VOL. 3 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 10:00 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. FRIDAY, JUNE 5, 1981 NO. 54

June 5, 1981 The House met at 10:00 A.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Tape 2182 PK - 1 Order , please! ORAL QUESTIONS M..~ . S!?EP...KER : The hon . Leader of the Opposition . ~ffi . STIRLING: ~tr . Speaker, I had a question for the Minister of :v!i.!1es and Energy (Mr . 3arry) but it is obvious that the government has a tactic no'" , once a minister get s i~ trouble they keep him out of the Hous e. SOME RON . t-1.El1BERS: 1-I..R. STIRLING : Oh , oh! On that basis we will never see the Minister of Transportation {Mr. Dawe) back again.

But in the absence of the Minister of Mines and Energy, I will ask the question to the Acting Premier, the Acting Minister of Mines and Energy, the Acting Minister of Transportation - MR. FLIGRT: And the,Acting member forSt, John's East .. MR. STIRLING: - a question to the President of the Council (M r. Marshall) . Doe s he support the view expressed by his colleague yesterday?

Wa s his colleague speaking on behalf of the government or was that another minister who was axpressing personal views when the government has now changed the issue from a separate corridor for transportation of electricity, a separate corridor to be built by Nelvfoundland, have they no1.r changed their po si tion to using the Quebec systa'll to transport power? Is that no111 the official position or was that just sq~4

'fr J~.me 5, 1981 Tape 2182 PK -2 MR. STIRLING: the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry) expressing a personal view? Do they now admit that they are talking about using the Quebec Hydro system? MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I may be acting but I am not as bad an actor as the hon. gentleman is 1 I can guarantee you that. The hon. gentleman, Mr. Speaker, obviously does not understand. What this government is doing and is demanding as its right as part of the Canadian community is the right to be able to transmit power through Quebec.

And it is also the right, Mr. Speaker, which would involve, which may involve the construction of a power line. But we also, Mr. Speaker, feel that we have an equal right to wheel power through Quebec where they are not using their lines to the full capacity. Mr. Speaker, what we do is we seek these rights, and when we get these rights that had been mysteriously withheld from us because we only have seven seats in Ottawa, when we do get those rights, Mr. Speaker, then we will be able to bring about the resource development in this Province which we seek to bring about for the people of Newfoundland. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: r-"1R. MARSHALL : Hear, hear! And anything that the hon. gentleman there opposite can do to assist us would be very much appreciated rather than attempting to confuse the issue by reason of their lack of - we have not got the capacity, Mr. Speaker, at the present time to transmit electrical power. Obviously the hon. gentlemen there opposite,particularly their leader, have not got the capacity to understand. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. STIRLING: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. 5~3.5

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2183 ow - 1 MR. SPEAKER(Simms): A supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. L. STIRLING: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) has attempted to get this debate off to the usual high plain.Another one bites the dust. You see, Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of glib, political - MR. HODDER: Rhetoric. MR. L. STIRLING: No, rhetoric is too good a word for it. But it is not good enough anymore 1 you see. You see, Mr.

Speaker, it is not ~ood enough anymore because the people of Newfoundland and Labrador are beginning to find out that this government makes a lot of sound and fury but when you challenge them to document anything, it is not documented. Well, Mr. Speaker, the only independent advice that I know that this government has is from the Lower Churchill Development Corporation, part of the - $15 million. MR. HODDER: MR. L. STIRLING: -$15 million that they spent investigating this. They told the government-and that is why, Mr.

Speaker, there is a great inconsistency between the infor­ mation this House is being given and what the government has been given by· its own corporation, the Lower Churchill Development Corporation -Mr. Speaker, in their report to the government they state specifically these circuits have a limitation of 700 megawatts. We talked yesterday - the Minister of Mines and Energy (11r. Barry) gave information which was incorrect, incorrect because either he knew it was incorrect or incorrect because he did not know and he was misunderstanding. SOME HON. MEHBERS: Oh, oh~ sq£6

June S, 1981 Tat:Je No. 2183 ow - 2 ~1R . SPEAKER (Simms) : Order, please ! MR . L. STIRLING: The question is : does the minister, does the government accept the results of these studies which said, :md thi s is their quote, 'Greater sales ex~ernal to the Provi~ce would require s~reogthened delivery systems' - in other >•ords , additional systems to be buil;:. 1 :1r . Speaker- :ices t:-te President of the Council (Mr. ~~rshall) recognize the advice from the Lower Chur­ chill Development Corporation as t~e indepencient acivice t:hat ~o~e have spent $15 million for? .ll.re they not taking that advice? MR.

SP::AKER: the Council. :1.~. ~.;. M..~S~.LL: The hon . ~~e ?resident of Mr. Speaker, we take all advice t:hat is given to us and we assess it and hopefully we ~~cierst~,d it. I do not really understand ~~e hon. gentleman's line of questioning. The fact of the mat:ter is that the hon. the ~inister of ~ ~es and Energy (Mr . Barry) also has a report from very reliable sour ces to the effec -t that there is capacity in t:1 ose lines to enable us to carry on some of the develop~ent with respect to the Lower Churchill .

Now when we get recall of our rights anC. t.he ~later Right:s Reversion Act has been determined by the court in our favour ,as I have every confidence it •.till be,then, Mr. Speaker, we are going to have a great deal of power for which we are going to need ~ore capacity than on ~;e Queb ec line at the ?resent time . I am =eally a:raid, ana I really mean this sincerely, i::1at the hon . gentle­ mar. on the attack - and I heard h.i.-n on the radio :.his morning as ~o;ell 5937

---· June- 5, 1981 Tape No. 2184 NM - 1 MR. ~ffiRSHALL: seems to get some particular piece of information and he thinks he has a germ of an idea and he tries to develop it and when he is developing it, Mr. Speaker, it just leads to utter confusion. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that this Province is attempting to develop the Lower Churchill River, the hydro power on the Lower Churchill River. The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that this government has taken a dramatic act in order to regain and recapture and obtain our basic rights, inherent rights, on the Upper Churchill.

The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that you cannot transmit power through the air. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that power has to be transmitted over transmission lines. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that there are transmission lines already going from Labrador through the Province of Quebec in which there is capacity that is available and should be available to us. And the fact of the matter is that our knowledgeable Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry), Mr. Speaker, is working very hard on this and has the information.

Now if this causes a great deal of concern to the Opposition and the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stirling), Mr. Speaker, it is rather unusual that he as a Newfoundlander would be rather concerned about this. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. Leader of the Opposition just does not understand~ I mean,these are the basic facts before us: Hydro power has to be transmitted; there is capacity on the existing line to transmit some of this power and we want the right to be able to wheel the power and we also want the right, Mr. Speaker, for that corridor. In other words, Mr.

Speaker, we want to be treated as Canadians in Confederation, an~ if t~e hon. gentleman there opposite, you know, if perhaps he could Lake the weekend and do a little tit o~ study and stop 5Q33

June 5, 1981 · Tape No . 2184 NM - 2 MR . MARSHALL : a~tempting to - I eo not think he does i~ deliberately. ffe does not do it deliberately, he does it congeniality; he cannot help it, Mr . Speaker . What he·is doing , Mr. Speaker, is really just - ~L~. TOL.K: Question! Question! ~. :-1ARSH.U.. .L: I am ~ot asking questions, I am answerL"'lq them . MR. STIRLING : You are not answering them. MR. :-tARS HALL : What the hon . gentleman is doing , Mr. Spea~er, is just confusing the issu e and confusing it abysmally. The f?ct of the matter is that this government has these matters in hand, All we need, Mr.

Speaker, is to gain the co -operation of the friends of the hon. gentleman up in Ottawa, and if he could turn his questions ~nd his suggestions to his buddies i~ Ottaw~ . and he can do anythL"'\g to gain us our basic rights up there, he will be doing ·a grea~ service to this Province . Right now what he is doing is a disservice by trying to confuse the is sues. SOME HON . tiDlBERS : Rear, hear! MR . STIRLING: A supplementary, ~r. Speaker. 59j 9

··~ June 5,1981 MR. SPEAKER (Simms): MR. STIRLING: Tape No.2185 AH-l The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Unlike the infallible people on the other side,I do admit that I do not have all of the knowledge and information but I have the good sense to use the expert advice that is given to this Province and for which we spent $15 million. Lower Churchill Development Corporation, Mr. Speaker, is our corporation which we own and that is the advice that I am quoting, Mr. Speaker.

And I would challenge the government to table this mysterious independent advice that they have got, which they have not tabled and they have not even identified. Now dealing with the Lower Churchill Development Corporation, Mr. Speaker, it will be interesting to hear the minister's response to the comment in which they say, "The market in Quebec will be mainly dependent upon their ability and willingness to pursue and extend sales contracts with neighbouring provinces and states." Mr. Speaker, I would like to have the minister pay strict_ attention to this.

"They will have large surplusses of electric energy in their own system;· In other words, they have more in their own system that they can handle until 1988 and are actively promoting an expansion of their hydraulic potential in Northern Quebec to meet their own needs after that time. So by our own independent advice,there is no surplus in their system, there is no excess in their system to take our power. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the second question that the minister dealt with in an incorrect manner yesterday was when he attempted to give the people of this Province the impression that this was all going to be sold on almost instant recall. The question I would like to ask the President of the Counci] is whether or not he agrees with the $15 million advice that says 59rfD

June 5,1981 Tape No. 2185 AH-2 MR. STIRLING: "it will be dependent upon significant strengthening of the transmission delivery system;therefore,energy sales contracts will have to be long-term "? Mr. Speaker, the Lower Churchill Development Corporation said that these contracts will have to be long-term. Would the President of the Council explain the difference between the rhetoric we heard yesterday and the $15 million advice which says tha the contract will have to be long-term?And the people who made that recommendation are our own Board of Directors headed up by Chairman Victor Young.

Would the President of . the Council explain that inconsistency? MR. SPEAKER (SL~s): The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSRALL: Mr. Speaker, I do wish really there was a giant mirror on the other side of this House so that the hon. Leader of the Opposition could see the embarrassed look of his colleagues when he is asking questions of this nature. The fact of the matter, Mr.Speaker, on this, that LCDC report as to long-term contracts- how long will long-term contracts be,he asked?- I can guarantee him, Mr.

Speaker, they will not be sixty-five years, they will not "be fifty-five, not forty-five, not thirty;five years, Mr. Speaker. MR. STIRLING: Stop bluffing. MR. MARSRALL: I am not bluffing, Mr. Speaker. The fact of the matter is that this government has already been in very serious negotiations with potential customers for the Lower Churchill. 5~\\1

June 5 1 1981 Tape 2186 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: Anc:J in Nova Scotia they want our power. ~ffi. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentlemen want the answers I will give them to them. 1but I have no desire to talk over them. MR. STIRLING: Let us have some proof. MR. MARSHALL: That is fine, Mr. Speaker, if they want to ask questions, I will answer them. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker.· MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. the member for LaPoile. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: Do you want to go ahead? I yield. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for LaPoile yields for a supplementary by the hon. the member for Windsor - Buchans. MR.

FLIGHT: My supplementary is to the Minister of Development, Mr. Speaker, on the same issue. The Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry) yesterday indicated that our ability to get going quickly on the Lower Churchill depends on finalizing some of the - bringing some industry in. Now, the minister has been, we know from the press statements and everything else, pursuing agreements with aluminum companies to locate in Labrador or on the Island.

Would the minister tell us to date what the success rate has been and how close we are to finalizing an agreement with any user of large scale electricity that would enable us to look seriously at an immediate start of the Lower Churchill or a start very quickly? ~fuere are we in our negotiations with the aluminum companies? !4.R. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development. MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, the answer to that is not a simple answer as the hon. gentleman might have indicated by his question. MR. HODDER: No simple answers over there. 5 ~fk2

June 5, 1981 Tape 2186 EC - 2 MR. WINDSOR: To answer that question properly one has to look at a whole scenario as it relates to,particularly 1 the development of Labrador since this is really what we are talking about. We are talking about developing the pot~ntial that is up there, not only for hydro development but also for high energy using industry such as aluminilm, also for forestry potential and any other number of things and tourism not the least, Mr. Speaker. What we attempted to ' do ,as hon. gentlemen recall, last year we had the icebreaker Franklin and the M.V.

