May 1,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIII No. 18

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers.

The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker,

WHEREAS the people of Manitoba -

AN HON. MEMBER: You have to ask leave to introduce a

resolution.

MR. DECKER: May I have leave to introduce to a

resolution, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: So we are not on Statements by Ministers -

the hon. the minister is asking leave?

MR. DECKER: I am asking leave for a resolution. We have

the consent of the Opposition and also the NDP.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. DECKER:

WHEREAS the people of Manitoba who live in

the Red River Valley are facing a monumental challenge brought on by natural

causes; and

WHEREAS all Canadians share in the struggle of the people of

Manitoba and of the Premier and government, the mayors and municipal councils,

relief organizations, water control management authorities and all other

emergency teams to minimize the life threatening challenges and the property

damages thrust upon them by the unusually high levels of the spring run-off in

the flood ravaged areas of Southern Manitoba;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly of

Newfoundland and Labrador express our concern and, as members of the Canadian

family, want them to know our prayers, thoughts and best wishes are with them as

they struggle to control the harsh realities that nature has unleased.

Mr. Speaker, if you will permit me, in the year 1964 I spent

a summer in Manitoba. I spent time in practically all the provinces of this

great country of ours, and the thing that I remember most about Manitoba is the

similarity between that Province and our own. Now, first when you hear that

statement, you would think that no two provinces could be more different,

because we are surrounded by the ocean, except for the Labrador part of our

Province, and Manitoba is completely land-locked. I am not talking about the

geographical similarity or dissimilarity, Mr. Speaker, I am talking about the

similarity of the people. If you look at Manitoba, for years and years the

economy was based upon farming, and synonymous with a farming economy would be

rural people. Even with the city of Winnipeg, which is, of course, the largest

settlement in the Province of Manitoba, the rural ceiling, the rural ambience

permeates the population of Winnipeg just as it does in St. John's,

Newfoundland. We are a rural people.

What we all recognize in Newfoundland and Labrador is the way

we stand by each other. In rural Newfoundland you will borrow a loaf of bread,

you will borrow a garment of clothing, you will borrow an automobile. In

Manitoba, the thing that struck me is how they borrow, they loan - they loan

tractors, they loan combines. It is that rural ambience which permeates the

province. There is so much similarity, and other provinces are similar, as well.

In 1964, I was there as a young man, and even to this very

day, I receive Christmas cards and various letter from the people of Manitoba -

a very fine group of people.

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are no strangers to

tragedies, to natural disasters, if you look back through our history, long

before we came a part of this great nation. We have examples of our people who

were brought in from the seal hunt, frozen solid, corpses on the sides of

sailing ships.

We are no strangers to tragedies, to disasters. So, our

hearts go out to anyone in this great country of ours who is threatened by a

tragedy; be it from a natural cause, or whatever, we have empathy towards people

in such a situation. So, that is why every Newfoundlander and Labradorian is

keenly interested in the news of our fellow Canadians who live in Manitoba,

fellow Canadian who are threatened by a disaster of natural causes.

It is our hope and prayer that these dykes will hold and that

no more hardship will be forced upon the people of Manitoba than they have

already had to bear. But we want them to know, that we, their fellow Canadians

in this Province of Newfoundland and Labrador are standing solidly behind them

and watching them very closely.

AN HON. MEMBER: Do not forget the Newfoundlanders who are

up there.

MR. DECKER: Yes. My colleague has pointed out to me also,

that there are Newfoundlanders and Labradorians living in Manitoba. I read a

letter from a person who was quoted in The Evening Telegram just

recently. We also bear them in mind, but as Canadians, the newest members of the

Canadian family, we in Newfoundland and Labrador want our fellow citizens in

Manitoba to know that we are just as anxious as the people who live right at the

edge of these dykes. And when the flood does crest, we are hoping that these

dykes will hold and that this thing will have as happy an ending as it is

possible to have under such very serious circumstances.

Mr. Speaker, it is our wish that they know that we stand with

them.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to say to my colleagues in

this House how happy I am that we can have a three-party agreement on this

resolution.

Yesterday, I made the suggestion to the Government House

Leader. He was very receptive and I want to thank him for that.

Mr. Speaker, as members of the Canadian family, to which the

Minister of Justice just referred, we share the anxiety of our friends and

families in southern Manitoba and all of the people and residents in that part

of that province as they try to cope and try to brace for what will be known as

the `Flood of 1997'. All of us have watched with concern in the last few days

and the past few weeks as residents, flood control personnel, other emergency

agencies including the Canadian military, prepared for the worst case scenarios.

Mr. Speaker, it is our hope and our prayer that the various

dykes that surround these communities and particularly around Winnipeg and all

the other neighbouring towns, will hold, and that they will be able to control

the flood waters. Mr. Speaker, from the experiences up river in the southern

region of Manitoba and the areas of North Dakota, we know how precarious and

unpredictable these dyke systems can be and how unpredictable events can be.

Last evening on CBC television, in particular, as well as in

other media, we saw the determination of residents as they tried their best to

cope with the forces of nature. Mr. Speaker, we encourage them and we admire

their resolute spirits. More than 25,000 residents in the Province of Manitoba

have already been evacuated from their homes, and we have seen and witnessed

through television the building of the Ronkite dyke or, as they call it, the Zee

dike, because it zigzags south and west of the city of Winnipeg. This dike was

built in the past month using everything that was available.

We saw in today's paper the pictures of the school buses. We

saw the mile-long bunker that has been built with every resource that was

available to them. Mr. Speaker, we hope that everything holds.

So, Mr. Speaker, we want as Canadians, to let the people of

Manitoba know that we care, and today we reach out to them and say to them: We,

as a Province, know what adversity is, and, as the Minister of Justice said: We

are no strangers to the unforgiving forces of nature. As a young boy I well

remember growing up on the Burin Peninsula and hearing my mother tell what it

was like to be in a little village called (inaudible) during the great

earthquake and tidal wave of 1929, as she watched the houses being destroyed and

families being floated out to sea as a young girl of fifteen years old. She told

us what it was like to see that kind of tragedy. She was there. Mr. Speaker,

today we show concern for the physical safety of our Canadian friends, and we

also want to show concern for the protection of their property.

Earlier today I spoke with Mr. Albert Pelley the manager of

the fund development communications offices with the Red Cross of Newfoundland

and Labrador. He informs me that Mr. Desmond Dillon of Gander left this morning.

Mr. Dylan is a trained official with the Canadian Red Cross. He left to assume a

supervisory position in one of the reception centres in the southern region of

Manitoba. Other officials are on standby in this Province. They are ready on a

standby basis to go when, where and if they are needed. As some members know,

the Newfoundland and Labrador division of the Red Cross functions as part of the

Atlantic division. The whole effort for Atlantic Canada has been coordinated

through St. John, New Brunswick.

I would like also to note that Mr. Pelley and the regional

director for Newfoundland and Labrador, Ms Rhonda Kenney, are in the galleries

today. They are here because they are interested in this particular resolution.

We welcome them and assure them of our support.

I've also been informed that the Red Cross has begun an

appeal for funds. I want to recognize that the Royal Bank of Canada has started

with a $100,000 donation. I'm informed that all the major banks across this

country are receiving funds to assist the people of Manitoba. Of course,

donations can be made directly to the Canadian Red Cross here in this Province.

I've also been in contact today with officials of the

Salvation Army. I want to recognize in the gallery as well Major Roland Murphy

of the Salvation Army. He informs me the Salvation Army has been on site since

day one. They tell me that they will be on site as long as the need exists for

them. In fact, today I have a copy of a press release that was issued yesterday

by the Salvation Army headquarters in Toronto, and it says: Already over 60,000

people have been served by the Salvation Army since the beginning of their floor

relief work in the Winnipeg area. Volunteers have registered and have taken

part

in working in some way. Workers have been working diligently twelve to fourteen

hours a day meeting the needs of the flood victims.

Mr. Speaker, I also want to note, the Salvation Army

operation is called `Operation We Care'. I say to my friends in this House, we

want to recognize the work of the Red Cross and the Salvation Army in reaching

out to our friends in Manitoba.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to the press as well, with

permission from these people, that both Major Murphy and officials of the Red

Cross are available to meet the press after Question Period today.

We on this side, and in this Party, and as a Canadian family,

feel for the anxieties of the people of Manitoba and we want to thank all hon.

members for their support of this very important and crucial resolution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to wholeheartedly support the resolution presented by

the Minister of Justice on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador, and commend the Opposition House Leader for suggesting that we send

such a message to the people of Manitoba through a resolution of this House.

I am sure all hon. members have been watching with great

trepidation the events unfolding in Manitoba over the last number of days. While

we all have to deal with sort of our inconveniences of daily life - I am sure

there are a lot of people who were not very happy to see twelve inches of snow,

or however much we got yesterday after we were expecting a spring come by - but

obviously these little inconveniences pale in comparison with the crisis that

the people of Winnipeg and area are experiencing these days when their very

homes are being threatened by the flood of - well, it is not the flood of the

Century - I am told it is the largest flood waters expected since somewhere

around 1850 or thereabouts. So we are dealing with a very serious situation

which is only mitigated to some extent by the good weather that they have been

having in Manitoba, and the lack of rain.

I am reminded, I suppose, of last summer when the people of

the Saguenay region of Quebec had to deal with a perhaps more devastating flood

situation when an unexpected flood that they were not able to be prepared for

caused a great deal of property damage, dislocation, and upset in Quebec. The

people of Canada responded with open hearts for their fellow Canadians there in

Quebec, laying aside any differences that may be perceived from time to time

across this country by reasons of geography, by reasons of politics, by reasons

of different cultures and different backgrounds.

It is a recognition that we are all a part of the same

Canadian family, and that when one group of family members is going through

adversity, the rest of the Canadian family participates in trying to mitigate

the problems and seek solutions, and that is what we are doing here today, and

through the efforts such as those outlined by the Opposition House Leader of

people in this Province offering the support and assistance individually and

through their organizations.

