VOL. 2 SECOND SESSION OF THE THIRTY-NINTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIP HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 1983 NO. 3

March 8, 1983 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Tape No. 90 Order, please!

Before we commence today's proceedings, I would like to extend a welcome to those in the galleries who are here in recognition of International Women's Day and representing the following organizations: the Women's Institutes of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Association of Registered Nurses of Newfoundland, the Women's Network, the Day Care Steering Committee, the NM - 1 Professional Secretaries Association, the Newfoundland Status of Women's Council, the Newfoundland Organization of Women, the Women's Association of Memorial University of Newfoundland, the Women's Resource Centre of Memorial University of Newfoundland, the Newfoundland Teachers Association, Special Interest Council on Women's Issues in Education, Training for Tomorrow, Career Explorations for Women, the Women's Health Education Project, the Catholic Women's League, Transition House, the Provincial Advisory Council on the Status of Women, Newfoundland and Labrador.

On behalf of all the members, I welcome you ladies to the galleries today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, -hear: 202

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 90 NM - 2 STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The han. the President of the Council. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, last evening the Premier and I met with representatives of oil companies involved in drilling presently being carried on offshore under the supervision of the operator,Mobil Canada. At that meeting the facts relating to the issuing of the provincial order .tb cease drilling were fully set before the representatives of these companies.

The report of the Petroleum Directorate entitled A Prel iminary Analysis Of Operating Conditions At The Hibernia 1-46 and North Dana 1-43 Locations was given to all present. I am tabling a copy of this report for the information of hon. members. This report is a thorough and objective analysis of weather and ice conditions from February 12th. to the 20th. this year, the capacity to respond to the emergency which these conditions · made imminent and forecasted conditions in Hibernia during the residue of the Winter drilling season.

This report show conclusively, M:t:. · Speaker, that this Province acted solely on the basi.s of facts that were before us. At the time the order was issued, I might point out, another storm had been forecast and the decisi.on was made at a special Cabinet session convened to consider the urgent indications that were presented by that forecast. The

summary of this report, Mr. Speaker, reveals some chilli.ng factors and I would like to read into the record the

summary of the report. It reads as follows: "In 1983", now this is · a report put out by the Petroleum Directorate 1I might emphasis, Mr. Speaker, professional experts in the fi.eld who have done it after consultation wi.th .- 203

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 9.0 NM ~ 3 MR. MARSHALL: such agencies as the International Ice Patrol and other forecasting concerns. 204

March 8,1983 Tape No. 91 ah-1 MR. MARSHALL: "The 1983 Winter drilling season is proving to be one of thaworst ice years on record:' the report says.'' Storms, freezing -rain and low visibility 1 cornbined with the presence of icebergs 1 which are occurring earlier and with greater frequency than normal 1 have resulted in an increased risk to personnel working offshore, the rig itself and the environment. "Preliminary indications are that the number of icebergs in 1983 will equal, if not exceed, that in the previous extreme year of 1972.

The International Ice Patrol reports that already at least , up to this time, at least 126 bergs have passed the latitude of the Hibernia location compared, Mr.Speaker, to 40 by this date in the previous extreme year of 1972 ,and I might add,compared to an average of 9 since the early 1900 when the Titanic sank. So we have a comparison, 126 to 40 and 126 to 9,"During the perioq February 16th to February 19, 1983 , the following situation existed at Hibernia 1-46 step-out well being drilled by Mobil:' I might add that that particular step­ out well was being drilled by the West Venture.

"There were 84 people on board the drilling unit "West Venture with at least 10 icebergs and bergy bits in the vicinity of the rig during a severe Winter storm which lasted 2~ days •1' I could add also to describe that storm, Mr. Speaker, the fact,as the report will show,that the seas had reached crests of 68 feet, that the wind was in excess of 80 knots an hour, that within a very dangerous area of the rig , I think within about 10 to 14 miles, there was a 100,000 ton iceberg on the seas,and within a shorter distance another hugh iceberg. You have to picture 205 .

Marc h 8 , 1983 Tape No . 9 1 ah-2 MR.MARSHALL: the condit.:j..ons that were there. ' 11Icebergs could not be towed away due to rough sea~."Mr. Speaker, in 68 foot seas you do not tow away a 100,000 ton icebergs. The vessel was. moored, Mr. Speaker, on all ten anchors, the West Venture. "Anchors coul:d not be pulled due to rough seas; the last attempt on the night of the 16th"- the member for ~ogo (Mr. Tulk) probably finds this rather amusing but I do not think it is to most people. "Anchors could not be pulled due to the rough seas.

The last attempt on the night of the 16th was not successful~' I underline the fact that there was an attempt to pull the anchors. At the very best it was a dangerous procedure to be done,but in 68 foot waves it would be suicidal to attempt it so the anchors could not be pulled. 206

March 8, 1983 Tape 92 EC - 1 MR. MARSHALL : 11 No personnel, Mr. Speaker, could be removed from the rig by helicopter or supply vessel ,during the period the rig was threatened by icebergs 1 due to weather conditions . '' I emphasize again our guidelines that we put out had it .down that four hours before any forecasted winds of 80 knots per hour the people would be evacuated from the rigs. It could not be done in this case because of weather conditions.

Another factor, "At 0100 hours, at 1:00 1 on Friday, February 18th, a bergy bit was within seven nautical miles of the rig but flying conditions prevented Mobil from evacuating any personnel from the _ rig.

Under the adverse conditions that existed at that time, the shearing of anchor chains would have been highly hazardous and may not have been completed in time.'' Another factor, "Successfully shearing the anchor chains would set the West Venture adrift, as it had no means of propulsion, and it would not have been possible to get a towline to a supply vessel due to the rough seas." Another one,"Successful abandon­ ment via the rig's lifesaving equipment would have been unlikely due to the high winds and the rough seas. ''Based on this incident," Mr.

Speaker, and I emphasize,· based on this incident alone and other factors in the report, "the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador concluded that unsafe operating conditions existed and that a stop drilling .order was justified. "While weather and ice conditions have moderated for the present, the extreme number of bergs present to the North of the drilling area and the normal occurrence of frequent severe storms during this period 207

March 8, 1983 Tape 92 EC - 2 MR. MARSHALL: indicate that these favourable conditions will not continue during the rest of March. "Moreover, as the experience of February 16th indicates, conditions can deteriorate quickly with little notice given present forecasting capabilities. Bergy bits often cannot be detected until within the vicinity of the rig, particularly during storm conditions.

This leads to the problem of having insuf­ ficient time to secure the wells." If you want an indication of that, those people who look out and may say - although they cannot today - that conditions are fine, the Monday before February 16th, forty-eight hours before, they were fine as w~ll and then, within forty-eight hours, we had this occurrence. UBased on this analysis, Mr.

Speaker, it has been concluded," the Petroleum Directorate says,"that the risks associated with drilling operations on the Grand Banks ~t this particular time are simply too high and drilling should be suspended, pending the following: Operating cQnditions, especially the coincidence of a high number of icebergs and severe weather, must improve in order to lower the risk. This combination may reach an acceptable level by the end of March or early April,'' this combination of weather and icebergs.

"Second, there must be a full review of all aspects of Winter drilling oper­ ations, particularly with respect to icebergs and storm conditions. Third, there must be a significant improvement in search and rescue capability in this Province." Because as the report indicat.es 208

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 93 MJ - l MR. W. MARSHALL: Search and Rescue was called at one o'clock on that particular day of February 16. It took four and a half hours for one helicopter to get here from the Gaspe Bay Peni~sula in Quebec, it was twenty-one hours before two other Search and Rescue helicopters managed to get to St. John's from Summerside,and even from Gander it was twent y-one hours. We are absolutely determined that there will not be, under the provincial aegis, any further drilling until such time as we have adequate search and rescue to protect ~he lives and the security of the people involved. Mr.

Speaker, the representatives received this briefing with a ~o berness befitting the seriousness of the information, i.e., the representatives of the company last night. They will absorb the facts and be back with their decision in forty-eight hours. In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, we made in very clear, crystal clear, that continued defiance of our order was totally unacceptable and the result of that meeting in no way implies there is a moratorium placed upon our directive. Our position, Mr.

Speaker, is quite clear 1 that that directive,in the name of safety as well as anything else,should have been complied with the moment it was given and there is no excuse under the sun for it not having been complied with up to now. We advised the <1afiance is received very seriously and should anything happen offshore, Mr. Speaker, they, that is the company representatives and those responsible for not responding to that order,would stand condemned in the face of the facts presented to them last night in this report.

The government just cannot understand the positions taken in face of the urgent and compelling facts. It is my opinion, Mr. Speaker, that the representatives of the company left very concerned and troubled persons, as well they might. There is no doubt 209

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 93 MJ - 2 MR . W. MARSHALL: in my mind that they too feel these rigs should be brought ashore . However, it is obvious and very unfortunate that the federal minister is preventing their taking this action. He is v~ewing it as totally political. It no st certainly is not, · it is a question of safety, I challenge him to read that report and deny any fact in it. I hope that,fortified by our analysis in that report, his representative at the meeting- and there was a represen tative; unfortunately Mr.

Chretien could not see his way clear to attend personally to revie w these very essential and urgent facts - but I hope his representative at the meeting and the corporate represent atives,armed with this report can convince him of the wanton recklessness of his position. 210

March 8, 1983 Tape 94 PK - 1 MR. MARSHALL: In the meantime, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chretien bears a very l:eavy and I might say a very unnecessary responsibility. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR . NEARY: Hear, hear! The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of public record in this Province that on a number of occasions following the Ocean Ranger disaster we in the Opposition raised the matter of offshore drilling during the Winter months both inside and outside of this House.

It is tragic and unfortunate and sad indeed that the hon. gentleman who just made that pious statement did not listen to what we said at that time. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.. NEARY: It is too bad and it is unfortunate, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. gentleman did not listen to Captain Nehring,who is now being invited to give testimony before the Royal Commission hearing on the Ocean Ranger disaster, whose correspondence and report I sent to the hen. gentleman -in January 1 two months before the Ocean Ranger disaster. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

NEARY: It is too bad the hon. gentleman did not listen to that warning signal that went up at the time. AN HON. MEMBER MR. NEARY: Why? Why? I do not know why _ Only the hon. gentleman can answer that, Mr. Speaker~ MR. WARREN: Because it was not in his political interest. MR. NEARY: I say this to the han. gentleman, Mr. Speaker, it is high time that he stopped playing his little game, that he stopped his one-uprnans~ip and that he sit down with the federal authorities and tried to resolve this matter through negotiations. 211

Ma rch B, 198 3 MR . NE ARY: to a m eeting - MR . MORGAN : MR . NE ARY : Tape 94 PK - 2 The hon. gentleman was invited Tell your.budd~es about ~t. Mr. Speaker, this is ·a very serious matter, and as the hon. gentleman indicated to my colleague,who lives on the sea,that I would like for the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) to keep quiet while I am speaking on this matter. The Federal Minister of Energy (Mr. Chretien) called a meeting ten days ago, convened a meeting to discuss this very matter. Did the minister who just took his seat, who made the Ministerial Statement, did he agree to attend? Nq, he did not.

He would not even send an official to the meeting. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me say this, the hon •. gentleman is talking over there as if he were in full command. The Newfoundland Appeals court,three Newfoundland judges, Newfoundlanders 212

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 95 JV - 1 MR. NEARY: whom the Premier praised on another matter that was before the Court - MR. DAWE: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR. WARREN: Transportation? MR. NEARY: please? MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: The issue was safety boy. Order, please! Order, please! Why do you not straighten out Mr. Speaker, could I have, silence Order, please! ~ praised these judges on the Constitution and on another matter that was before the Appeal Court.