Arctic in Lake Melville, which we have proven now almost conclusively that we can keep open with a transportation corridor through Lake Melville into Labrador~ In order to make that attractive and to create an industry there or establish an industry in Labrador, we obviously need the hydro power under which to attract that industry. So the whole basis of Labrador development is two things, Mr. Speaker, it is the transportation corridor throug~ Lake Melville and it is t~e development of Gull Island - not the Muskrat Falls, Gull Island. MR.

FLIGHT: Well, on Gull Island, tell us ~ow close we are to an industry, boy, and stop bluffing like your colleagues have been doing. Tell us what you ~ve accomplished. MR. WINDSOR: Listen to the answer. Be polite. MR. DINN: Ask him is he the energy critic still. tfl..R. 1'1INDSOR: I have all day, Mr. Speaker. If the hon. gentlemen want the in fo rmatio n fine. If they do not I will sit down. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! sq~3

June 5, 1981 Ta p e 2 1 86 EC - 3 M..R._ HODDER: We know what you are saying, but we want to know .to know •11hat vou can do ahnut it. MR. DINN: Listen to words of wisdom! MR. WINDSOR: Anythin.g you tell the hon. gentlemen, Mr. Speaker, is new for them. What I am saying, ~x. Speaker,_is very simply this, that we have been carrying on very fruitful discussions with the aluminum industry who are extremely interested-in Labrador because it represents one of the most stable world supplies of hydro-electric power.

In many countries of the world, the traditional aluminum producing countries such as Japan and Australia, they are having very serious problems, and in fact in Japan they are closing aluminum smelters because they do not have a dependable long-term supply of hydro-electric power. We can o.ffer that in Labrador if we can develop it. If we can develop it means i·f we can get a corridor through Quebec to sell the surplus. MR. FLIGHT: Wrong! You are going to use it, you say, in Labrador. You are going to use the power. MR. WINDSOR: Yes, some of it. sq~ 4

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2187 SD - 1 MR. WINDSOR: If the hon. gentleman could stifle himself, Mr. Speaker - MR. FLIGHT: Name the companies. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Order, please! MR. WINDSOR: -then I will try to put a few things in perspective . MR. FLIGHT: Name the companies you are dealing with MR. WINDSOR: The fact is that Gull Island will generale 1,600 megawatts power . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. WINDSOR: The fact is that we need about 500 or 600 on the. ·:::sland. The fact is that the aluminum smelter will use 540 - MR. FLIGHT: Which aluminum smelter? MR.

WINDSOR: - and simple mathematics will indicate that there are about 600 megawatts left - MR. FLIGHT: Is that all? MR. WINDSOR: - which has to be marketed to the West in the short-term because it is not economical to generate - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. WINDSOR: The han. gentlemen now, Mr. Speaker, want a definition of 'short-term; Alright._As the President of the council (Mr. Marshall) indicated - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. WINDSOR : - no way, it is not going to be sixty-five years of a contract with - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR.

WINDSOR: - dec~easing rate with no ~e- negotiation clause. It would be a long term contract, Mr. Mr. Speaker, that - 5 ~l\5

June 5, 1981 MR. SPEAKER(Simms): that frequently - MR. FLIGHT: 1-iR . SPEAKER: Tape No . 2187 so - 2 Order, please! May I just make an observation Stick to giving out meals . - we will hear mew~ers complaining because answers are long , but I of~en hear questions being asked as well while a minister is answering . And perhags it would be mor e appropriate to save subsequent questions for supplementary que st io ns rather than while a mini.ster is on his =eet becau se he could be there all day . The hon . minister. HR . WINDSOR : I will try to carry on.

It will not be a long -term con~ract, as the hon . gentlemen would have, like a sixty -five year non- negotiable contract.

It \vould be lo ng enough to be attractive to our customers but yet it will have the re-ca ll provisions so that as we can develop other industries, not ju st aluminum but perhaps the forest industry, perhaps further processing of the mineral resources of Labrador that we will have a re-ca .ll right firmly in that contract so that any time when it is desirable and applicable to Ne~vfoundland we can use it in Newfoundland , we will be able to re-call it so that the resources of th is Province are used in .the first in stance for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians . SOME RON . MEMBERS : Eiear, hear . MR .

SPEAKER: The hon . member fo r LaPoi le . MR. NEARY: I.n the ab sence of some of the ministers who I tvante d to ask some very heavy que stions to - SOME !!ON. ~!EMBERS : MR. SPEAKER : MR. NEARY: Oh , oh ! Order, please! I cannot hear . In vie w· of the fact th at most of 5~~6

June 5, 1981 Tape No . 2187 SD - 3 MR . NE .ARY : the ministers are absent,and I had some pretty heavy questions for some of the minis ters, I will just go and ask the Minister of Justice (Mr .

Ottenheimer ) if he ha s managed to remedy or recti!Y the gross error that ~a s made in the construction of th e new wing for Her Majesty 's Penite!ltiarywhe'reby if the fire alarm goes off all the doors automatica~ly open up and all the prisoners could just pour out into the streets : Wo~d the hon . gentleman cell t~e Eouse if there was an error in the design of that system and if so has the hen . gentleman n01v taken steps t.o remedy that particular situation? ~1R . SPEAKER (Simms): The hon . Minister of Justice. MR . OTTENEEIMER: Mr .

Speaker, I must. point out that there was no error in the design when ~~e building was completed . Obviously a number of adjustments in al~ost any building of this kind have to be made and 1-'h. <'t was nece ssa ry . obviously 1vas to accompli .sh t".-10 things: Num ber one, the security of the public,and that means prisoners , you know, were - obviously t:ta t the .1\N HON • t-1EMBER : SOME HON. MEMSERS: MR. C~HRIMER: In j?rison . fiear , hear! - in prison . 5~\\7

J une 5 , 198 1 Tape 218 8 PK - 1 MR. O'D'PENHE.IMER : exactly,and not wandering around; and the other being that in case there was a fire then obviously the prisoners­ there would be a means of getting out of the building in case of fire or danger, because it is necessary, as I point'ed out in another context because there has been so.me criticism that we are spending too much money on jails, but as I pointed out in another context that with the right to deprive people of their freedom,which the state has, there is also obviously the obligation to provide for their basic safety.

About a week or ten days ago the whole system was inspected by the senior personnel of the correctiotiisystem, the Fire Commissioner, and senior officials from the Department of Justice. I understand that when the buildin.g- and the building is not yet in use;' there are certain furnishings that still have to go in - that no problem is anticipated in the security system or the fire alarm system. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: A supplementary. A supplementary, the han. member Mr.

Speaker, I understand that this fire alarm system was buil-t in to the design of the building and the problem seems to be that all a prisoner has to do is to be able to design a key for a lock, Tn the case of a fire,the security will go around and use their master key in a lock that will open up all the doors and windows in Her Majesty's Penitentiary. Now any prisoner or anybody with any ingenuity at all could make a key that could fit that lock. "Has that situation been remedied? And what will it cost the taxpayers of this Province for that mistake sq*s

June 5, 1981 Tape 2188 PK - 2 M.R. NEARY: that was made in building in~n~s fire alarm system where the moment the lock was turned every window and door in the place opened up and anybody who wanted to leave the premises could leave it? Has i~ been rectified? Has that matter of making a key that could fit tha~ lock be~~ cured yet? 1-1R. SPEAKErt (Sirtuns) : MR. OTTENHEIMER: The hon. ~inister of Justice. Mr . Speaker, ~o my knowledge there· was no error in design, it was a matter of adjustment of the system and the adjus~~ent obviously taki~g place several ~onths before the building was in regular use .

So it is a matter of adjustment. And I understand from the Super~tendent of the Peniten~iary and other people k~owledgeable ir. t~s matter that there is no problem, ~ha~ is a matter of adjustmen~. Tbe cos~. r do not know, would be quite, quite minimal; it is not a redesign ,it is an adjus~ent of a system.

And I understand from people whose profession is, you know, in the correctio~ field that they anticipate absolutely no problem in balancing those two impor~ant fac~ors,that is,security oE ~~e people in the area outside of the prison , and also the rights that the prisoners have, and the obligation that we have.to see that ~n case, you know, there is an e~ergency or there is a fire that obviously that they are kept incarcerated while the fire is going on. ant.icipated. k~d I understand that no problem is sq~g

June 5, 1981 MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Tape No. 2189 NM - 1 A final supplementary. A final supplementary, the hon. Mr. Speaker, I do not understand that term the hon. gentleman is using, an adjustment is being made. What is the adjustment now? Can they make their own keys for these locks or can they not make their own keys? What kind of an adjustment is the hon. gentleman talking about? Is the adjustment that you can now make a key to fit the lock? Well, I mean,what is it we are talking about here?

Could the hon. gentleman be a little more specific and tell the House now whether or not the system has been changed? How it has been changed? )Vhat happens now in the case of a fire at Her Majesty's Penitentiary? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I am not not a locksmith, nor a designer of penitentiaries and I can only inform the House that no problem is anticipated, and how these matters are adjusted - you know, I personally do not claim to have any expert knowledge in it.

We have, you know, some highly qualified people as Superintendent of the Penitentiary, as Director of Corrections and Assistant Superintendent of the Penintentiary, a number of people who are extremely familiar with all of this and know what the practice is in other prisons of, you know, comparable size and comparable nature. I have not gone down to check every lock as indeed it would not be a very good idea if I did. But, you know, I am told that no problem is anticipated. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. In view of the fact that the organizing committee for the upcoming Winter Games has 5({$0

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2189 NM - 2 MR. WARREN: resigned this morning en masse, has the minister made necessary arrangements to appoint a new organizing committee? And why did the committee resign? MR. SP~R (Simms): The hon. Minister of Culture, Recreation and !outh. MR. TULK: MR. STIRLING: MR. ANDREWS : He did not know that. Thank John Crosbie. I was informed very early this mornincr that it did occur last night~ That is my understandinq, Mr. Speaker. I am at the present time, well within the next hour, I will be communicating with the ex-committee. It is unfortunate they have resigned.

I do not know the reasons for that but I will be communicating with them. MR. WARREN: !;iR. SPEAKER: Torngat Mountains. Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. A supplementary, the hon. member for MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the minister is not more aware of this serious turn of events. Could the minister advise - surely goodness the minister should know the reason for the resignation, why they resigned. Could the minister elaborate more on why the organizing committee resigned. r-m. TULK: What reason did they give? MR. SPEAKER: and Youth. MR. ANDREWS: The hon. Minister of Culture, Recreation Mr.

Speaker, I just informed the hon. member that I heard of the event early this morning. ~ffi. STIRLING: You do not know when was early? MR. ANDREWS: this mornincr. MR. STIRLING: MR. ANDERWS: Quite early, about eight o'clock On the radio? No, not by radio at all. I am not aware of the reason. I will endeavour to find out the reason. 5~§>1

June 5, 1981 M...~. HODDER : ;)oi..R. ANDREWS': lie, Sir? ·.m. TULK : MR. ~.Nom.;s : a lie'2 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. I>TARREN: AN HON. MEMBER: ~!R. HARSMLL: :<1R . SPEAKER: Tape No . 2189 NM - 3 Are you telling the truth now? Are you accusing me of telling a It is j ust a question . Are you accusing me , Sir, of tel ling Order, plea se! Order , please! Sit down, boy . Sit dow~ . Do not be so foolish. A point o£ order, Mr . Speaker . A point of order h as been raisec by the hon . President of ~~e Co~~cil . ~1R . MARSHALL: The hon. gen t leman's ~.ro rds '"'ere quite clear, Mr . SpeaJcer, and call fQr an i!1ll'lediate r·etrac't:ion . 5~~2

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2190 DW - 1 ~~. SPEAKER (Simms): To the point of order, I would ask the hon. member to withdraw those remarks. MR. HODDER: ~~. SPEA...><ER: MR. G. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER: member for Torngat Mountains. I withdraw, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member withdraws. A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary, the hon. MR. G. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary to the minister is: would probably one of the reasons '"hY the committee resigned be the lack of co-operation from the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth (.M r.

Andrews) ,the lack of funding from this government and bombardment ov John Crosbie about the $150,000 that has gone in through the National Revenue office? Would these be some of the reasons why this government is not paying enough attention to the upcoming Winter games? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. MR. H. ANDREWS: Mr. Speaker, I cannot answer why the committee resigned.