They are very lucky to have had the forewarning of some

months that this might be happening and the opportunity to prepare and work

together. I think what I was struck by looking last night at the extensive

coverage on television was how the whole community of Manitoba had worked

together to prepare for this. They had built the dikes that were outlined, some

built many years ago, but recently have had opportunity to do the same thing. I

was also struck by the coming together of people in Manitoba. The native people

from a reserve who were staying en masse in a community called Ste. Anne nearby,

a Franco-Manitoban community, where they got to know one another and were

expressing how important this was for them to understand one another and make

friendships, and this was a bringing together of people who were brought

together by a potential tragedy and who are learning more about one another.

I hope, along with other hon. members, that the preparations

are successful, that the preparations that have been undertaken at great expense

and great effort and great community, will be successful in staving off the

worst possibilities of this potential disaster. I know it must be a very

devastating thing for people to leave behind their homes, even for a short

period of time, knowing that they may not be able to come back to them because

they may be devastated by a flood. That is a very horrendous experience, and any

of us would be tremendously upset and concerned about having to go through that.

Our hearts, and my heart, goes out to the families who are experiencing this

great uncertainty at having to go through that at this time, and I along with

all other members know that there is no worse disaster than having to leave your

home for a period of time.

My best wishes, my concerns and my thoughts, are with the

people of Manitoba at this time, and I hope that this resolution, and the

forwarding of this resolution, gives the people of Manitoba some understanding

of how we here in Newfoundland and Labrador feel at this time of crisis for our

brothers and sisters in Manitoba.

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

Technology.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members are aware,

Premier Tobin is presently in Aberdeen, leading a delegation of companies -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

We haven't called Statements by Ministers yet. I thought the

hon. Minister was speaking to the resolution.

Is the House ready for the question?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

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

`aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: Against?

I declare the resolution unanimously carried.

Statements by Ministers

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

Technology.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members are aware,

Premier Tobin is presently in Aberdeen, leading a delegation of companies on a

trade mission to Scotland.

The mission is part of our efforts to develop relationships

with international partners in an effort to pursue global opportunities. It is

an initiative that can be attributed to the signing of a Memorandum of

Understanding with North East Scotland, which was signed on June 20, 1995. The

purpose of the MOU was to stimulate greater economic activity between the two

regions. Areas of specific interest included energy resources, offshore

business, marine industries, environmental technologies and information

industries.

I am pleased to announce today that as a direct result of

this MOU, the Premier has recently participated in the signing of three joint

ventures between companies in Newfoundland and Scotland.

The first joint venture is between A. Harvey and Company

Limited of St. John's and Consolidated Supply Management of Aberdeen. The new

company, Harvey CSM, combines the wealth of North Sea and international

experience of CSM in logistics and supply chain management with the first class

facilities, resources and local reputation of A. Harvey and Company of St.

John's. The company will provide an integrated logistics/supply chain support

service to the emerging oil, gas and mining industries in Atlantic Canada and

worldwide.

The second partnership is between Specialist Solutions

Limited of St. John's and Simul8 Limited of Aberdeen. The new venture, Trans

Atlantic Medical Limited, will undertake software research and development

projects to capture specific market niches in medical diagnostic imaging. The

company's software will be designed for use by radiologists and other medical

specialists and will enable the transmission and `rendering' of medical images

over existing computer networks. The company's approach to Tele-Radiology will

provide access to critical patient data in an inexpensive, unique and user

friendly format. Trans Atlantic Medical Limited will be headquartered in St.

John's, here in our Province, with a satellite office in Aberdeen.

Mr. Speaker, the third joint venture is between Net.f/x

Marketing Technologies of Mount Pearl and ACS Design and Telematics of Banff,

Scotland. These companies have formed a strategic alliance to develop a virtual

trade zone to facilitate communication and trade between the two regions.

Mr. Speaker, a significant amount of work has been undertaken

in the last eighteen months on both sides under the Memorandum of Understanding.

It demonstrates that building relationships and developing partnerships is

critical to pursuing global markets. The companies I have just referred to will

open new markets for each other and provide direct economic benefits to their

regions.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my hon. colleagues to join me in

congratulating these Newfoundland companies and the Aberdonian companies on both

sides of this agreement, and we wish the Premier well as he pursues new global

opportunities for our economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I commend the government on their recycling program. I read

this release yesterday and I heard it on the news again today.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate the companies that

have signed agreements with those in Scotland, but I guess the real question

here is: How many jobs have been created through the signing of these joint

ventures? After the investment that the Province has made to trade missions now

to Aberdeen, Scotland - who signed these Memorandum of Understandings - how many

jobs have been created through these joint ventures, that is the real question?

Mr. Speaker, the fact that our Province is reaching out

globally to sign agreements with other countries and companies in other

countries is commendable but again, the important thing to Newfoundland and

Labrador is what are we getting as a return on our investment? What economic

benefit is it going to create to Newfoundland in the terms of employment,

something that Newfoundland is seriously lacking? Again, Mr. Speaker, I commend

the companies in Newfoundland that have signed these agreements with the

companies in Scotland. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Vidi, does he have leave?

By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I too am pleased to see that Newfoundland companies are

engaging in partnerships internationally. It has been a feature of the business

relationships in Newfoundland for many, many years for Newfoundland business

people to have international connections throughout the world with the salt fish

trade, with the fishing industry in general and we have a great history of that

which has died off in the last number of years. So these efforts of Newfoundland

business ventures and international connections are very important to make and I

hope that they bear fruit. They may not be immediate but I hope that they bear

fruit in the long run because we do have, as part of this Province, to spread

our wings to get involved in ventures throughout the world, to bring our talents

and our assets into the international marketplace and this is one example of how

it can be done.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, health care is the highest priority of the

people of this Province and it is the highest priority of the government of this

Province. I stand today to provide details of the upcoming provincial health

forum announced by the Premier last week. This forum is intended to address

specific problems which have stressed the system and the clients who need,

expect and deserve quality health care.

The provincial Health Forum will serve several important

functions. It will discuss specific problems in the system today and seek input

which can be used to reduce or eliminate these problems. It will allow

front-line health care providers the opportunity to voice their concerns and

offer suggestions for improvement to health care provision in Newfoundland and

Labrador. It will provide advice on how new or reallocated funding from this

year's health budget can be best used to meet the health care needs of the

people of this Province. It will not address all areas of health care delivery

at one time, but it will address major issues such as the reorganization of

primary health care. It will also discuss many concerns of front-line workers

and clients.

Mr. Speaker, the health forum will take place on May 9 and

10, at the Littledale Conference Centre in St. John's. The forum will have

representation from health care providers, front-line workers and the general

public to provide frank and substantive input which will result in optimal

solutions. Since it would be impractical, in this forum, to include every person

and group associated with health care, we will continue to encourage ongoing

input from all health care providers throughout the Province.

We recognize the merit of their advice and are prepared to

meet with these people and other representatives of front-line workers and the

general public to productively meet the challenges we are facing today. I am

also pleased that the Nurses Union and the Medical Association have recognized

the Premier's role in the federal government's announcement this week that there

will be an increase in the cash floor of the CHST. The extra $66 million that

this means to our Province is critical and it adds value, Mr. Speaker, to the

forum process.

Delegates to the forum include: representative of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses' Union; NAPE; Newfoundland and Labrador Medical

Association; CUPE; Allied Health; PAIRN; the Association of Registered Nurses of

Newfoundland and Labrador; the medical school at Memorial University;

institutional and community health boards; and health care consumers from the

general public. These qualified and capable people are volunteering their time

and expertise to work, in partnership with government, towards positive outcomes

for the problems we have identified. Government appreciates their participation

in this process and we expect to receive positive feedback. It reinforces

government's commitment to provide quality health care services to the people

throughout Newfoundland and Labrador and to improving the system, wherever

necessary and possible.

Mr. Speaker, the health care system in this Province today is

fundamentally sound and government is committed to improving that system to the

extent possible.

Mr. Speaker, in this year's budget we allocated funds for a

number of improvements over and above the flat line budget which was announced

last year. We approved $2.6 million for salary physicians who work in rural

Newfoundland. We are providing $400,000 to operate a dialysis program in Central

Newfoundland. We have also committed funding to update the programming documents

and the redesign of the James Paton expansion, as per the recommendations of the

Central Newfoundland health services review, along with the other work that will

be done this year. In addition, work has commenced on the redevelopment of the

Melville Hospital in Goose Bay. Preliminary work will be carried out for the

planning of health facilities in Bonne Bay and Stephenville, subject to a review

of services in Western Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, $2.5 million is allocated to

institutional boards for the purchase of new medical equipment, over and above

what is in our normal budgetary allocation for that specific purpose.

Throughout this year, health boards and their foundations

will be asked to match the government's contribution for a total of $5 million

for the purchase of capital equipment.

Mr. Speaker, government is working for and with the people of

this Province. At the conclusion of this forum, we will inform the people of

this Province of its outcome. I expect that with the input of these people who

will be at the forum, those who are directly associated with health care

delivery, that government will be able to continue to provide the best possible

health care services to all citizen's of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I always thought that the minister had done a course in how

to recycle the news, now I am sure that the minister has done a course in how to

recycle the news.

The funding that he talks about in here, he has now announced

for the tenth or twelfth time and the minister knows full well, of the $66

million that is coming into this Province, not one dime, not one new cent of

that, there is not one new cent of that for health care in this Province. The

only thing the minister is doing is trying to get seven of his cousins sent back

to Ottawa and let me tell you, Mr. Speaker, that is not going to work this time.

The people of this Province will not be fooled this time, especially by the

Minister of Health, any more in this Province. We will not be fooled any more by

this minister.

We now have another study, we did a study in education by Dr.

Canning, that is probably gathering dust somewhere on his shelf. I just hope

minister, that if we are going to do this one, this one does not go on the shelf

like most of the ones that you have done before. More recycled, absolutely

telling us nothing, the only thing you are doing is out again campaigning for

your cousins and hoping that they are going to get back to Ottawa, this is one

of the biggest loads of garbage that we have heard in this House in a long, long

time. The Minister of Health in this Province should be ashamed of himself,

should be ashamed of himself, that is what he should be, Mr. Speaker. The

minister who sits there, who thinks there is no problem in health care, it

really shows how out of touch he is with the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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.