These three Judges in their wisdom ruled only a couple of weeks ago that the offshore came under the jurisdiction of the GOvernment of Canada. !s the han. gentleman ignoring that fact? That is a decision of the Court! Three Newfoundland judges were unanimous. Mr. Speaker, in view_of their - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. the President of the Council on a point of order. MR. MARSHALL: The hen. gentleman is addressing himself to a statement that I made concerning a meeting with the representatives of the companies last week.

I do not see that the decision of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland is relevant. I think the han. gentleman could as well spare us a revulsion of hearing a Newfoundlander exulting in the loss of a decision of'that nature by the people of this Province. I think he could spare us from exulting over the fact that the Grand Banks -of Newfoundland have become the Grand Banks of Ottawa. MR. NEARY: There is no point of order. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Han. members, I am sure, will agree that the ruling on someone being relevan ·t 213

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 95 JV - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): is perhaps one of the most difficult that the Chair has to deal with. I would perhaps remind the hon. Leader of the Opposition that he has very limited time to speak in ~eply to the Ministerial Statement and maybe he could be a little more relevant. MR. NEARY: I appreciate Your Honour being concerned about my time, but I believe, Your Honour, that I am relevant as Your Honour did not rule me out of order. The hon. gentleman is only making these point of orders to try to use up my time. Let me say this again, Mr. Speaker.

The hon. gentleman I heard on CBC radio this morning - in spite of the fact that I tried to clear it up yesterday - and the hon. gentleman is not Minister of Energy, he is Minister withopt Portfolio. The hon. gentleman must realize, M~. Speaker, that he is no longer in ~ommand. Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman can titter and laugh all he wants. The hon. gentleman has pangs of conscience because of the Ocean Ranger disaster. Mr.

Speaker, let me say this, it is outrageous that the hon. gentleman should take this unilateral decision without any prior consultation with the people who were given the jurisdiction over the offshore by the Newfoundland Appeal Court. Now who is playing politics? The hon. gentleman did not raise this matter until after the Court decision and even last night, when I heard the hbn. gentleman comment on this very serious matter, he was hurt, his pride was hurt because the oil companies did not send their top executives, they only sent junior executives to consult with the hon. gentleman.

And then at the end, both he and the Premier had to have a few darts at Mr. Chretien. 214

March 8, 1983 MR. NEARY: resolve the matter? Tape No. 96 SD - 1 Mr. Speaker, is that the way to Mr. Speaker, who was playing politics when they made these statements last night in answer to questions by news reporters about Mr. Chretien? MR. DOYLE: MR. NEARY: The federal government. Mr. Speaker, I believe the administration would be well advised to follow the advice of the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) I the former Minister of Energyrwho has a great deal of respect in this Province.

There are an awful lot of people subscribe to his thinking and his point of view that what they should do, as the han. gentleman, the member for Mount Scio, said publicly - he is on public record as having stated it - that the policy and the trend . - -- - and the tradition has been to have prior consultation on these matters before the government rnaK.es a decision. That did not happen in this case.

And I believe they should take the advice of the member for Mount Scio, and sound advice, and stop corning into the House with Ministe:r;ial Statements and inflarnrnatory .staternents that can only prolong these discussions 1 and get back to the negotiating table and sit down and try to resolve this matter in a statesmanlike way and stop playing their little silly political games. That is what the han. gentleman did today, that is what he is doing every day in this House, that is what he is doing outside the House. The press are falling for it.

They should research Hansard and research the .newspapers to see what the hon. gentleman said about this matter a year ago, see what t~e han. gentleman said about. it in November past before the decision of the Newfoundland Appeals Cou .rt. It would be worth.wh .i.-le to put together a package of the Premier's remarks ~n~ the han. gentleman's remarks· in connection with drilling during the Winter months off our coast. MR. WARREN: Hear, hear. MR. NEARY: It would be worthwhile for the 215

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 96 SD - 2 MR. NEARY: press, the media of this Province, to research Hansard and go to.their own morgues and look at the statements made by the han. gentleman and see who is being hypocritical and who is playing politics with this very serious matter, Mr. Speaker. So in conclusion let me warn and advice the hon. gentleman that instead of coming in here with his political rhetoric and his little political game-playing that he take the matter seriously and attempt to negotiate a resolution of this matter before we have another disaster off our coast. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR.

SPEAKER (Russell): Statements? SOME H.ON. MEMBERS : PREMIER PECKFORD: H.ear, hear. Are there any other Ministerial The hon. the Premier. Hear, hear. Mr. Speaker, just yesterday the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary)_ tried to avoid taking a stand on the closure of the Shoe Cove Satellite Tracking Station - SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. PREMIER PECKFORD: - by trying to highlight a supposed error in a press statement on the subject issued by me on February 15, 1983. 216

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 97 NM - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: More particularly, the Opposition Leader (Mr. Neary) disputed the truth of the statement that the Shoe Cove station provided realtime data on"iceberg movement, the location and character of pack ice and seas tate conditions~· Moreover, a statement from the minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate to the effect that Shoe Cove was not providing "daily"_ice information was used to back up his accusation. The assertion on iceberg movement, while perhaps overstated, is not entirely.without foundation.

The statements on pack ice and seastate conditions are clearly and unequivocably true. As well, the assertion by Federal Energy Ministe,r Chretien that Shoe Cove did not provide real time, up to date and ongoing data shows a woefully inadequate know~edge of the science and technology that was used at Shoe Cove. As well, there is a difference in the meaning of the words "real time" and the word "daily" when applied to Shoe Cove. Before I elaborate further, let me review the situation, Mr. Speaker.

In Decem~er of 1982, the provincial government, through the Department of Development, submitted -the people around on the opposite side of the House and others who do not like us say we only took the position on Shoe Cove a wee~ or .two ago -in December of 1982 the provincial government, through the Department of Development ·submitted a discussion paper to the federal government in an effort to convince it not to close the Shoe Cove station. I have in my hand a copy of that document.

In addition to pointing out the valuable services provided by the station in offshore monitoring, the paper pointed out the tremendous potential of the station in the offshore, general marine and scientific research areas. The paper appended a list of nearly eighty customers who used the services provided by Shoe Cove. The first one o~ the list of the eighty is none other than the 217

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 97 NM- 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Department of Fisheries and Oceans, the federal government; Whale B.esearch at MUN, MacLaren Plansearch; the Department of Environment, the Province of Newfoundland; the Minister of Lands and Forests, the Province of Quebec; Hunter and Associates; Atlantic Biological Services; the University of Colorado; Bedford Institute of Oceanography in Nova Scotia; MacLaren Marex; Cat Arm Consultants; Geosight, the University of Miami Oceanocrraphy; the University of California; Naval Department, Sydney, Nova Scotia; Remotec Applications Incorporated; Physics Department, MUN; C-Core; Dome Petroleum; the Newfoundland Forestry Research Centre; the University of BC Oceanography; gs Geological Survey; the Department of Development, the Province of Newfoundland; Dalhousie University Oceanography; Alberta Remote Sensing Centre; Nordco, Fence; Reading Univeristy, England; Ice Climatology, Ottawa; Javelin Limited; a group from Quebec;" a group from Denmark - I cannot pronounce the words , that is why I am saying a group from Denmark.

The Phys~cs Department, MUN; Bowaters Newfoundland; Norandat the Department of Earch Services, MUN• Ice Central - Ice Central, Mr. Speaker, Ice Central, A~~ospheric Environmental Service, the federal government. Ice Central used to get information from Shoe Cove. Now let us play with words, Mr. Speaker, let us start playing.with words today as the han. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) tried to do yesterday. McGill 218

March 8, 1983 Tape 98 PK - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: University, the Marine Science Centre, the Health Sciences at Mun, A.E.S., Downsview, Ontario. Downsview, Ontario has a centre, but they could not get all of the information themselves they had to go to Shoe Cove to get the rest of it, a federal government agency again. The Department of Mines Newfoundland, the Canadian Forestry Service, again, the Placer Development Limited, The U.S.

Navy, Petro-Can, Utah Mines, Esso Resources Frontier Explorations Limited, Nova Scotia Department of Lands and Forests, for God sake, Selco, Geography Department, Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, R.A.F., Laval University, Acre Consultant?, the Geography Department at McGill, a group from France, I cannot pronounce the name again, and on it goes. Eighty. MR. T. HICKEY: That is the one they say is obsolete. PREMIER PECKFORD: The list is quite diverse including universities, government departments, research laboratories, and consulting companies from all over the world.

The document also contained letters of support from the station's contined operation from none other than Petro-Canada, Gulf Canada, Mun Engineering, Mun Physics and Chemistry, The Maritime Remote Sensing Committee, The Canadian Remote Sensing Committee, The . Newfoundland Centre for the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services, C-Core, Remotec, The National Research Council of Canada, a beast of the federal government, and Fis~eries and Oceans Canada. Letters of support saying keep Shoe cove. Mr.

Speaker, let me give you just a few quotes of what these organizations had to say about Shoe Cove. Petro-Canada: "Within our department the analysis of 219

March 8, 1983 Tape 98 PK - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: satellite data has become an integral component to the successful support of our exploratory drilling programme in Labrador." SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: The Maritime Remote Sensing Committee; "The Maritimes stand at the threshold of signing into action a comprehensive programme of remote sensing technology transfer with the Canada Centre for Remote Sensing. Without the real time" - not necessarily daily - "Without the real time" - and Mr.

Marshall in his statement was talking about daily, he wanted it upgraded, is what the Minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate was saying in his statement. We want it upgraded even further. Forget about taking it away. Real time is pretty good, a day, ~wo days, three days, but we would like to have it daily. And what I was saying in my statement is it does provide ice information, a day and a half, two days. three days, it could provide it daily if you upgraded it.

Without the real time image advantages available from Shoe Cove, the Maritimes Technology Transfer prograrn:me ·stands in jeopardy." The Newfoundland Centre for the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, what did they say?

"Should the Tracking Station be closed, The Oceanographers and Research Engineers in this community will lose a valuable research tool for several years, satellite imagery has been used by researchers to study and monitor sea ice movements offshore Newfoundland and Labrador." C-core: "The present generation of satellites tracked at Shoe Cove . have provided a source of information for the .

East Coast region where traditional surface collected data is extremely sparse." And finally, Rernotec said, "Landsat Data has proven to be useful for offshore studies concerned with what? the detection of ice and icebergs." MR. MARSHALL: There you go! 220

March ff ,1983 Tape No. 99 ah-1 PREMIER PECKFORD: Surely , Mr. Speaker, these learned people are aware of what they are talking about and they are very sensitive to the important role played by Shoe Cove both in offshore sea and ice monitoring,as well as marine related research •. Mr. Chretien's statement that Shoe Cove did not provide "real time" data also shows a. basic lack of understanding. Shoe Cove used to track the Landsat satellite and the NOOA'. satellite. NOOA provided date feed to the station twice daily, and Landsat very 16 days.

A couple of .years ago there were two Landsat series satellites and they provided a date feed every eight days. The date from both Landsat and NOOA and fed into a sophisticated computer system which, combining the information from both satellites~did provide a continuous picture over time, of offshore ice conditions -@ver time it did provide information on ice. What the minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate wanted in his role there · he wanted to see it upgraded so it was even quicker time. There was already time and ice information from Shoe Cove,but let us make it better. While,as Mr.

