Volume XLI Wednesday Province of Newfoundland FORTY- FIRST GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Second Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard) Speaker: Honourable Thomas Lush [Preliminary Transcript] Number 49 6 June 1990

**NOTE** HANSARD EXPERIENCED TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES THIS AFTERNOON SESSION. The House met at 2:00 p.m. MINOR RECORDING Mr. Speaker (Lush): Order, please! Oral QUestions Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, I have a series of questions for the Minister of Finance (inaudible) isn • t here. I normally would not question the absence of a Minister, Mr. Speaker. I take for granted when a Minister is absent, he or she is on Her Majesty's business.

But I hope the Minister is not, in view of the Premier's conunents a few weeks ago, in Ottawa giving constitutional advice to the Premier. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr . Simms: Like he was last November. Mr. Rideout: Where he was last November. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Finance, I will direct my question to the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Simms: He is twice as bad. Mr. Rideout: Mr.

Speaker, on Kay 2 past, I enquired of the Minister of Finance whether or not the present constitutional impasse the country finds itself in was reflecting itself in higher Ll June 6, 1990 Vol XLI borrowings for the Province? The Minister, at that time, assured me and the House that was not the case. Now, Mr.

Speaker, as a result of conunents made before the House of Conunons Finance Conunittee yesterday by the Federal Minister of Finance, indicating that provinces like Newfoundland are now paying from one-half to one per cent premium on bonds, I would like to ask the President of Treasury Board whether in fact he can confirm that the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador is now paying from one-half per cent to 1 per cent premium on recent bond issues? Mr. Sinuns: Minister of know. Mr. Winsor: advisement. Mr. Simms: Finance. Contrary to what the Finance said. Don't Take it under Ask the Minister of An Han.

Kember: again, Mr. Speaker. Let me start Mr. Speaker: The han. the Government House Leader. Mr. Baker: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, the Minister of Finance is in New York signing the bond issue; at this very moment, as we speak, Mr. Speaker. He is not in Ottawa. There have been a number of conunents made concerning the effect of the constitutional crisis on a variety of money matters in the country in terms of the effect on the Canadian dollar, in terms of the effect on the stock markets and so on.

I think a lot of these conunents are not borne out by what has been happening, both on the stock market and what has been happening No. 49 Rl

to the Canadian dollar. The Canadian dollar, for quite sometime, has been fluctuating around eighty-five cents, and it dips below and it goes above and so on. I believe yesterday, or this morning, it was at 85.12. The Canadian dollar fluctuates. And every time it drops, they blame it on the constitutional crisis; every time the Toronto Stock Exchange drops, they blame it on the constitutional crisis. But the next day it comes back again. For the last number of months, the Toronto Stock Exchange has been on a high and it has stayed there.

So I want to question the supposition, first of all, by the Federal Minister of Finance that the constitutional unrest in Canada at the present time is affecting the money markets. Now having said that, Mr. Speaker, we did recently - An Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Mr. Baker: Well , I would say to the Opposition House Leader, all he has to do is check the financial pages for the last two months and he will see what I am saying is absolutely correct. Now, then, Mr.

Speaker, with regard to the raising of the bond issue, which was the second part of the question, when we go to the bond market we have a level which we expect we will get on that market. I believe, and I will get the exact figures for the Leader of the Opposition as quickly as I can, but I believe that we were about a half percentage point, or four-tenths of a percentage point higher than we expected we would, or somewhere in that vicinity. But I will get the exact figures and advise the Leader of the Opposition. L2 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: Mr.

Speaker, will the Minister confirm that the most recent bond issue, as announced by the Minister of Finance on May 24, is bearing a Meech Lake premium, up from .85 to 1.30 per cent, and that, in fact, will cost this Province an extra $20 to $22 million over the life of the bond issue? Can the Minister confirm that, Mr. Speaker? Mr . Simms: No, he (inaudible). An Hon. Member: There is no Meech Lake premium. Mr. Simms: Yes, there is. Mr. Rideout: Go pick up the Globe and Mail today! Mr. Tobin: Old Chicken Little. What is old Chicken Little saying over there? Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Government House Leader. Mr.

Baker: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, as I pointed out in the answer to the first question, the tendency is to blame all those things that happen on the constitutional unrest in the country. These comments tend to inflame the situation and do nothing to help it, certainly. What we are seeing, Mr. Speaker, in terms of our credit rating and in terms of what we have to pay to raise money, is a reflection of the $5 billion that we are in debt, most of which was accumulated during the last ten years. That is what we are seeing, a reaction to the financial management of this Province during the last ten years.

No. 49 R2

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Rideout: (Inaudible) intelligent response from the President of Treasury Board. Let me ask the Minister a very simple question to which he can, for once today, say yes or no. Can the Minister confirm that the Province's fiscal agents are still the firm of Merrill Lynch? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: I will check into that, Kr. Speaker, and advise the hon. Kember. An Hon. Kember: The President of Treasury Board doesn't know who our fiscal advisors are. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: Mr.

Speaker, is it possible the President of Treasury Board does not know who the fiscal advisors to the Province are? Is it Merrill Lynch or is it somebody else? Have the Government brought in new fiscal agents since the Government changed? Surely, Mr. Speaker, the President of Treasury Board must know that? Mr. Simms: Right on! Mr. Speaker: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Kr. Baker: I am very concerned, Kr. Speaker, in this House about giving answers that are absolutely accurate. I always try to give answers that are absolutely accurate and checked out.

To the best of my knowledge, and I am not the Minister of Finance, there has been no change. L3 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: We got something out of the Minister. Mr. Simms: To the best of his knowledge. Mr. Rideout: To the best of his knowledge. Mr.

Speaker, let me ask the Minister this: In view of the fact that Merrill Lynch, who are still the Province's fiscal advisors, as far as I know and as far as the Minister knows, and in view of the fact that Moody's, both of whom today have said that the weaker provinces in Atlantic Canada will continue to pay a significant premium for borrowings, bonds, as long as this constitutional crisis continues, in view of that, Kr. Speaker, how can the Minister try to slough off for some o.ther reason increases in premiums in the bond issues we are paying today? An Hon. Kember: Moody's? Mr. Simms: Are Moody's our advisors?

Mr. Speaker: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The reason I can say that with assurance, Kr. Speaker, is because of all of the other myriad of comments over the past couple of weeks that have been coming out from so-called financial experts, claiming that the bottom is falling out of the Canadian dollar because of Keech Lake, that the Toronto stock exchange is collapsing because of Meech Lake. None of these things are No. 49 R3

happening, Mr. Speaker. I prefer to take a more rationale, sensible view of what is happening in this country. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, will the President of Treasury Board undertake, if the Government have not already done so, to consult with their own fiscal advisors, Merrill Lynch, and see if Merrill Lynch will confirm for him what they are confirming to the news media in this country, that in fact the constitutional crisis is causing a premium to be paid for bond issues by this Province and all other Atlantic Provinces? Mr. Simms: Ask your advisors.

You do know who they are? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Mr. Speaker, I will listen to Merrill Lynch and Moody' s when it comes to the figures, but when it comes to just a simple opinion as to what is causing things to happen in the market , these companies have been wrong before and will continue to be wrong in the future, Mr. Speaker. I do not assume that every word that comes out of their mouths is the gospel truth. We take advice from these people and we operate as well as we can using their advice, but we do not assume that everything they say is absolutely correct.

I do not know how they can possibly prove, in light of the other kinds of comments these financial experts have been making, I cannot see how they can possibly prove that there is any direct connection to the constitutional crisis. L4 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. Mr. Tobin: Mr.

Speaker, I had a question for the Minister of Transportation but he is not here, I had another question for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs and he is not here, so I will probably direct my question to the President of Treasury Board. I hope his response to me will not be the same as the one to Leader of the Opposition, when he says all the financial institutions are misguided, something like the Premier would say. Everybody in this Province is misguided except him and the Premier. An Hon. Member: question? (Inaudible) the Mr. Tobin: question when the question. I will ask the I am ready to ask Mr.

Speaker, I recently met with a group of homeowners from Pearson Street. These people are renting houses there, some of them for the past fifteen or sixteen years, which are now being changed to condominiums and the price has gone from $55,000, which they were offered for last year, to $70,000 this year. In order to make the purchase they have no now choice but to buy the homes and abide by the group's decision on what colour the houses are painted and everything else, or move out after paying fifteen or sixteen years rent there.

The bottom line is the people there are all basically middle-income people who are not No. 49 R4

eligible for subsidized housing, and do not have the necessary funds to pursue a mortgage to buy these houses, so I ask the Minister if Newfoundland and Labrador Housing will consider putting in place a subsidy to assist these people with their downpayments to buy these condominiums so as not to be forced on the street? Mr . Speaker: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: It sounds like a very good question, and I will certainly take it under advisement. If the Member could provide me with all the details he has, I will certainly take it under advisement and investigate it. Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. Mr. Tobin: Mr. Speaker, let me say to the Minister I will be more than glad to provide him with all the information, letters and that, which I do have here, and hopefully he can do something about it. I want to again emphasize to the Minster that this is being done and the only way these people can come up with the funding is if Government does provide them with it, and I would certainly hope they will. Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. Mr.

Parsons : (Inaudible technical problems) - with the responsibility of developing various options for the renewal of hospital facilities in st. John's, with particular reference to the Grace Hospital and St. Clare's. LS June 6, 1990 Vol XLI My question to the Minister is has the Hospital Council now formally presented its report on these options to the Minister of Health? Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Minister of Health. Mr . Decker : (Inaudible technical problems) . Mr. Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister says they have received the report.

Has Government considered the report and made the decision on what option it supports for the renewal of the Grace and st. Clare • s hospitals? Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Minister of Health. Mr. Decker: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the Government is presently considering all nine options, looking at the seventh option which was recommended, but a firm decision has not yet been made. Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. Mr. Parsons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Can the Minister confirm that the Government has recently advised the Grace General Hospital that the Government is considering an option not presented to it by the Hospital Council, that option being the closure of the Grace Hospital? Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Minister of Health. Mr. Decker: Mr. Speaker, the St. John's Hospital Council came to Government with nine options to deal with hospital problems within the city. Number seven was the one which the Hospital Council recommended, which would cost No. 49 RS

about $250 million in 1988 last-quarter dollars; in today's dollars probably well over $300 million. Before the Government took it upon itself to spend that kind of money - and as you always find, Mr. Speaker, the estimates are usually under, so we are talking a potential half billion dollars this could go to - before we undertook to spend that kind of money, Government went back to the St . John's Hospital Council and suggested that they would look at least one other option, and maybe a dozen other options. We have to make sure, Mr.

Speaker, when we spend that kind of money, that there is no less expensive way to deliver the same high level of care which is presently being delivered. Mr. Simms: So the answer is yes. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. Mr. Parsons: Now that the Minister has confirmed the closure of the Grace Hospital - An Hon. Member: The option. Mr. Parsons: - that option - can the Government confirm that as part of that option of closing the Grace Hospital the Government is considering not adding any additional beds or facilities to already existing hospital facilities in st. John's? Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Health. Mr. Decker: Mr. Speaker, the Grace Hospital, the present facility, that structure on the southside of LeMarchant Road, when we took over Government we found that that building needed to be replaced. There is no doubt about L6 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI that. The 300 plus beds must be replaced. If the Grace Hospital were closed today, if it were to disappear, we need these beds in the city. Now, Mr.

