, not only in Newfoundland. It

is a problem that needs to be addressed and needs to be addressed now.

I also suggest that the minister might want to look at the test that is

presently given to new drivers. In this Province today, in order to drive a

vehicle you must have a driver's licence, but equally important, in order to

drive a vehicle you must also have a minimum of third-party liability. One goes

hand-in-hand with the other. You are not allowed to drive without third-party

liability, and you are not allowed to drive without a driver's licence. You

would be surprised at how many people out there who know the shape of a stop

sign, they know the shape of a yield sign, but how many young drivers out there

today know anything about insurance? How many drivers out there today, when you

ask them if they have insurance coverage, they say: Yes, I have insurance. But

they do not know if they have public liability, they don't know if they have

Section B coverage, they don't know if they have

Section C. They are not sure.

They don't know, in a lot of cases, what their insurance means or what it

consists of.

If we are going to require, Minister, for our people to have insurance, I

think we should also include a few questions on the written driver exam about

insurance. At least it will get them to go looking and go searching, and find

out what some of the terminologies used in the insurance industry are.

I was an insurance representative for twenty-one years before I came into the

House of Assembly. Many times people would come to purchase - especially young

people - auto insurance and they would say: I want insurance. That is all they

would know about it. You would write them up their policy, they would pay the

premium, and they would not know what insurance they had until they were

involved in a collision or a mishap with somebody. Then they would come back and

probably find out that the insurance they thought they had purchased to protect

themselves was not there at all.

We heard this as we travelled the Province. We heard of people going to sign

an SEF form that would allow an underage driver to drive their vehicle, only to

find out in one particular case that the form they signed took away that very

privilege, and while driving in another province the person who they thought was

insured was not insured, and was involved in an accident for which they are

still paying the price.

We have started here today. I think it is a good beginning. I compliment the

minister, but I ask him to continue to implement the suggestions and the

recommendations that are made and brought forward in the report of the Select

Committee of the Property and Casualty Insurance in this Province. I feel that

give the implementation of those recommendations four or five years and we will

see the reduction of insurance premiums, because it will reflect on the payouts

the insurance companies are paying.

I commend the RCMP and the RNC and the Newfoundland Safety Council for taking

an interest in this piece of legislation, and coming here today in order to see

it passed through the House of Assembly, or at least passed through second

reading. Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to rise at second reading and support Bill No. 29,

An Act To

Amend The Highway Traffic Act (No. 2), to provide for a Graduated Driver Licence

Program. I think that this program ought to have a very positive affect on the

safety on our highways, both the safety of young people and young drivers and

the general safety of the program. I want to recognize the presence in the

gallery of representatives of both police forces and the Department of Works,

Services Transportation safety officers as well, as the Newfoundland Safety

Council.

It is not often recognized that both the RNC and the RCMP play a very

important role in the area of safety and safety education. They are not just

concerned with a strict enforcement of the rules as they exist, but they have a

very important role to play in encouraging safety on our highways. I am glad to

see they are here and in support of the Graduated Driver Licence Program.

When I learned to drive years ago the idea that was common in those days is

that you really learned to drive after you got your licence. You got your

licence, you qualified, you passed your test, then you really learned how to

drive afterwards. There was some common sense to that, and that common sense is

reflected in this program that we are discussing today. The common sense is that

the actual learning how to drive was becoming an experienced driver. That you

became an experienced driver really after you passed your test and after you

started driving. You did not become an expert driver just because you were able

to pass the test. You in fact passed the test that showed you had the basics,

and then you learned how to drive by getting experience on the highways and by

driving around in your community.

That is what this program recognizes as part of an inherent part of human

nature. That every young person, it is just as true today as it was when I was

young, is very anxious to get their licence because the privilege of driving a

vehicle is regarded as one of the paths to adulthood, a recognition that you are

responsible enough to get behind the wheel of a car and drive a vehicle.

That is a very important right of passage to adulthood, and people are

anxious to get that as quickly as they possibly can. This accomplishes that.