The upcoming forum on health care at the Littledale

Conference Centre sounds to me like a public relations forum, as apposed to a

health care forum. It seems to me from the description of the minister that this

is a 'by invitation only event', which with the comments of the minster, if the

minister thinks that there is an extra $66 million in the health care system,

hundreds of millions out of the health care system, then he is really embarking

upon a public relation's campaign and not really interested in finding solutions

to the health care needs of the people of this Province.

Mr. Speaker, there are solutions that have been presented to

this minister and the Social Policy Committee of Cabinet. The minister was not

even aware of them when he was asked questions in the House in the last few

days. So, Mr. Speaker, I don't see how a public relations forum is going to

change all of that, but we may well hear some ideas that the minister will be

required to speak of because they will be publicly mentioned to implement if

they come from sensible people who may be available, may be allowed to

participate in this forum.

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A good news item.

Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to inform the House today that

Newfoundland and Labrador will be hosting a major international conference on

sealing.

When I learned last fall that the North Atlantic Marine

Mammal Commission (NAMMCO) was planning this major conference, and was

considering several Canadian sites, including Toronto and Montreal, I

immediately invited the Commission to hold the conference in this Province. As

the Province on the doorstep of one of the largest seal herds in the world, and

considering our historic economic and cultural links to the seal fishery, this

Province is an appropriate location for this conference. The fact that we are

this year celebrating the 500th anniversary of Cabot's arrival is another good

reason for holding the conference here.

I am delighted that the Commission has accepted my invitation

to hold the conference here in November, bringing to St. John's participants

from twelve to fifteen countries. To date, approximately 250 participants are

expected to attend. Ms Kate Sanderson, secretary to NAMMCO, is in St. John's now

to finalize some preparations for the conference.

This international conference on sealing will not only serve

as an excellent information and technology exchange, but will give world-wide

promotion to the overall efforts of many countries to revitalize the sealing

industry. It will also be an opportunity to showcase how the Newfoundland and

Labrador seal fishery has been revitalized because of tremendous research and

development efforts being undertaken here.

At a time when markets for seal oil and meat products, as

well as leather and fur products are being expanded and strengthened, the

international conference will be a timely one.

It is estimated that the Newfoundland and Labrador seal

fishery will have an export value of $25 million or more this year. Fur markets

are strong, and commercial markets in the Far East have been successfully

expanded to accommodate a portion of the seal oil capsule production. Mr.

Speaker, considerable success has also been achieved in producing such products

as seal salami, pepperoni and sausage, as well as prime meat cuts for markets in

China, Korea and Japan. Market opportunities are also being explored for canned

seal meat, prime cuts, and vacuum-packed flippers. Prices to sealers this year

have been the best in many years. This shows enormous promise for our seal

fishery in 1998 and beyond. About 5,000 sealers are engaged in the fishery, with

another 500 people involved in the processing-related jobs.

So at this time when our seal fishery has reached the stage

where there is utilization and marketing of the entire animal, we take pride in

hosting an international conference.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to thank the minister for providing me with a

copy of the Ministerial Statement prior to the House's opening and, I commend

the minister, Mr. Speaker, for taking the initiative to bring this conference

right here to Newfoundland, which is where it should be held because there is no

other profession I suppose, at least here in Newfoundland today that has had the

unfair and negative publicity as this particular hunt and this particular

activity has had, Mr. Speaker, and the people who are bringing it about are

people who are being motivated and doing it for their own personal financial

gain.

Mr. Speaker, this is one hunt today that is carried out in

this Province in a very humane, professional way, and whatever we can do to show

the rest of the world that it is being done in a responsible manner, then I

think the onus is on each and every one of us to go forward and do that. I

compliment the minister and I think he should also bring forward the great

benefits that are being brought about to our people with this particular hunt.

It was only last weekend I was down in my district when the boats, because of

the ice conditions, landed in Catalina and in three days there was something

between 50,000 and 60,000 pelts and carcasses delivered over the wharf there.

Tractor=trailers were going, local people were working, the hotel was full and

it showed a different community from what I saw the week before and those are

just some

of the benefits. It is a hunt, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, just to clue up. It is a

hunt that was held at a time of the year when it bestowed many positive things

to our fishermen in order to give them money to get geared up to prosecute the

cod fishery and the lobster fishery, et cetera. I say to the minister in cluing

up that he should check the credentials of each and every one of those

individuals, and if there is any doubt there whatsoever, tell them to leave

their cameras at home. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. the Member for Signal Hill -

Quidi Vidi have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm, pleased that the

North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission will be meeting here in Newfoundland and

Labrador next fall. I think the minister has done well to secure their

attendance here.

The seal hunt was once known as the greatest hunt in the

world. It has in recent years received a lot of negative publicity throughout -

particulary North America and Europe. I think it is fitting that this Commission

is coming here with a number of countries participating. I hope that it is an

opportunity to put a different spin on the seal fishery, and a different spin on

the use of the products that are available from the seal, and to highlight the

efforts that are being made by this Province to turn this industry into a modern

industry which is viable, humane -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HARRIS: - and advantageous -

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

are to the Minister of Health. In Corner Brook, Labrador City - Wabush, Happy

Valley - Goose Bay, Grand Falls - Windsor, Clarenville, Marystown, Gander and

St. John's - the pre-Budget consultations travelled all around the Province

where people told you: Don't cut health care. The Budget document even admitted

that people told you: Don't cut health care. So what is it about `don't cut

health care' that you don't understand, minister?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member is

living in pre-Budget announcement times in his mind, I believe. He is right that

the hon. the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board went around the Province and

visited - I imagine he got the names of the places right. In any event, he did

consult. The people said: Don't cut health care. When the Budget was presented

in the House the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board announced that we were

not going to cut the health care budget as previously committed to.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: But, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance

and Treasury Board went further than that. The Minister of Finance and Treasury

Board proceeded to outline a number of new initiatives that would be undertaken

this year in the health care budget, and announced new funding to be added to

the previously committed funding to the health care budget. In simple terms, for

the benefit of the hon. member, government didn't cut the health care budget. It

increased the health care budget.

Now, in simple mathematics, when you cut something you put a

stroke in front of it, minus. When you add something to it you put an x in front

of it. We put a big x in front of the health care budget. We added money to it,

A-D-D-E-D!

AN HON. MEMBER: Plus, plus sign.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, a plus sign, alright. Mr. Speaker,

there is some difference as to - there is a little rural versus urban debate as

to whether plus and add is the same thing. But I will undertake to commit to

everybody that in my judgement -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: - plussing and adding are the same thing!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: It means more money for health care, and

let the hon. member hear that loud and clear and understand what it means.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister is a

little mixed up in his pronunciation. It isn't x, it is axe that the minister

put by it, I say to him.

The health facilities operation budget for last year, here in

the very Estimates, including hospitals in this Province, there was a total of

$598 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: Health facility operations, I say to the

member, for 1997, is $587 million. That is $11 million less funding for health

care this year, not even counting the impact that inflation will be having on

the value of the health care dollars.

I say to the minister, and I ask you once again: What is it

about, `Don't cut health care' that you don't seem to understand?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: The most obvious thing about it is that it

common figures on a piece of white paper, put down in black print.

The hon. member chooses to ignore conveniently, which is one

step short of putting forward something that would have to be described in

unparliamentary language so I won't do it, but basically what he is putting

forward is an infactual proposition. The health care budget has been increased.

Now, within that health care envelope of $910 million or so,

we move around money where we appropriately should. There is a little bit less

in the institutions this year -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: There is a little bit less in the

institutional side of the health care budget because the boards are operating on

a three-year planning cycle which commenced the previous year. What the hon.

member chooses to conveniently not acknowledge is that there is more money in

the community health side of the budget this year. There is more money going

into new programming this year, such as the dialysis service. There is new money

going into the equipment part of the budget this year. In short, Mr. Speaker -

AN HON. MEMBER: More money into (inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: More money into the rural doctor's pot. He

conveniently ignores the fact that there is $6 million or $7 million more gone

into the MCP budget.

He can be selective in picking pieces out of the budget, but

it is such a - I don't know - silly type of proposition to try and put forward

the fact that $903 last year is not as much as $910 this year.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to finish his answer quickly.

MR. MATTHEWS: Nine hundred and three last year is not as

much as $910 this year. Nine hundred and ten this year is $7 million more than

$903 last year - more money, more money, for health care.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I ask the hon. minister to

take his seat.

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To stand here, to sit in this House and take that utter

nonsense that the minister is trying to tell us, it is nonsense.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Money from the health care budget used to

pay legal fees to Trans City because this government circumvented the Public

Tender Act.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: That is where money is going from the

health care budget.

Today we have heard again about chaos in our system on the

West Coast. Family practitioners in Corner Brook are telling us they cannot

continue to help cover for the hospital emergency department there, and unless

the government addresses this concern within the next week they are going to

refuse to do shifts at the hospital's emergency departments where now there is

only one doctor on staff.

Minister, how much more information do you need before you

finally admit that successive years of deep cuts to health care funding are the

root of the crisis that we are facing in health care in our Province today?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, cuts to health care, or cuts

that he alleges which are infactual????, is not the problem in Corner Brook with

emergency room coverage. We do have two shortages in casualty officers who work

in the emergency department, that is true, but I would remind the hon. member

that there are just as many family practising physicians in the community,

practising fee-for-service, in Corner Brook today as there was last year at this

time and as there has been historically on average.

I would also remind the hon. member, in case he doesn't know,

that by virtue of the principles under which doctors operate, by virtue of

principles that are laid out by the NLMA and the Medical Board, family

practitioners who operate in the community have always participated in emergency

room coverage. There are just as many doctors there to do that now as there was

heretofore. The doctors who practice in the community have an obligation to

ensure that their patients are cared for well beyond the nine to five hours of

their clinic. They have an obligation to ensure that their patients are cared

for on a twenty-four hour basis, and the doctors in the Corner Brook area, while

they may be finding it difficult to have all of them participate at this point

in time in emergency room coverage, they nonetheless do recognize that

responsibility. They are providing coverage, and I have every confidence that

there will be adequate coverage as best they can help us provide it in the

emergency room on an ongoing basis.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is not what we are hearing from doctors, doctors having

to work all night long and go to work again the next day in their own practice.

That is not what happened before minister, and you know it.