The motives that the hon. member suggests, I think, would be unfounded,that this government has provided considerable resources to the Labrador Winter Games Committee, much more than any Winter Games Committee - or any Summer or Winter Games that were ever held in this Province. If that is the reason,I do not think it is a valid reason. MR. >v. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Bellevue. 5~;3

June 5, 1981 Ta.pe No . 2190 D>v - 2 HR . \v. CALLAN : Mr . Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of 1-tunicipal Affair s (Mr ~ . Newhook) what date, how soon l·dll she be in a position to announce the munici ­ palitie s that 1-lill receive water and Sel-ler ?re jects fo .r this year, this constzuctlon season' MR . SPE&~ER (Siwms ): The hon . ~tinister of :·1unicipal Affair s. MRS . NEWHOOK : Mr . Speaker, next week some time we will have it all put together and the announcements •A' ill be made . MR. W . CALLAN : 11R . SPE..lU<ER : member for Bellevue. A supplementa=y, Mr . Speaker . A suppla~ent~J . L,e hon . MR.

W. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask th e same minister ~ill that list of approvals for the towns and villages throughout ~,is Provin ce be ?ublicized or pub ­ lished in the same way th at the roads programme was published a fe w day s ago? MR . SPEA.KER : The hon . Minister of :1unicipal Af.=ai.rs . MRS • NEWHOOK : Mr . Speaker, I have not yet quite decided which way we will publish it but it certainly will be published. MR. G. WARREN: ~fR. SPEAKER : :1ountain s. MR. G . WARREN ~ Mr . Speaker. The hon. member for Torngat Yes, Mr .

Speake=, my question is to che Hinister of Ru =al , Agricultural and N ort':1er::~ Development (Mr . Goudie) . Could the miniscer advise the hon . House if funding for the day to day opera"t.ions of the Incian community of Davis Inlet has been curtailed because cf dis - ance bet•A'een offi cials in his depart::nent and the Indian B~~d CoQ~oil in Davis Inlet? 5~!J,4

June 5, 1981 Tape No . 2190 Di-1 - 3 MR . SPE.~R (Simms) : The hon . Minister of Rural, Ag.ricul tural and Northern Development. MR . GOUDIE: I can advise the Eouse, "'lr. Speaker, tha·t all of the funding requests vlhich had been submitted by the community of Davis Inlet to the Federal/ Provincial Committee ove r the last year have been provided . There are a humber of dollars left in the Happy Valley/ Goose Bay offi ce of the department s~;s

June 5,1981 Tape No. 2191 AH-1 MR. GOUDIE: awaiting the receipt of invoices from the Band Council of Davis Inlet and when these invoices are received they \vill be paid for. So all funds have been transmitted from this office down here to the Happy Valley-Goose Bay office and when invoices are received from the community the funds will be disbursed to them. MR.WARREN: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): A final supplementary. The hon. member for Torngat-Mountains. MR. WARREN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, in response to the minister' s ,answer in saying that when receipts are received more funds will be issued. Could the minister advise or confirm that the receipts were brought into the office in Goose Bay and other officials cannot =ind the receiots and therefore the money is being held back because the officials cannot find the receints l·'hich were delivered to his office in Goose Bay? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development. MR. GOUDIE: Mr. Speaker, I was not discussing receipts,I was discussing invoices.

If the receipts had been there then obviously the money would have been expended. In any event 1 I have been told as recently as 9.30 this morning,that all funds have been extended for which invoices have been submitted. As I have indicated, there . are a number of dollars remaining in the Happy Valley-Goose Bay office,or under the control of the Happy Valley-Goose Bay office,awaiting these invoices and when the invoices are received the funds will be disbursed. MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has expired. sq4s

June 5,1981 Tape No . 2191 AF.- 2 ORDERS OF THE DAY: MR . HARSHALL : Order 1 Bill No . 88. Motion, the hon . the Minister of Justice to introduce a bill, "A.n Act To Amend The Landlord And Tenant (Residential Tenancies) Act, 1973(No .2 ) ," carried. Dn motion, Bill No.88 read a first time ordered read a second time tomorrow . MR . ~!P.RSHJI.LL: Order 8 Bill No . 87 Motion, the hen . the Minister of Education to introduce a bill, ".il.n Act To Amend The Education ( Teacher s 'P ension~Act (3ill No . 87~ carried .

On motion , 13ill ·No . 87 read a first time ordered read a second time tomorrot·l . ~~t ion, second reading of a bill, ".!l.n Act To Repeal The Income Tax Discounter s Act , " (Sill No . 27) . MR . SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. OTTENHEU£ER: The hen . the Hini ster of Justice . Mr . Speaker, there is very little to be said about this bill . l·lhat it will do is repe a.l a provincial statute now on the books called the Income Tax Discounters Act . Income tax discounters are people who give cash advan ces on refundable income tax and charge a percentage for it . 5£i1~7

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2192 SD - 1 ~...R. OTTENHEIMER: It was necessary some years ago to introduce legislation in the Province to put a ceiling on the percentage they could charge and that ceiling was 10 per cent. The reason the Province entered the field was that the federal government had not legislated there. The federal government subsequently did and their ceiling is 15 per cent, so we are now repealing the provincial act.

Actually to the best of my knowledge there are no income tax discounters operating now because obviously the percentages are quite lower than other legitimate ways of loaning money which is close to what it comes to. So this repeals a bill that is no longer necessary. On motion, a bill, "An Act To Repeal The Income Tax Discounters Act", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committe~ of the Whole House presently by leave. (Bill No. 27). Motion, second reading of ·a bill, "An Act To Amend The Change Of Name Act, 1978". (Bill No. 26). MR. SPEAKER (Simms}: The han. the Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr.

Speaker, · certainly the principle and concept here are quite simple and straight­ forward and it is a bill which I think will be of, you know, quite some benefit to a number of people. The fact that it is, you know, quite short and quite straightforward does not mean that it is not something of some importance and worth doing. At present under the Change of Name Act for a person over the age of eleven , that person has to give consent, in other words, be informed about it, etc. This amendment will do away with that requirement and will leave it to the discretion of the court.

In other words, a court may, it does not have to, but may dispense with the requirement of consent in the Change of Name Act for a person over eleven. It puts that discretion in the court because 5G~B

June 5, 1981 Tape No .2192 SD - 2 MR. OTTENH£D!ER : obviously there could be circumstances with people over e).even, of any age. Al.\l BON . MEMBER : w1ly the change? MR . OTTENHETI1ER : Well,the change being that- well , I mean, you know, if one could hypothecate circumstances I suppose, you know, a ~erson who would have been considered all ~heir lives tha~ t~ey were the ~a~ural son of A and B and in fact are not the natural son of A or of 3 or the natural daughter of either one, those kinds of circumstances, but the court \vill !':ave the discretion whether to =equire it or not .

The onus, obviously, •.o~ou ld - it just gives the discretion to do a~1ay •t~i t..TJ. that requiremen~ . On motion a, bill, "An Act To Amend The Change of ~arne Act, 1978," read a second time, ordered refer=ed to a Co~t~ee of the Whole rtouse present ly ":>y leave. (Bill No . 26). 5't ~9

June 5, 1981 Tape 2193 PK - 1 MR. MARSHALL: Motion 27, Bill No. 23. Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Newfoundland Human Rights Code". (Bill No. 23). MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased, and I know hon. members will be very pleased,with this legislation.

This is,as everybody knows, the International Year of the Handicapped and the legi~lation we are now introducing is an amendment to The Newfoundland H~an Rights Code,legislation governing human rights,which will have the effect of making it illegal to discriminate against physically handicapped for purposes of employment or accommodation.

So what it does, it adds a category; there are obviously already categories­ political belief, religion, ethnic background, race, sex, etc.­ and this will add a category of disabled persons, persons suffering a physical disability,and after the enactment of this it will be illegal to discriminate against the physically disabled foremployment or accommodation. And there was a definition of physical disability in the bill which is quite, quite far-ranging.

There does exist and, I think', indeed for the disabled themselves, for their own protection, and, you know, the protection of other people working with them,there does exist the provision that if there is a bona fide qualification as determined by the Human Rights Commission in terms of employment,then obviously that will be taken into consideration. The idea is to establish the principle that physically disability is no longer or will be no longer a valid ground for discrimina~ion in employment or accommodation.

Obviously there can be situations where there is by the very nature of the disability, you know, certain qualifications could be necessary. Obviously, I mean, sqto

June 5, 1981 Tape 2193 PK - 2 MR. OTTENHETMER: the examples would be self-evident~ a blind person obviously could not be a school bus driver and things like that. But it establishes the legal principle that .. :;>hysioally disability is no longer a ground or may be a ground for discrimination in employment or accommodation . ~. SPEAKER (SL~s ) : The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, I think it is a good thing to have physical disability included in the Newfoundland Human Rights Act,make it the law of this Provi~ce. 3ut I do hope chat the disabled will have more luck at getting any grievances t~at they mig~t ~ish to process through L~e ~ewfoundland Rights Commission, che y w~ ll have better luck geccinq them precessed than a lot of the people whom I have met in the last couple of years who have laid grievances 511\ b1

June 5, 1981 Tape 2194 EC - 1 M.R. NEARY: with the minister's department in connection with h~an rights in this Province. I would 'say, Mr. Speaker, that the government's actions, by the w.ay -just to comment on what the hon. gentleman said when.he introduced this bill, this being the Year of the Disabled in this Province - I would say that so far all we have seen in Newfoundland is window dressing. The government really have not done too much for the disabled of this Province in this Year of the Handicapped and the Disabled, all they have done is provided window dressing. The Minister of Social Services (~.

Hickey) went down in the lobby of Confederation Building, had a news conference, made a great fuss about this being the Year of the Disabled and hung up a banner down there, and I believe that is all they have done. Up to now, bringing in this amendment to the Newfoundland Human Rights Code, they have not done too much. They should be ashamed of the lack of attention that they have paid to the handicapped in this tb.e Year of the Disabled. So I hope they will have more luck in getting their grievances processed than other citizens of this Province have had in the last few years. Mr.

Speaker, for instance, I had a case of a gentleman who bid on a planer in Central Newfoundland. The Department of Rural Development advertised for the sale of a planer. And we see more of these sales and auctions, sheriffs' sales and the like, going on more and more all the time in connection with loans and grants given out by the Rural Development Authority. And this involved items that were repossessed, where the government was trying to salvage a few dollars on some bad l9ans that they had made.

So they seized some equipment that was given to a sawmill operator, and included in that equipment was a planer. 5ll\ b2

June 5, 1981 Tape 2194 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: And this gentleman bid on the planer, but before he bid he went to the Highways depot in Clarenville where he was told the planer was down in the back yard. So the gentleman went down and looked at the planer and proceeded to submit his tender on the planer. And the sy·b3

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2195 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: planer. And the minister who is standing in the door, is well ::;::;;- aware of this case. If you talk about human rights, if you talk about trampling on people's rights - well,he bid on the planer and he was the successful bidder. And when he came back to get his planer he was told to pick it up at the Highways Depot in Clarenville.

And he went down, and when he went to the gentleman in charge· of ·the depot and said, "I carne for my planer that I bid on," they said to him, "Well, go down, it is down in the yard, go down and take it." So he went down and he took his planer, as he thought, and he brought it home. Well, the next thing he got an ultimatum from the minister's department telling him to return the planer,that he had taken the wrong planer. There apparently were one or two other planers in the yard at the same time. Well,the gentleman who purchased the planer bought it in good faith.

Nobody went down to show him which planer was his. Nobody bothered to show him. And he assumed that he had taken the planer that he had bid on. And the next thing he knew he had an ultimatum from the minister's department. And then they sent up and took the planer and brought it back and then withheld the payment that that gentleman had made on his planer for the cost of sending the low-bed or the tractor-trailer or whatever it was they sent to get the planer, they then charged that up to him, and refused to refund him his money. That is the kind of human rights we have in this Province.

AnO I could go on and give the House dozens and dozens of examples of how people's rights are trampled on in this Province. It is all window dressing. The Ombudsmen and the Department of Human Rights may not exist at all for what good they do in this Province. I do not know of anybody who has been successul yet, and I am talking about real hard human rights problems, I do not know of anybody who has 5~~4

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2195 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: won their case. Trivial matters, yes, dealt with by officials in the Labour Department, labour standards and so forth, never handled by the Human Rights Commissioner, or by the Director of Human Rights, handled by the staff of the department, out real hard cases of human rights,r have never seen one rectified yet. I have never seen one dealt with in a satisfactory manner, sqt,s

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2196 DW - 1 MR. S. NEARY: especially if it is a grievance against the government. And there have been numerous occasions over the last couple of years when I have dealt with grievances filling positions, political appointments. Political appoint­ ments, Mr. Speaker! Patronage, political patronage and politi­ cal appointments! And you say to the individuals, 'Well, why do you not take it up with the Director of Human Rights', and they shrug their shoulders in disgust.And they are so discour­ aged because they know they are not going to get to first base.