Speaker, Government is looking at the least expensive way that we can replace those beds and still maintain the integrity of the system and still deliver the high level of health care we want to deliver. Mr . Speaker, it is the duty of Government to do that for the people of this Province. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Warren: patients. Sacrificing the An Hon. Member: They are closing down the Grace? Mr. Tobin: Murphy, don't you clap. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. Mr.

Parsons: I want to remind the Minister that the Salvation Army in this Province has served this Province well as far as the Grace Hospital is concerned. Now I want to ask the Minister does the Minister think the health care needs of the residents of St. John's and, indeed, of all Newfoundland, can be met if almost 300 beds are taken out of the health care system in the Province? Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The bon. the Minister of Health. Mr. Decker: Mr.

Speaker, in the first part of the question the hon. gentleman made reference to the contribution the Salvation Army made to health care in this No. 49 R6

J>L . Province. Government and myself, we all recognize the tremendous contribution the Salvation Army has made, not only in St. John's, Mr. Speaker, but up in Labrador City and throughout Canada. There is no one underestimating or downplaying the contribution they have made. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Decker: Now, could we meet the health needs of St. John's if we took out 300 plus beds? No, Mr. Speaker, we could not meet the health care needs of this Province if we were to close 300 beds. Nobody is suggesting that we close 300 beds. We are suggesting that we build 300 plus beds, Mr. Speaker.

We are in the business of opening hospital beds, not closing them. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr . Decker: Mr. Speaker, if and when we close the Grace, we will replace it with an equal number of beds. An Hon. Member: saying when. But you are not Mr. Decker: am going Speaker. I am tempted to say I to stand again, Mr. Mr. Rideout: again, because let you. You won't stand the Speaker won't Mr. Decker: covered the gentleman. 300 beds. I think I have answer for the bon. We are not taking out We need the 300 beds and, thank goodness, we are going to place 300 beds for the people of St.

John's and the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker. L7 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Parsons: (Inaudible) when the hospital is gone. Some Hon. Members: It is a disgrace. Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Member for Humber Valley. Mr. Woodford: Mr. Speaker, my question was supposed to be for the Minister of Transportation but, I suppose, in his absence, I will direct my question to the President of Treasury Board. Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that there has been a very volatile situation with regard to the independent truckers in the Province and, more specifically, I guess, we would have to talk about the situation now in the Grand Falls - Badger area, where just yesterday there were some 40 RCMP officers there to try to control some of the protesters, namely, the independent truckers; and I think, in this case, there were two or three arrested - they even had a chartered bus there to carry away the protesters - would the Minister be able to inform the House of the results of any meetings yesterday between the Minister of Transportation and his officials?

Mr. Speaker: The bon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: No, Mr. Speaker, I cannot, and I am assuming the Minister of Transportation, when he comes back to the House, can inform the House of any contacts he has made and so on, with regard to the situation. We realize it is a serious situation that has been going on for years and, hopefully, we can find a resolution to it. Somehow, there has to be a resolution. No. 49 R7

Mr. Speaker: The han. the Kember for Humber Valley. Mr. Woodford: Mr . Speaker, a supplementary to the Minister. Would the Minister, then, being a senior Cabinet Minister, agree with me that the concerns of the independent truckers would be legitimate or not? Mr. Simms: legitimate? Are their concerns Mr. Woodford: Would he agree, being a senior member of Cabinet and a Cabinet Minister, that the concerns of the independent truckers in the Province would be legitimate or not? Mr. Speaker: The han. the President of Treasury Board . Kr. Baker: There are legitimate concerns, I should imagine.

I don't know specifically what the independent truckers have written down as their concerns, so I can't comment on any list of things that I haven't seen. But certainly there is a problem, and perhaps the Minister of Transportation will deal with it at some other time. Mr. Speaker: The han. the Kember for Humber Valley. Mr. Woodford: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

As I said before, the Minister responsible for Treasury Board, being a senior Cabinet Minister, would he take it upon himself to talk to his colleague, the Minister of Transportation, and get him to show some initiative and get the three parties together probably, to try to discuss this issue before it becomes worse? I am not being an alarmist or LS June 6, 1990 Vol XLI anything, but it is in Central Newfoundland today, I am expecting it to be in Deer Lake probably next week, and, I think, in the han. Kember's District, in Port aux Basques.

There is the potential for some very volatile situations over the next few weeks. So would he take it upon himself to ask the Minister of Transportation to get the three parties together to try to solve this problem? Mr. Speaker: The han. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Knowing the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, Mr. Speaker, I am sure he knows the situation and has taken steps to determine, maybe, what the way out of the situation is. I cannot make specific promises. I will certainly sit down with the Minister of Transportation and we will discuss the issue. Mr.

Tobin: Why don't you go down and buy your cars, then he can come back to the House? Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Kember for Fogo. Mr. Winsor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Fisheries. The recently announced Salmon Management Plan has come under severe criticism, I think from the Minister and from several interest groups. Can the Minister indicate to this House the level of involvement this Government had in formulating the plan for 1990? Mr. Speaker: The Minister of Fisheries. han. the Mr. Carter: Kr. Speaker, we had No. 49 R8

very little opportunity to have an input in the management plan announced by the Minister a few days ago, very little opportunity. My Deputy met with various Federal officials, both in Ottawa and just recently in Halifax, at the meeting of the Atlantic Salmon Advisory Board, but the final management plan which was announced on Monday is the product of Ottawa, without any input from the Department of Fisheries provincially. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Fogo. Mr. Winsor: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

It was customary in past years for the Atlantic Council of Ministers of Fisheries to have input into the Salmon Management Plan. Did this meeting occur this year, and did they make any recommendations to the Minister? Mr. Speaker: The Minister of Fisheries. hon. the Mr. Carter: I did not get the first few words of his question, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Fogo. Mr. Winsor: The Atlantic Council of Ministers of Fisheries, did they meet this year to have input? Mr. Carter: No. Mr. Speaker: The Minister of Fisheries. hon. the Mr. Carter: I am sorry. That is something else, Mr. Speaker.

I believe in other years, and maybe the Leader of the Opposition can either confirm or deny this, there was a meeting, I believe, of the Atlantic Provinces Ministers of L9 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Fisheries convened for that purpose. There was a meeting called to discuss the Groundfish Management Plan and the setting of the TACs and all that, but there was no such meeting called to discuss the Atlantic Salmon Management Plan which was released recently. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Fogo. Mr. Winsor: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

Did the Minister request that such a meeting take place so that we could have some input? And, furthermore, could the Minister tell us if he has made any request to Ottawa for compensation because of reduced quotas and the potential that there could be even further quota reductions? Mr . Speaker: The Minister of Fisheries. bon. the Mr. Carter: Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks I have made I do not know exactly how many, but several requests for meetings with the Federal Minister to no avail.

A number of meetings have been requested and, I regret to say, the Minister has not seen fit to accede to my request in that respect. Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes. Mr. Hearn: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have have a question for the Minister of Education who is not here, so I will ask another question to the Minister of Development. A few days ago, in response to a question to the Minister of Fisheries in relation to the deal between NLDC under the Minister's No. 49 R9

Department and the Twillingate plant, and also between NLDC and the plant in Trepassey, the Minister of Fisheries could not give me the answer; he said the Minister of Development had all the answers and he thought he would be tabling them in the House. I ask the Minister if he could tell us, what is the lease being paid at the Twillingate plant? What is the deal with the operator in relation to management fee? And, also, what is the deal with the plant in Trepassey? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Development. Mr. Furey: Mr. Speaker, I would undertake to table those details, yes. Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes. Mr. Hearn: Mr. Speaker, we have asked the question in the House on three or four different occasions to the Minister of Fisheries, and each time he has delayed given an answer. He indicated last time that the Minister of Development would table the answer. I ask the Minister, why is he hesitating to table the information? Does he have something to hide? And is it really a sweetheart deal, which would embarrass their dealings with all other plants in the Province? Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Development. Mr. Furey: Mr.

Speaker, I have nothing to hide. It is not a sweetheart deal, it is a deal which was constructed in a proper manner to protect 500 jobs of people in the Twillingate area, fishermen, fish plant workers, and LlO June 6, 1990 Vol XLI it is a deal, Kr. Speaker, that this Government is very proud to have put together. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Furey: Mr . Speaker, it seems to me that when - Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Furey: Mr.

Speaker, it seems to me that when the Government does something correct and proper and right to protect jobs, it normally is the duty of the Opposition to heap praise upon the Government for doing something correct. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Furey: In our view, Mr. Speaker, it was a correct deal. It is one, Mr. Speaker, that was put together by NLDC - the Member is correct. It was one that we consulted on a daily basis, leading to the deal, with the Economic Recovery Commission whom we give great credit for helping us construct this deal; and it is one, Mr.

Speaker, which a private sector person who has been operating in the fisheries, namely, Dr. Ches Blackwood, and who has been operating successfully - the hon. the Leader of the Opposition gave him great praise recently in this House, and I commend him for that. So, Mr. Speaker, all of the principals involved in this, NLDC; the Economic Recovery Commission; Dr. Ches Blackwood; and, indeed, Mr. Speaker, I would be negligent in my duties without saying that the Minister of Fisheries did a terrific job in putting this deal together, too. No. 49 RlO

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Furey: So I commend all of those people. 500 people - An Hon. Kember: order. On a point of Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The hon. gentleman seems to be involved in making a speech. I would ask the hon. gentleman to finish up in a half a minute or less, please! Mr. Furey: Mr. Speaker, in my commendation of all of those people who helped to put this deal together, I say to the bon.

Member sincerely, there was nothing hidden; nothing improper; and, as I have stated in my first response to the first question, I would be absolutely delighted to table the details and I will table the details at the appropriate time. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Opposition House Leader. Mr. Simms: like to - Kr. Speaker, I would Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! There is just a short time left in Question Period and I would ask hon. Members to extend the courtesy to the bon. the Opposition House Leader to ask his question. The Opposition House Leader. Kr. Simms: Thank you, Kr. Speaker.

I want to pose a question, if I may, to the President of Treasury Board. The Minister responsible for Public Libraries Boards is in Lll June 6, 1990 Vol XLI not in the House today, so I want to ask the President of Treasury Board, as the Minister who would be responsible for making any alleged cuts to any programs in Government services, in this day and age, when so much emphasis is being placed on illiteracy - Kr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! There seems to be a conversation taking place on both sides of the House and the Chair is having great difficulty in hearing the questions submitted by the hon.

House Leader. I have already asked for silence, and I don't want to do it again. The hon. Leader. the Opposition House Kr. Simms: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

As I was saying, in this day and age, when so much emphasis is placed on illiteracy through programs like Read Canada, for · example, with which the Premier's own wife, I believe, is quite familiar and quite involved, would the Minister or the President of Treasury Board agree that closing libraries, eliminating library programs and, in fact, cutting back on library programs, particularly one that mails books, for example, to remote areas of Newfoundland and Labrador, would be a very serious backward step, considering the program and the talk about illiteracy and so on? Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I suppose any cutback in any service to any part of this Province - any cutback to any service - is a backward step that we do not like to take. No. 49 Rll

Mr. Speaker: expired. Question Period has Mr. Simms: leave? Oh, Mr. Speaker! An Han. Member: Oh, Mr. Speaker! Some Han. Members: Oh, oh! By Mr. Simms: By leave? Mr. Speaker, the supplementary question is very important. Some Han. Members: By leave. Mr. Speaker: On behalf of han. Members I would like to welcome to the galleries today fifteen students from the Canada Newfoundland Youth Strategy Program from the Gander Bay area, along with their three teachers Mr. Derrick Hicks, Mr. Gary Penney, and Miss Evelyn Bennett. Some Han. Me mbers: Hear, hear! Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees Mr.