Where has the minister been? Where have you been that you

need a forum here on health care to be convinced there is a crisis in our

Province today? Hasn't the minister heard of waiting lists to see specialists,

hospitals closing due to doctor shortages, operating rooms closing, patients

being transferred because of equipment failure, patients waiting on stretchers

in hallways, patients dying while waiting for cardiac surgery, a boy whose

appendix burst in a hospital -

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

MR. SULLIVAN: When people search frantically for a doctor

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hasn't the minister

already heard of burnt-out and utter frustration among health care professionals

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

his question.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I'm (inaudible) the

question... Where have the minister's ears been for the past fifteen months, I

ask him? How much more must the system deteriorate and people suffer before you

admit that there is a crisis here and you start doing something about it?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There is a crisis

here, but as I said last week, the crisis is largely between the ears of the

hon. Leader of the Opposition. When a person who is elected to this House and

appointed to the responsible position of Leader of Her Majesty's Loyal

Opposition, with that honour, I would suggest, comes a fair degree of

responsibility.

One of the responsibilities is not to be an undue

fearmongerer so as to be, at the end of the day, in some instances, so has to be

challenged because of the inaccuracy of the statements he puts forward. About

two weeks ago the hon. member was alleging this, that and the other thing in the

health care system. It took the strong voice of one of our CEOs, Sister

Elizabeth, to tell the hon. member that he was whacko, that he didn't know what

he was talking about, he was putting forward false information, inaccurate

information, and information that he couldn't validate. We are still waiting in

this Province for either an apology or a validation of the nonsense that he was

getting on with!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister should

try to get first-hand information and not over fax machines from remote places,

I say to the minister. A family practitioner, Dr. Edward Fitzgibbons of Corner

Brook, said on the news today he is angry, minister, at comments made last week

that suggest the health care system is not in a crisis. Now why, when the crisis

in Corner Brook minister has been boiling over for months, has the minister made

absolutely no effort whatsoever to contact the health care professionals there

like Dr. Fitzgibbons, say, to find out what is going on and what needs to be

done?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, quite the opposite is true. As

a matter of fact, our health care boards around the Province are doing yeoman's

service, as volunteers, like our school board trustees, to help manage health

care on behalf of the people in their region.

I've been in touch with the Western Health Care Corporation

ongoingly regarding issues in their region, as I am in touch with other boards.

I was in Port aux Basques last week to discuss the doctor situation. Yesterday

afternoon I met with the CEO and the chair of the Western Health Care

Corporation, along with a couple of my colleagues, to discuss issues of

importance. So let the hon. member be aware and take at least some comfort in

the fact that this government is not asleep at the switch when it comes to

health care services.

We do have difficulties in certain areas, we do have problems

in certain areas. That is why today I was proud on behalf of the Premier and the

government to announce the Health Care Forum which will take place next week. We

expect fully to hear from not only doctors, but nurses and other health care

providers, as to how better we can do what we are already doing, and that is to

try and provide quality health care to the people of the Province.

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

Opposition.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I said to the

minister before, I never accused you of being asleep at the switch, because you

are never at the switch to fall asleep at! Now minister, you are the Minister of

Health in this Province and you are ultimately responsible. We have had hundreds

of health care forums around this Province. They are in newscasts, on

open-lines, they are in letters to the editor, they are in letters to you,

minister, and responses you haven't responded to, in phone calls, public

meetings, vocal demonstrations out there, unignorable actions by patients and

families, and by doctors and nurses daily throughout this Province.

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

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I ask the minister: Why is the

Minister of Health not doing his job of responding to the crisis? How much

longer will this daily charade of denials and delays have to go on before the

minister wakes up and does the job that he was appointed and elected to do?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member's

supporting cast over there a few minutes ago was talking about recycling. Well,

if ever I heard of a good recycling initiative, it has to be Question Period

from the Leader of the Opposition today because it is as Yogi Berra once said:

it is dj vu all over again in terms of his questions.

I am telling the hon. member again and I am telling the

people of this Province through the voice of this House that this government

understands the needs in health care; it understands its responsibilities; this

minister understands his needs and his responsibilities; I am prepared to put my

work-time sheet up against yours any day, hon. Leader of the Opposition, and I

can assure you that the people on this side of the House likewise who serve in

this government are prepared to put their commitment and their level of input

and effort and compare it with yours any day at any point in time and I am sure

that we will demonstrate, if we have to, on black and white paper, that our

effort is as good as or better than anything that you will ever be able to

produce on behalf of the people of this Province.

The fortunate thing for the people of the Province, Mr.

Speaker, is that the aspirant Premier will never in fact have to worry about

delivering on anything that he propositions or promises because this century

will long pass off the calendar -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: - before he will ever even have the

opportunity to again present himself and if I were him I wouldn't turn my back

too far to the south.

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

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is very unfortunate for the people in this

Province and the people who are sick out there, that they have to depend on this

minister to do something. I think it is very, very unfortunate I say to the

minister.

Minister, will you admit today that you are humiliated by

your failure to fulfil your responsibilities and that the Health portfolio is

far mare than you are capable of handling? Now I ask you today: Will you do the

honourable thing and submit your resignation and pass this critical portfolio

over to somebody who is prepared to do the job that needs to be done?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: I would say, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would say that if there is any one person in this Province

let alone this House, who is still in a position where he needs to offer an

apology for anything, it is that Leader of the Opposition over there. An

individual who has been challenged and told by those who run our health care

system, of great repute, that he did not know what he was talking about; his

facts were wrong. He was perpetuating an `infactuality' that bordered on lying

to the people of the Province, and I would suggest that he do the honourable

thing, apologize for the two-week long apology that has been in waiting or else,

he resigns from his seat and let somebody else of some calibre, quality and

quantity take over the job that he is trying to do.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today of course, are for the Minister of Health.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me apologize to the minister

because when I got up earlier, in my zeal again to just contradict what he said,

I want to thank the minister for providing me with a copy of his statement. As a

matter of fact, I suppose he thought so much of it, he actually hand-delivered

it to me.

But, Mr. Minister, you are aware that $10 million can be

taken out of the Contingency Reserve without having to borrow. Will the minister

agree today to take that amount out of the Contingency and to replace the $10

million that you have cut from the health facilities operation fund for this

year?

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will remind the hon. member that while the Minister of

Health has considerable responsibilities, he does not in any way nor does he

need to even wish to be the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board because we

have a capable, quality Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, who can answer

the question as to whether or not money will be moved around within the global

provincial Budget.

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

South, a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, let us recap briefly this past year.

We have had problems on the Burin Peninsula, in the

Clarenville area, we have had problems in St. John's, Corner Brook, in

Bonavista, in Gander, in Port Saunders, in Port aux Basques and now we are back

to Corner Brook again.

You must be embarrassed by this if you have any credibility.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. FRENCH: If you have the nerve, Mr. Minister, and if

you really give a darn about the people of this Province, you would do something

today, so I ask you today: Will you commit to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador to put the much needed funds back into the health care of this

Province?

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

Treasury Board.

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. member has asked a question that is not formally a

health question but one relating to finance, and we have said and as members of

the House know, the federal government has committed to putting another $66

million back into what is essentially health care, education and social services

programming in terms of funding over the next three years. Although it does not

give us any money in the current year it does give us some latitude to consider

whether or not appropriate adjustments can be made in this year's Budget to meet

any urgent and pressing health care needs.

As the minister announced today, we have asked the health

care forum to review the state of health care at the front-line with the

province's hospitals, and once we receive the results of that forum, we will

make a decision as to what, if any money, should be put back into the system. If

that requires dipping into the contingency fund, as the member referred to, then

that is certainly something Cabinet will consider.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Conception Bay South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Again, I go back to the Minister of Health. The $66 million,

as the Minister of Finance readily knows, is not new money that is coming into

this Province. I say to the minister today that the health system in this

Province is in chaos. I have written numerous letters, Mr. Minister, and I still

receive numerous calls. I think the greatest thing that can be done for health

care in this Province today, and I ask you to do it, is to submit your

resignation as Minister of Health in Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would simply say to the hon. member, an unlikely

proposition at best.

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

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

My question today is for the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, on Monday past, I asked questions re the

distribution of the infrastructure money. The reason for refusal for an arena on

the Northeast Avalon, given by the minister, is that he asked communities for

support and he did not receive it. Can the minister now name the towns which

refused support, and produce letters of non-support?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: No, Mr. Speaker.

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

Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Is the minister saying now that what he

said in the House of Assembly the other day was not true?

Mr. Speaker, I have four letters of support from four towns,

letters supporting the project through the infrastructure program - which was

supported since 1994, by the way. Another project, an arena in Clarenville, was

approved for $1.43 million. Will the minister admit that this private project

was approved even though it was not supported by the town, through the

infrastructure program, at the cost of water and sewer for the town?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a letter

from the town of Clarenville, supporting the sports complex.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: I believe, Mr. Speaker, the letter he is

referring to supports the project as a private project, not for the

infrastructure program money.

Can the minister explain how a project supported by four

towns, through the infrastructure program, with $1 million of private money,

could be refused, when a project, not really supported through the

infrastructure program by the town, for more money, was accepted? Are we looking

at pure, partisan politics and Liberal patronage to the uppermost levels?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, the hon. federal MP, Bonnie

Hickey, representing St. John's East, had approximately $4.5 million total money

out of the infrastructure. All you have to do is take $31 million and divide it

equally among seven MPs, and some MPs got a little more than others, but it

works out to be $4.5 million - $5 million. Mrs. Hickey immediately made the

commitment - and it was made here in the House during the Budget Speech - that

we were going to put $4.5 million into the harbour clean-up. So I guess half

that went to - it was her responsibility, and the other half was for the member

from the West, Mrs. Jean Payne. So $2.5 million or $4.5 million was gone. We had

the hon. member - and a good member he is - and my hon. colleague who represents

part of the district of CBS, asking for $3.5 million. We had five communities in

the hon. member's riding, asking for millions of dollars.

MR. TULK: Five million?

AN HON. MEMBER: Five communities.

MR. A. REID: And I say this quite sincerely, Mr. Speaker,

I sat with the hon. member, I sat with representatives from ACOA and both my

provincial people and from the Premier's Office, and the hon. lady did not have

the money to do a $3.5 million stadium, that the hon. member is talking about. I

suppose, what the hon. gentleman was basically saying, and has been saying to

the people of Newfoundland and to the people of St. John's East, is that all of

Bonnie Hickey's money this year should have been given for that stadium.