The Ombudsman and the Human Rights machinery in this Province ~just a farce. It is a farce, especially when it comes, as I say,to contesting grievances of appointments in the Public ~ces. This government is being blatant in their violation of people's human rights Blatant! The poor old fellow with the planer, not only did he lose his planer but was out of pocket - you know, I wrote the minister about it and he wrote me back and said, 'It is not our fault he took the wrong planer'. Well, how did he know he was taking the wrong planer?

Nobody in that depot had the decency or the courtesy to take the man down and say, 'There is the planer there that you bid on. Or there is the one you have to bid on'. And then after he was a successful bidder, 'There is the one you won the tender on'. The minister knows that. MR. G. WARREN: They just ripped him off, that is all. MR. S. NEARY: off, punished him, penalized him. Theyjust ripped the poor fellow The iron heel of this government .again .came down on that man. It is wrong and the hon. ·minister knows it is wrong and there is no excuse for it.

The hon. gentleman wrote me back and said, 'We cannot help it if he took the wrong planer'. How did he know? Would the hon. gentleman tell us how he knew which planer he had to take? Was there anybody there to point it out to him and show it to him? Just for the sake of storage they put this planer down sq'G

June 5, HSl Tape No . 2196 DW - 2 MR . s. ~EARY: in the Highways depot in Clarenville, threw it in the yard . And that man bid in good fa .ith on that planer and he thought that he was the successful bidder on tha~ planer . ~L~ . J . CARTER : That has nothing to do wit:h t.'-:e disab led: ~ffi. S. ~UL~Y: It does have to do with hl.l!T'all rights . And I am just making comparisons here, Mr . Speaker . I hope the disabled, the physical ly handicapped a~d the disab~ed ,will have better luck in getting thei r grievance s sorted out with this government than some o: the people that I ju st referred to.

Appointments, gove rn­ ment appoint~ents, political patronage! MR . J . CARTSR : This is nonsei'..se . c;o we have to put 1.1!? with t.rus? MR . S . NEARY : Yes, you have to put up with it . I! you do not like it, it is a :ine day ou t - perhaps it is too cold in the savoury patch today . . ~other case that was brought to my attention in recent days was the matter of governm enc purcha sing of data processing equipment . ::-tR . J . CARTER: No w, this is relevant? MR. S. NEil .RY : Yes, it is relevan t.

The supply o: daca processing equipmenc to this govern ­ ment, equipment valued at $10,000 - no publ ic tenders called 1 No public tenders, Mr . Speaker, called on daca processi~g 5<t~7

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2197 SD - l MR. NEARY: equipment, all the tenders go to the government's buddies. And so I hope, Mr. Speaker, that by including this, what may appear to be a simple routine amendment to a bill, well, I hope that the government will pay more attention to human rights than they have in the past. And I hope that the physically handicapped will have better luck at settling their grievances, as far as employment is concerned and equal pay and the like.

I hope they will have better luck in getting their grievances settled than the people in this Province who have had experience with the Human Rights Commission and the Ombudsman in the last several years in this Province. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : MR. HICKEY: The bon. Minister of Social Services. I am not going to delay the House, I just want to make a correction and offer some information to my hon. friend opposite.

I am sure that he would not want the public and especially the disabled community,to believe or go away with the notion that this government has done nothing or is doing nothing for the Year of the Disabled. We have done a number of things, Mr. Speaker. We have not gone out and given great publicity to it, we have not done a great PR job on it, maybe we should have,but certainly I believe that the important thing is that the effort is being felt in the area where it is needed and where it is going to do some good. He talks about window dressing.

I guess if we went out and did a massive PR job on all the things we were doing this year,then maybe his argument might well have some meaning ,that we were using the year as a ~rogramme, and the disabled people, to improve our image or to bolster our image, whatever the case may be. We have increased approximately in the ord~r of $300,.000, Mr. Speaker, to ~elp disabled people be rehabilitated, to put them into employment and to subsidize sqbs

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2192 so - 2 ~~. HICKEY: their wages for the first time, Surely that is not window dressing. We have provided $71,000, Mr. Speaker, the same as we did for the Year of the Child, to the disabled community so that they could come along with 5lrf ~9

June 5, 1981 Tape 2198 EC - 1 MR. HICKEY: a number of projects of their own choice and of their own making; set up an advisory committee to handle those projects and to approve those projects 1 taking them out of the realm of politics and government and everything else to make sure that the most deserving projects got approved. We have done a number of things. And we are seeing one today, Mr. Speaker, in terms of changing of legislation. I do not know how anybody can classify that as window dressing. It might be window ,dressing to those of us who are not disabled.

It certainly is not window dressing to the disabled people. Taking action on the Accessibility Act may not mean very much to those of us who can go in and out of buildings, but it sure means a great deal to people who cannot get into buildings and cannot get to their work places and their jobs, all this kind of thing. I am surprised, Mr.

Speaker, that the han. gentleman, if he wanted to find something in the Year of the Disabled to criticize - and to justifiably criticize - he did not include his colleagues in the federal government, the Prime Minister of this country, who goes around to be a very compassionate individual. MR. HANCOCK: What about the (inaudible) projects? MR. HICKEY: Let the han. gentleman listen now and he might learn something. Mr. Speaker, $1 million, a paltry, measly $1 million for this whole vast country and all the disabled people who are in it, $1 million is what the federal government put forward - a shame, Mr.

Speaker, a disgrace, an insult, while the Province of British Columbia, one province, one part of this country, could soend $3 million in projects, $14.5 million in line departments for a total of $17.5 million, purely and solely 5<f4~0

June 5, 1981 Tape 2198 EC - 2 MR. HICKEY: and absolutely geared to the improvement of the lot of the disabled; just one province alone, and the federal government, Mr.

Speaker'· who talk about equality and who talk about regional disparities and who talk about target populations that are at risk in this society and, of course, we should not forget who talks about a 1 just society 1 on >vhich the Prime Minister came into his leadership and came into being Prime Hinister, his famous cliche, 1 just society 1 , and here he is spending $1 million for a group of people who have been neglected by the federal government - and I might·say, some provincial governments, but especially the federal government - for years and years and years.

It is too bad the han. gentleman does not research his subject a little more, Mr. Speaker. On motion, a bill, "An Act To Amend The Newfoundland Human Rights Code," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill No. 23) . Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act Respecting Private Investigation And Security Services," (Bill No. 22). MR. SPEAKER (Simms): MR. OTTENHEIMER: The han. the Minister of Justice. Mr. Speaker, the Province has had for a number of years a piece of legislation entitled "The Private Investigators and Security Guards Act".

That has been in operation for any number of years. The purpose of this bill is to repeal the old one. This is a new and more contemporary legislation. Hon. members know that there is an increasing use of commercial security services. A number of these plazas, malls and various commercial enterprises do use commercial security services. sq31 ~

June 5, 1981 Tape No.· 2199 NM - 1 MR. OTTENHEIMER: And what we have endeavoured to do here, obviously, is to tighten up the regulations so that there will be adequate protection for the users of the security industry. In New£oundland there has been a considerable growth in that area. We have looked at legislation L~ other provinces and we have had consultation with the security industry in the Province.

What we are hoping is to eventually make training a necessary prerequisite, there have been some preliminary discussions with the College of Trades in that respect, and to encourage the security industry to establish an association with approved standards of member­ ship. We also want to expand the existing act to include controls over - or regulation over - you know, the use of dogs, burglar alarm agencies, that type of thing and to provide for bonding requirements, you know, for the private security industry.

It will come into effect on proclarna tion, it will not come into effect irnrnedia tely, and when it comes into effect,the present act regarding security services will be repealed. I would envision between a four, five, six month period before it would come into operation.

But the basic intention of it is to set up guide1ines whereby we can work in co-operation with the industry, not to impose it overnight, and there have been consultations in this, you know, for proper training prograrnrnes,in all likelihood conducted at the College of Trades and Technology , for security guards to provide - make sure there is the necessary bonding and liability insurance and professional standards for security guards. As I say, there is legislation to this effect which has been on the books for quite some time, but with the increase in use of this type of facility,then it 5q12 --"

June 5, 19.81 Tape No . 2199 NM - 2 MR. OTTENHEIMER: became apparent that it was necessary to review the legislation and to introduce a more contemporary approach, I suppose. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : ~!R . ST! RLING : The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Mr.. Speaker, there are a number of questions that arise as a res.ult of the explanation given by the minister. Wfien he says- and maybe by agreement we can have a series of questions and answers out of my speaking time,if you like, so that we do not have to wait until after the debate :ts over • MR. SPEAKER : Agreed . MR .

STIRLING : What effect would this have on, for exampl~ thecorps of commissionaires? Have they been consulted in this discussion? Are theY involved in it in any way? MR. OTTENHE'IMER: They are exempt because th .ey have their own identity and their own governing body. They are exempt. MR. STIRLING: MR. OTTENHE'IMER: MR . STIRLING: They are exempt from the act? Yes. When you say there has been consult~tion with the industry, what do you refer to as the industry when there is consultation? MR.

OTTENHEIMER: Well there have been discussions with companies providing security services, and also with users of the services. MR. STIRLING: And they are aware of this legislation and they are - MR. OTTENHEIMER: Yes. MR. STIRLING: - and they are in agreement with it? MR. OTTENHEIMER: To the best of my knowledge they all are. Yes. MR. STIRLING: Has the minister had any serious objections? Has the bill been circulated at all? Has he had any serious objections to the bill? sq13

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2199 NM - 3 MR. OTTENHEIMER: No. It has been circulated for some time. No, I have had no objections from members, either side. MR. STIRLING: And presumably the minister would agree, when we get to 5 ~14

June 5, 1981 Tape 2200 PK - 1 MR. STIRLING: the Committee stage,if there are any amendments or suggested changes that come in, they would be considered. MR. OTTENHEIMER: I would certainly give them their due consideration, yes. MR. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, I think it is important in this whole area that there be people who have their positions protected, that they are properly trained, and that this kind of legislation, if there is agreement, appe'7rs to be a progressive piece of legislation that we would have no problem supporting.

On motion, a bill, "An Act Respecting Private Investigations And Security Services", read a second time, ordered referred to a Corrtmi ttee .of the Whole House presently, by leave. (Bill No.22). MR. MARSHALL: Order 30,(Bill No. 39). Motiop, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Assessment Act". (Bill No. 39). MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs. MRS. NEWHOOK: Yes, Mr. Speaker, Bill 39 contains some necessary amendments to the Assessment Act.

It redefines the definition of assessor and director, it enables the Lieutenant-Governor in Council to appoint, in addition to a Director of Assessments, an Assistant Director. It extends the jurisdiction of the assessor to include the assessment of property in school tax areas. It rescinds the power of council to appoint its own assessor and this is consistent with the decision of government to vest the sole responsibility for the assessment function to our department assessors. It extends the period for the completion of their assessment role in a municipality.

It provides extended time for Court of Revision to deal with appeals. sq1s

June 5, 1981 Tape 2200 PK - 2 MRS. NEWHOOK: It requires that a property owner must advise the town clerk whe.n his or he r property changes ownership. And it requires the municipality, upon written authority of the minister,to provide the Departm~~t of N~tional Revenue with access to the municipa~ property assessment records. These , Mr . Spe~~r, are very necessary amendments to make our job a little easier. MR. SPEAKER (Simms ): The hon . Leader of the Opposition: MR. STIRLLlllG: Yes, Mr .

Speaker, this whole que stion of assessments and taki .ng the authority away from councils, is one on which I have a fundame!")~al difference of opinion with the government on their whole philosophy and approach. We , Hr. Speaker, have three levels of government. We heard very much in the last fe\v days 5Cfl6

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2201 DW - l MR. L. ST!RLING: .about two levels of government, the provincial and federal. Mr. Speaker, one of the most neglected forms of government is the municipal level of government. And this government has put municipalities al­ most iri the situation that caused the hon. John Crosb.ie to get so u~set when he himself was a councillor,when a minister said,'Well, of course, councils are only creatures of the government'. Things have come a long way down since then, Mr. Speaker. The approach of this government is th?-t councils cannot be trusted with any authority.