People always sort of felt discriminated against, I guess in this Province,

because you could not drive when you were sixteen, but you could in Ontario, the

States, and in other places. Now we have recognized that, but we have also

recognized that inexperienced drivers are involved in far more accidents then

experienced drivers. I want to make some reference to the insurance aspects of

this.

The Member for Cape St. Francis has raised some concerns about the cost of

insurance for young people. I would fully expect that in a matter of a couple of

years the experience ratings should reflect the safer driving habits and

experience of young drivers. I would expect that fairly immediately afterwards,

and if it do not happen I would urge the Member for Cape St. Francis to go to

the Public Utilities Board and ask them to review the rates for young people

under a particular age, based on the experience in this Province of young

drivers. If this does have the effect that is predicted, and I am confident that

it will have a positive effect, then surely that would be reflected in the

accident rate. It may take a couple of years for it to flow through the system

based on accidents that are already in the pipe, but there should be a resulting

decrease in the cost of insurance for young drivers, whether they be male or

female.

Notwithstanding the comments of the Member for Cape St. Francis, I suspect

the anecdotal evidence of his friends and children's friends and neighbours and

other people he has talked to, may not be a big enough sample to change the

rating system just yet. I think we could await further evidence on that before

we call for a change in the rate for young people.

This is a program that I support. I look forward to a reduction in the number

of young people who are killed on our highways. If you look at the figure of 800

young people in Canada per year losing their lives in car accidents, that would

probably translate in this Province to somewhere between fifteen and twenty per

year based on the population of this Province compared to the rest of Canada.

That is a very significant number of people. If the result of this effort can

reduce that significantly, that would be a very positive result indeed. The

number of deaths on our highways, the number of injuries that young people

sustain, and obviously the pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life for

young people as well as the cost of accidents would be thereby reduced.

I think there is some flexibility in the program. The minister has the power

to make and change regulations. I guess the first part of the program will be

the one that will have to be pretty carefully monitored to see how the program

is working. I hope that both the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and the RCMP

will be vigilant in seeing how the program is working, and not be hesitant in

pointing out to the minister and to the government any flaws that may appear in

the program. No doubt this program, like any other program, is going to have

some growing pains and flaws that will have to be worked out.

I hope that can be implemented, as the minister suggested, on January 1, and

that the new year will then bring about a better system for novice drivers. We

call them novice drivers; I know they are principally young drivers, although it

applies to novice drivers at any age. The new regime for younger drivers in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador should be a far more improved system as a

result of this program, and I commend it to the House and to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: If the minister speaks now he will close the debate. The

hon. the Minister of Government Services and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just before I close debate on second

reading, there are a couple of comments in response to the Member for Bonavista

South.

We take the report of the Select Committee of the House very seriously, and

we are dealing with the issues that were recommended in that report. Some of the

recommendations take longer than others and have to be dealt with in different

ways. This particular program was one of the easier ones to implement, that

allowed us to be able to get this implemented before January 1.

We are dealing with the issue of insurance rates in many ways, and hopefully

this is one of the issues that will certainly allow us to see rates either

stabilize or become much more affordable to the younger people, especially when

we go through this graduated program.

Some stats from 1997: Our population, I believe, is somewhere around 550,000

or 600,000 people in this Province, and we had, in 1997, 369,000 licensed

drivers. Many of our population take advantage of getting behind the wheel, so

it is very important that we get our young people set up through a good program

that will enable them to feel much safer on the highway when they get out there.

Also in 1997, there was a total of 410,743 vehicles registered in our

Province, which is a fair number of vehicles to be on highways such as we have.

That includes all types of vehicles, not only cars and light trucks.

Annually we get 6,000 new drivers come into the program each year at age

seventeen. We will see a change in that because we are now allowing people to

come in at sixteen, but there are still 6,000 new drivers each year who are

seventeen. It is quite a substantial number for a Province like ours. We also

see roughly 800 new motorcycle drivers per year. There are a fair number of

those as well.