Marshall said, we may not have been guaranteed an accurate ice picture for a ..given hour .6r a given day 1 we did g~t a pretty good idea on ongoing and developing ice trends.And what we wanted to do and why the minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate said what he said was we wanted to improve it, the onging thin~, the four or five days to one day. We did nevertheless have a pretty good idea of ongoing developing ice trends by the computer mating of data from the two very different satellites. And,as the hon. minister for the Petroleum Directorate's statement said,we are concerned 221

March 8,1983 Tape No . 99 a h - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: not only with keeping it but the "potential" for Shoe Cove, and this in no way detracts from my statement that we were getting a certain amount of ice data all along on an ongoing basis. With Shoe Cove gone, we can still get NOOA data from the Atmospheric .Environment Service in Downsview, Ontario, but ,Mr . Speaker, this date is in facsimile form, that is photographic form, the same sort of photograph we see used on the Evening Telegram or the evening T.V. weather forecasts , that kind of photograph. 222

March 8, 1983 Tape 100 EC - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: However, such data is next to useless for scientific purposes. The Shoe Cove data is stored on magnetic computer tape,and, as such, it is much more amenable to scientific data manipulation and analysis. Therefore, for all practical purposes the two satellites feeding into Shoe Cove gave us a very respectable real time'picture•of our offshore situation, which we wanted improved. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: And finally, Mr. Speaker, as for iceberg detection, this has been done, though not widely so, using Shoe Cove data.

The Remotec company invites the han. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) and other interested parties to view a Landsat photo on which icebergs can be detected. Admittedly, this technology needs some development. That is why we want to keep Shoe Cove, because we want to build on what we have. We have something which is important, that is what I said and what the han. the Minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate (Mr. Marshall) said, and we want more for the offshore. This technology needs some development to be put into widespread use but it has been and can be done.

The potential here, as the minister said, is one of our main areas of interest in Shoe Cove. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I call upon the Leader of the Opposition to stop trying to throw up technic ali ties and semantics in words as regards the Shoe Cove station. On that score I can meet him datum for datum in this regard, as I have shown in this statement. The fact is that Shoe Cove was providing ice infoDmation on a real time basis. With further upgrading, rather than closure, this capability could be enhanced using current satellites, and that is 223

.. ·March 8, 1983 Tape 100 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: what the minister was talking about. In the 1990s the federal government_will be launching a series of radar satellites which will make ice and iceberg detection even more timely and accurate, providing we have Shoe Cove to track the satellites and analyse their data. Rather than trying to attack my credibility, ~x.

Speaker, by nitpicking on what was or was not said on Shoe Cove - which can be proved to be consistent, I saying that what we had there already provided real time data on ice, the han. the minister saying we want it even upgraded - the Opposition Leader (Mr. Neary) should recognize that it has provided offshore ice information and has the potential to go far beyond its present capabilities. Rather than attack me, Mr. Speaker, why does not the Opposition Leader state where he stands on the Shoe Cove close down? That is the question he has been trying to avoid, Mr. Speaker, and the question he should answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Opposition. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The han. the Leader of the Mr. Speaker, instead of lecturing me and the Opposition, the han. gentleman ~hould be lecturing the gentleman who sits to his right, because what triggered this whole controversy, Mr. Speaker, was not I, but the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall). The President of the Council made a statement to The Evening Telegram. And what did the President of the Council say in that statement, Mr. Speaker? What did he say? He contradicted what the Premier said.

Here is what it said: "Marshall says government was aware that station did not provide ice 224

March 8, 1983 Tape 100 EC - 3 MR. NEARY: infomation." On March 5, 1983, 11Marsha11 says government was aware station did not provide ice information." 225

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 101 MJ - 1 MR. S. NEARY: And the opening paragraph of that statement made by the President of the Council,"William Marshall,the Province's minister responsible for the offshore, says the Province was aware that the Shoe Cove Satellite Tracking Station was not supplying the oil industry with daily ice information when it began a fight to save the facility." So the hon. gentleman's fight PREMIER PECKFORD: Real time. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I did not interrupt the hon. gentleman when he was speaking and I trust he will afford me - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! Order, please! MR. NEARY: - afford me the same courtesy, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps the hon. gentleman might have to learn the rules of the House. But, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is - MR. TOBIN: MR. G. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER: The paper told the truth. Oh, yes, since when? Order, please! MR. NEARY: The han. gentleman's argument is not with me,it is with his colleague. It is his colleague who contradicted the hon. the Premier publicly. I cannot help it, Mr. Speaker, if the han. gentleman's pride is hurt. I cannot help it if his feelings are hurt, Mr.

Speaker .· It is not I who hurt the hon the gentleman's feelings. And, Mr. Speaker, now the hon. gentleman is trying to redeem himself, he is trying now to brainwash the press that are up over here gaping down at ithe han. gentleman all day long and the Minister of Energy with the silly grin on his face, instead of the press being up where the ladies are today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! 226

March 8 ,_ 1983 Tape No. 101 MJ - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! Order, please! Order, please! I have to remind hon. members both to my left and right that when a member is speaking he does have the right to be heard in silence. MR. w,~, MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council on a point of or~er. MR.

MARSHALL: The hon. gentleman is addressing himself to a statement made by the Premier relating to the Shoe Cove Station and I fail to see whether the press gapes at us or,as he wanted this morning as he said in his letter to get them over there to gape at him that that has any relevance at all to the Shoe Cove Station. We are talking, Mr. Speaker, about gaping at satellites 1 not at the press gaping at the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary). MR. NEARY: That is not a point of order - SOME HON . MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.

NEARY: - that is just an example of the silly, childish attitude of the han. gentleman and the arrogance of this administration. It is not a valid point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The point of order is not valid but I think the han. the Leader of the Opposition has strayed a little from the rule of relevancy. MR. NEARY: So, Mr.

Speaker, what the han. the Premier is trying to do, he is trying now to portray the image of a gentleman who did not mislead the people of this Province when in actual fact the han. gentleman did make erroneous statements, made false and misleading statements, as confirmed by the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) in his statement to The Evening ~elegram Now, why is the 227

_.L_ March 8, 1983 Tape No. 101 MJ - 3 MR. S. NEARY: Premier making such an issue out of the Shoe Cove Satellite Tracking Station, a _ station which we are told, Mr. Speaker, cannot penetrate the clouds, does not give ice reports, does not give iceberg movements?- Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman is trying to convince us to his way of thinking_ he is making a very poor job of it 1 because I have a. feeling, Mr.

Speaker, this matter, which is federal jurisdiction 1 can be better handled by learned gentlemen- as he refers to in his statement - by learned gentlemen, scientists · and learned gentleman who make decisions on these matters. Mr. Speaker, is the hon. gentleman saying - PREMIER PECKFORD: Do you agree with that? MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I did not interrupt the hon. the gentleman I would ask him to observe the rules of this House, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! MR. NEARY: ,Mr.

Speaker, is the hon. gentleman telling this Ho~se that the people who made the decision to close that tracking station did not know what they were doing? Is that what the hon. gentleman is saying , 228

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 102 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: Or is he playing politics with it? Mr. Speaker, is he trying to give a little comfort to his colleagues? Mr. Speaker, is he trying to give a little comfort to the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Hickey), who planned a demonstration down at Shoe Cove? . Is that what the han. gentleman is up to? Is he trying to retreive his bad reputation as a person who covers up and misleads people - covered up on the $60 million deficit in this Province, covered up on the closing of the Burin fish plant, covered up on Corner Brook - and now, Mr.

Speaker, misled the people on Shoe Cove. Is that what the hon. gentleman is trying to do? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that if we are going to have demonstrations, this whole thing is designed - I hope the press do not fall for it - is designed, Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: - this whole matter is designed to distract attention from the real issues in this Province. And what are the real issues, Mr. Speaker? MR. HICKEY: MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Hickey) on a point of order. MR. HICKEY: I organized that protest to distract from nothing other than to bring to light the ineptness of a 229

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 102 SD - 2 MR. HICKEY: federal minister who does not know whether he is coming or going and who does not know the first thing,and not only that but who wil ~ not listen to the people with the brains, the technologists. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. HODDER: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : To the point of order, the han. member .for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I would just like to sa y that if the Minister of Social Services (.Mr.

Hickey) can organize a demonstration on Shoe Cove,will he go down and organize a demonstration for the unemployed and the situation that they are in 1or for the people who are on social assistance and the misery he has put them through! MR. WARREN: MR. HICKEY: MR. SPEAKER: Hear, hear. Join me and I would be glad to. Order, please! Hon. members are rising on points of order which indeed are not points of order at all but an opportunity to express opinions. MR ·. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, all of a sudden now the Minister of Social Services has become a scientist.

He is going to tell the scientists now and the technicians how to .run their affairs. He cannot even run the Department of Soc~al Services! Mr. Speaker, the fact of the Itla .tter is that all of this is designed to distract from the real issues in this Province. The real issues are Corner Brook, B~chans, Burin, St. Lawrence, Grand Bank, Fermeuse, Gaultois, Ramea, .. . ..• Labrador City, Wabush, Happy Valley, Goose Bay and Bell Island. They are the real issues in this Province. . I did not s·ee the minister leading a demonstration in these communities, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! 230

March a, 1993 Tape No . 102 SD - 3 SOME BON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh . MR. SPEAXER (Russell} : Order, please ! I would like to inform the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr . Neary) that the allocation of time in response to the Ministerial Statement has expired . Statements? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Are there any other Ministerial The hon. Minister of Education. Bear, hear . 23 1

March 8,1983 Tape No. 103 ah-1 MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, before I begin my statement I would just like to pause for a moment and observe that today is International Women's Day and it is good to see so many women in our galleries. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS.VERGE: I am pleased to reaffirm government's commitment to lower the pupil-teacher ratio for the next school year to 23 to 1. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS.VERGE: At the same time, Mr.Speaker, I wish to announce a number of restraint measures to offset part of the resulting extra expenditure for teacher salaries.

Government's promise to reduce the pupil-teacher ratio was announced by me on April 21,1981. At tha ·t time there was mapped out a three year plan for the provision of resources - school construction grants and teacher salary units - to coincide with the phase-in of the expanded high school programme. The programme began with Grade 10, or level 1, in September 1981 and will produce the first Grade 12 graduates in June 1 1984.

Over the three years from the 1980-81 school year to the 1983-84 school yea~ government will have completed its plan to lower the pupil-teacher ratio in three stages: 24.92:1 to 24.5':1 starting September 1981; 24.5 :1 to 24.0; 1 to 24.0:1 starting September 1982; and finally 23.0:1 starting September corning. Next September there will be 450 more teaching positions than there are this school year, resulting from the combined effect of the reduction in the ratio to 23.0:1 and the growth of student population with Grade 12. 232

March 8,1983 Tape No.l03 ah-2 MS. VERGE: The decision to proceed with the improved ratio will cost government approximately $8 million in the 1983-84 school year. It is virtually impossible for government to undertake this financial commitment without finding offsetting saving.s in othe:r:: areas of expenditure in education. For this reason government has decided to implement the following cost reduction measures: 1.

Adjusting the calculation of student enrolments to reduce the increase in the teacher allocations by about 30 across the Province to those school districts where high school students take pre-vocational programs in vocational schools. 2. Freezing the allocation of what are know as E.M.R. special education salary units at existing levels for all school districts which have already been allocated units equivalent to 10 or more per cent of their regular teacher allocations. 3. Freezing appointments of assistant superintendents and program co-ordinators at existing levels.

As a fourth measure, government will reduce spending on salaries for substitute teachers and we have informed the Newfoundland Teachers' Association of our intention to seek their agreement with the method of doing this '. Altogether these restraint measures will reduce the projected cost increase of the 23.0:1 ratio by approximately $4 million. This amount represents about one-half of the additional cost to government of improving the ratio. 233

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 104 NM- 1 MS. VERGE: It is important to point out that the lower pupil-teacher ratio will assure sufficient teachers to launch Grade XII as the culmination of the reorganized high school programme and, also, will permit continued adequate personnel in lower grades where enrollments are continuing to decline. Within the next few days, the Department of Education will give each of the Province's thirty-five school boards details of its teacher salary allocations for next year. Government is pleased to be proceeding with the implementation of the promised improved pupil-teacher ratio \.'.