Now, I do not think that the citizens of the city of St.

John's, the people who live in Paradise, in Mount Pearl, in Conception Bay South

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. A. REID: - in anywhere in St. John's East, would want

Bonnie Hickey to put $3.5 million into a stadium.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis, a final

supplementary.

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

Will the minister confirm that between the two projects, the

infrastructure money and the municipal capital works money, that there is $70

million being spent in this Province; and there are districts in this Province

that got as low as $300,000 and other districts got $500,000 and there are

districts in this Province that got as much as $3.5 to $4 million, out of that

money? And does the minister agree that that is proper distribution of the

funds, from his perspective? Would he also admit, that the monies that came

forward for the district of Cape St. Francis, through the federal member, Bonnie

Hickey, was adequate for that district compared to the districts across the

Province?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. A. REID: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will agree. In fact, the

hon. member who represents Conception Bay South got over $5 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: What, you never!

MR. A. REID: And the member is right here.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you a Liberal?

MR. A. REID: Mr. Speaker, I have to be careful, because

my hon. colleague here to the right will have to be - someone will have to

confine him if I tell how much money some of the Progressive Conservative

districts got. My hon. and good friend from Bonavista got in excess of $1

million for his district.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. A. REID: The members representing St. John's got

every cent that the City of St. John's asked for. So, Mr. Speaker, I have no

problem in admitting to him that yes, certain districts in the Province got more

money then others.

MR. J. BYRNE: Answer the question. You did not answer the

question.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question today is to the Minister of Forestry and

Agrifoods.

Mr. Speaker, during the past few days I have been asking

questions of the minister regarding the sale of Newfoundland Farm Products. I

have been receiving calls from all across the Province, from people wondering

why this government never called for proposals for the for sale.

I ask the minister if the real reason for this secret

transaction has anything to do with the fact that the lobbyist for the chicken

producers is the former Premier, Mr. Wells, and the Chairman of Newfoundland

Farm Products is the Liberal bagman, Mr. Norval Blair.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, let me answer the hon. gentleman's

question by telling him that an assertion he made here in this House yesterday,

concerning the former Premier of this Province, is totally wrong. He is not, I

have found out today - it is none of my business, really, but I had to go and

find out because the hon. member brought it up - but he is not the lawyer for

the Integrated Poultry Producers Limited, let me tell him that.

Let me also correct some other statements that have been made

by the hon. gentleman, raised by the hon. gentleman, and raised by some of the

media in this Province; and that is concerning the status of Seafreez in this

whole process. Let me read to him a press release that Bill Barry put out today,

signed by William Barry, on May 1, 1997, when he says: `Our preliminary

discussions about the future of Newfoundland Farm Products did involve a

position of fine utilization for the Corner Brook facility outside of the

poultry industry.' Let me also read another phrase to him that he raised

yesterday. This is Mr. Barry speaking now, that gentleman he quoted in this

House yesterday: `I am still having discussions with government about the future

use of the Corner Brook plant.'

Let me also tell him, Mr. Speaker, some more good news to

break his heart, so that he falls over backwards in his seat, so that `Chicken

Little' cannot go around singing out -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - the sky is falling in!

MR. SPEAKER: I ask the hon. the minister to quickly

finish his answer.

MR. TULK: I will conclude, Mr. Speaker, by telling him

that the employees today have asked us not to rush to call for more proposals

for Newfoundland Farm Products in Corner Brook because they would like to have

some time to see if there can be an employee takeover of that plant. Let me say

to him -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - and my concluding remark to him will be, we

have agreed that that should be the case.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Calling for one proposal back in 1995 is

not a rush, I say to the hon. minister. I would not consider that a rush. Mr.

Speaker, I referred to the former Premier as the lobbyist. I did not refer to

him as the lawyer today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: Maybe he is the government's lawyer, yes,

maybe he is. I ask the minister if the cosiness between bagman Blair, lobbyist

Wells and this government is more important than the jobs for the employees of

Newfoundland Farm Products at Corner Brook. Which is more important?

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman's question is

absolutely disgusting. I have no idea what the former Premier of this Province

is doing. Let me say to him unequivocally that there is nobody in this Province

who doubts the qualifications of Norval Blair as a businessman in this Province

when it comes to analyzing the food industry. He is the person, by the way, for

the education of the hon. gentleman, and anybody here who does not know it, who

took Lewisporte Wholesalers in Lewisporte - from the time when I was a boy going

in there, it was a little small place that used to sell a few groceries. He took

it to become one of the largest wholesalers, I suppose, in Canada.

AN HON. MEMBER: Casting aspersions.

MR. TULK: Casting aspersions. Here is the hon. gentleman,

in his desperation, Mr. Speaker, to get a few political points for his Leader

tomorrow, the person he is choosing -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. TULK: - trying to cast aspersions on that hon.

gentleman. Mr. Speaker, it is unbelievable.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Question Period has elapsed.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the annual

report for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, in my acting role.

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

and Lands.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wish to table the annual report of the Board of

Commissioners of Public Utilities on the operations carried out under the

Automobile Insurance Act for the period April 1, 1996 to March 31, 1997.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Judgment

Enforcement Act."

Further, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow

ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Remove Anomalies And Errors

In The Statute Law."

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

Rural Renewal.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the

hon, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, I give notice that I will

on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The

Wilderness And Ecological Reserves Act."

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse

au-Clair.

MS JONES: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that I will

on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following private member's resolution:

WHEREAS low-income families, particularly people on social

assistance, find it impossible to provide themselves with an adequate diet; and

WHEREAS food prices in Labrador are between 40 per cent and

165 per cent higher than those in the St. John's area; and

WHEREAS there is a lack of competition and fewer specials in

many communities in Coastal Labrador, there are no food banks to fall back on;

and

WHEREAS social assistance recipients in Coastal Labrador are

also burdened with a higher general cost of living than elsewhere in the

Province; and

WHEREAS a nutritious diet is essential to comfort, good

health and children's ability to learn. If children are not properly fed now,

society will pay in the future in terms of added health care costs and

unemployment;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this House of Assembly direct

the government to establish a food adjustment allowance for social assistance

recipients in Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Petitions

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

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

I am glad to rise today and present this petition from some

people in my district, from Jackson's Cove, Silverdale, Nick's Nose, and also

one other community, Langdon's Cove. I will read the petition because they have

done a very job on this petition. I will read the entire petition so we will get

the point across.

To the hon. House of Assembly:

WHEREAS regional councils may be feasible in some areas, it

will not be feasible in this area because of the distance between communities

and the scattered population; and

WHEREAS in this area the cost of living is already high

because of the distance we travel to work on a daily basis, and to essential

services on a frequent basis; the result, extremely high gas bills and vehicle

repairs. Since all telephone calls are long distance, except for a few local

calls, we have extremely high telephone bills; and

WHEREAS regional councils or service authorities will raise

our cost of living so high that it would be impossible for us to survive here,

it will result in extra taxes without additional services, which we cannot

afford. Property tax will result in the loss of property for which we have

worked so hard. It will cause forced resettlement, heartaches and sorrow.

Honest, hard-working people who have worked so hard and paid their fair share of

taxes will be ignored. The high tax on gas, vehicles, tires, broken windshields,

etc., should be sufficient for snow-clearing, road maintenance, etc.; and

WHEREAS regional councils will not be able to provide

additional service to our area because of high costs associated with the

distance involved, we are opposed to the paying off of other debts which will be

at the detriment and destruction of our own communities; and

WHEREAS the Federation of Municipalities does not support the

local service districts, they will continue to undermine and destroy our small

communities once they have been bled financially; and

WHEREAS the government continues to download to the town

councils, and has admitted it, they will destroy many little communities

financially and physically in the near future. Government should stop the

senseless, ruthless, savage attack and financial grab on rural areas.

WHEREFORE your petitioners humbly pray that your hon. House

may be pleased to request the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador not to

force any areas under regional government as special local service districts.

Mr. Speaker, as we know, the minister has been going around

the Province in the last little while in so-called consultations with councils

and so on. He has been in my area. The funny thing is that local service

districts and these other people were not invited to these. As consultation was

going on to the people who were going to be affected the most by this

regionalization, the people who were going to be affected the most were left out

of the consultation.

Mr. Speaker, a lot of these people in my district, and I am

sure in lots of parts of rural Newfoundland, are simply saying it is tough

enough as it is. As I mentioned in this House yesterday, they are not looking

for major highways or so on; they are just looking for necessities. It is so

strange today, the timing of this petition which I was asked to present, that we

talk about infrastructure funding, and to connect that to it.

No matter what district, or where it is, people are looking

for necessities and that should be the priority. When you talk about water and

sewer, and when the person invites you to their home to look at sewage running

out their back garden, or they cannot turn on the tap and have water, or they

have to put a child on a bus to go over a dirt road, there is something wrong.

The priorities should be with these people.

Like I also said before, the commitment to rural Newfoundland

had better come soon because, I say to the Minister of Rural Renewal, even in

the last days, weeks, that the situation in rural Newfoundland over the last few

weeks - and I do not know if it is timing or what; now we are into the middle of

a federal election, and the truth is, people could not care less about elections

or politicians right now. What I have heard in the last three weeks alone is,

`Nobody had better come knocking on my door, and that includes Liberals, Reform,

NDP, PC, or whatever they are.' They are simply saying, `We just had our school

closed; we cannot get through our road; the hospitals are in a mess.' It is all

coming at the one time.

What I am saying to the government provincially and federally

is that they had better start looking at real rural Newfoundland and say: Yes,

if we believe in rural Newfoundland we had better see something concrete. What

they mean by concrete is the necessities of life. They have been living out in

those communities for thirty, forty, fifty years, have their homes there, and

they still do not have water and sewer. There is something wrong.

If we do commit to that, and funds are directed into things

like that instead of civic centres or arenas or whatever, then the people are

going to say, `Well, government have their priorities right.'

I really, firmly believe in that, that once we show rural

Newfoundland that we are committed to necessities - like a community that asked

me yesterday not for a paved road but just to get their gravel road upgraded.