Speaker: The bon . the President of Treasury Board. Mr. Baker: Mr. Speaker, to meet the requirements of

Section 26 (1) Subsection 4 of the Financial Administration Act I would like to table a copy of an Order In Council relating to pre-commitment of funds within the Department of Education. 0 0 0 Mr . Warren: A point of order, Mr . Speaker. Mr. Speaker: A point of order, L12 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI the bon. the Member for Torngat Mountains. Mr . Warr en : Several days ago, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries, in answer to a question, said he would get back in a few days with an answer to the question.

I am just wondering if the Minister of Fisheries has an answer to the question I asked him, which is very, very important to the people in my District. Mr. Speaker: There is no point of order. The Minister gave a commitment to bring back the information, and it is up to the Minister when he brings it back. Orders of the Day Mr. Baker : Private Member's Day, Mr . Speaker. Mr. Day. Speaker: Private Member's Motion No. 12. The bon. the Member for Harbour Main. Mr. Do yle: Mr.

Speaker, this is a very appropriate motion we have before the House of Assembly today, very appropriate at this particular point in time, when you consider the state of labour relations that presently exists in the Province . I want to read into the record the Motion that is on the Order Paper today:

WhEREAS many collective agreements are going to expire this year in both the public and the private sector; and

WHEREAS climate private economic No. 49 a good in both sector growth labour relations the public and is essential to in the Province Rl2

and proper public administration, and the delivery of public services; and

WHEREAS the present Administration has failed to foster a good labour relations climate; THEREFORE

be it resolved that the House urge the Government to foster a good labour relations climate in the Province and that it negotiate in good faith with its own employees to ensure that public services are not disrupted in the coming year. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! I wonder if the hon. gentleman would permit me to interrupt him for just a moment. I do not like to do this, but some students leave early and I am sure the hon . Member will tolerate this. I would like to welcome on behalf of all hon. Members, thirty grade five students from the W.E. Cormack School, Stephenville, accompanied by their teachers, Mr.

Perry Cook, and Mr. Ash. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Member for Harbour Main. Mr. Doyle: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The last part of the motion again that the House urge the Government to foster a good labour relations climate in the Province and that it negotiate in good faith with its own employees to ensure that the public services are not disrupted in the coming year. As I said in the beginning, Mr. Speaker, this is a very appropriate motion to have on the Order Paper today, especially, when you consider the current state of labour relations in the L13 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Province.

The Government has been the Government now for only a short period of time, approximately twelve, thirteen or fourteen months, a very, very short period of time when you get right down to it. But, Mr. Speaker, the very significant thing about that is the fact that this Government has managed in that very, very short period of time to alienate more workers and to alienate more unions in this Province than you would expect.

They have managed in that very, very short period of time, only a twelve, thirteen, or fourteen month period, it managed to alienate more people in that twelve month period than you would expect any Government to do. I remember, Mr. Speaker, Members opposite when they were over here, saying that the current Government was in power too long, that they were long in the tooth, they had broken down their relationship with the various unions, especially the public service unions in the Province. But again, I would repeat, Mr.

Speaker, that this Government has done more, I believe in that twelve or thirteen month period, to inflame, to create acrimony and to irritate the public service unions in this Province than any other Government has done in that period of time. How Government has gotten off, as we all realize, Mr. Speaker, to a very, very bad start. They have gotten off on a very bad footing indeed. This Government is rapidly establishing itself as the enemy of the working . man, establishing itself as the enemy of the working class, Mr. Speaker, and especially the enemy of unions. No. 49 Rl3

Mr. Efford: (Inaudible). Mr. Doyle: Well, if the Member for Port de Grave would like to listen for a little while maybe he will learn something and maybe he will know what I am going to suggest. So if he will just sit there and be quiet for a little while, he will have his chance in about fifteen minutes from now, if he wishes to, to stand on his feet and tell us what he is going to do. Because it is more important that the Member tell us what the Government is going to do, than what we are going to do. We are not the Government of this Province. The hon. Member is the Government.

So it is more important that he lay out his platform to the people of this Province. So the unions are not waiting to find out how the Opposition are going to treat them. They are waiting to find out how the hon. Member, the President of Treasury Board, and the Premier is going to treat them. So, if the bon.

Member would like to be a 1i t tle bit patient, and if he would like to wait, I will give him fifteen or twenty minutes, the House will give him twenty minutes to stand on his feet and explain to the people of the Province what he is going to do, and what his Government is going to do to solve some of the labour problems, and the labour strife that we have in Newfoundland and Labrador right now. But as I said a moment ago, Kr. Speaker, the Government has gotten off on a very bad start.

They have gotten off on a very bad foot, and it is rapidly establishing itself as the enemy of the working class, and not only the enemy of the working class but L14 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI the enemy of the union movement in Newfoundland and Labrador. That to me, Mr. Speaker, is highly unusual when you get right down to it for this Government. That is highly unusual. It seems rather irregular to me that this Government would get off on that type of a foot. They seem to be out of sync with the established policy of this Government.

The policy that they enunciated to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador back a twelve or a thirteen or a fourteen month period. They are out of sync with their own established policy of how they were going to establish an air of co-operation with the labour movement in Newfoundland. And I would venture to bet, Mr.

Speaker, that especially in the more urban centres of Newfoundland and Labrador, and maybe around the rural areas of Newfoundland and Labrador, but more especially in the urban centres that this Government garnered or chalked up a consideration amount of support from the union movement in this Province, on the promise that they were going to establish a good labour relations climate. That they were going to be the saviour of the labour movement in Newfoundland and Labrador. There was going to be a new air of co-operation. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, will you use Beauchesne to stifle the Minister? Mr.

Doyle: There was going a new air of co-operation, Speaker. There was going to new day of dawning is everybody was saying. An Hon. Kember: (Inaudible). Mr. Speaker: Order, please! No. 49 to be Mr. be a what R14

Mr. Doyle: And I would imagine that the Government received its mandate on that basis. That was one of the reasons that the Government received its mandate. Because I would think that there was - maybe not a number of the unions, but there was a scattered union here and there who gave their support to the Government on the written promise that they would establish a good labour relations climate in the Province. So I think, Mr.

Speaker, it is fair to the labour movement right now, right across this Province, to expect in return some measure of co-operation from the Government, and some measure of fairness, when you get right down to it, in labour negotiations. And not only in labour negotiations, but in a lot of other labour matters as well. And the promise, Mr. Speaker, of that type of labour peace and that type of labour co-operation was made, and it was not only made, it was the basis of a campaign that this Government put on in 1989 to receive its mandate. It was part of their campaign. It was a plank in their platform, Mr. Speaker.

An Hon. Member: With all your experience tell us what you would do. Mr. Doyle: This is one of the reasons they are sitting over there right now. It was the basis of their campaign, and this was part of their campaign literature, and that was part of their campaign promise. And what did they say, Mr. Speaker?

They had the gall and to actually put on recent years economic in Newfoundland and been impeded by an the nerve paper, • in development Labrador has LlS June 6, 1990 Vol XLI unsettled labour climate, which has resulted largely from the failure of the Government to recognize the essential role of unions in our society.• Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Doyle: Now, Mr. Speaker, the gall, the nerve of any Government to act now in the way they are acting in direct contravention to what they put on paper.

If this group had their way right now instead of recognizing, as they said, here in their paper, their policy statement of principles, if they had their way right now with the current state of labour negotiations in this Province, they would wipe out every public sector union in the Province. And let us listen again, Mr. Speaker, they went on to say, 'The record of the Tory Government in dealing with labour has been dismal.' An Hon. Member: dismal. It had been Mr. Doyle: Has been dismal. 'The record of the Tory Government in dealing with the labour movement in Newfoundland and Labrador has been dismal.

Its adversarial approach has created some of the worse moments in the Province's trade union history. A Liberal Government will be determined to create an atmosphere of realistic co-operation in developing -' Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Doyle: • A Liberal Government is going to be determined to create an atmosphere of realistic co-operation in developing labour legislation and in dealing with the public service unions.' .No. 49 RlS

Now that all sounds pretty good, Hr. Speaker. The Liberal policy of fairness and balance will be the basis of negotiations - mutual respect. I will now have something to say about the mutual respect that the President of Treasury Board has established with the President of NAPE, in a few moments. The Liberal policy of fairness and balance will be the basis of negotiations. Mutual respect and genuine concern for the welfare and the interest of all sectors of society, employees, employers and the public at large, will be the guideline for labour policy in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Progressive and fair legislation will be developed to deal with issues such as double-breasting and industrial standards and the minimum wage and pay equity and on and on and on they went. But I guess, the most significant part of all that, and I have to read you this little paragraph, 'The Liberal Government is committed to full consultation with labour and management in the creation of confident legislation to address these issues. • And what did we see, what did we see, Hr. Speaker?

As soon as Government got ready to address the Bill 59 issue, they never even gave representation on the Committee to the largest public service union in the Province. In spite of repeated attempts, in spite of repeated attempts by NAPE, to have representation on that Committee, this Government didn't even see fit to give the largest public service union in the Province representation on that Committee, and that is the level of consultation. That is the level of consultation in which this Government is involved with the L16 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI public service unions on Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker.

And the nerve, as I said, Mr. Speaker, the nerve of this Government, in the second paragraph of it's Statement of Principles, to say that the former Government had taken an adversarial approach, has to be one of the most hypocritical statements that I have ever seen this Government issue, and they have issued a few, they have issued a few in the last .twelve or thirteen months, the short time period they have been there, they have issued a few hypocritical statements in their time, but this happens to be one of the most. Right in the middle, Hr.

Speaker, of the most sensitive labour negotiations that has taken place in the Province in a while with the lab and x-ray workers, right in the middle of that whole process, what did this Government do? Did this Government hold out the olive branch to NAPE, did this Government say to NAPE, we have to ensure that 6 50 of the Province's most valued workers, the lab and x-ray people are kept on the job? No, Hr. Speaker, they did not. What did they do, what did we see the Province's chief of Treasury Board, the Province's chief of Treasury Board , do?

The Government • s main emissary, the President of Treasury Board, Hr. Speaker, the Government • s main emissary whose responsibility it is not only to keep labour peace, not only to make that contribution of keeping labour peace and establishing a good labour relations climate, what did he do? He launched a vicious personal attack, not sticking to the facts, but launched a vicious personal attack on the President of the Newfoundland Association of Public Employees, and actually No. 49 R16

taunted him, actually taunted the President of NAPE into strike action. That seems unbelievable. That seems totally unbelievable coming from an individual who is the Province's chief emissary when it comes to labour negotiations in the Province. A man, whose responsibility it is to establish a good labour relations climate in Newfoundland and Labrador, what did he do, did he hold out the olive branch to NAPE and say look we have got to keep these 650 people on the job, the lab and x-ray people, they are one of the most valued groups of workers in the Province?