We are doing so in these difficult economic times on the basis that savings must be attained in other areas to assist with the cost of its implementation. S'OME HON .-MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR. LUSH: Hear, hear~ The han. member for Terra Nova. It is interesting to note why the minister would have to make this announcement toda~ This was a commitment made by the government back in 198L When it announced its inteption to establish a new reorganized high school programme, this was one · of the major elements in it.

F.irst 1 that we needed x number of teachers, somewhere around 700 I believe, to meet the minimum requirements. And this is one of the contentious points with respect to the onging NTA negotiations and it is . strange that the government would not give the NTA this commitment. And as I said, this has been one of the contentious points, one of the issues that they would not make any commitments to the Newfoundland Teacher~ Association on. So we have to thank the Newfoundland Teachers 1 Association 234

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 104 NM-2 MR. LUSH: for this because it looks like the government had intended to renege on this twenty-three to one ratio, and the NTA over the past couple of weeks have been exerting tremendous pressure and I am sure that they are delighted that finally the government has decided to go along with that formula:' to give the minimum required teachers to carry out this high school programme.

Because without these teachers of course the programme would have been in severe danger and ri.ght up until now, as I say, the government have not indicated or would not indicate to the NTA that they were going to carry out this particular part of the programme, This is a most important element to give our school board the · minimum number of teachers to carry on the programme. So, Mr. Speaker, .we are delighted, certainly we are delighted, but the government had no choice but to do it, or either that to throw out the new high school programme. They could not do Lt without these extra teachers.

So we are glad to know that the government is now carrying out that commitment so that schools will be able to carry on the programme in terms of meetLng the minimum requirements. Mr. Speaker, what we would 235

March 8, 1983 Tape 105 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: like to know now is whether or not school boards are going to be given enough money to build classrooms for those teachers, because some of those teachers are going to be without classrooms and that is going to be a very difficult situation. The minister says no. Well, only recently the Avalon School Board said t~at they did not know what to do with students in Mount Pearl, so that is a current story that they have students going in there next year and do not know what to do with them. I expect, Mr.

Speaker, that there are other school boards in the same situation, so now what we have to know is what arrangements there will be to provide space for those teachers to instruct the students, to offer the minimum programme that is set out by the government. Mr.

Speaker, the areas in which they are going to cut costs, I do want to say that one or two of them are very, very sensitive and will take further study, 1 Number one, adjusting the calculation of student enrolments to reduce the increase in teacher allocations by about thirty to those school districts where high sch~ol students take pre-~ocational programmes in vocational schools.' Mr. Speaker, that one needs a little more study.

I do not know what repercussions that will have on the particular school boards,so that one needs further study whether it will affect the programmes in those areas concerned and one would have to study that a little more fully. Freezing the allocation of EMR is certainly a very delicate issue, students who need more teaqhers instead of less MR. HODDER: That is right. MR. LUSH: -people who need special instruction; that is a very sensitive area. 236

March 8, 1983 Tape 105 EC - 2 MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the other one,on substitute teachers,is another very delicate area and I again would want to see the details on this. The minister has indicated that the details have not been worked out. But this is a very sensitive area. We are talking about substitute teachers, Mr.

Speaker, who go in for a week, go in for a month, go in for two months, and I am not so concerned about substituting on a daily basis, but teachers who substitute on a longer period of time, two weeks, a month, two months, this sort of thing, and I would hope that there would be some special consider­ ation for that and that these teachers in on a longer term basis would certainly get full pay. Because if they do not, I expect that school boards will have a great diffi­ culty, Mr.

Speaker, in getting substitute teachers, and that is very, very important so I again would want to know the details with respect to bringing in this measure before I could comment on it further. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Statements? MR. TULK: MR. SPEAKER: MR. TULK: . Are there any other Ministerial ORAL QUESTIONS Mr. Speaker. The han. the member for Fogo. I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan) and I would like to bring him back to some of the realities of this Province, and bring the government back perhaps to some of the realities· of this Province and their responsibilities, and that is the processing sector of the fishing industry. That is a provincial responsibility, Mr. Speaker, as I have said many times in this House. In other words, let me put it in baby talk for them: It is the responsibility of the provincial Minister of Fisheries to decide if a 237

Mar ch 8, 19 83 Tape 105 EC - 3 MR. TULK: certain fish plant in this Province is to reopen,what conditions will be attached to that reopening and when it will be reopened. With fish plants closed all over the South Coast of this Province, let me ask the minister a question, a particular question. Let me take a particulcu: examp:-e, the people of Burin. Will the minister through this House tell the people of Burin when their fish plant is going to be reopened or ,if indeed it is going to be reopened? It is his responsibility. Would he tell us, please? PRElllER PECKFORD: Ask Rompkey. MR.

TULK: · It has nothin~ to do with Rompkey, it is the minister's responsibility. Would he tell them? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! 238

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 106 so - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of .Fisheries. MR. NEARY: The processing sector - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker - MR. NEARY: - is the responsibility of the Province. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker - MR. TOBIN: You finall y asked a question on the fishery - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. TULK: - after three days in the House you were so concerned. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I am assuming I will be given a chance to answer the question if the Opposition Leader will keep quite so his colleague can hear the answer. Mr.

Speaker, the question with regard ' to Burin is the same as the question with regard to St. Anthony, with regard to Fermeuse, with regard to St. Lawrence, with regard to Gaultois, with regard to Harbour Breton and Ramea 1 that these plants are owned by companies that are finding themselves in very deep financial difficulty to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. And irrespective of whose responsibility and whose juridiction it is under 1 the fact is that Mr.

Kirby in his report has recognized it, the federal Prime Minister of the country has recognized it and is appointing a special Cabinet committee headed by Mr. Donald Johnson, the Minister of State for Economic Development, and a number of other ministers, a total of seven, to deal with that very serious financial problem in the Atlantic Coast fishing industry pertaining t'o three companies .- three large companies - Fishery Products, The Lake Group, Nickersons and also including T. J. Harding and John Penney and Sons. MR. NEARY: That is not true. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, it is t.rue tha .t T.J.

Harding is owned by Nick .ersons · 50./50 . and th.ey · are asking 239

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 106 SD - 2 MR. MORGAN: for $4 million to $5 million. So, I mean the hon. ~ember can argue or make believe it is not true but it is true. And that Cabinet Committee, Mr. Speaker, is .being appointed, as I say, by the Prime Minister. Mr. Kirby, the ·author of the Navigating Troubled Waters report has been asked to do all the necessary analysis of the situation and to do a very thorough analysis of the financial situation of these companies and to make a report to that Cabinet Committee.

And that Cabinet Committee has assured the Premier of the Province and the Newfoundland government, myself as the Minister of Fisheries, that no decisions will be made on that matter pertaining to Burin and other plants r mentioned prior to consultation wi~ the Newfoundland government and, of course, the other parties concerned and involved.

And until that matter has been addressed and a decision made by the Cabinet Committee - Newfoundland's minister in the federal Cabinet is a member of tha~ committee-and until that federal Cabinet Committee deals with that gigantic financial problem involving hundreds of millions of dollars 1 then I am not in a position to comment on any of the discussions ongoing or negotiations ongoing or matters being discussed between the levels of government or the parties concerned until it comes to a 240

March 8, 1983 Tape 107 PK - 1 MR. MORGAN: conclusion. And hopefully,Mr. Speaker, the conclusion will be finalized and decisions made .as quickly as possible. We said to the company which owns Burin, as the member for Burin (Mr.

Tobin) is quite aware of since he has been -very much invqlved in the whole issue from the very beginning, and, indeed, my colleagues who are members for areas where plants owned by these companies are closed, that we have taken a very firm position that nothing should have been changed, no decisions made by these corporate citizens to close any plant, including Burin, until this whole process I am talking about has had a chance to deal with the issue and how to put in place some kind of financial restructuring to put these companies on some kind of an economic footing for the future. MR. TULK: That is not true.

MR. MORGAN: But unfortunately the company chose not to listen to the Newfoundland Government. They went ahead and made- decisions to close Burin and to curtail other activity. At the present time, as again I want to rei~erate, the decision regarding Burin is the same as the decisions regarding other plants. However, Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that some other plants are als~ under the provincial government jurisdiction for processing licenc < the federal government has chose to make a decision, make a deci~ion directly without even consulting the parties concerned, and that is on St. Anthony. MR.

NEARY: Period - MR. MORGAN: MR. SPEA~R (Russell}: MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, during the -Oral Question Mr. Speaker. Order, please! On a point of order, Sir. Order, please! The han. Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. 241

March 8,1983 Tape 107 PK - 2 MR. NEARY: During Oral Question Period, Mr. Speaker ., I think the answers have to be concise and brief. The hon. gentleman is making a political speech, Mr. Speaker, and I would ask the Chair to direct the minister to obey the rules of this han. House. MR. MORGAN: MR. SPEAKER (Russell}: point of order. MR. MORGAN: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. The han. Minister of Fisheries, to the I heard the hon. gentleman outside of the House crying and bawling and screaming about 'Open the House of Assembly to discuss the fisheries and to discuss the problems of the fisheries.' SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MORGAN: Now I am trying to give information of what is happening in the fishing industry and the han. gentleman is saying I am too long giving information. MR. TULK: Tell the truth. MR. MORGAN: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I am saying that it is aLmost impassible to · give a brief answer, a concise answer to such a complex problem regarding the issue that was addressed in the question. MR. ANDREWS: · MR. SPEAKER: Look at Kirby•s answer. Order, please! As I said yesterday, I believe, there are only thirty minutes allocated to the Question Period.

Sometimes by the very nature perhaps of the question asked the answer might have to be a little longer than normal, but I would remind hon •. members that their answers should be as 242

March 8, 1983 Tape 107 PK - 3 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): brief as possible. The hon. member for Fogo. MR. TULK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I find it strange that the minister who is responsible is waiting for Kirby, waiting for the federal government for their plan of action. It seems to me it should be the reverse,that the minister should have a plan of action for the fish plant in this Prov~nce. MR. TOBIN: MR. TULK: specific question. MR. SPEAKER: MR. TULK: What a~out St. Anthony? So let me ask him a very Order, please!

Did he submit any plan of action to the federal government in regard to keeping the Burin fish plant open. He said that some companies closed dow:1 the plants without consulting the provincial government. Well,need I remind him that he has control of the processing licence. Did he say to Fishery Products, for example, "Unless you open the Burin plant, we will take your licences away?' MR. MARSHALL: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. President of the Council on a point of order. __ MR. MARSHALL: ~our Honour just drew attention to the fact that answers had to be brief, Mr.

Speaker. Also questions cannot be speeches. The han. gentleman is commenting on the answer. There is a procedure set down in the Standing Orders if he wishes to 243

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 108 NM - 1 MR. MARSHALL: avail of it, but in the mean- time this is the Question Period, the time for asking questions. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The han. Leader of the Opposition to that point of order. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. That is not a valid point of order. The hon. gentleman is being silly again and just showinq the arrogance of the administration. My hon. friend asked a specific question, I heard it. He asked a question of the hon. Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan); he was about to take his seat when he was interrupted by the han. gentleman, who does this from time to time, Mr. Speaker, just to stall for time when the heat is on a minister, when the heat is on the government, When they do not want criticism,the han. gentleman uses the parliamentary device of points of order. There is no point of order, Mr. Speaker, and I would ask Your Honour to direct the hon. gentleman not to be interrupting the han. gentleman while he is asking questions. Because the time AN HON. MEMBER: Go and sit down, boy. Sit down. MR.