Annually we have sorted out that there are about 7,100 accidents, and

annually we have approximately thirty-three fatalities. With this Graduated

Drivers Licence Program coming into play, we should certainly see a substantial

drop in that number.

Another initiative that our department has taken this past year and has been

very successful, and has put a lot of students through it, is the Driver

Examiner School Visitation Program which we did throughout the Province last

year and we are continuing to do this year. That has certainly impacted very

well on the younger drivers. In fact the take-up on that, according to my

officials, is very substantial. This will certainly help us as well in dealing

with the younger drivers who are coming onto the highways.

Mr. Speaker, I will deal with some of the other issues that the members have

raised in the committee stage, so I will now close debate on second reading of

Bill No. 29.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Highway Traffic Act (No.

2)", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House

on tomorrow. (Bill No. 29).

MR. SPEAKER (Penney): The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the House would like to have the

record show that there was a unanimous `aye' for that bill.

AN HON. MEMBER: Take a vote.

MR. TULK: We do not need a vote. If we all agree, the record will show

that.

Mr. Speaker, "An Act To Amend The Mineral Act", Bill No. 38, Order

No. 13.

Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Mineral

Act". (Bill No. 38)

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my pleasure to rise today to speak in relation to the Act currently

before the House,

An Act To Amend The Mineral Act. I want to speak in favour of

the legislation because it provides some new and strengthened powers to

government to act in the area of mineral development in Newfoundland and

Labrador.

We have an unhappy past in this Province in relation to our people obtaining

the maximum amount of benefit for our resources. You know, it is kind of ironic

that in the last couple of years a brand new political party arose out of

nowhere on the strength of a single proposition. That proposition was that the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador should get the maximum benefit from their

resources.

The people who devised that party may have had a very negative view of

Newfoundland history, but they did not know very much about Newfoundland

politics because it has been the policy of every single party in Newfoundland

and Labrador since the history of Responsible Government in this Province and

even before, Representative Government back in 1832, to have Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians obtain the maximum benefit from their resources. The question has

often been: How do we do that? And the question has often been: What is the

maximum benefit from our resources?

It has been an ongoing theme of Newfoundland history, whether it be our

mineral resources, whether it be our forest resources, or whether it be the

resources of the sea. The constant struggle in this Province has been between

the beneficiaries of our resources, whether they are resident here, or whether

the beneficiaries of our resources reside somewhere else in the capital markets

of England, the U.K., or the merchant princes going back to the fish merchants

or the lumber barons or the pulp and paper barons who established paper mills in

Grand Falls and Corner Brook. These people have done very well by our resources,

leaving behind serious questions about what value the people of this Province

have obtained.

When we look at our Budget, at the Estimates annually put before the House,

and we see that this Province gets more revenue from gambling, from bingo,

lotteries - lotteries run by the government - a tax on hope someone called it.

This government is really big on hope. They ran the last time on `ready for a

better tomorrow'. They are reaping more from hope than they are from positive

results. When we see that the revenue from gambling and lottery earnings is

significantly higher than the revenues from mineral royalties, by a factor of

about two, I think - almost twice as much comes from gambling than comes from

our minerals and royalties, including oil.

That is one aspect of it. That is certainly one aspect of it. The other

aspect is jobs; in many cases in our mining industry, well-paying jobs. We use

Labrador West as an example. We have very high paying jobs in the mines of

Labrador West. People who work there earn probably the highest on average

incomes of any town or city in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, in

Labrador West, and contributing significantly to government revenues in the form

of income taxes as individuals.

Mr. Speaker, individuals in this Province contribute ten or twelve or more

times the income tax revenue than do corporations. We had a situation a few

years ago where government introduced a Mineral Tax Act amendment which was

going to give a tax holiday for ten years for every new mineral development in

the Province - bar none. That was a decision of government in December of 1994.

They introduced a tax regime that was going to say - that did say - that from

here on in, any new mineral development in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador was going to have a tax holiday of ten years.