That's what you would expect the President of Treasury Board to do, you would expect him to do that. But no, Mr. Speaker, what did the President of the Treasury Board do? He launched a vicious, personal attack, he launched a vicious personal attack upon the President of Treasury Board, and actually taunted him into strike action, told him that he was feeding his ego. He told the President of NAPE that he was actually feeding his ego, and he said, when he gets finished with these little temper tantrums he is on, he will be back to the bargaining table. Mr. Simms: That was the first day of the strike. Mr.

Doyle: That was terrible. Mr. Murphy: What gall. Mr. Doyle: The Kember for St. John's South is right, what gall for the President of Treasury Board to launch that type of vicious attack right in the middle of the withdrawal of services of 650 lab and X ray workers, shame L17 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI indeed, holding up the sick people in the Province to that type of abuse and ransom. I would ask the President of Treasury Board, after having launched that vicious personal attack upon the President, is that any way for him to establish a good labour relations climate in the Province?

Is that any way for him to avoid unnecessary labour strife here in the Province? Instead of him trying to keep these people at the table, and trying to keep them talking, he was instrumental in causing 650 people to walk out. These are not people who walk out every year. This is not a group, the lab and X ray people, who at the drop of a hat are gone. This is the first time they were on strike in a nine year period.

You do not often see a group like lab and X ray taking that type of action, and I have a feeling that if the President of Treasury Board had exercised a little bit more ·diplomacy, and a little bit more sensitivity, these people would not be on the street right now. Mr. Speaker, we all know that Government cannot give a blank cheque to anyone, they cannot bend to every single request that every single union makes in the Province, but what we can expect, what Government can do, is negotiate in good faith and stop using the sick of this Province as part of a bargaining tool.

That is what actually happened in this round of negotiations, they used the sick and the dying of the Province as a bargaining tool, and that is not what you would expect from a Government whose main plank, or one of the main planks in its platform last time around, was the promise to establish a good labour climate with the No. 49 R11

people of the Province. That is not what you would expect. As I said a few moments ago, with respect to Bill 59, Mr. Speaker, Government, at that particular point, promised a full range of consultation with the labour movement in putting in place the provisions of Bill 59, and the Government never even had the decency, when they were putting in place the provisions of that, to give representation, as I said, to one of the largest public service unions in the Province. Is that a good labour relations climate? Is that the way to establish a good labour relations climate?

Is that full, complete, and total consultation, as the Government promised? Is that a heal thy climate for the union movement to be operating in? It is certainly not realistic co-operation, as the Government said it would offer . Most of all is that keeping your promise? Is that keeping the promise to''the labour movement that you would have full and total consultation with the public service and the private sector unions of the Province? The President of NAPE, Mr. Speaker, just recently made the statement that Government is not telling the truth in its public statements.

That is a very, very strong message for the ?resident of NAPE to make, that the Government is not telling the truth in the public statements it is making to the people of the Province. And the Government has been accused of trying to turn the people against the workers in this particular instance. What Government has been doing in this whole round of negotiations with NAPE, what we have been given to understand, is putting forth some Ll8 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI very - Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The hon. Member's time has elapsed. Mr. Doyle: will have anyhow. Okay, Mr. Speaker, I more to say later on Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Ms Cowan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am almost speechless at the unmitigated gall of this Member. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Ms Cowan: He was smiling throughout the entire thing. So obviously he could not take himself seriously. An Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Ms Cowan: That · is right. There were very few people left when he was nearing the end because they were too embarrassed. Their memories of what had happened when they were in power came back to haunt them and they could not face them. Mr. Hearn: Mr.

Speaker does the Government House Leader have a quorum in the House? Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! Quorum Mr. Speaker: There is a quorum in the House. An Hon. Member: eighteen? Where? No. 49 Where is the There is no Rl8

~ quorwn. An Hon. Member: There is a quorum. An Hon. Member: Where? Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! I will ask the Clerk to count the Members in the House. Mr. Speaker: Quorwn present. An Hon. Member: quorum? How many is a Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Minister of Health on a point of order. Mr. Decker: Mr. Speaker, what we have just witnessed is a case of disrupting the Government of this Province. And, Mr. Speaker, that hon. Member should be 'named' for disrupting this House.

There were eighteen or twenty Members in this House when he stood up and attempted to mislead the Chair by saying there was no quorum in this House. Mr. Speaker, that should not be allowed. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Decker: What the problem was when the hon. Member for Harbour Main was speaking, talking about all his labour relations stuff, not a single Member on his side of the House would stay and listen to him, that is what has happened, Mr. Speaker, and he should be 'named' and flicked out of the House. That is what should be done. Mr. Walsh: Not one stayed in the House to listen. Mr.

Speaker: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. Ll9 June-6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, let us get a couple of things clear right off the top. It is the responsibility, according to the Standing Orders of this House, Mr. Speaker, for the - An Hon. Member: We had a quorum. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, I did not interrupt the hon. Minister when he was speaking, would the hon. gentleman from Eagle River keep quiet, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! I ask the hon. Members to my left to extend this courtesy to the hon. Member speaking. He has a right to be heard in silence. An Hon.

Member: He came in late. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, I did not come in late. I can walk in and out of this House when I like when the Speaker is in the Chair. Now, Mr. Speaker, the fact of the matter is that according to our Standing Orders it is the responsibility of the Government to keep a quorum in this House at all times, if they want to conduct the business of the House, Mr. Speaker. Some Hon. Members: quorum here. There was a Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker - Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! Mr. Rideout: Mr.

Speaker, the other fact is simply this, that any Member on either side of this House can ask for a quorum call at No. 49 Rl9

any time. And it is up to the Chair to determine whether or not there is a quorum present in the House. It is not up to Government Members to say that somebody should be named or flicked out of the House for calling a quorum. Mr. Speaker, I have seen Members on the Government side when they were speaking calling for a quorum in years gone by. I have seen Opposition Members call for a quorum and walk out of the House en masse time after time, Mr. Speaker. But the rules of the House are clear. The Government must provide fourteen Members at all times. An Hon. Member: There were eighteen. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker!

Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Rideout: It is up to the Chair to determine whether there is a quorum or not! Mr. Speaker, will you silence that gentleman please. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Rideout: And the second point I want to make is this, that it is the responsibility of the Chair, not the Minister of Social Services, the Minister of Development or the Minister of Health to determine whether a quorum is here. They might not like it, Kr. Speaker, but those are the rules of the House. Kr. Speaker: Order, please! The Chair is about ready to rule on that point of order. Mr. Furey: To that point of order .

L20 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Speaker: I will entertain one more submission. The hon. the Minister of Development. Mr. Furey: Mr. Speaker, the Standing Orders are quite clear. As the hon. the Leader of the Opposition rightly points out, Standing Order 3 requires the presence of at least 14 Members to constitute a quorum of the House. Now, Mr. Speaker, clearly what just happened was, I guess, borderline infantile because what happened was the hon . Kember for Harbour Main introduced his Private Members resolution. An Hon. Kember: That is right. Mr. Furey: Mr.

Speaker, when we looked across halfway through his speech, which lasted twenty minutes, there was not one single Opposition Kember in their place, not one. Then halfway through his speech, the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes trying to be cute by half, decided that he would rise as the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations began her speech to call for a quorum, to disrupt the proceedings. Mr.

Speaker, clearly there were 14 Members on the Government's side, there were 4 Members on the Opposition side, and there was one independent sitting in the House, which makes 19 which is 5 more than that which is constituted under stand Order 3 for a quorum. Some Han. Members: (Inaudible). Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Kr. Furey: So, Kr . Speaker, clearly what it was was childish, very infantile for that Member, No. 49 R20

very childish games. And there was a quorum. And I would ask you to let the hon. Minister speak. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! An Hon. Member: You are taking up our time, for God's sake. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! I have heard enough submissions on this. There is no point of order. Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, with respect there has been two speakers from the other side, could I speak again please? Mr . Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! There is no point of order. The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Ms Cowan: How the truth hurts, Mr. Speaker, how the truth hurts. Some Hon.

Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The bon. the Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order. Mr. Rideout: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister is going to have to sit down and listen to the truth again for another minute or so, Mr. Speaker. The point of order I want to raise is this, Mr. Speaker. Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible). Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, the point of order I want to raise is this, is the deliberate attempt by L21 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI the Minister of Development to cast aspersions and motives at the Chair. Again, Mr.

Speaker, it is the Speaker in the Chair who determines, after a Member has asked for a quorum call, whether a quorum is present or not. Some Hon. Members: He did! He did! Mr. Rideout: The Minister of Development, Mr. Speaker, has no right to suggest to Your Honour that a quorum is present or is not present. Your Honour makes that decision, and for a Minister - An Hon. Member: He did that. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Rideout: Mr. Speaker, for any Kember on either side of the House to question Your Honour's judgement as to whether or not a quorum is present or not present, is not proper, Mr. Speaker.

And the Minister of Development should be asked by Your Honour to apologize to the House for what he has just done to Your Honour, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! The bon. the Minister of Development on a point of order. Mr. Furey: There was a specious argument and if ever the bon. the Leader of the Opposition deserved to choke on his own verbiage, that was one time for him to choke on his own verbiage. An Hon. Member: Sit down, boy. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Furey: Kr . Speaker, I never questioned Your Honour's ruling. In fact I commend Your Honour for No. 49 R21

the ruling. I was simply pointing out how childish the hon. Member for st. Mary's - The Capes was, reinforced by the childishness of the Leader of the Opposition. Mr. Speaker, I never questioned your ruling. We stand by your ruling, and I ask you to call upon the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The hon. the Kember for St. Mary's - The Capes. Mr. Hearn: When I stood to call quorum there were ten Members sitting opposite. An Hon. Member: That is true. Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible). Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Some Hon. Members: Now you are questioning the ruling. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! I ask all Members again to let the Member be heard in silence. Mr. Hearn: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Some Hon. Members: (Inaudible). Mr. Hearn: The Speaker, rang the bell which must have indicated that the Speaker thought there was no quorum in the House. Consequently, I submit, Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order, and perhaps it is time that the hon. the Minister of Development be reprimanded for questioning The Speaker again. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! L22 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Order, please! The Chair has heard enough submissions on this point of order.

There is no point of order. The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Mr. Tobin: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West on a point of order. Mr. Tobin: Mr. Speaker, I am being serious. I just wonder if it would be possible to get the Government House Leader in to (inaudible) the Government side of the House. Because he obviously doesn't have the ability to do it. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! There is no point of order. The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Mr. Tobin: Obviously whoever he left in charge cannot do it. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Tobin: Put John in charge. Ms Cowan : I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, in future, before the Opposition put in their Private Member's Bills, that they put in ones they can cope with. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Ms Cowan: I am going to start today by making reference to a couple of things I have heard said by the President of the Federation of Labour. When we were first in Government, last June, he was being interviewed by television, .Yo. 49 R22

and he was asked, how do you think this Government will be as far as labour relations is concerned. The gentleman's answer at that time, Kr. Speaker, was they could never be worse than the past down until the gentleman has withdrawn that remark, please! Mr. Furey: Withdraw it, boy. Come on! Government. Mr. Speaker: The han. the Kember for Burin - Placentia West. Some Han. Members: Hear, hear! Some Han. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Ks Cowan: I will also repeat, Mr.