NEARY: - the time is deducted from the half hour Oral Question Period that we have, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please~ It appears to the Chair that members either rising on points of order, or responding thereto, are equally as guilty perhaps of wasting the time of the House and the thirty minute~ of the Question Period for that purpose. The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: In answer to the question, Mr. Speaker, it was just yesterday, in fact, on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland that I met with Mr. Johnson, a federal minister1 Mr. Lalonde, a federal minister; Mr.

LeBlanc, a .federal minister1 Mr. De Bane, a federal minister1 Mr. Rompkey, a federal minister1 Mr. MacEachen, Deputy Prime Minister, the same meeting. And, Mr. Speaker, that kind of 244

March 8, 19 .83 Tape No. 108 NM - 2 MR. MORGAN: meeting involving the Newfoundland Government is the kind of meeting that we are not going to be discussing in public. We are determined as a government to take ·the right position, to make the right decision as it pertains to the processing problems of the Province and the processing sector of the fishing industry.

Sure we have our views on the plants that are closed, sure we have our vi.ews · on the re- structuring, but we are not going to take a final decision and a final position until we are totally sure the position we are taking is the right one for this Province. We are not going to be forced into taking any position or decision. And, Mr.

Speaker, because of that we intend to ensure,thiough the consultation process,of getting the views · and opinions of all concerned, and the Premier and his senior committee of Cabinet, the P and P Committee,has arranged to meet with and get the opinions from the banks, the companies - all of them have the same problems - and the union. In fact in the next two days it will be done. It is going to be do .ne. It is arranged.

So as we get input through . a consultation process, input from all parties and listen to their views and opinions, because it is a major problem, and the decision that we make is going to influence the fis~ing industry for twenty or more years to come and we want to make sure the decision we make as a government here, and hopefully in conjunction and co-ordination with the Cab~net Ministers in Ottawa I just mentioned, including my colleague and fri"and, .Mlr. ·De Bane, that we make the right decision. Mr. Speaker, the Opposition would love me to stand up in the House and criticize Mr.

De Bane and tear into him and all this. No, Mr. Speaker, I got a good buddy, we are cheek to cheek, we are heart to heart, Mr. De Bane and myself. we work in co-ordination every day. We talk to each other every day on the phone, meetings here, 245

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 109 MJ - 1 ' MR. J. MORGAN: meetings in Ottawa, meetings in Montreal. No, Mr. Spe~ker, the ~act is that my colleague and friend 1 the hon. Mr. De Bane,realizes that there is no future to the Liberal Party in Newfoundland, that he is going to have to work with the PC Government here to do things for our Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. B. TULK: Mr. Speaker . MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I could h~ve written the Minister's script. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I said to the Opposition House Leader (Mr.

Hodder) this morning I had a fair feeling of the way he was going to react. But, Mr. Speaker, it is his responsibility td handle processing in this Province. Now, is he committed in this Province to seeing that not one fish plant on the Southwest Coast will close or is he committed to closing certain ones? If he is,will he tell us which ones? He must know by now, Mr. Speaker, he has had a year and a half. What is his commitment to the people of the Southwest Coast? Would he answer that question for me? MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr.

Speaker, I can assure this House of Assembly that the policy of th±s government is not the policy of the Liberal Party, advocated, tabled iri 'the House of Assembly, now in Hansard, in the records of this House by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary), now leader of the party; the policy and the headlines were ::: r~ed in the local press the following day1 and rightly so, and quoted the han. gentleman quite properly, did not miss a word he said. "Let the companies go bankrupt,Neary says' was the headline, 'Let the companies go •·. The advice to Morgan, 'Let the companies 246

March 8, 198 3 Tape No. 109 MJ - 2 MR. J. MORGAN: go bankrupt'. I can assure the hon. House of Assembly that we are not going to adopt that kind of a policy - let the companies go, let them go bankrupt, let the plants close, let the people lose their jobs in plants, let the fishermen lose their markets for their fish. That is the policy of the Opposition Party, Mr. Speaker, but the policy of this government here is to do the right things to make sure that our fishing industry is going to be an economically viable industry in the future. MR. B. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, the policy of this government is quite clear, to sit back and do nothing and to let the industry fold . But let me ask the minister another question. Sometime ago the Premier of this Province met with Mr.

De Bane and when he carne back he used the term ·'~negative fallout', saying that he knew that there was going to have to be restructuring in the industry, that it was going to have to happen, but that there would be some negative fallout and he would hope that both the federal and provincial governments could co-operate in taking that negative fallou ·t. Would he tell us what that negative fall out is? I presume it means the close down of fish plants, the decimation of communities , but would he tell us whether in fact that is what the Premier meant? He must know • I he is his minister . MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries . MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I will try not to be partisan in answering this time. Mr. Speaker, the fact is it is a very serious issue because Mr. Kirby in his report here - and it is a very good report; there are some things that are not in there that we would like to see in there but in essence the bottom line is it is a good report; 247

J March 8, 1983 Tape No . 109 MJ - 3 MR. J. )1QRGAN: we have some concern with some aspects but in general if is good - and in his report he referred to making public the report at his press confeEences saying there would be some calamities - he used the word 'calamities' - in the fishing industry . The Premier has used the term 'fallout' because it came from, I think, one of the federal ministers, a possible ~allout in the fishing industry in Atlantic Canada even after the ,financial restructuring is put in place. Nmo~, Mr . Speaker, ' .I will answer the question very sincerely by saying that is of concern to this government, 248

March 8,1983 Tape No. 110 ah-1 MR.MORGAN: because fallout . or calamity, call it what you wish,mearrs closure of plants and loss of jobs. That is of major concern to us, these calamities or these potential cala~ities or potential fallout . And that is the reason why the Premier went to Ottawa and wants the assurance that if there are going to be fallouts, if there are going to be calamities, not to let these calamities and fall9ut just be dropped in the lap of the Newfoundland government and say, 'Here is your problem.' Unemployment in these communites in some cases could mean almost the death of a community.

And that is the reason he wanted the assurance. We are still concerned over that , that those negative aspects of any financial restructuring of the large companies - not be left for one government,but be dealt with in a v~ry co-ordinative way and jointly by both levels of government. And to ·date that assurance is still there, that any negative fallout or any calamity that is referred by Dr. Kirby will not be left unattended to and forgotten by both governments. MR.TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER (Russell ): member for Fogo. MR.TULK: A supplementary. The hon. Mr.

Speaker, let me put the question to the minister another way. Suppose Ottawa in their restructuring-and I know why he is in bed with the federal minister on this one; I know, no problem~ but suppose Ottawa says no to this plant, we are going to close you down and , yes to another plant, we are going to keep you open. Let me ask the minister is he prepared to see Burin, Fermeuse, Ramea or either of these places open and the other one closed? Now just what is he prepared to do? He is the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) in this Province responsible for the processing . 249

March 8,1983 Tape No. 110 ah-2 MR.TULK: sector of the industry. What is he prepared to do? How much money is he prepared to pu~ in? Or is he going to just lie and let Kirby and the federal minister decide for him and then a few days afterwards come out with a critical statement? Let me ask him that question- MR.SPEAKER (Russell): MR.MORGAN: The hon. Minister of Fisheries. Remember 1 the hon. gentleman when he asked the first question this afternoon said he was going to put the question in baby talk. Well it is obvious is going to be put in baby talk for him to understand because I went over it earlier.

The fact is that this restructuring of those large companies which own those plants in the communities mentioned earlier, that that question, that major problem is now being addressed and we are not going to get involved in disclosing any content or any aspect of these discussions and negotiations,if you want to call it that, between levels of government and the parties concerned.

And I am saying again the major concern of this government is that if there is going to be any negative aspects by means of plant closures 1 that we want an assurance because it is no secret. we· are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars 1 and the federal government is recognizing they have a responsibility to help out the Atlantic region's most important industry, the fishing industry. Surely they have a right to do it. They help out the auto industry, they help out the oil and gas industry 1 and surely·they are going to help out the most important industry we have, and they are going to.

We know they are going to. There is a need for injection of hundreds of millions of dollars and when the injection is carried out and the implementation is carried out it is not going to be done unilaterally by 250

March 8,1983 Tape No. 110 ah -3 MR. MORGAN : the federal government, it is going to be done in co -ordination with us here . That is when we will have our concerns put forward, that is when we will put our issues forward regarding respective plants. And if there is going to be any plant closed which is going to be detrimental or have any serious social affect on any respective area,we are going to have to work in co -ordination with the federal government to make sure these social problems are overcome . MR.NEARY : A supplementary, Mr.Speaker . 251

March 7, 1983 Tape lll JV - l MR. SPEAKER (.Russell) : Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: A suppl~entary. The han. I believe now that we have clearly established in this House this afternoon that the processing sector of the fishing industry is provincial respons .ibility. The government, the administration have laid back on their oars, have not lifted a finger to present ' . plans for the restructuring of the processing sector of the fishing industry. I am going to ask the han. gentleman now about a visit the Premier made to Mr. De Bane a few weeks ago.

The Premier went to Ottawa, met with th~ Federal Minister of Fisheries - ,PREMIER PECKFORD : MR. NEARY: if he would take his seat. PREMIER PECKFORD : You are going to ask me? Yes, I can ask the han. gentleman I will take my seat. MR. NEARY: At that meeting with Mr. De Bane, did the han. gentleman discuss the possibility of one large fish company operating all the fishery in Newfoundland, two companies operating in Newfoundland,or three companies operating in Newfoundland,or partial or full nationalization of the fishing industry? Now there are four questions in one.

Did the hon. gentleman agree or put forward a plan 1or agree with a plan or discuss one large company, two companies, three companies, or partial or full nationalization of the fishing industry? Will the hon. gentleman tell the House what he indicated to Mr. De Bane, his feelings, what he. wanted done in this regard? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes , Mr. Speaker, _in th;ot meeting that was held I ~de three points clear. _One, we have got to get on with getting this restructuring done and 252

March 8, 1983 Tape 111 JV- 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: getting some kind of co-operation between the two levels of government and the other parties to see that it was done as soon as possible. The people were out there waiting in various communities and we needed a comp~ehensive plan in place and we needed it done quickly. That was number one. I was worried about time and the time was of the essence and let us get on with it. Secondly, I indicated that the Government of Newfoundland opposed nationalization, we opposed one big company.

If anybody was thinking about one big company all nationalized, then we were opposed to it. We do not think that is the answer to the fishing industry in Newfoundland, especially the offshore fishery, let alone the inshore fishery. It cannot work in the inshore anyway. As related to the companies that exist there which are mostly offshore, we are opposed to one large company and we are opposed to nationali­ zation.

I think that was the way certain people were talking, that one large company would become a nationalized company, a company that the federal government, or whoever, or governments would control or have a significant say over. And the third point that I wanted to make was that if under some restructuring plan which everybody agreed with, all the governments and the industry and everybody else and the banks and it was done, that if there was to be negative fallout, as the hon . Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan) has already mentioned, that any negative fallout to a community or area of the · Province would have to be handled by both levels of g.overnment because we were not in a position to do it ourselves. Whilst the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) tries to say, you know, it is like saying that the processing sector is provincial, it is some good to have power over a processing plant if you do not have any fish or trawlers to go into that processing 253

March 8, 1983 Tape 111 JV - 3 PREMIER PE.CKFORD : plant. Do not be foolish and try to play silly politics, because it is ~at getting the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) anywhere. 254

March 8, 1983 Tape 112 EC - 1 PRE MIER PEC KFORD: Everybody in the Province knows and understands that 80 per cent or 90 per ·cent of the fishing jurisdiction lies with the federal government. Quebec has a di££erent system. It is a funny thing about Confederation~ Quebec got a favoured treatment status on fisheries. They can licence and can do a whole bunch of things that no other province can do. They got special status in fisheries. It was given to them in 1922 by a Privy Council decision, Privy Council No. 360, amended by Privy Council No. 1890.