For example, this government decided that regardless of the wishes of local people 1 and regardless of the ability of a council to handle the problem,that property tax would be imposed on all councils in Newfoundland regardless of size, regardless of community and regardless of the inherent problems. Mr. Speaker, in many other areas - for example, in dealing with the City of St. John's Act and dealing with property tax in the City of St. John's, a period of two or three years was used in order to allow something to take place and allow people to get used to an idea and to adjust to it. Now, Mr.

Speaker, in the case of rural Newfoundland,when the nev1 Municipalities Act was brought in 1 it was brought in a most cruel manner. And I am sure that any of the people who served on councils will recognize that when the gun was put to the heads of the councils and said, 'You must put in property tax. There is no question, you must put in property tax'. There were then two categories - actually three categories, Mr. Speaker, of councils. The first category was the council that already had property tax and that council- the ~ity of St.

John's, Grand Falls, Corner Brook - largely the larger municipalities - these councils could bring in 5~17

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2 ~rn DW - 2 MR. L. STIRLING: extra income by doing nothing because the government in the new Municipalities Act gave a grant, a substantial grant - SO per cent of the property tax - so that these municipalities who already had property tax had no problem with the new Act because they were bene­ fiting from a grant under the new Act. So there were no problems, no com~laints! That is one category of council. 5~18 -

June 5,1981 Tape No. 2202 AH-1 MR. STIRLING: Then there were two other categories of council, Mr. Speaker, one was a council that agreed with the concept of property tax and would have implemented it immediately and had prepared their constituencies for it. That council, Mr. Speaker, was treated in the most unfair manner because they,were treated in a manner that they had no control over,and it deals with this whole question of assessment , because the government has taken over the responsibility for assessrrents.

These councils were in agreement to put in property tax, they were in agreement to put in property tax 1 but the Province could not do the assessments for another year, two or three years. Mr. Speaker, I am sure this bothers the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mrs Newhook) because you have councils that are now cut back in their grants, cut back twenty per cent from the 1979 grant. They are cut back 1 they have less money to operate on than they had under the old system and they have no control over the implementation of the new system.

They would gladly put in the property tax but the assessments cannot be made, Mr. Speaker. So these councils find themselves in a position where this year the government have cut back on their grants and they cannot put in the property tax, although they are willing, which means that they have to increase service fees.

And at the same time,for a one year period only, senior citizens are exempt so that - not under property tax, ~or citizens are exempt under the poll tax - so that they have lost the income from the senior citizens for one year and the government did not increase the grants to take that into consideration. So, Mr. Speaker, for many municipalities in the Province , which are in the second category of municipality, they agreed to put in property tax but because of this bill that we are discussing, the Assessment Bill, they could not get the assessment done and they are being penalized in two ways , Mr.

Speaker. 5Q:]9

June 5,1981 Tape No . 2202 AH -2 t>1R . STIRLING: All of t.~e other taxes that they could levy 'had been cut out in favour of property t~x . Their grant s were cut back and a municipality found itself not having sufficient income, having to jack up the prices and,Mr . Speaker, it was most unfair to tho se municipalities . I am sure the z..tinister of ~tunicipal Affairs (Mrs Newhook:), being a fo~er councillor .can sympathize with t.~ municip alities. Th at is the second category ,~1r. Spea'<er.

And the third category of municipality is the municipality like the town of Bonavista i~ the district of Bonavista Sou~~ .as represented by the t>ti~ister of Fishe ries (~rr Mo rgan) . Th at category of municipality, Mr. Sp ea ker, was not ready for property ta~. The peop le in the CCimlllllities ...,'e->-e not ready for prop erty tax. Th ey are L~ communities ~~a~ are an encirely differenc set o£ circwnstances ' from established municipalities that are built on little fifty foot lot s. In t.~ose municipalities, Mr .

Speaker, there is a rea .l !ear, it is a genuine fe ar , as expre ss ed by th ese 500 people that showed up in Bonavista , a genuine fear that they are attempting to use an ass ess ment system, t1r. Spea~er, that does not fit . They are frightened of the propercy tax, ~~ey are against the property tax and they are concerned about two or three ~~gs , Mr . Speaker, two or three things that I would ~ow mention to the minister and I hope t.~at she will deal with them an d that sJ-.e wi.ll bring in amendments to de al with these questions because they are real !ears , Mr .

Spe ak er , all over this Province in the third category of muni ci pality , 54@0

June 5, 1981 Tape No.2203 SD - 1 MR. STIRLING: and that is where they have gardens, where they actually grow their year's supply of vegetables. Mr. Speaker, that should be taken out, made exempt, from any property tax assessment. The other area, Mr. Speaker, is in the area where people have vast stage properties, fishing stages and a lot of ?roperty dedicated -all of the things that go with it, flakes and stages and all that sort of thing. There ha~ been a suggestion - and I am not sure if Madam Minister is aware of it - that those fishing stages be considered for a business assessment. Now, Mr. Speaker - MR.

TULK: That is not true, is it? MR. STIRLING: That is the understanding that we have, that this was a suggestion made, that the department would suggest that that be used 'tor a business assessment. And the minister may not be aware of it. It was made by her officials in a part of Newfoundland, and it may have just been that personal official. And that is why I am bringing this out now,because I think this is where the minister can do something about it. Just let me review the fears in this - I do not know how much·time we have in this debate, Mr. Speaker? MR. SPEAKER (Baird) : You have an hour.

The Leader of the Opposition has one hour. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave. MR. STIRLING: By leave? okay. Let us deal with that in a little more detail, Mr. Speaker. And for the benefit of those who are now interested in listening to the debate, let me just review quickly. I said there are three categories of municipalities affected by the new Municipalities Act. The first category is the one like St. John's, Grand Falls, Corner Brook, all of these bigger municipalities that already 5tf(~1

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2203 SD - 2 MR. STIRLING: have property tax in effect. And for them there is no problem because the property tax incentive was immediately a grant to those municipalities so that they got a 50 per cent grant and I doubt if there was a municipality that already had property tax that did not benefit from that incentive. And the incentive is such that they now have a surplus. And this is the first category, Mr. Speaker, The first category are the ones that already had property tax in effect. That is the first category. There are two other categories of municipalities, Mr. Speaker.

The second category is the one in which the municipalities were quite happy to put in property tax, now do not have property tax, but the new Municipalities Act did not take them into considerationr the new Municipalities Act put it into effect immediately and,as we are dealing with this on assessment,the government could not keep up with the assessments. Badger's Quay, for example, in my own district, Trinity, another district, are prepared to put in property tax but they cannot get the assessment done because the Province controls the assessment. Now what about those municipalities, Mr.

Speaker, rural Newfoundland? Many of those municipalities were municipalities in which there is no great tax base, a lot of senior citizens there. So the government for this one year only, before property tax comes in,makes senior citizens exempt. And that is not a bad idea from the point of view of the senior citizen,or from the point of view of the government ,but from the point of view of the municipality,they had no income to offset that.

The government did not give them a grant to offset the senior citizens,loss of revenue, so that they were faced then with this most unfair situation.And these were the councils willing to put in property tax, willing! They had the -1979 grants programme cut back, 5CiS2

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2204 NM - 1 MR. STIRLING: : Mr Speaker, oy twenty per cent. They were not allowed to collect the fuel tax. They were not allowed. This was taken away from them. They were not allowed to collect the vehicle tax. So that these councils found themselves in the same position that the provincial government would have found itself in if the federal government cut out a programme and said, "We are going to implement a new programme," and it was under the control of tlie federal people, and it could not be implemented for three years, but in the meantime they cut back your grants.

There would be an uproar! Mr. Speaker, that is what happened to these councils. And they are trying the best - it is the best,money that this Province gets, the best value this Province gets is the volunteer municipal councillor, who volunteers his time. But he is now faced with just an unacceptable situation. ffe has had the grants programme cut back, he cannot implement the property tax, and therefore has got to double the poll tax,the service fees. And the minister is aware of a number of these councils that have come in. So in that category, Mr.

Speaker, in that category of council they are helpless, and they are being penalized and they are being blamed for an action which this government took, and an action which this government could correct very quickly. And I would like to propose how you can correct it. I would propose that for any council that cannot implement property tax, through no fault of their own, assessments and that sort of thing, that they revert to the old act as you have done with the City of St.

John's 1and other cases, revert to the old act, and the old grants programme until they reach the point where at their request, and with your concurrence, they can implement a property tax. That is a positive recommendation 5~S3

..- June 5, 198.1 Tape No. 2204 NM - 2 MR. STIRLING: which will help councils in this situation. And it is simply up to the government to do it . It is not a quest~on of a great political change of heart or mind, it just means a practical implementation of the new act; phase it in over whatever period it t.akes to do the assessment . ~ow, t!'lat is in the second category of council, a council that is prepared co implement a property tax. Now, Mr.

Speaker, in the third category of council, and that is the on e that is going to cause us a lot of problems, the third category is the Bonavista category, Bonavista in Bonavista South, and ~~at is where I have made some recommendations which I will repeat to the minister . First of all , these kinds of councils should be given, and this is a major change, Mr. Speaker, these kinds of councils should be given t:.e authority under the act- change the act from making it mandatory to giving them the choice, Mr.

Speaker, under the act about the kind of tax chat they wish to imple.'!t ent. i\s the minister knows , there are some municipalities where people have become condition ed to the idea of paying a service fee. Now I know the argument that sqs4 :

June 5, 1981 Tape 2205 PK - 1 MR. STIRLING: can be used against a service fee is that everybody pays the same service fee,either the richest or th~ poorest. But in many municipalities that has been accepted 1 that if you want water you pay a service fee. In many municipalities that has been ac~epted and it re .ally does not make any difference what I think or what you think in the provincial government, what is important is what the local people think, what the people in a rural council area think, what is important to those people.

And if they are quite prepared to raise, say - let us assurre a municipality, in total, can raise,say,$50,000 in property tax; if they want to raise the same $50·,000 by a service fee and a poll ' tax or anything else they want to carry it,which is important in that area - we talk about preserving - MR. TULK: Newfoundland. MR. STIRLING: - our way of life, preserving the right of Newfoundlanders to live in the way they want to live , well Hr.

Speaker, in many parts of rural Newfoundland there is a community that understands each other and what they want and the way they want to live and they understand and accept the fact that they have a pay a service fee, a poll tax. They do not understand or accept the imposition of a property tax from St. John's. MR. TULK: Do not need it, either. MR. STIRLING: So, Madam Speaker - or Madam Minister, Mr. Speaker. No inference, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Baird): I hope not. MR. STIRLING: Mr.

Speaker, what L~ey need is to feel safe and content in their own communities, that in a community, for example, like Bonavista, and I use that as an example, where the people are engaged in fishery, very industrious poeple,but they do not have a year-round income and they have gardens where they grow their own vegetables 5ct;~5

June 5, 1981 Tape 2205 PK - 2 MR. STIRLING: and they have fish stages, they have a lot of property that has been left to them by their generations - MR. TULK: Some of it very good property. MR. STIRLING: - they do not want to get caught up in whatever it is that is 'happening in other municipalities where you live on a postage-stamp-sized building lot. They do not want to live on that kind of building lot. They do not want to live cheek by jowl next to their neighbours in an urban community. They have,by their own decision,decided to live in these rural communities. So, Mr.

Speaker, what they want is - they elect people to their councils who reflect the needs and wants of the people in the area - MR. TULK: Exactly. MR. STIRLING: - and what they want is to have the authority to say, okay,we know we have to collect $50,000 but our local people want to collect it in this manner or that manner or a poll tax or service fees. And it is up to the government then to say, okay here is the amount you will have to collect and we will match it. We will match it, MR. TULK: MR. TULK: MR. STIRLING: DR. COLLINS: what you are saying? MR. TULK: MR~ STIRLING: I know you understand Newfoundland.

We will match it, Mr. Speaker. Because - Do you see the inconsistency of Not at all. Well, Mr. Speaker, I hope that the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) will enter into this debate and point it out because , let us take the politics out of it - DR. COLLINS: If you do not see it, I certainl y will enter to point it out. 541SB

June S, 1981 Tape 2205 PK - 3 i'1R . STIRLING: Okay . Very serious. Okay very serious. Let us keep politics out of this debate because it is too important . Mr . Speaker, it af:ects the live s of people throughout this whole Province, and i t affects the lives of the people lvho cannot look after the.'llselves and defend themselves bec;.:ause they do not have a continuing · annual income. MR. TITLK: Could I interupt you? Tbe difference betvJee .\1 you and the minister is t."lat you uruie...rstand rural Ne1.;foundland and he does not. 1-<.R. STIRLING : Well , ,,...e ,,...ill see.