Speaker, something I said another day in the House, that when I was being introduced by the same gentleman to a group of employees in the Province, he referred to the past Government as the most arrogant employer this Province has ever known. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Ks Cowan: Now I can recall, Mr. Speaker, in 1983, standing out in front of Confederation Building, on the steps, with about 3,000 teachers in front of me. And do you know why we were there, Mr. Speaker? We were there because of the Government's attempt to contract strip - contract strip - and they talk about fair labour relations. An Hon.

Member: Shameful! Shameful! An Hon. Member: That is why they (inaudible) the press. Mr. Hodder: Token woman. An Hon. Member: Did you hear that? An Hon. Member: I heard it. Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Ms Cowan: I think I shall sit L23 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Tobin: Mr. Speaker, I want to speak in the debate. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The Chair did not hear any remarks made by the hon. Member, so - Mr. Furey: Mr. Speaker, I think the remark made by the hon. Member Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! The hon. the Minister of Development, on a point of order. Kr .

Furey: I think the remarks the hon. Minister heard, and was highly insulted by, was the Member for Port au Port called her a token woman in the Cabinet. That is unacceptable, Mr . Speaker, and we would ask that the bon. Member withdraw that comment. Mr. Hodder: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! To the point of order first, please! The Chair did not hear any remarks made by the hon. Kember. If the hon. Kember wishes to speak on that point of order, I will hear what he has to say. No. 49 R23

Mr. Hodder: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Development should, perhaps, listen to what is being said in the House. What I said, Mr. Speaker, was that the Minister, when she was President of the NTA, was there because she was a token woman at the time, Mr. Speaker. That is what I said. An Hon. Member: Shame! Mr . Speaker: There is no point of order. The bon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Ms Cowan: I feel, Mr. Speaker, that that is a totally improper statement to make about a person who was duly elected by the membership of an organization. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Ms Cowan: I will ask the gentleman to withdraw it. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The bon. the Opposition House Leader on a point of order? Mr. Simms: No, I was standing to speak. I presume - Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Warren: She is sitting down, isn't she? Mr. Simms: for? What is she waiting An Hon. Member: A withdrawal. Mr. Furey: Do you all support that statement? Mr. Simms: for? What is she waiting L24 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! Mr. Simms: We have seen the way the Minister of Development has handled parliamentary matters in the past.

He is at it again, Mr. Speaker. The unfortunate part of all of this is that the origind point of order was raised by one of the Minister's own colleagues, the Minister of Health, and that fueled the entire debate. And the unfortunate

part is that the Minister of Labour, from whom we should hear in this debate, has now had her time basically eliminated. Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Simms: I would like to hear what the Minister of Labour has to say with respect to the resolution. Instead of the Minister of Development trying to play the role of Government House Leader. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The bon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations. Ms Cowan: I would certainly hope, Mr. Speaker, that gentleman does not associate himself with that remark.

I must say that the gentlemen on this side of the House have always treated me with the utmost respect, as I would expect. Some Han. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: Order, please. Ms Cowan: Thank you very much. No. 49 R24

I recall, Mr. Speaker, and I am recalling it with a great deal of vehemence and pain, I would say, in 1983 standing on the steps of Confederation Building with 3,000 teachers in front of me because of contract stripping by this Government who was so arrogant as to stand up today and talk about good labour relations and our failure to cultivate that climate. Mr. Hearn: contract. That was the last An Hon. Member: Put poor people in jail (inaudible). Ms Cowan: I recall in the mid-1980s, Mr. Speaker, zero and zero being introduced. Now is that fair labour relations? Is that negotiating in good faith? No, it is not.

It is going to the table with a fixed position which allows for no negotiations. Bill 59, a disgrace, a blight on the Province. For one of the first times in Canadian history the international labour organization had to come into a Canadian province and examine legislation to see whether or not it was discriminating against a union. And the results of that was that this Government was not treating labour fairly and that they were interfering with the proper collective bargaining rights of employees by introducing such legislation as Bill 59.

Bill 59, the type of legislation a decent law abiding people were forced to break, because of a principle that they were not being allowed to collective bargain. And then where did they end up? They ended up in jail. It was a disgrace, a disgrace that will be a blight on that party for years and years to come. L25 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Mr. Tobin: Do you support what your Government is going to do to the teachers? Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Ms Cowan: The essential services legislation, Mr. Speaker, could have been brought before this House while these people were in Government.

It was not brought before this House for two or three reasons, one, they never had sat, so it could not be brought before the House had it been ready. But the other thing is that the Minister of Labour then did not have the intestinal fortitude to make the decisions that had to be made so that that legislation could be brought to the Cabinet table. And that in itself is horrifying. And let me tell you something else too, Mr. Speaker, before I sit down because I only have a couple of minutes now, thanks to the disruptions that were caused by the people across the floor.

You talk about labour relations: when I carne into the Department of Employment and Labour Relations last May do you know how many grievances there were in that Department, just within the Department of Labour, now it should be setting the standards for all of Government? Thirty grievances. I cannot believe it. Somewhere in the area of thirty to thirty-five, and three court cases. And they have the gall to stand up there today and talk about labour relations as if they were the leading examples in the Canadian Nation when they were in Government. Some Hon. Members: Oh, oh! Ms Cowan: What did they leave me with?

What did they leave this No. 49 R25

Minister of Employment and Labour Relations with? Double-breasting? I had to cope with that. Did they ever cope with multitrade bargaining? No, they could not cope with that. Could they simply bring in something to do with it being a jurisdictional umpire? Something the unions have been asking for for years? No, they could not do that. Could they leave me with the Workers' Conunission that working order? not. Did they Labour Relations was No, leave Board Compensation in decent they could me with a that could deal with cases in an expeditious order? No, they did not.

And yet at the same time they sit there day after day expecting that I, instantaneously, would correct all these ills, and again I am complimented by the fact that they think I could do that. But this is a group that has the audacity today to bring in this particular resolution. Now I look at the President of Treasury Board and I consider him one of the finest people in the Province to be at a negotiating table. The man is conciliatory, he is diplomatic, he has handled himself extremely well. The essential services legislation was not in place, so what did he do?

He made sure that he met with the parties and that an essential services agreement was worked out between the lab and X-ray people. Are they going to have to worry about being thrown in jail? No, because of the fact that that gentleman sat down with them and did the right and the honourable thing. Mr. Tobin: The truckers in Grand Falls, what about them? L26 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Ms Cowan: Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, we have settled with the nurses. Everyone in Canada knows that settling with nurses in this day and age is a very difficult thing to do.

Nurses are standing up, as rightly they should, and demanding that they get their just deserts. This Government, under the direction of the President of Treasury Board, made sure that the nurses in this Province got what they deserved, and I am proud of that. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The hon. Member's time is up. Some Hon. Members: By leave? Mr. Walsh: No. I would not do them the courtesy of asking. Some Hon. Members: Oh! Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Opposition House Leader. Mr. Sinuns: Mr.

Speaker, I only have twenty minutes in the debate and, it being Private Member's Day, the time limitations are such that probably only two or three speakers from each side will get a chance to speak. Under normal circumstances, I would have no objection to letting the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations have a few extra minutes, but on Private Member's Day it is a bit difficult because of time restraints. Having said that, I will move on to make my own personal observations in support of the resolution presented by my colleague, the Kember for Harbour Main. And, if hon.

Members opposite - it must be the heat. I No. 49 R26

don't know what has got to them today, but the Minister talked about her time being pre-empted because of points of order from Members on this side of the House. I remind her that it was her own colleague, the Minister of Health, who raised the original point of order which caused all the debate and took the time from her speaking. So it would be appropriate for her to reflect on that before she makes the kinds of observations and critical of Members she has made. necessary for her to comments, on this side, It was not make them. Now, Mr. Speaker, if you look at the resolution presented by the Member for Harbour Main, I don't think you will find anywhere in the

preamble remarks that are strongly provocative or acrimonious towards the Administration. There is not much in the

preamble. And in the resolve part of the resolution it simply says, 'Be it resolved that this House urge the Government to foster a good labour relations climate in the Province and that it negotiate in good faith with its own employees to ensure the public services are not disrupted in the coming year. ' Now, I say to you, Mr. Speaker, I don' t see much in the way of provocative language in that resolution that would cause Members opposite to go off - An Hon. Kember: Half-cocked. Kr. Simms: - half-cocked today. Yes, that is a good word. I mean, I don't know what's wrong with them.

I don't know what they ate this morning, or what they had for lunch, but they are like a bunch of crackles over there. I urge them to settle down. If they can't take the words expressed by L27 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI my colleagues in debate, then go out and have a coffee, or something like that, and relax. The Government has a responsibility to ensure that there is a quorum in the House, so just make sure you have fourteen here and if the rest of you can't take it, please get out of the kitchen and go out in the common room. Kr.

Speaker, to begin my comments, I would like to reflect for a moment on my own short period of time in the post of President of Treasury Board; a year and-a-half, or so, I had there. I have some fond recollections and I can say that without hesitation. Most of my recollections of that period of time are fond ones. We had our differences from Treasury Board's perspective, but I attempted, at the time, to foster a good labour relations climate, which is what we are asking for in this resolution.

I took time, and made time, to go meet with the leaders of the major unions and associations in the Province, including the Minister of Labour, she will recall, when she was President of the Newfoundland Teachers' Association and I was President of Treasury Board. I went over to her office, in the NTA Building, and sat down and had a chat with her about some of the concerns the NTA had leading up to the negotiations, you remember, preceding the infamous 'thirty and out• issue. I went up and met with Mr.

Karch, the president of the largest public service union in the Province, NAPE, and I met with leaders of other groups, the President of the Nurse's Union, Jeanette Andrews, and all kinds of other people who were involved in the labour relations field as No. 49 R27

leaders in their own right with their own respective unions, and I think, quite frankly, that initiative was the least I could have done as President of Treasury Board. I think it did a lot to at least foster a good relationship - I think it did. The only thing I can use to substantiate my argument is the fact that in the period of time I was there as President of Treasury Board, we did reach a major collective agreement with the Newfoundland Teacher's Association, and we did reach an agreement with the nurses, by the way. Their last agreement was an agreement reached between this Administration and the nurses.

Mr. Baker: You were not there then, though. Mr. Simms: I was there then, I say to the President of Treasury Board. I was also the one who resolved the hospital support staff dispute two years ago. The last time the lab and X ray successfully concluded an agreement was during that period of time. All ,I am doing, basically, is just saying to you that I remember with some fondness some of those days. And I remember talking to some of the negotiators for many of those unions privately.

The one thing I found was successful, the one thing I found was helpful, was taking the time as President of Treasury Board to make myself accessible and available to, not only the presidents or leaders of the major unions, but the negotiators, the employees of the unions who actually are out in the front lines doing the negotiating on behalf of the union. I offer that as a suggestion and advice to the President of Treasury Board, particularly in the case of the L28 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI current dispute between lab and X ray.

I say to the President of Treasury Board, if the negotiator for NAPE in that dispute, I think it is Mr. Ryan, Jim Ryan, should ask to sit down and have a chat, I think he should make himself available, accessible, and listen. He should also, in my view, call Mr. March and get together with him over lunch, or whatever, and see if he cannot resolve the problem. Mr.

Speaker, I also remember fondly in those days, it is only a couple of years ago, the last couple of years, that it was our Administration, the previous Administration, which brought in the early retirement package for public servants which has been widely praised, with the one exception, of course, the fact that it was not extended to the health care sector of the public service, and that is unfortunate.