The Minister of Mines and Resources at the time was a geologist, an

experienced geologist with a doctorate in geology. He had worked in the

Department of Mines and Resources for many years himself, and he and his

government, in their wisdom of the day, felt that there was not very much left

by way of mineral development to take place in Newfoundland and Labrador. They

felt that we had to encourage the development of what little bits and pieces

there were around, the unprofitable mines; perhaps someone having a go at the

tailings out in Baie Verte, the marginal types of operation government was

trying to encourage.

They seemed to think that the only kind of mineral development that could

possibly take place in the future of this Province was mineral development

involving marginal operations that needed a tax holiday to go ahead. This was in

December of 1994, some months -

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Yes, in December of 1994, I say to the minister, you and your

government passed the mineral tax amendment act that gave a tax holiday to

Voisey's Bay.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Voisey's Bay was discovered in 1994. In December of 1994 -

November of 1994 - you and this government passed a Mineral Tax Act that was

giving a tax holiday to all new mineral developments in the Province, bar none.

The Minister of Mines and Energy wants to know what it has to do with this

bill. He obviously has not been listening to my remarks because what I have been

talking about is how we, in this Province, maximize the benefit to the people of

this Province from our resources. One of the ways that we do not do it is by

giving holus-bolus, bar none, tax holidays on the basis that we think somehow

there is nothing else to be discovered; there is nothing else to take place

except marginal operations.

I think the government acknowledged that they made a mistake. They did. They

acknowledged that they made a mistake, but they have yet to correct it. There

was legislation brought in by the previous Premier in what turned out to be the

twilight of his premiership, what turned out to be one of his last acts in this

House of Assembly. There was legislation brought in at second reading to bring

in a new mineral tax and royalty regime. What happened to it? Dead. It died with

the government, never again to see the light of day.

The former, former Leader of the Opposition who faced the electorate in the

last election as Leader of the Opposition, that former, former leader -

MR. SULLIVAN: Former, former, not me.

MR. HARRIS: Not you, no. The former, former.

The former, former Leader of the Opposition, Lynn Verge, and I were

successful in forcing the government to stop, to send that legislation to a

Select Committee of the House. That legislation on a new mineral royalty regime,

we forced the government to put that to a Select Committee of the House. That

committee was supposed to meet but never met.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Yes, that is a very interesting story. I will let you tell it

yourself now when you get up.

Mr. Speaker, that committee never met. It was never able to hear from people

across this Province as to what kind of mineral royalty regime we should have in

this Province to deal with Voisey's Bay. It never met because the government was

dissolved. A new Premier took the place of the previous Premier and we went into

an election. From that day forward we have yet to see a piece of legislation

dealing with royalty regimes for minerals in this Province. We have yet to see

one.

What do we see instead? We see two things. Number one, we know there is

something going on. We know there are negotiations going on behind the scenes

between the government and Inco. They probably stopped a little while ago. They

are probably on hold at the moment, but we know there have been negotiations and

discussions. We do not know yet what those negotiations were. We do not know yet

what royalty regimes were under discussion. We do not know yet what this

government believes ought to be a proper royalty regime for Voisey's Bay or

other mineral development.

Now what we have is legislation here - it is an improvement. We do not have

words that are subject to

interpretation by high-priced lawyers, subject to the

uncertainties of the courts, using words that members opposite get up and

trumpet when it suits them but they lose out when it comes down to having them

interpreted.

We now have a definite seat of power in the Cabinet. What we lack, despite

that, is some certainty.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) said you were down before the PUB last

(inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I was down there yesterday.

Mr. Speaker, since this is going to appear on the record, the members

opposite are wondering what I was doing at the Public Utilities Board. I will

tell them what I was doing at the Public Utilities Board. I was responding to a

very important concern that was raised to my office by many, many people over

the last year. That is the collection practices of Newfoundland Power, and how

they go about cutting off people's electricity when they are unable to pay their

arrears or unable to pay their light bill.

I am doing that as a Member of the House of Assembly, and trying to do two

things. I am trying to have proper collection policies written that people can

know about. The second thing I am trying to do is hopefully to create - out of

excess profits that may have been earned by Newfoundland Power - a hardship fund

for those people, some on social assistance, some who are working, who do not

get enough money from this government to be able to heat their homes and feed

their families, can get some relief. That is what I am doing there.