They are not asking for the world, Mr. Speaker, they are just asking for basic

necessities.

It is a warning, that is what it is, a warning coming from

this member today, and it is a warning from a lot of members in this House. I

know they are on both sides because I have talked to them. The warning is: time

is crucial. This spring and this summer, if people in rural Newfoundland do not

start seeing a concrete example of a commitment to rural Newfoundland and

Labrador through what the member even mentioned today in her motion, then there

is going to be a big, big problem in this Province, and nothing is going to

settle them down. No civic centre is going to settle people down.

We are just getting back to the fishery. We hope that is

going to be positive. We hope Voisey's Bay - we hope on all these things, but I

am telling you, time is crucial right now. Over these spring months and during

this federal election -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. SHELLEY: To clue up, Mr. Speaker. During this federal

election, if people do not see some concrete commitments to rural Newfoundland,

there is going to be a problem, and there is going to be an uprising in this

Province.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to support the petition as put forward by my

friend and colleague, the Member for Baie Verte.

Just this past number of weeks there have been many meetings

held across Newfoundland and Labrador on regionalization, I say to the minister.

Down in my particular district we had two meetings, one in Port Union and one

which concerned Trinity North and Bonavista South, up in Clarenville. They were

two of the biggest meetings the committee had heard throughout Newfoundland and

Labrador. I would think, had they been better advertised, or people had been

made aware that the meetings were happening, you would have seen many more

people out, because they have grave concerns.

It is a situation whereby the minister had gone out to rural

areas just a few weeks prior, had met with the town councils, and refused to

meet with the people from local service districts and the general public. One

particular person, the chairman of one local service district, picked up the

phone and called the minister himself and asked if he could come to the meeting.

He was told no, in no uncertain terms. You are not invited to the meeting. It is

only for town councils, it is not for local service districts, it is not for the

general public. The committee will follow me and you will have an opportunity

there and then.

What those people are saying is that it should be our choice

to live in the Plate Coves, it should be our choice to live in the Dunterras and

the other small communities out there. We chose to live here knowing full well

we were not going to get sidewalks, we were not going to get street lights, we

were not going to get a Cadillac sewer system, unless we paid for it, and we are

prepared to do that. But do not come and tell me that if I am going to continue

to live here and I am not going to be able to get those amenities, I also must

pay the debt other towns have acquired over the years.

I believe in town councils, I will make that perfectly clear

here now. I believe in forms of municipal government. But I believe in it by

people having a choice, I believe in it - if that particular community wants to

have a form of local government, and collectively they come together and form a

town council, then God bless them, so they should have a local government. That

is the way many of our communities have moved ahead. In fact, some of the bigger

communities cannot exist without that form of local government.

I do not believe in small communities having to assume a form

of government if it is not their wish. Some of the incorporated communities now

are complaining and saying it is unfair for those other small communities to be

getting a certain lane ploughed in the wintertime, or it is unfair for the

Department of Works, Services and Transportation's truck to be putting a load of

stone on a certain roadway. There is a very good reason for that. It is because

those road component grants now have all but disappeared. Nobody was complaining

a few years ago when they were getting $2,000 per kilometre for each kilometre

of local road in their community. You did not hear anybody complaining then,

because there was ample funding. That particular road component grant could be

taken and spent elsewhere.

Now that it is diminished, some of those communities are

obviously putting pressure on the minister and coming out and saying: We want to

tax other communities because they are getting their work done for free. Mr.

Speaker, a lot of them are not getting their work done for free. When you talk

to some senior citizens out there today, who are paying in access of $500 for a

small water supply, a garbage collection and fire protection, which is not

uncommon, that is not services for free. When you look at the taxes that people

are paying, when you look at the fees that people are paying to license their

car on an annual basis, when you look at the taxes they are paying for gasoline

and for every other thing that they purchase when they go to the local store, or

buy supplies, they are getting nothing for free. People are already taxed enough

in this Province and they are paying ample for the services they are getting.

They are paying enough money, I say to the people opposite.

Those people should have a say. They came out in the

community in Clarenville, and they spoke very loud and very clear. They said: we

are paying enough taxes, we do not want any more services. We do not want to be

burdened by a cadillac water and sewer system, if we want a street light, we

will put up our own. This is Newfoundland, this is not mainland Canada. People

live in those communities because they want to live there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. members time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: They want to live there, Mr. Speaker. It

is the place, in most cases, that many of them have returned to. They went away

to the mainland or they went away to the bigger centres in Newfoundland and

Labrador and they choose to go back to those communities and retire.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. members time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: They choose to go back to those

communities and retire and they should be granted -

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

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: - they should be granted that

opportunity, I say to the people opposite.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. members time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: And that is all they are asking for, is

to be listened to and to have their advice heeded.

Thank you.

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to take a couple of minutes to speak

to the petition, but to speak from a different point of view of what both

members opposite just spoke and saying that nothing should change, everything

should remain as it is and people living in communities, not lose their

identity, and people in communities not pay any more taxes or any more cost of

what they are already paying for services.

One problem that we have in this Province, that everybody

should and I think most everybody recognizes, is our geography. We have

500,000-plus people, 550,000 - 560,000 people, spread over a geography four

times larger than a country like Japan or as large or larger than Great Britain,

Scotland, Ireland, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia. Just imagine, out of that small

population and that vast land, becomes the same demand of services by people as

if they were living in a concentrated area. There lies the problem, there is no

magic wand to be waved, there is no magic printing press to print off money that

is not available and out of 550,000 people, with the economy the way it is and

people not working, if people are not working they are not paying taxes, becomes

a problem for a government or whatever the stripe is, where do you get the money

to provide the services to all of the communities, all over Newfoundland and

Labrador?

Okay, changes are taking place. A better way to govern, a

better way to manage and changes will take place and if you do move with change,

then we lose again and I think that has been one of the problems here in

Newfoundland and Labrador, we have been not willing to move with change. There

has got to be a better way of running this Province, with the people living in

the communities scattered all around this vast land of Newfoundland and Labrador

then we have.

AN HON. MEMBER: Bring them all together (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: No, I said there has to be a better way to

manage because where people are living and with the geography and the costal

communities scattered all over this vast land, there has to be a better way to

manage and if that is regional government, if that is some form of regional

government, we should at least take a look at it with an open mind. We should

take a look at it with an open mind and if people oppose it, then they should

offer up a better alternative. A better alternative in a manner in which you can

manage and you can govern the Province in a better way to take advantage of the

amount of money that is available. Nobody is forcing anything on anybody, but to

date I have not heard of anything better. We are 500 years old, celebrating the

500th birthday this year and we are still in a financial mess, there is

something wrong and we have to ask what is wrong and we have to try to improve

on it, recognizing the problem and finding a solution.

Now, the hon. member points at this side and says: this is

wrong. Well, let me tell the hon.member what we inherited in 1989 from the

former government -

AN HON. MEMBER: Give it up boy!

MR. EFFORD: You don't want to hear the truth do you?

AN HON. MEMBER: Why don't you go back to (inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: You don't want to hear the truth. A $7

billion debt with a $585 million annual payment of interest. Mr. Speaker, if we

had that to put into infrastructure and into communities we would not get half

the complaints that we have today!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Reaction, reaction.

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

MR. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I present a petition today to the hon. House of Assembly, in

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in parliament assembled. The petition

of the undersigned residents of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador ask

the House of Assembly to accept the following prayer;

We the residents of Newfoundland and Labrador wish to

petition the provincial government, the Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation and the Premier to immediately reverse the decision to privatize the

provincial parks as they are the people's resource. We feel that this decision

was made in haste without any consultation of the people of the Province and the

people who own the parks.

Mr. Speaker, I have presented many petitions in the House to

date against the privatization of provincial parks, over 15,000 names. There are

seventy-seven people who have put in proposals for the takeover of these parks.

We are told by the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation that the reason

the parks are being privatized is to save $1.8 million. Well, Mr. Speaker, in

the estimates meeting this week I questioned the Minister of Tourism, Culture

and Recreation as to what the actual savings would be this year. It is actually

far less than $1.8 million. Of the ninety-two employees that have been

displaced, forty-five of those employees will be rehired through the provincial

parks that are going to remain in place at a cost of $100,000 plus the cost of

what the Province would normally have provided through student employment. So

that's a double loss. First of all the $100,000 that it is going to cost the

Province and secondly, the fact that it is going to cost what it would cost the

students and the fact that the students will not find that employment this year

through the provincial park system.

Secondly, the minister has informed me that this year, being

the Cabot 500 year, being an important tourism year for Newfoundland and

Labrador, Mr. Speaker, a year that we cannot afford to have something go wrong

with the provincial parks, she is putting in place a support system and staff to

help the new owners, the new operators of these provincial parks - once they

become privatized -to make sure that they operate at the same standard or as

close to the same standard as possible that our provincial parks are operated

at.

So, Mr. Speaker, she was unable to give me the actual amount

of what was going to be saved this year but she did say it would be far less

than $1.8 million. In fact, it is going to be less than $1.8 million every year

because of the forty-five employees that are hired through the existing

provincial parks. So the fact of the matter is, the program review that was put

forth by the Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and accepted by the

Department of Tourism, Culture and Recreation which outlined the reasons not to

privatize our provincial parks, most especially during 1997, our Cabot year, the

program review actually said that 1997 would not be a good year to privatize or

experiment with the privatization of provincial parks. The minister actually

agrees with that because she is putting in place a support staff and a support

system to help the new operators of these provincial parks - once they become

privatized - to make sure that the standards are not compromised this year. If

that is the case, Mr. Speaker, should we not reverse this decision immediately

and look at privatization maybe next year? If we are not going to save the $1.8

million this year, nowhere close to the $1.8 million this year because the

minister does not want to jeopardize the standards in the park this year and she

is going out to pay for support and pay for support staff this year, to make

sure that that standard is not jeopardize, why do we not look at waiting until

next year to experiment with privatization?

There is not a member in this House, probably not a person in

the Province who would disagree with the fact that experimenting with

privatization this year is a dangerous thing. We are putting in jeopardy our

tourism industry in the Province; we are putting in jeopardy -

MR. SPEAKER: (Inaudible).

MR. OSBORNE: Just a couple of minutes to clue up, Mr.