I also remember fondly, my limited experience at the negotiating table specifically, when, at five o • clock in the morning, I had a telephone call during a dispute with, I think it was the hospital support staff and the major issue was pay equity, equal pay for work of equal value, and I recall going up to the Battery Motel at 5 o'clock in the morning to - Ms Cowan: The gone on strike brought it in. union would if you had have not Mr. Simms: Perhaps so, is the point? What Minister's point? but what is the An Hon. Member: point? What is your Mr. Simms: My point is that we had success during the tenure.

We did reach an agreement with the No. 49 R28

~t. union. We were the Administration that brought in the pay equity program. The Minister of Labour says the union would have gone on strike if you had not brought it in. Well, so what? What is your point? Mr. Efford: (Inaudible) get testy. Mr. Simms: Ask your colleague, the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, the last person in the world, by the way, who should be interjecting. She is supposed to be a diplomat and now she is starting to get nasty. Speaker, we did pay equity program, negotiated the are quite proud of Anyway, Mr. implement the successfully program, and we that, as well.

There were other initiatives on the labour front, positive initiatives, which Members opposite failed to mention, and one was the legislation we debated here yesterday in the House , the amendments to the pension plan. It basically was to provide for the money purchase pension plan for part-time employees. Employees in the public service in this Province who are part-time employees did not have access to a pension plan, and, Mr. Speaker, it was the previous Administration that brought in that money purchase pension plan for employees who are part-timers.

So to leave the impression somehow that the previous Administration didn't do anything positive in the way of a labour relations climate, is quite inaccurate. It is totally inaccurate, Mr. Speaker. I also say to Members opposite that they can keep raising the issue of the 1986 dispute, when public servants in the Province L29 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI saw fit to withdraw their services and go on strike. There is no question about it, that was a serious time in our Province's history - no question about it. But, Mr.

Speaker, the point is, of course, that the matter was eventually resolved with a commitment to bring in revisions to The Public Service Collective Bargaining Act, or at least the amendment, Bill 59, to that Act, to try to improve the situation. It's quite easy to criticize what occurred four of five years ago, quite easy, and Members in the Opposition have certainly had no difficulty doing that, too, from time to time. But the point is, Mr. Speaker, you have to rise above that kind of criticism and get on to the future and the present, and you have to learn from the mistakes, if they were mistakes, of the past.

That's the whole point, and that's the whole point of this resolution. Mr. Walsh: It is hard to swallow that down. Mr. Simms: There is no difficulty swallowing that at all, Mr. Speaker. If one is prepared to be big enough, man enough, there is no difficulty in swallowing those kinds of comments, Mr. Speaker. An Hon. Kember: (Inaudible) the children whose fathers and mothers were in jail. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Order, please! Mr. Simms: You see, Mr.

Speaker, they have in their minds, particularly the Kember for Mount Scio - Bell Island, that if they keep that up, or something, it is going to make a major, major contribution to the debate on this resolution and that • s going to do No. 49 R29

a lot to improve the labour relations climate in the Province. But I say to the Member, his ba-st bet is to sit back, or go out in the Corrunon Room or something, if he has nothing more than that to contribute to the debate on the resolution. Mr. Speaker, those are the kinds of things that did occur back in the days when I was there, and I just made that point because I know how difficult the portfolio is. Treasury Board is a very difficult portfolio.

There are two major issues with which you deal, basically, as President of Treasury Board, neither of which makes you very popular, either with your colleagues or with the public service, in many cases. Mr. Efford: You three-pronged approach. Mr. Simms: To what? An Hon. Member: relations. had a To labour Mr. Sirruns: No, not particularly. I had no pronged approach. Whatever I did came naturally, Mr. Speaker, that's all I can say. There was nothing planned or plotted.

The President of Treasury Board, of course, has the fiscal responsibility in terms of expenditures of the public service and the Government, and that doesn't make him very popular with his Cabinet colleagues, in particular, because quite frequently he is the one who has to give the instructions to his fellow Cabinet colleagues you have to cut back this, you have to cut back that. So it doesn • t necessarily make him a popular person. And the Treasury Board L30 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI President, of course is responsible for all the negotiations.

The President of the Treasury Board is the chief negotiator for the Province in all its bargaining disputes or bargaining units. Mr. Efford: So you have some sympathy (inaudible) . Mr. Simms: Oh, I certainly have sympathy for him. Absolutely! And I have no problem saying so. That is why I have tried to offer a bit of advice and suggestion, for what it • s worth. Maybe it is worth nothing, but I did offer it and it might help. I mean, I say it sincerely. And, Mr. Speaker, he is going to need all the help and support he can get from colleagues opposite.

I just want to mention some of the agreements that are about to expire or have expired this year, and that will be up for consideration, Mr. Speaker, involving thousands of Government employees. You have the Air Services workers. I don't believe they are settled yet. All these contracts will be expiring or have expired this year, 1990. Air services, Allied Help Professionals - there are problems with that particular set of negotiations right now.

The Cabot Institute support staff, The Central Laundry, The correctional officers, the fire fighters; the biggest one I guess, general service, is coming up, group homes, hospital support staff, and we know where that sits right now. Hospital support staff, in the next week or so, I guess, is going to come to a crunch. Hospital support staff from both NAPE and CUPE, their contracts have already expired. You have lab and x-ray, and we know they are already out on No. 49 R30

strike. You have the MOS, 2, 000 employees in the public service, contract expired this year. You have the Marine Institute, you have the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation, you have the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, you have the teachers 8,300 or so teachers in the Province. Vocational instructors, another 640, and the Waterford Hospital support staff. Mr. Speaker, all of these bargaining units have their contracts expired now, this year, or will be expiring sometime before the end of 1990. So this is a very, very tough year in terms of negotiations in the public service.

I do have some sympathy for the President of Treasury Board. He will need the support of his colleagues in Cabinet to help him reach, not only satisfactory, but reasonable and acceptable agreements with all those groups. I do not know what it is, Mr. Speaker, but there must be somewhere in the area of 25,000 employees represented by all those bargaining groups I just mentioned, and maybe a few more I missed in my reading. About 25,000 public servants this year, all negotiating, all bargaining for new contracts. Kr.

Speaker, I think the resolution, which calls for the Government to foster a good labour relations climate to reach agreement with all those units, is a timely resolution. I offered a bit of initial advice to the President of Treasury Board: to make himself accessible, to call the leaders of the unions, to sit down and talk to them privately and see what you can do to work out problems behind the scenes, which sometimes is much more successful. I offered that bit of L31 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI advice to him. I would also suggest to him that he temper his public comments.

Because, quiet frankly, when I read the comments of the Minister in the paper on Monday, the provocative statements about Mr. Karch on a temper tantrum, making his workers suffer, on an ego trip and things like that, I was very surprised. Mr. Walsh: It is better than putting him in jail. Kr. Simms: I am glad the Kember mentioned about putting it in the mail, because - Mr. Walsh: Putting him in jail. Mr. Simms: Oh, putting him in jail. He is back on the jail thing, yes. Mr. Speaker, I would not say it is better than putting him in jail necessarily.

I do not think either putting him in jail or making provocative statements like that does anything to foster a good labour relations climate, and that is the point. I know that might be a bit over the head of the Member for Mount Scio Bell Island, but that is the point. Mr. Speaker, secondly, he made the comment that he did not know what to do concerning the hospital support staff situation. He also, as I understand it, last year sent out a pretty provocative letter to the members of the Newfoundland Teachers' Association that got them all riled up.

I do not know if it was over - was it the pension issue or something else? Mr. Winsor: In collective bargaining, he told them, not to expect too much. Mr. Simms: Anyway, my colleague will elaborate on it. So my advice to him on that score is he No. 49 R31

should temper his public statements, try as often as he can to remain noncommittal. No comment is the best public posture for a President of Treasury Board, in my view. That is my advice to him. Now it is up to him how he deals with it. But he will need his colleagues' strong support. He is coming in now. I am sure he heard what I had to say. I also say to him, in Cabinet, may I urge the President of Treasury Board to talk to his Cabinet colleagues at the very next Cabinet meeting and say, Now, colleagues, I would like you people to temper your comments publicly, as well.

I want you people to temper your comments publicly as well, because that does nothing to foster a labour relations climate. When the Minister of Finance, for example, as he did last October, threatens the Member's people in the civil service, looking over their shoulders and talks about • they should not unless they have something to fear' and he says, • God help the public servant who plays patronage' and these kinds of things, there is no need for those kinds of provocative comments, because that disrupts the public service and causes a ripple down through the public service.

It does not do anything to help foster a good labour relations climate. Today, Mr. Speaker, we have a lot of thorny situations. We have public service strikes, we have private sector strikes, loggers, truckers protesting, and the lab and x-ray people actually out on strike. We had the correctional workers protesting for the last few weeks from time to time, for whatever their reasons were. That L32 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI does nothing, Mr. Speaker, to help the atmosphere for good collective bargaining.

Even management in the public service were upset over the pay raise they got last year, Members opposite will recall. And there is a considerable amount of demoralization in the public service as a result of the initiatives of the Government last year when they fired a number of people in the so-called purge, and then they hired the Assistant Deputy Minister in Social Services, Mr. Tulk. That demoralizes the public service, and it does nothing to help labour relations. Now I will conclude, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure if I have a minute, but I will try to conclude by making one final plea to the President of Treasury Board with respect to the current situation affecting the lab and x-ray workers. I make one final plea to him. I ask him to pick up the telephone, call Mr. Karch personally, and ask Mr. March if you can meet with him to find out if there is a way to resolve this situation with respect to the lab and x-ray workers, because nobody - Members opposite laugh at it, particularly the Kember for Mount Scio - Bell Island. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! Mr. Simms: I assure him it is not humourous.

It is a serious situation. People in this Province are suffering, and it should not be necessary. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The hon . the Kember's time is up. Mr. Simms: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some Hon. Members: By leave! By No. 49 R32

leave! Mr. Simms: All you can do is make a joke of it, the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island. It is a serious matter, boy. It is a serious matter. Mr. Speaker: John's South. Mr. Simms: backlogged, admitted to laugh at it. Mr. Speaker: The Member for St. There are people people not being hospitals, and you Order, please! The hon. the Member for St. John's South. Mr. Murphy: Mr. Speaker, before I get into the resolution, I would just like to remind the hon.

Opposition House Leader of a situation where I would assume all the bargaining units he just named that we as a Government, and more especially the President of Treasury Board, has to sit down with in the next twelve months to negotiate contracts. Let me suggest to the Opposition House Leader that every single one of them out there would much sooner sit with this President of Treasury Board and this Government than the previous Administration, Sir, believe me. Mr. Simms: them. You had better ask Mr. Murphy: Before I get into the resolution, Mr.

Speaker, I watch Members opposite day after day criticizing and ridiculing the hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations for not standing and speaking on issues. Today she stood up to speak on this resolution, and the first thing we saw, and I was very L33 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI surprised, Mr. Speaker, to tell you the truth, because I have some respect for the bon. Member for St. Mary's - The Capes, but purposely to interrupt the Minister he puts forward a silly quorum call and then we saw what happened, and gave you, Mr.