If members opposite want to take potshots at me for being before the Public

Utilities Board, they can go right ahead. In fact, I would welcome some of them

coming down and offering some more evidence from problems they have had with

people who have had trouble with Newfoundland Power or Newfoundland Hydro, I say

to the Minister of Mines and Energy.

I have just written you a letter about the particular individual. You will

hear from me.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, to get back to the Mineral Tax Act and the

Mineral Act, what we are doing here is in effect the same thing as government

has done, taken upon itself with respect to Voisey's Bay. They have taken power

onto themselves, and with that power comes a great deal of discretion, I say.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: The minister says responsibility. Yes, responsibility, but I

am going to ask this minister, and hopefully he is going to address this when he

speak on this bill: Let's look back in history and see what previous governments

have done with the kind of discretion they have been given by legislation.

We have seen, for example, the giveaway of most of our forest resources,

large tracts of land.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I am back before Commission of Government, I say to the

minister. I am back to 1906, 1909. If looking back in history we see that this

Province, and the people of this Province, and country before it, gave away

total rights to natural resources in order to get development, that has to end.

There has to be a continuing ability of government, of the people of this

Province, to extract the best deal we can get in order to get development and

maximize our potential.

One of my first lessons about this I learned in the Province of Alberta when

I was there as a law student in the 1970s. This was just after this Province had

started a drilling program, just after this Province had gotten involved in

offshore oil exploration. What I discovered out in Alberta is that the people of

Alberta, the Alberta government, owns every drop of oil in the ground.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: They do not have any ocean; I noticed that when I was out

there. I was 700 miles from the ocean; I remember it well.

They owned that, and do you know something else? The Alberta government has

the power to amend every lease with every oil company, based on their ownership

of the oil in the ground. That is a continuing power that the people of Alberta

have, through their government, over time, to make sure that they are able to

insist and maximize the resources of their province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I say to the minister, that is why I remembered it so well.

It was so important to Alberta's control of its own resources in the future.

That would be fabulous, if we in this Province had the same right of ownership

and control of offshore oil. It would be fabulous if we continued to have that

right over our forest resources in this Province that have been hived off and

given to private interests, whether it be Bowaters, Abitibi Consolidated, or

whatever their name is this particular year. I do not mean that facetiously, but

it is obvious that the ownership of the resources of this Province changes hands

again and again - not our hands, someone else's hands, whoever has the capital

power to buy out this company or merge that company or take over some other

company and have the resulting control over our lands.

We have seen that when that happens we alienate our natural resources to

private interests. We do not have the kind of control we need to have. As a

result we see Bowaters, for example, for fifty or sixty years, produce one

product. Out of the vast forest resources they had under their control and

power, they produced one product - pulp and paper - newsprint. As a result, the

West Coast of our Province in underdeveloped. It does not have the diversity of

industry and enterprise and manufacturing that is could easily have if, in fact,

there was the power and control of governments from time to time to insist that

the whole panoply of products that are able to be developed from forest

resources were in fact produced.

It has taken extraordinary measures by government to force companies to use

enormous sawlogs for sawlogs instead of turning them into pulp. It has taken an

enormous effort from governments from time to time to do that.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Well, governments do some things but they often have to pay

for them with concessions of other kinds. We should not have to do that.

Sometimes we do.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: That is what I mean, sometimes we do.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Progress is being made. I am not saying that. I say to the

minister: Why did you have to do it? This is something -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: You did it, Mr. Speaker. This government did it because

nobody had done it in the past. Nobody had forced them because they were able to

exercise their power and control because of their ownership of the resource.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: It is absolutely right to do it. It should have been done

fifty years ago. What happens is, when we allow ourselves to have these natural

resources alienated in the hands of someone else, they start exercising their

private property rights and they have the ability to insist that they use those

private property rights in the way that suits their profit.