Let the minister - I will not j udge the minister . I ,,...ill let him enter the aebate . Now, Mr. Spea ker, just let me sum up what I am suggest i ng to the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mrs. Newhook ), 5<¥'~7 .:

June 5, 1981 Tape 2206 EC - 1 MR. STIRLING: that in this third category of municipality - now. on the first category, the ones that already had property tax, their people have settled down and they are getting a grant, no argument; the second category, I think they are not being treated fairly; the third category - what I am suggesting to her is that we change our act, instead of making it mandatory we say, 'You must collect, municipality.' Let us say you are talking about $50,000 worth of tax.

Whether they collect the $50,000 in property tax or they collect the $50,000 by a tollgate, what difference does it really make to the government? The government should be prepared to contribute the 50 per cent they are contributing on property tax because the council has the responsibility of collecting that money by whatever means. The responsibility of the government is to say, 'Okay, you collect your share of the money, we will contribute our share of the money.' That is the responsibility of the government.

It is not the responsibility of the government to impose and dictate to people in a community as to how they should collect their taxes because that is a municipal responsibility. So in that third category of council, I am suggesting, Mr. Speaker, that the property tax not be mandatory, that the type of tax used be the type of tax that the councils and the people they are elected by decide. That would give flexibility, Mr.

Speaker, that would give respect to the individual, a concern for the individual, a concern for the Newfoundlander and Labradorian living in remote parts of this Province and, as is said, 'let the person do his own thing', let the person live in contentment and security. Hard work, Mr. Speaker, he wants to work hard, sq~s

June 5, 1981 Tape 2206 EC - 2 MR. STIRLING: he is not looking for a handout. There is no fisherman looking for a handout in Bonavista. He is prepared to pay his fair share, but he wants to be able to do it in a way that he can cope with. So that is the recommendation to the minister on the third category. Now, Mr. Speaker, in the over- all - and let me repeat, Mr. Speaker, what it is that should be done by this House of Assembly in this time of very high costs and high interest costs and the fear that people have of losing their homes.

Let there be a unanimous agreement in this House that under either category that I mentioned, the three categories of councils and in property tax, let there be a unanimous resolution of this House, a unanimous agreement, that one assurance that we can give to people who are living in Newfoundland and Labrador, 'Yes, you have to pay your fair share of the taxes.' And we should resort to the court to collect them, use whatever the normal process is, but if you have tried everything else. Now,let us take the example of somebody who is in Bonavista or somebody who is in St.

John's or somebody who is in Humber West, Mr. Speaker - MR. WOODROW: Not Humber West. MR. TULK: Bay of Islands? MR. STIRLING: - or somebody in Bay of Islands, a situation in which somebody - and let us look at the categories, let us look at the type of person that we must resort to taking his home from him. Now, I am talking about an owner-occupied home. I am not talking about a landlord, a landlord I am not concerned about. A landlord can fend for himself. This is a free 5C, 9>9

June 5, 1~81 ~ape No .. 220.7 SD - 1 MR. STIRLING: enterprise system and he·can fend for himself, What I am talking about is an owner/occupier where the legislation at the present time will enable a council to sell that home to recover the taxes. Now what kind of a person are we talking about? r1R. BAR:f<ETT : obviously. MR. S~IRLING: A fellow who did not pay his taxes, Okay, a person who did not pay his taxes- first marks fer the member for St. John's West (Mr. Barrett. MR. TULK: MR. STIRLING: Go outside the overpass, boy. Agreed!

That is the primary concern,. that is the first thing that a fellow has got to do to be eligible to have his home taken away from him,is he did not pay his taxes. So the member for St. · John's I-I est and I are in agreement. If he paid his taxes there would be no problem. That is the first and fundamental thing. Now, why did he not pay his taxes? Well, let us look at two or three reasons. Let us assume it was the member for St. John's West who did not pay his taxes. It may be because he had a dispute with the council or he had a dispute with somebody who was occupying his home or for some other reason - MR.

BARRETT : MR. STIRLING: (Inaudible) handle all disputes through courts. - and so they can handle disputes through the courts -we are moving right along. So therP­ is no problem with the member for St. John's West-Because he has the income and we take it through the courts, no problem, the court gives a judgment and the municipality collects the taxa No problem with the man from St. John's West because he has the money. MR. TULK: Steady income, arrlsteady job. MR. STIRLING: But let us take the member for Bay of Islands (Mr. Woodrow) who is not awealthy man, let us sctt:ao

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2207 SD - 2 MR. STIRLING: take the member for Bay of Islands (Mr. Woodrow) who is a man who has had a number of occupations. Let us suppose during the change in occupations - a period in change of occupations - when they do the same thing as they did for the member for St. John's West (Mr. Barrett), they take him to court and they find that the man does not have any income. AN HON . MEMBER: (Inaudible) pension. MR. STIRLING: That is right. No income, he does not have any income. Now what happens? So the courts cannot take that, he has no income.

Let us give him three or four children, he is now an unemployed former clergyman with three or four children living in a house that he owns in Bay of Islands. MR. TULK: He owns his house, his father willed it to him. MR. STIRLING: Yes. A house that he has acquired, been handed down to him, a house that is worth a lot of money if he had to build it today. Let us suppose he were disabled, sick, let us suppose he had to go on welfare - all of those things, okay? SOMR HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. STIRLING: Okay, Mr. Speaker, let us deal with that situation.

So they take him to court - AN HON. •·:E2 ·::o::::::::c: ( Inaudiblel deal 11ri th a si.tua tion. MR. STIRLING: - and he has no money. He has no money, Mr. Speaker, so then they come back and say, 'The only asset that the man has is his horne'. So what advantage can there be, Mr. Speaker, in taking that man's horne and forcing his family out on the street? He has now lost his horne and they have collected their taxes, he has lost his horne and he is now left with his family on the street, no place to put them. MR. TULK: by Government. MR. STIRLING: They will have to be looked after You are ahead of me. 5Cf91

• June 5, 1981 Tape No . 2207 SD - 3 MR . STIRLING! He !las no other choice, he has got to go to the Department of Social Services and you could have the silly situation that they will have to go and try to find or build or buy a home 1with all the indignity involved, because this man had a temporary problem before he then get : elected,and he could have 9aid his taxes . C·!R. HODDER ! (inaudible l funds . But this government, you see, in both to get federal 5qf1 2

June 5,1981 Tape No. 2208 AH-1 MR. STIRLING: Now, Mr. Speaker, let us take the situation that happens in many cases where you have a fisherman, a fisherman who has worked all his life, given everything that he has to give. He has given his children everything, every chance. MR. BARRETT: Never pay it back. MR. STIRLING: Now, Mr. Speaker, that is part of the looking-down-your-nose attitude that causes us problernsJ that will enable this kind .of legislation to be brought in. Take a fisherman , Mr.

Speaker, who has raised his children, who has never taken a nickle of welfare, who has worked at every kind of job and has gone into construction work and he is back horne and cannot get a fishing license, cannot get into fishing and he has now got no income and he cannot pay his taxes. What is the advantage of taking that man's house from him: Because, Mr. Speaker, that is one thing that Newfoundlanders still consider sacred. And I tell you that there will be some people shot if they try to go in over a boundary and take a man's horne.

In many parts of rural Newfoundland many people who have had to go away to work all their lives felt that they could come horne to rural Newfoundland to live, could grow a few vegetables, catch a few fish and they could exist until the next opportunity carne. Mr. Speaker, they do not understand the cruelty of government. A government is suppos~ to work for people, a government is supposedto be concerned. They expect that a government is elected to help those who are unfortunate, those who are disabled, those who are without an income. So, Mr.

Speaker, they have a situation in which they expect the government· to help them then and that is the very precise time 1 under the present legislation,when they are going to deal him the final blow, they are going to take 5<1.(ft 3 .:::

June 5,1981 Tape No . 2208 AR-2 MR . STIRLD.\1G: his hous<! . ~ow, t·1r . Speaker,there should ~e no doubt . ~1R . !iODDER: Tory thinking. ' . ~m . TULK : Very Tory yes . Tory t:hinking . MR. STLTU.L\1G: Now, I want to give a chance to the o~her side. I want to get them to recognize that this ki~d of a reform, ~~is kind of a change is just a dec ent change, just a change that is brought about by a concern :or human ~eings. It may be Liberal. MIL TULK : It is . M.~ .

STIRLING: I mea."1 1 it may be the kind of thing ~~at Lib er alism stands for ,but surely God there is no polit:ical party that is again st that kind of thin!<:ing ,And now that it has been brought to your attention,surely you can agree that there can never be a set of circumstances, there is never a set of circ~stances ,anytL~e ,when you should be able to take somebody's house. can understand - And I can understand, ! ~R. BAR..'RETT : .:Offi. STIRL:nlG : A cap in hand approach. A cap in hand approach . Slit~ 4 .:

~ June 5, 1981 !.ffi.. BARRETT: SOME RON. MEMBERS: !.ffi.. TULK: speak yourself, boy? !.ffi.. STIRLING: Tape No. 2209 That is exactly what it is. Oh, oh! Why do you not get up and Get up and express yourself . NM - 1 There is no excuse for why people should not pay taxes. You do not realize how you are insulting people. In the first example that we went through where some­ body has the money to pay the taxes, as you said, "Take it through the courts." And that is what he should do. with the assumption MR. BARRETT : is that right? !.ffi.. TULK: Now, Mr.

Speaker, I am starting off (Inaudible) pay taxes obviously, Go away, boy. Do not be stupid. I pay more than half of tf't.em in here now. !.ffi.. STIRLING: No, but you see, Mr. Speaker - MR. TULK: The only new dollars in St. John's come from fishermen. MR. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, that is why I attempted to give them the situation. Mr. Speaker, I would challenge the member for St. John's West (Mr. Barrett), or the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) to tell me any set of circumstances, any set of circumstances in which, after going through all of the processes, it ever makes sense -give me any set of circumstances,any time under any circumstances in any district where, having tried everything else,you reach the point where you want to take somebody's house when it is their only asset, the owner occupied house. Mr. Speaker, there is not a set of circumstances where that makes sense. I am not talking about landlords, I am not talking about paying taxes. Of course people have to pay taxes. MR .. ~lDREWS: Owner occupied houses now. 5~5

June 5, 19.Bl MR . STIRLING: hou ses. t<f.R . ANDREWS : MR. STIRLING: Mr . Minister. t-IR . TULK: MR . STIRLING : Tape No ·. 22 .09 NM - 2 I am talking about owner occupied I will take that under consideration. ·Very good. Thank you very much, Four on our side. He may get flicked out of the Cabinet very quickly now oecause he has now departed - MR. TULK: Short stay. MR. STIRLING: it. I am talking aoout AJ.\1 !:rON . MEMBER: MR • STIRLING : - with the position. I do appreciate Property tax. :Very good. Okay? We are talking about owner occupied houses and I issue the challenge to anyone - MR.

ANDREWS: Not slum landlords. MR. STIRLING : Not slum landlords, no problem with slum landlords. As a matter of fact 1 I would be very specific, owner occupied. Okay? If the person who occupies the home owns the home, whether that is a widow who inherited it and she has now got a large - MR. ANDREWS: right now. MR. STIRLING: I will have a chat with the minister Very good. Well,we have the minister moving along. That is excellent. MR. HODDER: Let us get down to the gardens again, the gardens, the vegetables. I want to know about that. MR. STIRLING: No, I .think we have made some progress. Mr.

Speaker, I think we have made some progress. We have a minister - naw,we have been bringing this up, we have been bringing this up in this !:rouse of Assembly for the two years that I have been elected to this House of Assembly. It is our position. It is the first promise that I have made to people; 'once we are elected as the government'. Now, if the minister, who has just 5Cf~6

- June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2209 MR. STIRLING: said that he is committed - the minister has committed himself to going and having a word with the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mrs. Newhook) - to bring s41q7 NM - 3

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2210 DW - 1 MR. L. STIRLING: in legislation that supports the position that we have been making time after time after time, I would welcome it. I would give them full credit for it.