Speaker, the problem of having to address several points of order, issues that need not have been addressed at all. And, of course, the end result was that the bon. Member from Port au Port, for what reason I do not know, heat of debate or whatever, but this is 1990, Mr. Speaker, and I do not need to remind you, Sir, or this hon.

House of the efforts of the women of this Province and this country, and the tasks and hurdles they had to overcome to get some kind of sense of reasoning and credibility which they so rightfully deserved many, many years ago, what they had to do, and for someone in this House to use the phrase •token woman• is totally unacceptable. I would hope, as that bon.

Member thinks about what he said in this House today, that he shows the intestinal fortitude and the courage to come out here and apologize to the Minister and apologize to every woman in this House, at the Clerk • s table, and all across this Province and all across this country. An Hon. Member: He does not have it, Tom. Mr. Murphy: Now, Mr. Speaker, if I might, I have nothing but respect for the hon. the Member for Harbour Main who brought this resolution in today. I do not have any problem with the resolution in his first 'Whereas• and his second 'Whereas•. Of course, typically, partisan No. 49 R33

politics way into and they again always finds its hon. Members opposite, bring in some silly that kills and flattens 'Whereas' the logic goodness and of 'Whereases' . sensitivity the first and two Now, who to know better, Mr. Speaker, than the hon. Member from Harbour Main that this resolution obviously was written by the hon. the Member for Green Bay, or some such other Member? Because it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, and I will talk about that a little later on. An Hon. Member: lunatic. By some other Mr. Murphy: But first of all, Mr.

Speaker, let me talk a little bit about the labour movement in this Province and the tremendous struggle they went through over the years. And let me remind - as the Opposition House Leader referred to the histories of what we used to call the trade union movement years ago, when labour really found its place in the sun in Newfoundland. And I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, it was not under any Tory administration but under a Liberal administration.

I can remember the days when the Newfoundland Federation of Labour, under the leadership of people like Frank Chafe and Cyril Strong the late Cyril Strong - and these gentlemen who worked so hard in this Province to bring the rights of workers to the forefront. And for the first time in the 500 year history of this Province, Mr. Speaker, they found a sympathetic ear in the Smallwood Administration and finally the workers in this Province found a place in the sun. L34 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI You know, Mr.

Speaker, I suppose it was probably determined throughout Canada, not only Canada, but the United States, Great Britain, Australia, throughout the world as the greatest contract, the greatest labour contract that was ever signed. And some of the bon. Members who sit in this House today, and I think the hon. Minister of Fisheries was part of that Government, the most credible labour contract that was ever signed, that was ever heard tell of before, was a ten year collective agreement on the Upper Churchill Falls project.

Now, we can debate and argue about the other contract associated with Churchill Falls for ever in time, but the contract between Acres Canadian Bechtel and the building trades of this Province who, all of a sudden, came on the map, a ten year collective agreement, an agreement that showed the start of that majestic project and the completion of that majestic project without one work stoppage. Liberal legislation, liberal contract, and, Mr. Speaker, then we moved on. Then we moved on into the Moores years. Now, you know, Mr. Speaker, the Moores' years were really not and I do not mind saying this, Mr.

Speaker, I will be totally candid and totally honest. The Moores' philosophy with the trade union movement was basically almost as solid as the previous administration. Premier Moores gave the trade union movement its fair share and sound legislation as time went on. But, of course, the sad part about it, as far the labour movement is concerned, is Mr. Moores moved on. Of course we all know what he is doing today, he is organizing the Meech No. 49 R34

promoters all over the Province, and so forth and so on. We saw this morning and listened this morning to the business friends and colleagues of our friends opposite, who certainly have nothing to do with the trade union movement I assure you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Moores is now assisting this group in trying to make the Premier of this Province and his sense of principle, his sense of fairness in this whole Meech Accord, trying to make it look like some kind of self-promoted egotistical move on behalf of the Premier of this Province, trying to downgrade him, trying to shove him down in a hole. This is what Mr.

Moores is up to today, along with his Tory friends who, I understand, Mr. Speaker, opened an office this morning in downtown St. John's. It is called Pro Meech Propaganda, and they are about to get in order. And I am sure there is lots of money around for these gentlemen, and we will lots of rhetoric. If we do not have something by the end of the week, we will hear from these gentlemen, I am sure, all the sad things that are going to happen to this Province because the Premier took a stand. You know, Mr.

Speaker, I cannot fail in my own mind, that when I look at these people, it reminds me, Sir, of the oldest profession, do you sell? What do you sell in the name of principle? But that is for another time, Mr. Speaker. Then Mr. Peckford arrived on the scene, and we know, Mr. Speaker, what kind of friend Mr. Peckford was to labour. We know what he did for labour in this Province.

We heard new catch phrases called double-breasting, again to support the friends of the Tory party, the L35 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI entrepreneurs who could take the fiber, who could take the sweat off the labour movement in this Province, who could take it and when they did not get the contract at the inflated price, they would get this subservient company, this fictitious payroll company, to bid on the same contract and then they would go in. The option was to the carpenters, the labours, the pipe fitters, the iron workers and the boiler makers, their option was to go to work, Mr.

Speaker, for non-union wages or stay home. That is what the Peckford Administration did for the construction trades in this Province, Mr. Speaker, who went downhill after the Smallwood years. I remember projects started by the Smallwood Administration when the hon. Member for Harbour Main - he sits in his place and he will not look - but he knows what I am going to say is right. When we didn't have enough tradesmen, Mr.

Speaker, in this Province to supply the projects started by the Liberal Administration, to complete the job, and we ended up with all kinds of travel card labour people in our Province, pipe fitters, boilermakers, ironworkers, from where would you think they came from. They came from New Brunswick and La Belle Province, and worked side by side here in Newfoundland, and again we showed that we were their neighbours. All of that went downhill after the explosion on one side of the Gulf and the other side of the Gulf, poof, and today, Mr.

Speaker, we know that $100 million later all of that material has been dozed over. Tory knowledge, Tory wisdom, and when they dozed it over Mr. Speaker, they did not only bulldoze the materialistic ends of the lower Churchill No. 49 R35

project, but aspirations of movement with it. they the dozed trade the union Now, Mr. Speaker, last year, and the Kember alluded to the promises of this Administration. The people of this Province had options, Mr. Speaker, they had options. They could have gone to the polls and returned the inventors of Sprung, the inventors of Bill 59, the inventors of paddywagon policy, the inventors of billyknocker bullyism, that is what I said, Mr. Speaker. That is what happened. You know, Kr.

Speaker, why these people over there could not negotiate, they could not negotiate with the NAPE individuals the last time out, because you were not allowed to negotiate in jail. You were not allowed to negotiate in jail. And he has the gall, the adulterated audacity to stand in his place and bring this resolution before this bon. House, the very Minister who was the Minister of Labour for the previous Administration. It is incredible that he can even stay here, Mr. Speaker, after bringing this type - I swear Mr.

Speaker, the bon. the Member for Green Bay must have wrote it and the bon. the Member for Harbour Main could not have even read it, before he read it today. It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. In saying that, Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to carry on for another minute while I find something here. An Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Mr. Murphy: You know, incredible Opposition That is right. Mr. Speaker, it is the wisdom of the House Leader. Of L36 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI course, if you are here thirteen or fourteen years something has to rub off.

So every now and then he shows a little bit of 'I know what is coming next', wouldn'd you expect that. Mr. Speaker, you know the bon. the Member for Placentia who obviously has not only had a tough week, but a tough day. Yes , something happened today that caused a little bit of turmoil, look at him, just a smiling Kember representing his District. He passed this on to me. The Kember for Green Bay reminds me of a poem, the Cabinet Boy. I had better read this first, Mr. Speaker. The dirty little nipper/took his hundred grand/ and followed Brian the skipper. I do not know if that is - no, no point of order. Mr.

Speaker: Order, please! The bon. the Opposition House Leader, on a point of order. Mr. Simms: Fourteen Ministers the Premier has and his back bench is abuzz' n/perhaps the Premier should resign/ then we would have a baker's dozen. Mr. Speaker: Order, please! To that point of order, there is no point of order. The bon. the Member for St. John's South. Kr. Murphy: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on the wisdom that I have condensed and so eloquently orated in this House today, and when you consider that I would like to look the Member for Harbour Main directly in the eye No. 49 R36

and tell him that I can agree to his motion, only up to, Kr. Speaker, and I would like to move an amendment, seconded by the han. Kember for St. Barbe, and the following amendment would read that the third 'Whereas' be deleted and the following added;

WHEREAS the present Administration has worked hard to foster a good labour relations climate; and

WHEREAS Administration destructive climate. Hr. Speaker: the previous created a labour relations Order, please! The Chair would like a copy of the amendment and will probably recess for a moment afterwards to check to see if the amendment is in order. Kr. Sirmns: Could I just make a general cormnent while Your Honour is waiting? The han. Leader. Hr. Sirmns: the Opposition House I will make a mild submission because we only heard it verbally, we did not catch it all, we would like to have a copy, too, if there is another copy.

In listening to the wording, my recollection of amendments, the purpose of amendments, is to make a resolution more acceptable in the Legislature, and it seemed to me using the words, the previous Administration created a destructive labour relations climate, are not very timely words in order to try to make the resolution more acceptable to the House. I am not so sure that this would be, not only unparliamentary, but I am not so L37 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI sure that it would be very conducive to making the resolution much more acceptable to the House.

Your Honour might want to consider that when he recesses and has a quick look at it. Hr. Speaker: The han. the Minister of Development. Kr. Furey: Your Honour, (inaudible - technical problems) the reason that the bon. Kember asks for this is completely unacceptable to the Government. What is acceptable is to replace the present Administration failing to foster a good relations climate, with something that is acceptable to this Government, and that is that the present Administration worked hard to foster a good relations climate, and that the previous Administration created a destructive labour relations climate.

What we are saying is that we want to amend it to get rid of that which is unacceptable to us, yet acceptable to the Opposition, and replace it with something that is acceptable to the Government, and I believe acceptable, if you are being honest at all, to the people of the Opposition. Hr. Speaker: The Chair will recess for a few moments. Recess Hr. Speaker: Order, please! The Chair has considered the amendment put forward by the bon. Kember and rules that the amendment is in order. The bon. the Kember for St. John's South. No. 49 R37

Mr. Murphy: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. (Inaudible technical problems) Minister stood up and said that, I think the amendment is obviously in order and I certainly respect your judgement. Mr. Speaker, I think this Government has shown initially that we have nothing but admiration and respect for the trade union movement in this Province whether it be the public service or whether it be in the private sector.

And given the limitations and understanding the nature of what is in front of us and the dollars that are needed to address all of these collective agreements, that this Government is now finding itself forced to sit down and deal with. I know, Mr. Speaker, and I have nothing but total confidence in my colleague, the President of Treasury Board. I know from dealing with him that he has nothing but - and on behalf of unions dealing with him, I might add, dealing with the President of Treasury Board on behalf of the unions, he has nothing admiration and respect for the union movement in this Province.

I also can honestly say, Mr. Speaker, that over the next year and years that we will find out that not only are the NDP perceived to be friends of labour in this Province, but this Liberal Government will be friends of labour in this Province. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: The bon. the Member for Fogo. Mr. Winsor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to speak on the motion so ably put forth by the L38 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Member for Harbour Main and certainly not the amendment put forward by the Member for St. John's South, old landslide Murphy himself.