The Privy Council decision of No. 360 gave them jurisdiction over the fisheries in their area but excluded the Magdalen Islands. The Privy Council No. 1890 gave them the Magdalen Islands as well. So they ~ave it since 1922. We have not been so lucky. They do not treat all parts of the nation the same. They treat Quebec in a favoured way and they do not treat Newfoundland the same way. But that is alright, I mean, we have made that point before. So in that meeting that was held in Mr.

De Bane's office that day, I made three points: One, time was of the essence, let us get on with it; two, that we oppose nationalization of the fishing industry, and,as we understood the rumours and different things that people were saying, that one company would mean nationalization; and three, that if there were to be an agr ,eement between all parties that a certain plan were to go ahead and there was negative fallout from that plan,that both governments would have to address it jointly and respond to it positively for that area or for tnat community. So that is where it was.

Only one more point really: anything else, I said, as a scenario, as alternatives ~ put these two companies 255

March 8, 1983 Tape 112 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: together, put those three together, put another three together, put those two together- we were prepared to look at and would base our final decision upon the data and upon analysis of the data. And that is where we are right now. We are still getting information, computer runs done on it. As a matter of fact, I do not know whether the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) has indicated, but I do not mind indicating to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Neary) and to the House and to the Province that yesterday the Minister of Fisheries was in Ottawa, there was a .meeting of the federal Cabinet Committee at which all parties in the fishery who were going to be affected by the restructuring plans~ade their positions known. The Province of P.E.I., the Province of New Brunswick, the Province of Nova Scotia, the banks, all the companies and the union, they are all here tomorrow to do the same process with the Newfoundland Government.

We did not make our position known yesterday primarily because we are not in a position to make it known, because we want to know where everybody else stands. We are a government and we are not going to be pre-arpted by somebody else. The Leader of the Opposition or the member for Fogo CMr. Tulk) have no worries about that. This is a government that prides itself on having its homework done and we are not going to be caught out on this one, we are going to do it right.

And the Minister of Fisheries was in Ottawa yesterday on behalf of the government and the people of Newfoundland to say exactly that to the federal Cabinet Committee: Tomorrow we will be conducting the same process of asking the companies, 'Where do you 256

March 8, 1983 Tape 112 EC - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: stand on all the stuff that has gone on and the Price Waterhouse report with all the data? 257

March 8, 1983 Tape 113 PK - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: We will be asking the union, and the companies, we will be asking the banks, we will be asking Price Waterhouse and we will get all of that data. We know where the other three provinces are, we got their positions from them yesterday.

Then after we got all of that, and because Price Waterhouse says, A, B1 C, D, E, F, and G based upon the data - I mean, a computer is only as good as the information you feed it, so we did not take the scenarios that were spewed out of the computer by somebody else•s question and by somebody else•s information, we said, 'Hold on now, just one second. This is fine and dandy, but we would like to look at all of this. We have a few experts around too.' And so we said, •we would like to see this scenario into the computer.

We would like to put this into the computer.' And all that information will not be available to us until Thursday or Friday. So, Mr. Speaker, I am just so happy that the Leader of the Opposition tMr. Neary} asked me this question, because I spend more time, day and night, and the Minister of Fisheries tMr. Morganl is worn out, Mr. Speaker, on this matter of the fishery, and I am too. The Minister of Development (Mr. Windsor!, we spend more time on this! We had meetings all Friday evening and Friday night, all through the week­ end, on Sunday MR. TULK: making a speech_.

We asked him a question and he is PREMIER PECKFORD: - the Minister of Development, the Minister of Justice CMr. Ottenheimerl, the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collinsl - MR. NEARY: Time is up, Mr. Speaker. 258

March 8, 1983 Tape 113 PK - 2 MR. SPE AKE R (Russell ) : Order, please! PREMIER PECKFORD: (Mr. Marshall). SOME HON. MEMBERS: The President of the Council PREMIER PECKFORD: MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: PREMIER PECK FORD : Oh, oh! We are worn out. Order, please! On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. We are worn out. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! ~he han. Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR.NBARY: The han. gentleman does not understand the simple rules of this House. MR. SIMMS: A good answer. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, he does not understand the rules of the House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: MR.

NEARY: Hear, hear! Order, please! Mr . Speaker, my point of order is this, the han. gentleman, in his answer to my question, misled the House when he said - SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh~ MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: Hold on now! Wait now. ER. SPEAKER: Order, please! I would ask the han. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) to refrain from accusing the han. Premier or any other member- of misleading the House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Withdraw! Withdraw! · MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, my understanding of the Parliamentary rules, Beauchesne and so forth is that you are permitted to finish your statement before the Speaker rules. I believe that ordinary simple - 259

March 8, 1983 Tape 113 PK - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: That is up to the Speaker. MR. NEARY: No, it is not up to the Speaker. No 1that is f~eedom of speech, Mr. Speaker. MR. SIMMS: You are challenging the Speaker. MR. NEARY: No 1I am not challenging the Speaker. But, Mr. Speaker, my point of order has to do with a statement made by the hon. gentleman. MR. MARSHALL: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (.Russell}: Order, please! The han. President of the Council on a point of privilege. MR. MARSHALL: Your Honour himself, the position of ~ur Honour has just been attacked by the Leader of the Opposition '(Mr.

Neary) • Your Honour had made a ruling with respect to the Leader of the Opposition. There can be no decorum in this House -if any member of this House debates Your Honour's ruling and does not accept it. I think it is incumbent upon the Leader of the Opposition to be required immediately to retract his insinuations as to the way in which your Honour is conducting the proceedings of this House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Kear, hear! 260

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 114 SD -1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: To the point of privilege, the hon. To that point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, the House Leader opposite (Mr. Marshall}, .when he stands on a point of privilege, is himself abusing the privileges of this House. A point of privilege is something that ought rarely to come up in Parliament.

Now I have not seen in the last four or five years a matter which affected the privileges of all members1because a point of privilege is one that is•absolutely necessary for the due execution of its powers.' It is something that is enjoyed by individual members because it comes about when the House cannot perform its functions.

Section 16, Beauchesne, Mr. Speaker, page 11, 'the House cannot perform its functions without the unimpeded use of the services of its Members. It is something that affects-all members of the House and when it is used it ought rarely to come before the House of Assembly and when it is used it should not be used for frivolous purposes. MR. NEARY: To the point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of privilege, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, If I were in Your Honour's Chair right now, which I am not, but if I were I would feel highly indignant about what the hon.

President of the Council (Mr. Marshall} did. The hon. the President of the Council tried to bully the Chair, almost threatened the Chair by raising this so-called point of privilege, which is not a po.int of privilege. The han. President of the Council tried to use brute force on the Chair, tried to intimidate the Chair, Mr. Speaker. The hon. gentleman is quite capable of doing that, he does it all th.e time in this hon. House, Mr. Speaker. 261

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 114 SD - 2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I was merely raising the matter of answers to questions,and again I have to refer Your Honour to Beauchesne, 'Answers to questions should be as brief as possible'. That was the main point of my raising the point of order and the hon. gentleman came in with this frivolous, nonsensical, silly point of privilege. But, Mr. Speaker, what worried me about it was they have forty-four members on that side of the House, we are only eight over here, and the hon. gentleman is trying to use brute force to intimidate and threaten Your Honour.

Now we have heard these rumors and reports prior to the House meeting, Your Honour, that that was the intention of the government,to try to bully the Chair. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. NEARY: And when Your Honour looks out at forty-four members on that side of the House, eight on this side, I do not believe Your Honour is going to be intimidated or ~nfluenced in any way, shape or fopm by the fact that they have a large majority on that side of the House. I am sure Your Honour is going to be fair and impartial and will see that the rules of the House are obeyed and that the decorum of the House is maintained.

Now, Mr. Speaker, if . anybody is responsible for lowering the decorum of the ffouse and the courts in this Province,it is the hon. gentleman. And I will be dealing with that matter tomorrow, Mr. Speaker. 262

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 115 NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The han. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: It is not a case, Mr. Speaker, in this House the fact there are forty-four against eight. It is the case of the Office of the Speaker. If the hon. gentlemen wants to quote rules, let them look at Beauchesne, page 19, paragraph 52, "Tl'),e Speaker should be protected against reflections on his actions." There .are instances that are given there. Again on page 38, Mr. Speaker, paragraph 117 (1) - MR. NEARY: No wonder you would smile • MR.

MARSHALL: - "The chief characteristics a~tached to the office of Speaker in the House of Commons are authority and impartiality. As a symbol of the authority of the House, he is accompanied by the Mace," etc. "He calls upon members to speak •.• when he rises to preserve order or to give a ruling he must always be heard in silence. No Member may rise when the Speaker is standing. Reflections upon the character or actions of the Speaker may be punished as breaches of privilege." SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. NEARY: MR. MARSHALL: Hear, hear: You are running the House. I am not running the House.

This is the authority of the rules. MR. NE~RY: _ You are running the House. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: MR. MARSHALL: The hon. gentleman with his way, you know, gets up and talks about eight in the House and forty-four on this side. But Your Honour holds the Office of Speaker, the rules are set down with respect to the Speaker, and unless the Speaker is protected 1because the hon. gentleman continually, and that was just an example, when Your Honour makes : a ruling to get up in this House and to question the fact 263

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 115 NM - 2 MR. MARSHALL: that Your Honour made a ruling at a certain time when he was speaking and what have you, is entirely out of order. PREMIER PECKFORD : Hear, hear! MR. MARSHALL: The Speaker is entitled to protection and the Speaker is going to get the protection of this House. SOME HON. MEMBERS,: Hear, hea:t;! MR. SPEM<ER: I recognize the final speaker on this point of privilege. The hon. member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: To this point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. I noticed.when the House Leader opposite read they say the devil quotes scriptures to suit himself-out when he read this particular

section he certainly did not read it correctly. Mr. Speaker, first of all there .~ -· . was no ·reflection against the Speaker, and I submit the . transcripts will shows that. Secondly, Mr. Speaker, if he had continued to read that particular

section he would have seen that even in the House of Commons debates- Beauchesne,

section 52- even when members of the House of Commons wrote articles which complained about the Speaker's ruling and used that type of decorum in the House of Commons during the pipe line debate it was not considered a breach of privilege. I would consider, Mr. Speaker, that what happened in the pipe line debate in the National Parliament of · Canada· and . the reflections that were made on the Speaker that this would not be considered a breach of privilege or anywhere close to it• I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the House Leader opposite (Mr.

Marshall) should not use quest~ons of privilege just because one serious one may co ~ e up sometime and it will be like the boy who called wolf. As Mr. Speaker knows, the question of privilege rarely ever comes up here and I have 264

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 115 NM - 3 MR. HODDER: never seen a question of privilege which was ruled for the person who brought it up here in the House since I have been here for the past seven and a half years, and I would say that the House Leader 265

March 8, 1983 Tape 116 EC - 1 MR. HODDER: opposite should be more cautious in the way he uses parliamentary language. MR. NEARY: Abusing the rules of the House, misusing and abusing the rules. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! There are two points ther~, perhaps. If I remember correctly, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) was making a statement or was about to ask a question and he used a term which the Chair felt may have been a little unparliamentary.

And the Chair certainly has the initiative and should indeed take the initiative to remind any hon. member if he uses a word or term that is unparliamentary that the Chair does not necessarily_have to wait until the end of the speech to make a ruling on that. I would also like to say that the point raised by the hon. the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) was indeed no~ a point of privilege and the Chair is not of the opinion that either side of the House has attacked the Chair. MR. NEARY: He should learn the rules. The hon. member should learn the rules. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: Withdraw! Withdraw!