Mr. Speaker, in principle what is being done here is a very positive thing. I

would go further and say that it is not retroactive enough. I know the minister

made some promises about tabling legal opinions; I have not seen them yet.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Yes, and I am sure that if it is in the interest of the

people of the Province that Cabinet will agree to make them put them on the

Table of this Legislature.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: What I am interested in is the future of this Province. If

this minister is saying that there are legal opinions that prevent them from

going back before 1993, let us see them. They are only opinions. They are not

state secrets. If the minister wants to say that they are not in the interests

of the Province, let him explain why they are not. Let him put them on the

table. I would like to see them because I think we should be going back further

in time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Take the consequences. We will take them on and stand up for

our future.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: The minister is being facetious, I know, and he will, in his

own speech, deal seriously with these issues.

Mr. Speaker, there has to be a point at which we stand up and say we are

going to take control of our natural resources. We have taken a few steps in the

past and some of them have been expensive. We took back some of the reed lands.

We took over CF(

L) Co. We can also pass legislation, and progressive

legislation, that sees us taking control over a mineral development in this

Province that goes back prior to 1993, that ensures that whatever property

rights exist in mineral development cannot come under the same regime;

progressively based on rules that would gradually see all minerals come under

this if they are not developed. (Inaudible) I think it was a different regime.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Okay, I will deal with that. I mentioned that what we are

doing here is giving a lot of power to the executive. That cuts both ways. If

you have a government that is prepared to stand up, be tough, and represent the

best interest of the people, then it is good. On the other hand if you have a

government - and some have said that former Premier Smallwood was good at this

too, doing whatever deal he had to do to get a development to take place.

That is the other side of that, Mr. Speaker. I am not going to deal with any

particular argument about history, because that cuts both ways. The other side

of that is that if you have a strong government that is doing a proper job, and

they have the tools and the power to do it, that is one thing. On the other

hand, if you have a government that can be manipulated by the carrot of

development into making bad deals, then it can go the wrong way.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: I would be much happier that it reside with the executive

because the executive we can throw out. The judges we have trouble throwing out.

The judges, once they are appointed - and I don't disagree with that, Mr.

Speaker. The independence of the judiciary is important, but the will of the

people is also important.

As long as this legislation is there individual particular schemes can be put

before the Legislature to be voted on, rather than people saying: I discovered

this mineral, I have these property rights, and I am going to dispute them in

the courts. This is a very positive step. I guess one of the things that has

changed over time is that developments of this nature are going to be

scrutinized very deeply by this side of the House, by the public in general. As

long as we have the ability to influence agreements that are made there should

be some process in place that we do not have a fait accompli presented to the

public: Here is the deal that we have made with such-and-such an organization,

lay it on the table, and that is it, take it or leave it.

There ought to be a process as part of this where there can be public

scrutiny of a proposed scheme for a particular development before the die is

cast. That is what is important. When you give the Legislature power there is

public scrutiny. When you give the executive power quite often the public

scrutiny comes after the fact. That is the only weakness I see here, and I think

it can be improved by a process that subjects this to public scrutiny before the

die is cast.

The other weakness of the executive having the power is they can do a deal

and present it as a done deal and say: If you don't like us, throw us out next

time. The public never has a chance to have a look at the deal before the die is

cast. That is one of the weaknesses of this approach. We should look at some

scheme or some method whereby a proposed leasing arrangement can be subject to

public scrutiny, perhaps a committee of the House, before the die is cast. I

think, in terms of insulating the people and the government from legal

challenges, this is a good first step.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I want to say a few words on this Mineral Act, or more than a few I would

imagine. Bill 38 is

An Act To Amend The Mineral Act. What have we done, and what

has history shown that we have done, in this Province for hundreds of years with

our natural resources? The Minister of Mines and Energy does not look too

energetic over there today, but he is going to hear the story now. Our history,

as I said, is that for hundreds of years we have squandered our natural

resources. It started in 1497 when John Cabot -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon? My relatives may have been there, I say to the

minister. Sometimes in this House of Assembly when things are being dragged out

I feel like I have been there, I can guarantee you that, when I'm hearing some

of the ministers on that side giving answers. I can guarantee you that, with

respect to time going by.