It was interesting to hear him speak, in fact, interesting to hear both Government Members speak on this important resolution put before them, because of the failure of both to address the real serious labour concerns that there are in this Province. And I concur with the Opposition House Leader that the President of Treasury Board is going to have a difficult year. The negotiation process that is already started with all of the collective agreements expiring some 25 thousand people are negotiating contracts. It is . going to be very, very difficult.

And I was quite pleased when some time ago the President of Treasury Board at the last minute was able to negotiate a settlement with the nurses, a good settlement, one that the nurses justifiably needed. And I was quite proud and pleased that he was able to do so.

I was much more disturbed though when shortly after that the President of Treasury Board sent letters to every teacher in the Province circumventing the process of collective bargaining, warning teachers: do not expect too much, do not put your expectations too high, because the amount of money that we had given out to the nurses is not available to everyone. And as my colleague from Grand Falls indicated to the Minister, the Minister and the President of Treasury Board cannot engage in that type of negotiating if he wishes to have negotiating in this Province that is conducive to the well being of the Province.

No. 49 R38

A last ditch effort has managed to provide essential services for the sick of the Province, but the health care is now in shambles. There is no question about it. I had a call yesterday from a constituent who has been in hospital now just about two or three weeks waiting to have surgery, and it has been put on hold because of the inevitability of the labour dispute. The people who were expecting good medical care in this Province have now to rely on certainly less that top notch medical care. In addition to that, I heard the Administrator of one of the large hospitals in St.

John's, say yesterday, that it is not much point for people to come to the hospital to expect routine medical work because they will not be able to handle that kind of service now, because of the demands on the system from the emergency wards in the hospital. I say to the Minister, this is pretty serious stuff. These x-ray lab technicians operate at full capacity for most of the year and now the backlog that is starting to accumulate after one week and if it continues on into the second or third week, it can only detract from the health care that our people should and must have.

In addition to that we see the likelihood of the support staff in this Province going out on a strike in the very near future. I think the President of Treasury Board is now in the process, I think, this Saturday, he indicated he would be negotiating with them. I was alarmed to see his comment in the paper that he didn • t know what to do.

I think he has since tried to clarify it for the House by indicating that this was only a part of the statement, and it was L39 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI not the statement in its entirety, and I would like to caution the Minister that this kind of thing does nothing for negotiating, negotiating through the Telegram, when you belittle the people you have to negotiate, telling the President of the largest labour union in the Province, NAPE, that once he gets over his ego tripping and everything else, then perhaps he will get down to some real serious bargaining and this is certainly not the way that the collective bargaining process takes place.

I am also quite concerned, I know the little bit was going on with the collective bargaining process for teachers and I think I even heard the Minister of Labour say under her breath at one time today • a strike is a legal part of the bargaining process.' While it might be so, it is certainly not a very desirable method of achieving labour peace in this Province. We have serious problems. The NTA is now engaged in, across the Province meetings, and I see the two colleagues, the former Presidents of the NTA are now conspiring there, in an attempt to settle the labour unrest with the teachers.

I don' t think they are going to be very successful because during the last election, workers in this Province in the public service and teachers in large parts, supported a number of the people opposite based on the belief that these people were going to give them substantial salary increases, improved pension benefits and a number of other things, and what we find happening so far, is, contract stripping, pension benefits being reduced and 'thirty and out • being challenged and questioned, and all kinds of things happening that are No. 49 R39

ce~tainly not endea~ing the - An Hon. Hem be~: (inaudible). 'Thi~ty and out • Mr. Winso~: No, he wouldn • t da~e say 1 thirty and out • . He said yesterday though, when someone spoke on pensions, he said teachers have a right to be concerned. I don 1 t know if it • s suggestive that in this next round of negotiations what we saw being proposed as legislation yeste~day is about to be ~escinded and some new legislation int~oduced reducing benefits and so on. It is ce~tainly not going well in the public service. The Membe~ for st. John's South, when he spoke - it's a knack that - An Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Mr.

Winsor: What's that? An Hon. Member: (Inaudible). Mr. Winsor: I am not going to engage in that kind of debate. The Member for St. John's South, when he spoke, kept ~eferring to what happened previously. The~e is no question that there were some se~ious labour disputes in this P~ovince in the mid-1980s. There had been serious ones in the 1970s and I suspect serious ones in the 1960s. But that does not solve the problem of tomorrow. We jokingly, sometimes kid the Minister of Education about telling them that some of his ideas are yesterday's, but we were only joking when we do that.

What we have to do, as a Government, and as a people is to look for tomorrow and the President of Treasury Board is into some difficult times. We on this side of the House L40 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI cannot agree with the amendment put forth by the Member for St. John's South, so I think that since there is a dispute as to the acceptability of this amendment, the important thing is to agree on the resolution itself, the resolution being:

BE IT RESOLVED that this House urge the Government to foste~ a good labour relations climate in the Province and that it negotiate in good faith with its own employees to ensu~e that public services are not disrupted in this coming year. And I think people on both sides of the House can support it. To make it even mo~e acceptable I move seconded by the Member for Menihek the following subamendment 'That all WHEREASES including the amendment be deleted so that we can ignore any of the confusion and debate, and the House can vote on the resolution itself, but none of the WHEREASES. Mr.

Speaker: The Chair would like a copy of the subamendment. Mr. Winso~: All the 'Whereases' - An Hon. Member: In the amendment or in the - Mr. Speaker: O~de~. please! Order, please! The Chair will just recess for a few minutes to see if the subamendment is in orde~. Recess Mr. Speaker: Order, please! The Chair rules that the subamendment is in order. No. 49 R40

The hon. the Member for Fogo. Mr. Winsor: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Having that out of the way I think that this House can now get on to dealing with the real serious issue that there is the real possibility that we could have serious labour unrest in this Province during the coming months, and the President of Treasury Board has a terrific onus on his shoulders to see that essential services in the operations of this Province can continue as they should. The Minister of Employment and Labour Relations when she did have her few brief comments, spoke very little about labour relations in this Province.

She spoke more about things that were happening in her Department or had not happened, and I am kind of amazed that in the second year of her mandate we have yet to see any double-breasting legislation. The Member for St. John's South spoke of the need to have double-breasting and suggesting all kinds of motives as to what had gone on. The Minister has now had ample opportunity to prepare double-breasting legislation. In the ·Estimates Committee on two years following the Minister has indicated that double-breasting legislation was being prepared.

We have waited and waited for the legislation to be brought before this House - An Hon. Member: They're coming to get you. Mr. Winsor: The ambulance Minister of said, to come Coming to get you. is coming to get the Social Services, he and take him away. L41 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI But the Minister has got some serious problems.

The Workers Compensation Board that she referred to and the problems that were there, it was only recently, this week, I think, or late next week, we saw the example of the troubles at the Workers' Compensation Board in a letter that the Chief Executive Officer wrote to the Minister, calling her to respond to a crisis that was occurring in the Workers• Compensation Board, and I think I saw another

article in the paper that suggested some three-quarters of all the cases that had gone before the Tribunal had either been changed or significantly altered when it got back to the Workers' Compensation Board. So the Minister has some serious labour problems on her hands. The President of Treasury Board I am sure will have to do the serious negotiating to solve the problems of the collective bargaining process. But the Minister has to facilitate it by getting her own house in order. We have labour unrest throughout the Province.

The truckers out in Grand Falls and Central Newfoundland area are having serious problems. The Wooddale Nursery Workers, layoffs in these areas. There are all kinds of labour unrest in this Province that the Minister must address if we are going to have peace in the labour movement. So I urge the President of Treasury Board to get on with fostering good labour relations in this Province, to keep his curt remarks from being published in the paper and to see if this Province can go on to improve its educational system, its health care, and the other services that are so essential for our people. No. 49 R41

Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker: The hon. the Member for Stephenville. Some Hon. Members: Hear, hear! Mr. K. Aylward: It is with great pleasure that I speak in this debate, but I find it somewhat ironic though, to tell you the truth, Mr. Speaker, to have the Opposition Party in this House trying to tell us about labour relations. We will take advice from a lot of people, but I am not so sure we are going to listen to exactly everything you tell us about labour relations.

I think the debate of the resolution is good to have because labour relations are very important in this Province, and a good labour climate is very important for the development of the offshore, and other developments in the Province, and for the economy. In order for the economy to thrive you have to have a good labour climate, and you have to have a good mood in the labour relations sphere, and unless you have that you run into problems.

The previous Government who were there for a long number of years, seemed to have lost control when they were there, especially in the last three or four, of the labour relation situation in the Province. One can only come to that conclusion, basically, because of the many disputes that occurred and the way that those disputes were handled. When you go back and look at the headlines from a couple of years ago you would not know that the Opposition who are here today, were the Government of the day and were dealing with the situations that we have to deal with now. I went back and had a little look, Mr.

L42 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI Speaker, at some of the press clippings of the day and it was very interesting actually. An Hon. Member: You are the Government. Mr. K. Aylward : We are the Government and we are going to deal with it. We are doing all kinds of things, but you have to remind the Opposition once in a while about what they used to do, so that when they tell us what we should be doing we can look back and say, well, we are going to try, and that kind of thing. You have to remind them once in a while, and I do not like to do this, but once in a while I just have to do it.

I am not doing it to be nasty, or anything like that, I am just saying we have to have a level playing field in the debate. All I am trying to do is to make sure that the debate that is occurring is very level, and that both sides present their case, and present what they would like to see happen. Obviously, our Minister of Employment and Labour Relations has been trying to clear up, and clean up, the things that were left there, a number of the issues that were not resolved when we took over the Government.

She is doing a good job and we are going to see some changes happen in the next li ttle while, but those changes take some time. Legislation takes time. Give us a little while. Twelve months is a long time, I know, in some people's minds but in politics it is not very long at all, especially when you are trying to make some changes. But, just a reminder, Mr. Speaker, of the negotiating strategy as outlined by the previous Government when it came to NAPE. I have here a No. 49 R42

special bulletin from the Newfoundland Association of Public Employees which was put out back in 1985-86 and the cover of the bulletin says, 0 - 0, The Collective Bargaining Attack, and Bill 59, the Legislative Attack, so those memories are not that long ago. One of the things that we have to do as a Government is try to make, I suppose, a repair job with the labour movement, and rebuild the confidence of people in Government, in Government negotiators, and how Government treats the labour movement.

That is a tough job to do because they still do not trust the Government as they should, and deal with the Government like they should. That is not our fault. We inherited a situation where we have had to come in and try to deal with the problems. So we are trying to do that. I was very pleased to see the nurses received a fair settlement. A situation which over the years had declined, we were losing a lot of nurses and so on. It was very important for the health care of this Province that that situation change.

I was noticing the other night on a news clipping, one of the nurses who was being interviewed said, or one of the representatives said that it was going to make a difference for them in keeping nurses in the Province in the health care sector. I think it was a good move. Again, I think one of many that is going to have to occur to see a repair and to see an improvement in the labour relations of this Province.

The other things that you have to understand too, we are trying to deal with an attitude and trying L43 June 6, 1990 Vol XLI to deal with the problems that have really festered and festered and festered and, especially, from under the previous Government. I think that is a fair comment to make. Although, I must say the present Opposition House Leader when he came in there, he was trying his best at that time when he was the President of Treasury