Speaker?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

MR. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, I am honoured to support this

petition on behalf of the people who have signed it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to support the petition as put forward by the

Member for St. John's South, a member who has put a lot of time and effort in

going out and listening to the people, consulting with the people and finding

out their views. A member who travelled across this Province, talked to the

people who were concerned, talked about the people affected and what he heard,

Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that it was not the same as what the Minister of

Finance and Treasury Board heard.

The Minister of Finance and Treasury Board went out and

supposedly consulted and talked with people and implemented a Budget that was

supposed to reflect what people thought, reflect people's views, be a people's

Budget, Mr. Speaker, but I can assure you that out in rural Newfoundland and

Labrador today, if each one of us went back to our district and talked about the

cuts that were being brought forward by this government and the things that were

being privatized, such as the parks, you won't find many people who came forward

and told the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board that they wanted their parks

privatized. You won't find too many people who came forward and told the

Minister of Finance and Treasury Board that we would like our parks now passed

back to private enterprise for $9,000. I have been hearing the price of $9,000

for a provincial park - unheard of. The Member for St. John's South asked the

Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation if she would submit some information

regarding what those particular parks have cost us over the past number of

years. We have no information, Mr. Speaker, no information whatsoever.

I was listening to the Open Line show one night and I heard

the Member for Grand Falls - Buchans, call in to the Open Line show about the

parks in the area that were being privatized and she called back twice, Mr.

Speaker, the same night, because of what she had said and then somebody else

called in and she had to call back, was it twice or three times?... you were in

Corner Brook and finally, she had to call back again at the end of the program

and try to clarify her position. She was very, I suppose, agitated because

naturally she would like to be a good member, like all of us here we would like

to please our constituents, and I can understand where she is coming from; she

did not want to come out and say she disagreed with it because I suppose she has

hopes to get into Cabinet some day, and does not want to take on the government

so she had to call back a couple of times to try to pacify her constituents and

try to tell them: No, I don't believe in it but yes, I support it. That is what

she was trying to say, but she was very agitated, she was very concerned about

it because she knows that her constituents were dead set against this

privatization plan.

She knew, Mr. Speaker, that many of those same people who

went out to vote for her and whom she is expecting to go out and vote for her

again, will now probably be deprived of an opportunity to take their children

and be able to afford to go to those parks. These are not parks, Mr. Speaker,

where you see Newfoundlanders pulling up with their big motor homes, their

33-footers, for the most part they were parks that people took their hardtop

campers or their canvas tents and went and enjoyed a family outing. For the most

part, it is a situation where people took the pot and the Coleman stove and went

out on a Sunday evening and had a meal of salt beef and cabbage out in the

provincial parks.

Young people, seniors, the poor people of this Province, Mr.

Speaker, this was their trip down to Florida. You don't see them tanned like the

Minister of Health this time of the year, if they are, it is wind burn I say to

members opposite. Those are the people who use those parks and who will now be

deprived of going out with their families and using those government-owned

facilities. They are going to be deprived of that

MR. EFFORD: Why?

MR. FITZGERALD: - because the minister knows very well

that once you privatize something then it becomes profit-driven and then, Mr.

Speaker, up go the fees in order for them to make their profits and make it a

viable operation. Why else would somebody buy a park if they did not want to

turn a profit? So if government is losing money and if those people are expected

to go back here and do different things, then they are going to have to put the

price up and what they will be doing by doing that, is drive the common

Newfoundlander, drive a gentleman and the family who would like to take their

family out for a Sunday afternoon or a weekend, what they are going to do is,

drive them out of it altogether and that is a shame. It is a shame.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: Just to clue up, Mr. Speaker. I would

like to touch on the employees of those parks.

MR. EFFORD: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member does not have leave.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am not going to pass up this opportunity to

make a few comments on the petition presented by my good friend from St. John's

South, the quiet man, and -

AN HON. MEMBER: The man from the dark side.

MR. EFFORD: The man from the dark side.

- and my good friend from Bonavista who is not so quiet but

very seldom talks and points it out as it is.

I think my good friend, the Minister of Forest Resources and

Agrifoods, pointed that out very clearly today in Question Period and put the

hon. member in his place. I think when he comes in with a question from now on,

I don't think it will be one written by Sue and not researched. I think when

they ask another question it will be written and researched by the member

himself. He won't allow that to happen again.

Mr. Speaker, privatizing the parks and closing the parks, I

keep hearing the word `closing' parks. There are no parks going to be closed;

and what is wrong with privatization?

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

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South on a point of order.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I listened to the Member for

St. John's South, and I know what I said myself, and I never heard one person

talk about closing parks. What we talked about and what the prayer of the

petition was, was privatizing parks, I say to the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture, just for clarification, a point of clarification.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member has stated himself it is not a point of

order. He took advantage of the opportunity for clarification.

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, if you are going to talk about

privatization of parks, and in the same tone or the same voice say that because

of privatization there is nobody going to go in the parks, then I don't know

what the word means, if closed does not mean that; the parks are not going to be

in operation.

Both members said very clearly in their remarks that because

you privatize it, it is going to cost too much for Newfoundlanders to be able to

avail of the use of the parks. Therefore, if that is the case, the parks are not

going to be in operation if nobody is going to use them. That is the reference

to which I was referring. I don't know what is wrong with privatization, and I

don't know why we should be fearmongering.

Gushue's Park, in the area in which I live -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, protect me.

Mr. Speaker, Gushue's Park, in the area in which I live,

which I pass every single day coming to and from St. John's, I had numerous

calls from people in my district who wanted to apply to take over Gushue's Park.

I visited Gushue's Park many times. What is in there? Government has operated

that park for years. You go in there, there is a place to pull in a camper.

There are no services, nothing there, just go and park your vehicle. If a

private operation takes over that park, in which I know there is a great deal of

interest, and puts in services over and beyond the normal services that you

would expect to have in a park, and they charge a reasonable - because

competition will cause that to happen - a reasonable fee, and if people don't

use it they would have to drop their prices if their prices were too high, then

the parks would be better utilized and more things in the parks for those people

who visit the parks.

Mr. Speaker, times are changing. Government does not have the

dollars - and the Opposition is complaining all the time - in infrastructure and

roads and health care and education. Put your priorities right. Where should you

best spend the dollars that you have available to you? If private operators

could operate those parks and provide the service, then, Mr. Speaker, it is the

right thing to do.

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

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition on behalf of a number of

Newfoundlanders who are petitioning the House on the issue of a school lunch

program.

These petitioners say as follows: that

WHEREAS poverty and its effects are serious problems for so

many in this Province and things are getting worse; now more than one-third of

Newfoundland and Labrador children live in families on social assistance; and

WHEREAS child poverty and hunger are a sad reality which

hurts children today in their chances for the future in education and in life,

and hungry children cannot learn; and

WHEREAS a universal school lunch program would provide a

stigma-free way of ensuring every schoolchild a good, nutritional meal every

day;

We, the undersigned, petition the House of Assembly to direct

the government to establish a universal comprehensive school lunch program for

every school in Newfoundland and Labrador to help end child hunger and to give

our children a better chance.

Mr. Speaker, these petitioners are asking the government to

recognize what I think common sense would tell even the most cold-hearted and

cruel person, that if you go to school hungry you cannot learn properly. It has

to be recognized that something must be done about that. I noted earlier today

the Member for Cartwright - L'Anse au Clair gave notice of a motion to be

presented to this House regarding the circumstances in Labrador, and the special

circumstances that people on social assistance find themselves in there because

of the excessive cost of food in Labrador. The estimates that have been given is

that the cost of food in Labrador is from 40 per cent to 165 per cent higher

than that in St. John's, Newfoundland.

That is astounding, and points out the gross inadequacies of

the social assistance rates. Because it has been estimated by the Newfoundland

Dietetic Association in a survey done last Fall that the cost of providing a

nutritious diet for a family of four, based on St. John's prices, would use up

85 per cent of the basic social assistance rate available to people outside of

the cost of rent. That represents a substantial amount of money just for St.

John's alone. If the prices of food in Labrador, the Labrador Coast, are 40 per

cent to 165 per cent over the prices in St. John's, we can see that people on

social assistance in Labrador are in very dire straits, that they cannot

possibly get sufficient food for a nutritious diet.

Neither can the communities. Many communities in this

Province cannot come up with a voluntary charity-based program to provide a

school lunch program for their schools. It cannot be done. Government has to

recognize that.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: It is pretty obvious. Even the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture would know that every community in this Province does

not have the resources, does not have the community base, to provide a

charity-based school lunch program in their communities. The ones that are in

the most dire need are the ones who are least able to provide a school lunch

program for their schoolchildren. The parents are at risk, the children are at

risk, and it is not possible to come up with this program without the support of

government.

These petitioners recognize that and they are asking the

House to direct government to establish a universal comprehensive school lunch

program for every school in the Province - not just ones which happen to have an

active P.T.A., not just ones which happen to be in a place where there might be

a Lions Club or a Kinsmen club or a social group that is prepared to take it on,

but for every single school in the Province, Mr. Speaker, so that each child has

access to a nutritious, healthy meal every day that they are in school; so that

they can go some way to help them attack the child hunger that they are facing

so they can take advantage and learn in school that is being provided by the

public. The funds for this, Mr. Speaker, can clearly come -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. HARRIS: - from the money that is being saved in the

education system today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will sit down and allow the

Government House Leader to address the petition that is being presented by these

petitioners.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today in support of the petition, as I

have done on a number of other occasions and as has been done by my colleague,

the Opposition House Leader, on several other occasions. This is an issue which

has been brought forward by my colleague, the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi

Vidi, on numerous occasions, and it is one which requires attention and

requires, I would suggest, serious consideration by members opposite. What I

find happens so often is that when issues are presented in this House

repeatedly, it tends to give the impression that they are unimportant, because

familiarity often gives one the impression that it is just repeated information,

it cannot be that serious, it is just another petition in a long list of

petitions, one after the other. But, obviously, when you seriously consider the

content and when you seriously review the prayer of this petition, it can be

readily seen that it is of utmost importance. Mr. Speaker, although this has

been presented on numerous occasions, it does not in any way, take away from the

seriousness of the intent and the importance of the prayer. Because we are

dealing with perhaps our greatest resource, that being the children of our

Province.