Order~ please! This issue began when the Chair rose to suggest·to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition that the remark he made was perhaps an allegation that the Premier - I think it was the Premier - had misled the House, and it was the Chair's opinion that this is not correct and I did ask the hon. the Leader of the Opposition to withdraw the remark. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I did not say 'deliberately misled the House', so I withdraw. MR. SPEAKER: The time for Question Period has expired. 266

March 8, 1983 Tape 116 EC - 2 PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the Public Accounts of the Province for the year ending March, 1982 and at the same time, report of the Auditor General to the House of Assembly for the financial year ending March, 1982,and also departmental observations on the report of the Auditor General for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1982. MR. MARSHALL : MR. SPEAKER: ORDERS OF THE DAY Order 1, Address in Reply. Order 1, Address in Reply.

The debate yesterday, I think, was adjourned by the hon. the member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Yes, Mr. Speaker. As I was saying yesterday, Mr. Speaker, when I closed the debate, this government has done a lot of things in my district, a lot of things against the wishes of the people, I might add. I am glad that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) is in his seat today because he probably has not heard what I said yesterday about his department. I want to just mention the inshore fishing gear programme for Labrador residents.

It says that you must be a full-time fisherman and also it says you must be a resident of Labrador in the region. Now, during the past two years 267

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 117 MJ - 1 MR. G. WARREN: the minister's department has authorized payments.out of this fund to fishermen operating longliners from the Province, fishing in Labrador. Now, as far as I am concerned, that is a complete abuse of the funds that the Labrador fishermen are entitled to. The minister's department has authorized distribution of those funds to fishermen who own longliners in Conception Bay, in Notre Dame Bay and along the Northern Peninsula.· Now, Mr. Speaker, these are some of the things that this government has done in my district. Mr.

Speaker, that refers to native funding, I might add. I would not doubt at all that the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development (Mr. Goudie) may follow me, because I have ~een in the House since 1979 and every time that I take the opportunity to speak, the person who usually follows'me is the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. That is usually the only time, other than when he is presenting a bill, that you hear the hon. minister speaking. So, I hope, today, that he will stand up and defend his department's handling of the native fund money because, Mr.

Speaker, the minist~r's department has completely abused the spending of the funds belonging to the native people. The'minister's department has been called upon, he has been called upon, Mr. Speaker, but by the Conne River Indian Association, not only by the combined councils of Labrador, representing thirty-three communities, which met in Happy Valley - Goose Bay in the early part of February and passed a unanimous resolution at that time asking for a public inquiry into the spending of the native people's money by his department. And, .Mr.

Speaker, in fact the minister's officials told the Nain Council, in a meeting that I attended just two weeks ago, that there was $486,000 of native people's money that was not used during the last fiscal year. When asked what happened 268

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 11 7 MJ - 2 MR. G. WARREN: to it, they could not tell us, Mr. Speake~. And until the ~inister and his officials - MR. B. TULK: There is a very good reason for that, is there not? MR. WARREN: Yes, there is a very good reason. I would like to say to my hon. from Fogo that the minister's officials have said that they have taken the money and put it in reserve. Reserve for what? For the next federal/provincial election probably. Mr. Speaker, there has to be an investigation and there is only one way to do it. Mr. Speaker, I sent a telegram to the hon. the Minister of Justice (Mr . G.

Ottenheimer) asking him to initiate a Commission of Inquiry and the Minister of Justice sent me back a telegram saying, 'It is a federal/ provincial native agreement, so contact the federal department.' Mr. Speaker, monies belonging to the people of this Province that have been administered by this government is a federal responsibility? MR; HODDER: Right on. MR. WARREN: I have also, Mr. Speaker, telexed the hon. John Munro. I 'wish to advise the hon. House now that before too long we will find out what happened to all of the $39 million that was allotted to the native people of this Province. MR. S.

NEARY: Conne River included. MR. WARREN: That is included in the $39 million, yes. 269

- March 8,1983 MR.WARREN: Tape No. 118 ah-1 Mr.Speaker, there are many people in this Province who have not received the money that belongs to them, and they will not receive it,Mr.Speaker,as long as the Department of Rural DeveLopment is administering it.There is only one way,Mr.Speaker,and I hope that the han. gentlemen will take my advice and the advice of 'other people and native groups in this Province,and that is to have direct funding, direct funding from Ottawa and then the native people in this Province will get what justly belongs to them.

Mr.Speaker, I know my time is getting short.However,the Premier and the Minister of Social Services (Mr.Hickey) and a few more of his colleagues were down in Shoe Cove recently on the picket line. MR.NEARY: Right on . MR. WARREN: Down in Shoe Cove on the picket line and .here were the cameras taking pictures of the Premier and the hon. Minister of Social Services down fighting to save the Shoe Cove station.Where was the Premier when the Markland hospital closed down? Where is the Premier now when the Conception Bay South Intergrated School Board,all their schools are closed?Where is the Premier now?

Where is the Minister of Social Services? MR.TULK: Out there in the corridor. MR. WARREN: Yes, that is where he is,out in the corridor.That is how much concern he has.That is the concern of the Premier.But when the Minister of Social Services thinks about the Shoe Cove station,and when the Minister of Social Services asks the Premier to come down on the picket line,the Premier should remember that there should be equality in this Province and this governrnent,with forty-four seats,should show equality.There is equality needed,Mr.Speaker. And,Mr.

Speaker, it is amazing that we can look right down through my district and see what this government is doing. MR.DAWE: When was the last time you were in your district? 270 ·

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 118 IB-2 MR. WARREN: Tuesday past. Tuesday past. And I might add too that your department is not plowing the roads up there although you are taking the money away from the people, you are not plowing the roads. Your department is not plowing the roads. So, ~rr . Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. Minister of Transportation about _something else. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to have order before I continue. MR. SPEAKER (MCNICHOLAS) : Order, please! MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, let me say something to the Minister of Transportation. I would like the han.

Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) to hear this. Here is the concern that the Department of Transportation has for Labrador. The federal government built an airstrip in Davis Inlet and where would you think the equipment is stored? The equipment for the airstrip in Davis Inlet is ' stored in Deer Lake. I MR. NEARY: What? MR. WARREN: It is stored in Deer Lake. That is the Minister of Transportation . By the way, they have had it since last October and they did not send it into Davis Inlet but they kept it in Deer Lake. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is what the Minister of Transporation is doing.

Why does he not stand up .now and defend that? What is the equipment· doing in Deer Lake,just in a storage room down there? So, Mr. Speaker, you can see what the minister is concerned about. The minister is more concerned, Mr. Speaker, about going on picket lines for the Shoe Cove station •. 271

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 119 NM - 1 MR. WARREN: So, Mr. Speaker, we can see that - I read an

article a while ago. It was in The Evening Telegram in 1980, and I am going to just read it for the public record, Mr. Speaker. It says, "Missing from our Home" and I am going to read it in its totality. Mr. Speaker, it is only a short ad and it was in The Evening Telegram in 1980. It says, "Residents of Labrador wish to advise that between 1497 and 1980 various items have been removed from our home without our consent.

Here is a list of them: Fish, qaantities undetermined; seals, quantities undeterminedi lumber, quantity undetermined; iron, quantity undetermined; furs, quantity undetermined; electricity, quantity undetermined. Most goods last seen heading for the island." Yes, Mr. Speaker, since 1497, and even up to today, the Government of this Province is taking everything out of Labrador and putting very little back. And that is what is happening, Mr. Speaker. That is what is happening. The government is taking practically everything aut of Labrador and putting very little back. And it goes further, Mr.

Speaker, and says, "Some red hot items may have already be .en sold through a pawn broker." Yes, Mr. Speaker, the same thing with the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), he got up today and he lambasted for about fifteen minutes on nothing. "However, . last year some 5 million pounds of cod was t~en out of the waters close to Makkovik and processed elsewhere, processed here on the Island and as far away as Spain." Now, Mr. Speaker, this is what this government is advocating. Let us take it away from Labrador.

Let us take its hydro resources, let us take its natural resources, but we will put very little back there. And with that, Mr. Speaker, I believe that this government is a dismal failure to the pe9ple 272

,:. March 8, 1983 Tape No. 119 NM-2 MR. WARREN: and we can see today that if the Premier and the minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate (Mr. Marshall} had only read the letter that the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) wrote before the Ocean Ranger disaster, I arn·doubtful that the Ocean Ranger disaster would have occurred. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear! MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I am doubtful, that we would have had that diaster. But it was just because the Premier and the minister were too pig headed, Mr. Speaker, to listen or to read a letter that we had the' O'ce·an· Rancger disaster. Mr.

Speaker, I would say it probably could pave been averted if they had listened. Thank you, very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Dr. McNicholas): Before recognizing the member for st. John's west (Mr. Barrett), I would like to rule on the point of order made by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. NearY) yesterday. I was not in the Chair·at the time to hear the :.·comments made by the hon. member for Stephenville (Mr.

Stagg), but I hava looked up Hansard and I saw the comment was, "The offshore case that was recently erroneously decided by the Supreme Court of Newfoundland." I also looked up the references that .the hon. Leader of the Opposition submitted, and they, in my opinion, referred purely ~o.the conduct and integrity of the judges and not to an opinion of the member on the ruling, so they are not applicable, in my opinion, in this case. ·There is no point of order,-only just a difference of opinion between two hon. members. 273

, ___ . March 8, 1983 MR. SPEAKER (_McNicholas): SOME HON. MEMBERS: AN HON. MEMBER: Tape No. 120 SD - 1 The hon. member for St. John's West. Hear, hear. Are you going to go half an hour? MR . BARRETT: No, no intentions of going half an hour, Sir. I do not believe in wasting the time of the House like some people opposite. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a few observations on this very timely Speech from th .e Throne. I say it is v~ry timely, Mr.

Speaker, because I think it is one that has been necessary to set the record straight, ·to show and to reiterate to the people of this Province the absolute tyranny that is being practiced by the Liberal government in Ottawa against the people of this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. BARRETT: And not only that, Mr. Speaker, but this tyranny is supported by the provincial Liberal sheep that we have in this Legislature. Mr. Speaker, the people of this Province entered Confederation as people of an independent country thinking that they were entering into a partnership, a partnership until now.

This Throne Speech highlights th .e difficulties that are being experienced solely because of the federal Liberal p·osition on matters affecting the people of this Province. Let me review some of these items that are outlined in the speech. At our doorstep lay .the greatest offshore petroleum res·ources. yet discovered in North Merica. In additio~ , we have ~he immense water power resource of Labrador. Unfortunately, in both instances Newfoundland ~s been forced to resort to the judicial process to achieve a fair and equitable treatment in relation to thes.e great resources.

It is unfortunate if not tragic that this Province has been -27 4

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 120 SD - 2 MR. BARRETT: forced to use the courts of this land for protection in a country built on compromise and in a country built on co-operation. Mr. Speaker, this speech also highlights th.e total disregard that the Liberal Opposition has for the welfare of the people of this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. MR. BARRETT: Newfoundland is the only Province in Confederation that does not have a major_ say in its chief industry - the fishery.

And it is interesting to note that Newfoundland, although it h.cis two-thirds of the fishery resource of Eastern Canada, two-thirds of the employees of the federal Fisheries Department work in other provinces. I do not think that this kind of thing would be tolerated in any other provincial jurisdiction of this Confederation. Mr. Speaker, an observa;tion that was made was a reflection on the speech of 1979. The great question posed 'today is ·whether we in this Province are ready to_move away from a paternalistic centralized federalism.

Are we ready to trust more and more on our own abilities as a society than in "fec;leral transfer payments? 275

March 8, l983 Tape l2l JV- l MR. BARRETT: Four years later, four years, Mr. Speaker, this question is still unanswered. Just look at the waffling that exists on behalf of the members opposite. Just look at the short-sighted views expressed by certain members of the Media and ~ertain uneducated and uninfonmed views that are expressed by certain people in the business commu~ity locally and not only that but within our own Municipal government. I do not think that we are quite ready yet in the minds of some to break the bonds, the chains, the umbilical cord of Ottawa. Mr.