It is maybe an argument the Premier will be able to use and say, 'Yes, I know that 'Stirling' said that as soon as he becomes Premier the first piece of legislation that he will bring in will be to take away the threat of losing your home, if you have no other asset, if it is an owner occupied home.' The Premier will be able to say, 'Well, do not elect 'Stirling' Premier for that reason because we are going to correct that reason. We are going to give you a change in the Act'.

And I am sure that the minister who is probably - he certainly was the most influential of all of the backbenchers, he was cer­ tainly closest to the Premier. I do not know what the relationshi? was but he is certainly, probably the strongest minister in the government today and now that he made that personal commitment to get that legislation changed,I have no doubt, Mr. Speaker, I have no doubt, I am very pleased to announce that that will be done because there is no one closer to the Premier. There is no one closer to the government than the minister.

And I have no doubt that the strongest of the ministers · will bring it in. MR. TULK: He will fight for it. MR. L. STIRLING: MR. H. ANDREWS: MR. L. STIRLING: He will fight for it. I will fight for it. He will fight for it and~ Mr. Speaker, there is no question in my mind - I will give that minister full credit - I would say now - MR. H. ANDREWS: It will not be a hard fight though because what you are talking now is common sense. 5<\~ 8

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2210 DW - 2 MR. L. STIRLING: Very good. Did you hear that, Mr. Speaker? The minister said what the Leader of the Opposi- tion (Mr. Stirling) is saying,. it is such common sense that he will go·to •great lengths. He will guarantee it. He will fight for it. So, Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we have been effective in this House of Assembly, that it uoes show that if you get a good principle - MR. TULK: The minister just said he was going to bring it in. MR. L. STIRLING: Excellent! Excellent, let us give them a round of applause on the other side. SOME HON. M&~ERS: Hear, hear! MR. L.

STIRLING: Boy., oh, boy, this is a great day. This is a great day in this House when a newly appointed · minister 1 obviously a man who is concerned about the people, took this Liberal policy which we brought in and he is now going to steal it. I am glad. He can have it. This is the kind of thing we will continue to do. I would expect 1 now that the minister has committed himself,that we can consider that legislation will be brought in and I hope it will be brought in this session - AN HON. MEMBER: MR. STIRLING: not fool around. If he says - How about Monday? No. Look this minister does SOME HON.

MEMBERS: By leave, by leave! MR. H. ANDREWS: Sooner than you think. MR. L. STIRLING: Okay, Mr. Speaker. By leave today. You see, Mr. Speaker this proves one thing. This proves that a principle - MR. H. ANDREWS: An effective Opposition can get action. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 5dj~ 9

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2210 DW - 3 MR. L. STIRLING: Excellent~ And I hope that the minister - I do not even object to · the fact that he is not sitting in his seat making those comments. No objection! It proves, Mr. Speaker, cer- tain principles,once you develop ~~e>

June 5, 1981 Tape 22 11 EC - 1 MR. STIRLING: a policy that comes out of philosophy, you see - our philosophy is a concern for people. $. TOLK: That is right. MR. STIRLING: And when we developed this policy and we said, 'This is the first piece of action that will be taken by this Liberal Party, ' you then have a minister from the other side with a social conscience who said, 'Tha~ makes sense.' Now, I wonder, Mr. Speaker, why it is that that minister was the one who put his money where his mouth is sort of thing, stood up and said, 'I will fight for it.' MR. TULK: That is right. MR.

STIRL IN G: ·rs it acy '\Qrler that. that minister did it': Which district does he represent? As our former Premier would have said, Does he represent St. John's? Is it possible that he represents one of the eleven seats in St. John's? SOME' HON. MEMBERS : No. MR. STIRLING: St. John's East maybe? 'SOME' HON. MEMBERS: No. MR '. STIRLIN G : St. John's Centre maybe? SOME' HON. MEMBERS : No. MR . STIRLIN G: St. John's West? SOME' HON. MEMBERS : No. MR . STIRLIN G: What does he represent? SO.W HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! AN HCN. MEMBER: Burgee - Bay d 'Espoir. MR. STIRLING: Corner Brook ~maybe Corner Brook.

Is it possible it is Corner Brook? Grand Falls maybe? AN HON. MEMBER: south. MR. STIRLING: South. In all of the South Coast, what kind - HR. HODDER: A Liberal seat. MR. STIRLING: Give ne a hint. Give ne a hint. MR. HODDER: It is a Liberal seat. b~1

June 5, 1981 Tape 2211 EC - 2 MR. STIRLING: Big communities, large urban c.entre? Is it possible that tha~ agent represents a rural district? MR. HOOOER: MR . STIRLING: MR. HODDER: MR. STIRLING: MR. HODDER: Yes. No. A rural district - Yes. - where people are concerned? Yes. MR. TULK: (Inaudiblc i Liberal district. MR. STIRLING: How long has it been Tory? It must have been Tory for fifty years. Fifty years? Twenty-five? MR. TOLK: One year. blVrP2

June 5, '1981 MR. STLIU.ING: a massive Tory vote. AN HON. MEMBER: MR. ST IRLING: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. ANDREWS : MR. STIRL ING: MR. HODDER: (ina udib le). Tape No. 2212 One year. It must have been (Inaudible) hundred days. A massive Tory vote? No. Thirty votes. You remember the day. Only thirty votes. In othe -r words landslide PK-1 MR. LUSH: It is what you would call a political historical poof. MR. STIRLING: Is it possible that it is Burgee-Bay d'Espoir? And is it possible that he is representing the view expressed by those people - MR. TULK: Exactly. MR. STIRLING: - th _e people in that Liberal district? Mr.

Speaker, now that we have agreement from the minister on that great Liberal principle that he is committed to - and I think him for it and I have no doubt we will have the legislation that says, 'an owner occupied house can never be taken for tax purposes', period. MR. BARRETT: That is the Liberals. MR. STI RL ING: Now let us go back - no, well, I know that, that is the thinking of the member for St. John's West (Mr. Barrett) . MR.. HODDER: The member for Portugal Cove. MR. STIRLING: I do not know how long he will be around once the DAC proposal is approved, but we will see. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR.

STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, now I wonder is it possible - since we got that concession from the minister, I wonder can we move a little further - is it possible - MR. BARRETT: MR. STIRLING: Corne on with your wish list. Okay. Is it possible - let us blh6'3

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2212 IB-2 MR. STIRLI~G: try one more - is it possible that he will exclude gardens? MR. HOLLETT : Vegetable gardens. MR. STIRLING: Vegetable gardens from the assessment? Is it possible we can do that? AN HON. MEMBER: ~d motor cars. MR. STIRLING: Is it possible that we will not have the fishing properties, the stages and the flakes, is it possible that that will not be included for business t~? Can we get that? AN HON. MEMB.ER: I have to go back to my chair. MR. STIRLING: Come back to the chair because he is now going to make another speech. MR.

TOLK: We might have the vegetable gardens too, we ~e not sure. MR. STIRLING: is there, Mr. Speaker, as long as the minister 66>&4

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2213 so - 1 MR. STIRLING: there may be some hope that there is going to be a dent, there may :be a dent. Mr. Speaker, let me - would you like for me to yield so that you can comment on those other two or three places? AN RON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) crossword puzzle MR. STIRLING: What is that? MR. ANDREWS : I have to finish m¥ puzzle, MR. STIRLING: Oh, I see. I hope that somebody does not pinch him and wake him up. Mr. Speaker, let me just sum up then the position of the Liberal Party on those areas. MR. TULK: Do not forget the fishing problems, we have to have that. MR. STIRLING: problems. MR.

TULK: MR. STIRLING: We already talked about the fishing Has he agreed? He is not quite sure, he is finishing his crossword puzzle first, as soon as he finishes his crossword puzzle. Mr. Speaker, we have established one thing,that when we take a firm position on this side representing the views of the people, that there must be somewhere over there under the backbench, a fearless minister who will take a position as he has taken. Now let us just sum up the other things that need to be done, Mr. Speaker. If we could only get th~ kin~ of concern - MR. TULK: We are not getting to the good ministers. MR.

STIRLING: AN RON. MEMBER: MR. LUSH: - one, Mr. Speaker - Former backbenchers. Most ly courage. t,oes

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2213 SD - 2 MR. STIRLING: - we should take out of that act the automatic imposition of property tax. We should transfer that question - MR. ~= You are against property tax? MR. STIRLING: No, no, we are not saying that we are against property tax, that is up to the municipality. What we are saying is that the municipality should be prepared to decide how they collect the tax. The concern of the provincial government should be the amount of money they are prepared to contribute and they should contribute that amount of money. MR. ANDREWS: question? MR. STIRLING: MR. ANDREWS: Could the hon.

Leader answer a I will be glad to. Do you think that in principle a property tax is a fairer tax than a poll tax? It is a very serious question. If I live in, let us say, the town of Bonavista, which is a current example, and I am the owner of a large business establishment and I have a $200,000 house on the hill and you are a worker in the fish plant, do you think that I s·hould pay the same tax as you pay in the form of a poll more tax as a property tax? MR. STIRLING: or should I not have to pay Yes, Mr. Speaker, I served a term with the Federation of Mayors and Municipalities, the. Minister of Health (Mr.

House) was on that great executive and at the time MR. ANDREWS: Answer the question. MR. STIRLING: Oh, I thought you asked me a question you wanted answered? Would you tell me the answer you would like for me to give and maybe that will solve all the problems? MR. BARREIT: That is why he ask you the question. MR. STIRLING: Mr. Speaker, while we ~ involved boos

June 5, 1981 MR. STIRLING: there was a study Tape No. 2213 so - 3 with the Federation of Municipalities, 6~tn

June 5,1981 Tape No. 2214 AH-1 MR. STIRLING: done, there was a study done, Mr.Speaker, and the study indicated that people should be paying on the basis of ability to pay. And what the minister has gotten in his question is that we have given up in that area instead of being advanced in our thinking and saying, okay, that the only fair judge is on the basis of income tax. Theee was a Royal Commission which recamended income tax. So the only problem that you have in that situation you are talki~g about ,is there may be one of those in a community.

But there may be many .~eople who have inherited an old family home which has got just r ~ I!UJCh value in it • And you use either downtown or any part of rural Newfoundland where you have houses that are worth an awful lot of money but the people do not have an income 1 and that is where the property tax gets to be a problem. The name of the game, Mr. Speaker, is not what my personal . view is. MR. ANDREWS: The (inaudible l_ looks af.ter that with their estate tax. MR. STIRLING: in Canada any rrore. Yes, but we do not have that here We do not have that in the Province _ getting rid of the succession duties.

We have capital gains and capital gains taxes those who actually make a gain. It does not tax somebody who has inherited something but who has otrer incare. So, Mr. Speaker, that is an ongoing debate and the essence of what I am trying .to say to the member is you should transfer that question, th .at question which is a good question and which every person has to answer, you have to transfer that question to a municipality. ~use the answer to this question is that in some municipalities everybody would prefer to pay bo88

Juen 5, 1981 Tape No . 2214 AH- 2 MR . STIRLING: an equal rate. Whether it is fair or not , that is what they prefer and if somebody would prefer to do that,then that is the way it. should be done.

In another community - I am suggesting,and this is a basic question of phi l osophy, that if you trust people to elect - we trust people to elect their councils, we trust people to elect their provincial member and w.e trust people to elect their fedet:al member so that on those areas that relate to municipal taxes,th.at problem should .be transferred to the municipality and the people in that municipality so that they would ans wer the question . I am suggesting to you that that is not a question that you and I have to answer . When I was a city councillor or when 6~9

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2215 NM - 1 MR. STIRLING: I was on the Federation of Municipalities, I was quite happy to answer i~. See there is the difference in philosophy. MR. ANDREWS: But did you also have the responsibility to ask and answer the .question? AN H.ON. MEMBER: Agreed. MR. STI'RLING: Mr. Speaker, I just told you that that answer should be transferred to the local municipality because the answer is different in different municipalities and you know know that in Burgee - Bay d'Espoir, you know better than they do in some of the other districts.

And that is why you are supporting this business of not taking sornebody's horne. AN HON MEMBER: I am all for that. MR. STIRLING: So, Mr. Speaker, to allow some other people to get into this discussion and to allow the minister to introduce some of these amendments, let me just sum up then two or three things that I believe that we have accomplished here today. One, I believe that the government has accepted the principle as proposed by us over the last two or three years that when all else fails you should neve~ be allowed to take sornebody's house because of taxes.