The petition states that the effects of poverty are serious

problems for many in this Province and that things are getting worse. That is an

understatement, I would suggest, Mr. Speaker. All we have to do is read the

report that was recently prepared by Dr. Canning. In that report there was an

entire

chapter which is dedicated to poverty and how children who come from poor

families are simply not in a position and do not have the ability or the

capacity to readily learn as effectively as children who come from another

income level. So, obviously, Mr. Speaker, the issue of poverty and the issue of

hungry children is an essential issue that has to be considered at all times

when one reviews the educational opportunity and benefit of an education to

these children.

Mr. Speaker, this particular petition deals with a universal

health care program and it is one that I personally endorse because there is no

need, when we are dealing with children, to be selective. There is no need to

say, `this child needs it and that child does not.' We are dealing with young

children. We are dealing with children who require a basis, who require a

minimal amount of protection and a universal health care program would do that.

A universal school lunch program would provide a stigma-free way of ensuring

every schoolchild a good nutritional meal every day. So, not only does it have

educational benefit, the universal lunch program, Mr. Speaker, would allow each

and every child in our school system to be treated equally and fairly. There is

no discrimination. There is no selectivity. There is just one child being

considered and regarded on an equal basis with every other child, regardless

whether it is a boy or girl, regardless of the grade, regardless of the

community, regardless of the home, equality throughout and that is what this

universality program, Mr. Speaker, is all about.

So I support the prayer of this petition. I support it once

again and, as I have indicated, we have done this on this side of the House on

many occasions. It is an important issue. Why, Mr. Speaker, is it important?

Because it deals with our children and nothing more can be said about it. It is

something that has to be given serious consideration by members opposite. It has

great value for our young people and it will give these children nutritional

well-being and a sense of equality, which every child in this Province deserves.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious issue, the petition put

forward by my hon. colleague opposite and supported by the Member for St. John's

East.

I had the opportunity and the privilege and the honour of

being Minister of Social Services in 1989, for a short time, for two years.

During that two years, I spent untold hours meeting with groups of people about

hungry children. In fact, I played a major role into the first school lunch

program introduced in St. John's, down at Gower Street United Church.

I was invited to visit a school, and the first place I

visited where the school lunch program was put in place, I saw children - the

staff and the people who were getting the school lunch program involved, pointed

out to me how they were so quiet and so removed from the rest of the class and

how their grades had not been up to the expectations that the instructors

thought they should be.

Mr. Speaker, we introduced at that time, a school lunch

program. I think, if I remember correctly, it was about $28,000 that we put into

it that year, through the Department of Social Services, in co-operation with

the community groups.

Six months later, I visited that same school and just walked

in around, not to be seen as being someone looking at people to see how they

were, and the staff pointed out the same three children that they had pointed

out before the school lunch program had begun. And, Mr. Speaker, emotions - you

cannot hide your emotions, when I saw at the beginning and then, six months

later, saw those same children, and such a difference, such a difference in

those three children. They had been fed on a regular basis, on a morning and a

daily basis, and their ability to mix with other children and their getting

involved and their learning ability really came alive. We are only talking, in

this case -

MR. TULK: There is no doubt about it, there was never a

minister that went into more (inaudible) and when in looking for more children

than that minister, there.

MR. EFFORD: Exactly. Mr. Speaker, I am only using the

example of three children, here. You can apply that to any school in the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and you can multiply the numbers - you

just cannot imagine what is happening out there. And it is not only the social

services client, it is the low-income wage earners, those people who are working

for minimum wage, probably worse off, in a lot of cases, than social assistance

recipients, if you can be any worse off. Nevertheless, it is a real factor.

One time, I had a call from a constituent of mine in

Shearstown, and my son was in high school at the same time that this young boy

was in there. His dad called me. He had been out of work and had to go on social

assistance. He called me, and I knew the emotion, you could hear it in his voice

when he was talking on the phone. He said to me: `John, I understand that you

are working and that you are earning money and that your son, Lee, is going to

school and he is fed well; but let me tell you how my son' - four nights that

week, the most he had for supper was Kraft dinner. Four nights in one week, that

was the most he had for supper. That was all he could afford, and you could hear

the emotion in the dad's voice when he was telling me - not because he wanted to

be in that position, but he had no other choice.

It is a serious problem, Mr. Speaker, and we all have to do

more. The Minister of Forest Resources and Agrifoods just told me, this year the

School Milk Program - $200,000, and if I remember correctly, I think the

Department of Social Services last year put in $125,000. It is still not enough.

MR. TULK: By the way, the milk producers in this Province

have contributed substantially to the milk program.

MR. EFFORD: Exactly, the milk producers in the Province.

But, Mr. Speaker, we all, industry, governments, community groups, we all have

to do more. We have to continue giving more until every child, every child in

this Province of ours has enough food to put in their stomach. The very least we

do.

Mr. Speaker, we support the attempt of what we are trying to

do, and we will continue to do more to make sure that our children are fed

properly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: There was an item on the Order Paper under

Routine Proceedings that was overlooked by the Speaker, so I will revert to

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

Rural Renewal.

MS FOOTE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today to table

in the House on behalf of my colleague the Minister of Tourism, Culture and

Recreation the response to the question about the Newfoundland and Labrador

delegation travelling to Bristol to attend the departure of the Matthew .

MR. SPEAKER: It being Thursday and 4:00 p.m, I will read

the three questions we will be debating in the Late Show.

Number one, from the Member for Cape St. Francis: I am

dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs re: my question concerning the infrastructure funding.

Number two, from the Member for Kilbride: I am dissatisfied

with the answer provided by the Minister of Education re: my question on

training concerning the Terra Nova development.

Number three, from the Member for Waterford Valley: I am

dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Health re: my question

on Dietetic Association recommendations to government.

Orders of the Day

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. TULK: Motion No. 1, Mr. Speaker, the Budget speech.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion No. 1, the Budget speech.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill - Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Actually it isn't the

Budget speech, but it is an amendment to the Budget speech that is presently

before the floor. I believe I have only a couple of minutes left so I won't be

able to launch into a very long addition to my remarks on Tuesday.

I do want to say that the economy of this Province, and the

true state of the economy, is not really accurately represented by the

Province's response, and by the government's response in the Budget. As an

example, and going back to the discussion we were just having about children and

poor children - I know the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture has a very

serious concern there.

Let me say that I was shocked to discover, from reading a

report from the National Council on Welfare which was released recently, that

based on its study and its comparisons in poverty rates across the country, it

has shown that in 1989, Mr. Speaker, 17.9 per cent of the children in this

Province were living below the poverty line. Just shy of 18 per cent in 1989.

In 1995, the last year for which figures are available to

this study, the poverty rate for children in Newfoundland and Labrador was 26

per cent, fully 8 percentage points higher. Nearly one-third more children

living in poverty in Newfoundland and Labrador in 1995 than there was in 1989.

That is a very substantial and significant increase in poor children over a

six-year period, from 18 per cent in 1989 when the Liberal government took

office to 26 per cent in 1995.

When you look at how that poverty rate is experienced by

children of single-parent mothers, 77.5 per cent of the children of single

mothers live in poverty. Mr. Speaker, that is the reality that is faced by

children in this Province. The number of children that I referred to is over

36,000 poor children in Newfoundland and Labrador and, as the Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture says, it is not just children of families on social

assistance; it is children, in some cases, where the parents are both working.

In some cases only one parent is working; in some cases they are on social

assistance. Thirty-six thousand children in 1995 were living in poverty -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: - and this government and the government's

budgets ought to address that very serious concern.

I understand my time is up, Mr. Speaker, unless I have a few

minutes leave.

MR. TULK: No.

MR. HARRIS: The Government House Leader is not giving any

leave to talk about the number of poor children in the Province, so I therefore

will have to sit down.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright -

L'Anse-au-Clair.

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I wanted to have some comments, of course, on the Budget

Debate and also as it relates to, I guess, poverty and the situation a lot of

people in my district are in as well as others in the Province, and I refer

specifically to people on social assistance who live on the Coast of Labrador. I

am sure the hon. Member for Torngat can attest to the information I am going to

provide.

In recent weeks I took a serious look at all of the

communities and what the people in these communities were paying in terms of

food costs and the cost of living and so on. I refer specifically to the people

on social assistance, and I broke this down for a family of four who would live

in various parts of Coastal Labrador. Now, we are talking families here who

receive about $600 a month on which to live. First of all, they are paying the

highest prices for diesel generated power in the Province, they have the highest

energy costs of anywhere in the Province, and that equals to about $100 a month

of their expenses. Then they also have to contend with the prices, and these

prices that are reflected here include the air subsidy that has been calculated.

I think it was this year - no, last year - the Newfoundland

Dietetic Association did a survey in the St. John's area, and they looked at

what it would cost to feed a family of four nutritional meals for a full week,

and the cost was just over $120 a week, and that was in the St. John's area.

That calculated to be about 84 per cent of the assistance rate that they were

receiving. Now the assistance rate is the same all over the Province, and if it

was equalling 84 per cent of that rate in St. John's it equals anywhere from 45

per cent to 165 per cent greater than that rate in Coastal Labrador.

I looked at oranges, for example, and this will amaze you. In

St. John's you can buy those oranges for $3.29 a dozen. When you work your way

up through the Coast of Labrador in terms of Mary's Harbour, you are paying

$5.40 a dozen. You move further up to Black Tickle and you are paying $8.90 a

dozen. You equal out those grocery rates for a week and you are paying 165 per

cent greater for those groceries in that community.

These are instances where we have to look at the assistance

rate for these families, totally inadequate. They do not have the support

services and mechanisms in these communities to be able to offset their cost of

living. They don't have food banks. They don't have places where they can go and

get second-hand clothing and things like that for their children. They don't

have lunch programs in school, on which the hon. members presented petitions

today and spoke. These are all issues which have to be dealt with to try and

alleviate the cost of living for the people up in that area.

Also, when I looked at this, I looked at the fuel allowances

that they were receiving to heat their home and offset that cost. Those

allowances were set at $90 a month, and I couldn't believe that they have not

been looked at since 1992, and there have been no increases in those rates. If

you look at a family up there which is burning oil to heat their home, they are

looking at anywher