Speaker, this government has tried valiantly to reach a fair and equitable and reasonable settlement on the offshore issues. The Opposition members opposite are still not aware or refuse to accept the fact that the Federal Government and not the Provincial Government was the first to refer the offshore matter to the Courts. The Federal Government referred to the Supreme Court of Canada,last Spring,the matter of the offshore jurisdiction and this Government was forced to try and have this case heard in its pwn Provincial jurisdiction before that case was heard in the Federal Court.

As a matter of fact, it was the supreme Court of Canada that adjourned and delayed the hearings until now only just recently, from last Fall, so that this 9ould be heard in the Provincial courts. It is unfortunate that this reference was not decided as the people on this side of the House would ~ve liked to have seen it decided. I do not think that view is shared by the members opposite~ I think they are happy, they are delighted, they are elated with the fact that this indication of transfer of ownership has gone to Ottawa. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to suggest that we should be commending the minister responsible for 276

March. 8, .1983, Tape .121, Page 2 -- JV MR. BARRETT: energy (Mr. Marshall) in this Province in his untiring efforts to bring about a political settlement in this issue. This gentleman has met for many days and months. And I think, to give the devil his due, Mr. Chretien 1net in a matter of good faith on this matter. However, there is no question in my mind that Mr. Chretien did not have the backing of Trudeau and his henchman, Lalonde. I believe that this is the reason why Mr. Chretien was not able to agree to put in writing what was agreed verbally :Oy these two honourable ministers of the Crown.

It was solely that he was not given the autority to do that, because he did not have the . support of the two key players in the federal government in Ottawa, ~rudeau and Lalonde •. There is no question at all that he was undemined and that he as an individual certainly attempted to deal in good faith with. this Province. MR. NEARY: Only a dirty-minded individual would think that. MR. BARRETT: Well, boy, it would take you to sort that one out, would it not? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear , hear ! MR. NEARY: to even think that . MR. BARRET'!' : You would want to be pretty low Mr.

Speaker, in the last three years th .e-federal government contrioution in the fie .ld of regional development will ~op over $70 million a year, to this year's total commitment of approximately $35 million, 277

March 8, 1983 Tape 122 PK - 1 MR. BARRETT: yet this Province has made detailed proposals to the federal government totalling approximately $550 million, less than 10 per cent of the identifiable regional programmes necessary for this entire Province. Secondary highways upgrading, industrial and cornrnerical upgrading, Corner Brook harbour development, mineral development, and so on, they are all enunciated in this Speech from the Throne.

The federal government's acceptance of this Province's position that long-term resource development projects are the cornerstone of job creation programmes is fundamental to job creation. Why should funds be used for short-term projects when this Province has been able to identify long-term resource related projects in the forestry, mining, fishery, agriculture, and transportation sectors? It is only because the federal government has no interest whatsoever in trying to respond to these needs in this Province.

This government has been unceasing in its efforts to persuade the federal authorities.to provide Canadian defence facilities in this area. We remain the Province which gets the lowest percentage of the defence dollar per capita. And our friend from Labraqor, what have they done in Labrador? In order to get defence dollars in Labrador we got to bring in the West German Air Force. MR. TULK: It is only minor. MR. BARRETT: ~he federal government brings in the West Ger.man Air Force to try to spend a few bucks to improve the quality of.life in - Labrador. MR.

NEARY: We should kick them out and retaliate against the seal ban in West Germany. We should kick the West Ger.mans out of Labrador. MR. BAIRD: Talk to your friends in Ottawa. They bring them in we,do not. 278

March 8, 1983 Tape 122 PK - 2 MR. BARRETT: It has nothing to do with us, the Pro vince. We have been trying to get a federal force there. MR. NEARY: Well,why do you not suggest it? .MR . BARRETT : Why do you not suggest it? You have yo~r member for down there. MR. NEARY: The West Germans should be kicked out of Labrador. MR. SPEAKER (McNicho la s) : Order, please! MR . BARRETT: Just recently the federal government announced the closure of the Shoe Cove Satellite Tracking Station. Another gem!

The governments of the other Eastern provinces,and the scientific community,have all supported this government on this issue. And was it not delightful to hear the presentation of the Premier today on this subject? It is unfortunate that the members opposite were not able to do the homework that he has. He know exactly what he was talking about, and he shot tlEm down again in fine style. Not even this most basic issue,the Shoe Cove Satellite Tracking Station, not even this most basic of all issues had the members opposite been able to agree on.

They still cannot break the political ties that they have with their ~rudeau buddies in Ottawa. Even on a matter as basic as this, they still got to hang in there, hang tough with Ottawa. Terrific stuff. The five year agreement between the provinces and the federal government provided a level of funding to provinces for health care and post-secondary education. It was a significant sum and·greatly assisted this Province. There ·is no question.

However, this government like all the other governments of the various provinces,were dismayed I I ·' that during negotiations for a new five year agreement the federal government revealed that the provinces could expect less of an increase in the federal contribution than we had been led to expect. This government calculates a loss of revenue from this 279

March 8, 1983 Tape 122 PK - 3 MR. BARRETT: new five year plan of $125 million compared with the formula of the previous plan. It has been said many times in the 280

March 8, 19 83 Tape No. 123 MJ - 1 MR. H. BARRETT: past that no society can grow and flourish through transfer payments. At best transfer payments provide minimum standards and tragically,over time,produce an apathetic, uncreative, docile society. How better could you describe the Opposition here? Apathetic, uncreative and docile ., a society that the Liberal Party of this Province obviously advocates. Our Province must adopt policies which will allow this Province to break out of this transfer payment dependency as it presently exists.

We as a province would have no problem in getting financial assistance from Ottawa. All we have to do is opt for the local Liberal Opposition posibion on the offshore issue; we let Ottawa, we let Trudeau write the ticket. Give it all to them, let them have it, let them write it and we will get all the transfer payments that we need, no problem. We will have it forever,but so wfll we be a second rate society because of it. Unfortunately, they cannot even get together on that side.

Here we have the existing Liberals over there all supporting the Ottawa position on this and what do we have? we have the most recent past Liberal Leader of the Party - no, second past - twice removed,is he? - 'tr. William Rowe comes out publicly stating his disapproval of that position and totally supporting 100 per cent the position of this Provincial Government as it relates to the offshore. MR. WALSH: It took him a long time but he finally saw the light. MR. BARRETT: He wants to get as far away from that clan opposite as possible, there is no question about that. Mr.

Speaker., we should all now realize that the present administration in Ottawa has no intention of negotiating anything with this Province. Trudeau 281

March 8, 1983 Tape No. 123 MJ - 2 MR. H. BARRETT: intends to change the whole fabric of Confederation and is using this Province as his personal whipping boy. AN HON. MEMBER: Right on. MR. BARRETT: He thought he had selected his weakest partner in Confederation to achieve this, a province with the most fragile of all economies and with the highest unemployment rate. If any province could be beaten to its knees, Truaeau thought that we were it. But how wrong that fellow is. He will never make it down here,because we are not going to give in like that. The people of St.

John's West supports this government's position that it will continue to pursue its reasonable position on offshore negotiations, that this Province will continue to pursue its Constitutional position on the fisheries and that this Province will continue to use all measures to see that the Upper Churchill deal is changed. Mr. Speaker, I would like to challenge the members opposite to also apply themselves to these principles Thank you very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. B. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr.

Speaker, let me first of all, in the few remarks I am going ~o make,congratulate the mover and the seconder of the gracious Speech from the Throne, the member for Carbonear (Mr. Peach) and the member for Burin - Placentia West (Mr. Tobin). I know· that in order to say something in this House the member for Burin - Placentia West must have undergone a tremendous amount of soul searching in view of the problems, the frustrations and so on that he must be experiencing with the fisheries,and I say that in all sincerity. 282

March 8, 1983 Tape 124 EC - l MR. TULK: In my few remarks, Mr. Speaker, this evening, I want to make a few things absolutely and crystal clear. First of all, the Throne Speech that we have in front of us gives absolutely and teetotally no new direction to this Province. I can remember sitting here the other evening with the member for the Strait of Belle Isle (Mr. Roberts) when it was being read, and saying to him, 'Have you heard this before?' And he said, 'Yes, for the last ten or twelve years.' Mr.

Speaker, I have only been in this House four years and I have heard the same litany of complaints and the same garbage and hogwash that I heard again the other day. Mr. Speaker, we live in a Province that is literally bankrupt but yet this Throne Speech gives no new direction for this Province to take. It rehashes the same old lament~ the same old problems, the same old laments are coming up. I think somebody said that there were twenty-seven incidents where the federal government was again criticized and, Mr.

Speaker, if the federal government needs to be criticized, sobeit, but you cannot build the Province by criticizing somebody else all the time. MR. STAGG: (Inaudible) . MR. TULK: Now, I would ask the Yahoo from Stephenville to be quiet because I will address his concerns before I am finished, I am sure. I listened yesterday evening to his garbage and I hope he tries to listen to my common sense this evening. I would just ask him to be very, very quiet over there, be quiet and he might learn something. As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, the Throne Speech, I think, criticized the federal 283

March 8, 1983 Tape 124 EC - 2 MR. TULK: government twenty-seven times and I think there was something like five or six references to the Province of Quebec, but there were no new directions given in that Throne Speech. And that is one thing that I want to make absolutely clear.

In a Province that has seen under the Tory regime a decrease . in the earned per capita income of Newfoundlanders as against all Canadians since this government came to power, since this administration came to power, in a Province that has seen that we are still hearing the same old nonsense against Canada and aga~nst Quebec - no new direction. Mr. Speaker, there is one other thing I want to make clear. .I want to make one other thing absolutely clear. I am not going to try to portray the other side of this House, try to paint them in any way as non-Newfoundlanders, I am not going to do that.

I am not going to try to call them traitors as we have been called on this side. I am not going to ~ay that they do not care for Newfoundland, that they have no feelings for Newfoundland. I am not going to say that at all, Mr. Speaker. I am not going to go on as did the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) this afternoon when he found me smiling across this House when he was reading something and tried to tell me that I would find the offshore situation, danger in the offshore in this Province, a laughing matter. I am not going to go on like that.

I would remind the President of the Council that I live on the ocean of this Province. My parents have lived on the ocean of this Province and I know it .. perhaps better than he does. So 284

March. 8, 1983 Tape No. 125 NM-1 MR. TULK: I am not going to do th.at kind of thing, Mr. Speaker. I am not goinq to do that kind of thing. MR. BAIRD: I think you were found under a rock. MR. TULK: At least I got out from under it. You are still there. It is ontop of your shoulders. Mr. Speaker, like every person in this House I will say that the opposite side of this House are good Newfoundlanders. Now, Mr. Speaker, I makeithat statement knowing full well, as I have said, that we have the highest provincial debt of any Province in Canada,per capita.

In spite of the size of the public debt that this Tory Administration, since 1972 -·since 1972 they have increased the size of the public debt in this Province from $800 million, less than $1 billion, $800 million, to something like $3.5" billion, $~,200,000,000. I say that, Mr. Speaker, but I still refuse to say that bhey are not good Newfoundlanders. I do not believe they ~now how. I think that is their problem. They·just do not know how. We have a credit rating, Mr. Speaker, a credit rating that is the worst o~_any of the ten provinces in Canada, and I want to, Mr.

Speaker, read par.t of a telephone conve~sation that was held with Moody's the other day. One of the questions was, "What is Newfoundland's credit rating?" The question was put to Moody's. ·"Newfoundland's present c'redit rating is Baa 1 AN HON. MEMBER: Is what? MR. TULK: Baa 1, which