In reality, if people want to sit back and size up the situation with respect

to this Province, our natural resources, Mr. Speaker, we have squandered our

resources over the past number of years. Since back in 1497, as I say. If you

would read your history books, back in the time of the fishing admirals, they

would be down sitting on the barrels handing out judgements all over the place.

What did we have at that time? We had our people working for a pittance, and

when they were finished up for the season they would owe the people they fished

for. That went on over the years in the 1930s, 1940s and 1950s.

AN HON. MEMBER: Long before that.

MR. J. BYRNE: Long before that, the Member for Humber East says. That was

with our fishery. That continued on in the 1950s through the 1980s with our

natural resource of the fishery. When we joined Confederation back in 1949 and

we gave jurisdiction to the federal government for the fishery, Mr. Speaker,

they started giving away all kinds of quotas for the foreign fishery, to

countries like Spain and some other countries, I suppose, in Europe. We gave

away our fishery for years. Today we are paying a price for it in this Province

when we don't have a fishery like we used to have.

The Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture gets up every now and then and he

talks about: We have more money coming into the coffers now from the various

fisheries and the different species and what have you. We do not have as many

people working in the fishery. We do not have the rural fishery, the inshore

small fishery where the villages in this Province survived for years.

I got that from the Premier, I say to the Minister of Mines and Energy. Then,

what happened? After we gave away our resources with respect to the fishery,

then came the forestry. What happened there? We gave that away over the years.

Yes, the natural resources. I remember the former minister of forestry, the

Member for Windsor-Springdale, was asked a question in this House of Assembly by

the Member for Baie Verte. The response was: Trees can't swim.

There are questions being asked all the time with respect to the forestry

about the natural resources, about silviculture, and that is why he is no longer

the minister. With that attitude of course, let's look at our land. We wanted to

get a railway across this Province. What happened there? We gave away our land,

thousands of acres - we would say now thousands of hectares - for the railway.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I wish I had been there to survey it, I say to the

Government House Leader. I probably would not be here today, I would be off

retired somewhere, I suppose, Mr. Speaker. The railway, again, we gave away

thousands of acres of land. I think it was a few years ago we got some of that

land back in a deal with one of the paper companies.

Then came of course the infamous Churchill Falls. Again, a natural resource

for this Province that should have been utilized for the maximum benefits of the

people of Newfoundland and Labrador. What is happening? Again, a comparison can

be drawn between Churchill Falls and the IOCC situation that we find ourselves

in today and the people being upset. Churchill Falls, water flowing for

eternity, flowing hundreds of millions of dollars into Quebec.

The point I am trying to make is that this piece of legislation hopefully

will go a long way to resolving that situation and putting to an end the

squandering of our natural resources in the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon? Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Mines and Energy is

not taking this very seriously. This is very serious. This is a piece of

legislation that is being -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Pardon? Yes. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Mines and Energy

who is sponsoring this bill in this House of Assembly, who tabled this bill in

the House of Assembly or whatever, who is presenting it, is over there and I do

not think he is taking it too seriously. Maybe it is just the spirit.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am getting to it. I am telling you history now. I have

already told the Minister of Mines and Energy since I stood that we support this

legislation, but there are some concerns. I think the minister should be

interested in hearing what they are.

One thing is that it is about time we as a people maximize the benefits that

we get from our natural resources. Again, this piece of legislation, hopefully,

will go a long way for us as a people to maximize the benefits that we get from

our natural resources.

Basically, when we have legislation coming through the House of Assembly -

and there was some discussion on this with the Government House Leader some time

ago, since I have been here anyway - when we get legislation that is going to be

put to the House, that we get it in advance so we can sit down, go through it

clause by clause, come in this House of Assembly, speak to the legislation, and

we can say if we are for it or against it. Often times we do not really have a

lot of lead time to look at the legislation and get up here and speak and make

some good points.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Minister of Government Services and Lands, who is not

in h