You should not be allowed to take it and sell the house for taxes. That I think we now have agreement on. Secondly, the area we do not have agree~ent on is that our policy is the question of whether property tax should oe used or some other form of tax should be left to tfie municipality. Thirdly, that those municipalities in the second category that I talked about before, those municipalities that are prepared to implement a property tax, should be given back the same grant system and this should be hl,J10

June 5, 19.81 Tape No. 2215 NM - 2 MR. STIRLING: implemented over a two or three year period. And in those areas, the third category,a community, a community _that does not want property tax, that the decision as to tli.e type of tax to be collected should be left with that municipality. And th~t the government's responsiblity is to say, "You collect this gross amount and we will match it. And it is U:p to you wli.ether it is property tax, poll tax, fuel tax, or some other tax." And I will guarantee you, Mr.

Speaker, that the people's desires in those communities will be best reflected by the people that they elect. If we are going to get back to the question of assessment, Mr. Speaker, I do believe, and the minister may answer this when she speaks, that where a municipality is large enough to employ its own assessors, I believe the municipality should have the right to do that, to use its own assessors, trained assessors as they are doing, say,in the City of St. John's.

And when you are doing assessments, and we are talking about property assessment for the purposes of a residential property tax, gardens should be excluded, all fishing property should be excluded, and a look taken at rural Newfoundland to make sure that what people want in rural Newfoundland - they want to pay their fair share. They have no argument about paying their fair share.

But they want to define the type of tax that they are prepared to pay and the responsibility of the government is to match the contribution, by whatever formula they are going to,without tryinq to force municipalities into a common mold. Because the 19G>J1

June 5, 1981 Tape 2216 EC - 1 MR. STIRLING: essence of our way of life in Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, is to give every opportunity to the individual to develop, to live where he wants to live, to live in the kind of community he wants to live in, to take the kinds of employment opportunities that he wants out to let him have the freedom and to let his family have the freedom to live and respond in ·the way that they want to live and respond. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, the han. the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mrs. Newhook) is quite able to respond to all these and I am sure she will when she rises to close the debate. But, you know, I really could not resist having a little go at all this. Just the first point. The han. the Leader of the Opposition brings forward a heart-rending scenario of a person who changes his job and therefore has no qualifications for a new job, therefore he does not have a joo, and then he has no income,and then he has a big load of children, and then he has a health problem - and I have just forgotten the rest of the scenario.

Anyway, it was a "l!last heart-rending scenario of this citizen. And lie then says that this citizen is living in an outport area and that,therefore ,this means that property tax cannot work. Now, you know, this is a ref.lection, in .my view, o£ how little insight the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has in the matter. The han. the Leader of the Opposition was on a municipal council. He, himself says he was part - he was on the executive of a national council, the Federation of Municipalities and so on. Now, from that you would certainly think that he would be12

June 5, 1981 Tape 2216 EC - 2 DR.COLLINS: have the insight to know that in urban areas you have very similar social circumstances to that. You have poor people in my part of St. John's. You have-people down there who are without income of any substantial nature. You have people down there with large families • You have people down there with handicaps and heal.th problems and so on. So by the very fact that they are in urban areas, does that mean that no urban area can have a. property tax?

It is such a specious and such a peculiar argument for someone who has had some contact w-ith the municipal goverrunent 1 that I am amazed that this would be brought up in this forum. I mean, we are supposed to take our responsibilities s·eriously here. We are supposed to bring up arguments that really have content and have some sense. We are . not here just in a little debating society in a high school or something, just to score a few points. We are supposed to bring up substantive matters here, matters that mean something to the people.

And for someone who has had some contact with municipal government to bring up that sort of argument is enough to make you wonder what his view of this House of Assembly is all about. Now, the other thing: He brings in three categories of /JD13

' June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2217 ow - 1 DR. J. COLLINS: .municipalities and he goes through them. Mr. Speaker, I do not claim to be any sort of expert on the Municipalities Act,but I am not aware that that Act lays out three categories such as he spoke of. I hope that he will in actual fact point them out to me, t~ese particular categories such as he has described them. It seems to me what. he was describing" were totally artificial categories.

They might be called the 'Stirling categories of municipalities', the definition of which were drawn up OI:l the spur of the moment here in the House~ And we are supposed to take this all seriously .' Mr. Speaker! Mr. Speaker! Anyway. the main point I wanted to get up on was that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stirling) made a great point saying, 'Look, the govern- ment is at fault here. It did not supply the means whereby these municipalities out there could make assessments so that property tax could be properly assessed'.

He said, you ,know, this was a hold up on those municipalities that are out · there, the government is at fault, they put them in an impossible situation because they could not get their assessments done.But then their ·grants were withdrawn and,therefore,those municipalities were faced with the issue of having to double the poll tax or the service tax, and this was a terrible, terrible imposi­ tion. Now, Mr.

Speaker, he then turns around and says, 'Why does the government not allow certain municipalities, if they do not want to have their properties taxed, why does it not allow them just to carry on with their poll tax or their service tax?' So in one instance the government is at fault for bFJ14

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2217 DW - 2 DR. J. COLLINS: not allowing property tax to go in and therefore,this is a terrible dastardly thing to do to those communities and on the other hand he says, 'Oh, the answer to that is to make them just double their poll tax or their service tax'. I mean,the inconsistency of the thought is enough to really make you wonder whether the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stirling) knows anything about the processes of government.

I think that it is quite clear that he has a long way to go before, in actual fact, he is going to be in any sort of position not to lead a government, not to lead an Opposition but to really have any concept of what an M.H.A. is supposed to be thinking about when he is sitting in this House and when he is speaking in this House. The final remark I just want to make, Mr. Speaker, is that clearly the Leader of the Opposi- . ~ t~on never hopes to ·form a government.

He says that people who live in urban areas and therefore elect people from urban areas, these are a strange sort of people, these are an odd type of people. Only the people in rural areas - he was getting at my hon. colleague, the hon. Minister of Culture, Recreation.and Youth (Mr. Andrews), say that he could not possibly be from an urban area because he is too sensible a fellow. Only the people in urban areas are a strange, wierd type of citizens who elect peculiar types of people to this House of Assembly. He is saying that he does not want and does not expect to be elected by people from St.

John's, from Grand Falls, from Gander, from Corner Brook and from the other urban areas. hDlS

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2218 NM - 1 DR. COLLINS: so, I mean, it is quite clear that he never has any hope of forming a government. As a matter of fact,I do not think he really has much hope of forming a government even if we had two governments here. If we just had an ~roan citizen government and a rural citizen government, I doubt very much wheth~r he would have much of a shot at the rural citizen government. So I just bring in those few points there.that the hon. Leader of the . Opposition (Mr.

Stirling} is really supposed, when he brings up points in this House, to bring up points that he has thought through, not superficial, debating club, or debating society points. He is supposed to bring up points here that are of value in assessing the measures that government puts before the people in this House. He is supposed to bring up weighty matters, not superficialities. And secondly, he really is supposed to get down to it and learn a little bit about how governments work. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. ro1E HCN. MENBERS: Hear-, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Butt) : The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr.

Speaker, this amendment brings into question,really,the whole concept,practically,of the act recently passed by the government, the Municiaplities Act. This is not the only amendment ,I would suggest ,that we are going to have related thereto because that whole entire act is just a: .nightmare. It is just a total mess, Mr. Speaker, and I am sure that the officials who have to deal with and interpret the complex rules and regulations that accompany that municipalities act would agree that it is a nightmare and that it is very difficult to apply in the Province generally. That is the problem with the property tax .

That is the problem with an y measure that is applied in a blanket form to apply to every area in Newfoundland equally, and that makes the problem . Because it does not take into account/ boJ s

June 5, 1~81 Tape No. 2218 NM - 2 MR. LUSH: it does not take into account the local needs .and, Mr . SpeaRer, that is the problem with property tax io tnis Province . We have stated that we are not against property tax per se. What we are against is the blanket, if you ~11, oflt 7

June 5, 1981 Tape 2219 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: the blanket and total applicatio~ of that principle to all areas of the Province. And we think that the rules and regulations governing property tax should be a little more flexible. I suppose the key words would be flexibility and fluidity with·respect to this particular amendment and with respect to the whole concept of property tax.

But it seems as though the government, in laying out this plan, in bringing in this concept of property tax, did not pay sufficient attention to the local needs, the local structures within communities, the economic base of each area, But as I have said before, the thing was meant to be a blanket application, and by doing this we have placed many communities in a very unfavourable c?ndition with respect to being able to cope with the requirements of the act as they relate to property tax. So, Mr.

Speaker, along the lines suggested by the Leader of the Opposition, we are suggesting that instead of this raw, total application for all of Newfoundland, an application, if you will, that allows for no flexibility, an application that allows for no consideration of the local needs of an area, that does not take into account the local economic base and does not take into account at all the economics of an area, we are suggesting that there be more flexibility, that the rules be not so stringent, that they be not so regiment, that there be some flexibility and fluidity attached to those particular rules and regulations.

So, Mr. Speaker, I think the Leader of the Opposition has come up with a really good suggestion and some good ideas to the minister in this particular instance. 6018

June 5, 1981 'Tape No. 2220 SD - 1 MR. LUSH: And the other thing that this property tax is doing -of course, I do not know whether the government is aware of this, whether they are doing it unwittingly,because the government on occasion, on many occasions, have committed themselves,or at least they have enunciated,or at least they have articulated, they promulgated the policy of keeping intact, if you will, the Newfoundland culture, the Newfoundland tradition, keeping intact the culture and the tradition and the customs of rural Newfoundland.

Well,I want to suggest to the minister, through the Speaker, that this property tax, really, will have the effect of disrupting that culture and t~at custom in many of the areas of rural Newfoundland. And again, that is not to suggest that we, any of us as politicians, should be trying to convince people that they can get services in their communities without having to pay for them. I think, number one, that that day is gone and I believe that that attitude does not exist anymore among Newfoundlanders, be it rural Newfoundlanders or urban Newfoundlanders or whatever.

I think everybody today, every sound-thinking,rational Newfoundlander believes that if we are to get services then we have to pay for these services,be they water and sewer or local transportation within the community or whatever people - street lights or whatever it is, garbage collection, snow :::learing, all of these public services 1 that the people of Newfoundland certainly realize that they have to pay for these particular services. But, Mr.

Speaker, there has to be some understanding, there has to be some consideration given to, as I have said before, the ability, if you will, of people to pay for the services and the ability to pay, in this particular case, the property tax. I believe that with all of the taxes that are being levied on people no~ that there seems to be a lack of understanding for the needs of people and for the ability to pay all of the taxes that are levied upon the f,Q19

June 5, 1981 Tape No. 2220 SD - 2 MR. LUSH: people of the Province. So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Leader of .the Opposition (Mr. Stirling) certainly came through with great suggestions and, if acted upon,would allow the minister and the government to get out of this tremendous dilemma that they are in, to get the people of rural Newfoundland off their backs, particularly people living in the areas of Bonavista and Glovertown and Musgravetown MR. 'IUI.K: (Inaudib le) M.R. LUSH : Right. This is where the Leader of the Opposition came ~~rough with several su ggestio ns, I believe, that would assist .

And, Mr. _speaker, again the idea or the concept that a person can lose his home, Mr. Speaker, for not having paid property tax, I think is a rather stiff rule, a rather stiff regulation , a regulation,again, as I. have said before, that does not take into account the culture of Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, r suppose one of the treasured t.hings in Newfoundland, one. of the most treasured b@AD

·June 5, 1981 Tape 2221 PK - 1 MR. LUSH: of all possessions is to own our own horne. And I believe that in Newfoundland, in this Province, that we have the highest proportion of homeownership right throughout ~anada. Now, Mr. Speaker, that has been a tradition of ours. Indeed, yesterday when my friend and colleague, the mernbe~ for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) talked about the curse of credit, you know, I was then reminded of that aspect of our lives where we want to own our own homes and it is offensive to Newfoundlanders to mortgage a ~orne. That is offensive to .them. They do not want to do that.

They want to be able to build their horne and move right into it. And, you know, there are so many young couples in rural Newfoundland today, even with the high cost of living, even with expenses the way they are, that it would surprise hon. members and I am sure Mr. Speaker would find it surprising,the numbers of Newfoundlanders today in rural Newfoundland, young co1:1ples who get married today and after their honeymoon move into a h