May 13,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIV No. 23

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

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

Provincial Affairs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it will be my pleasure later today to introduce,

for first reading, a bill to create a new Municipalities Act for the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: The new act will give municipalities

greater freedom, flexibility and autonomy to effectively manage their own

affairs and to eventually become masters of their own destinies.

The Municipalities Act is the enabling legislation for the

Province's 287 towns, its single regional council, and 175 Local Service

Districts. This new legislation reflects the broad based view of all of the

stakeholders, including our municipalities, the Federation of Municipalities,

and the Association of Municipal Administrators.

The introduction of this legislation is an important

milestone for my department. Over the past several years the Department of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs have focused on ensuring that municipalities

have the necessary tools in the way of legislation, financial, administrative

and communication supports to respond to challenges and effectively serve their

residents. The new Municipalities Act is the most significant component of this

"tool kit" approach of providing support and fostering self-reliance and

independence among local governments. It will be accompanied by a substantial

training initiative as well as an education and awareness campaign.

Development of the new act has been subjected to an extensive

review and consultation process for the past several years. It has taken into

account a number of emerging issues such as the need for greater autonomy for

municipalities, the changing role of the Department of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs, and the economic realities of administering local governments in

addition to dealing with inadequacies in the existing legislation. This review

and development process has enjoyed the involvement and cooperation of the

municipalities, the Newfoundland and Labrador Federation of Municipalities, and

the Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Municipal Administrators.

In the meantime, a number of substantial amendments have been

made to the existing legislation in order to provide municipalities with the

benefits identified during the ongoing review process. These include several

financial and tax-related amendments that were approved in December of 1998 to

allow municipalities to incorporate the benefits in their 1999 budgets.

There will be ample time during debate to speak about the

more significant provisions of the act; however, I would like to briefly

highlight some of them today for hon. members.

The new legislation removes many of the restrictive

provisions that are contained in the current act. It increases municipal

autonomy in administration and financial management; it expands taxation and

collection capabilities; it provides authority for economic development; and, it

expands as well as provides new authority for service delivery and municipal

controls. In addition, the new act is organized in a way that it is much easier

to use.

This act will greatly support municipalities as they strive

to meet the current and future challenges of local government.

This government recognizes that the future growth,

development and prosperity of the Province as a whole will depend, to a large

extent, upon strong and vibrant municipalities. I believe that this new act will

help to ensure that our municipalities are structured in such a way as to enable

them to more effectively deliver the types of services that people will require

- and are able to afford - in the years to come.

I would like to recognize that individuals in the gallery

today who are representatives of the various stakeholders who have participated

in this consultative process: Mayor Dianne Whelan of Paradise, who is the Avalon

Regional Director of the Federation of Municipalities and representing the

Federation's President, Sam Synard who could not make it today; Mayor Heber

Walters of Portugal Cove-St. Phillips, and Chair of the Federation's Review

Committee for the new act; Dr. Patricia Hempstead, Executive Director of the

Federation of Municipalities; and Mr. Gerard Lewis, former President of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Association of Municipal Administrators.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

I want to first thank the minister for a copy of his

statement before the House sat today. I appreciate that. As a former mayor of a

small town, I would say that I do not often stand in my place and congratulate a

minister on the other side on something they have done; but this new

Municipalities Act has been a long time coming. We have been a long time waiting

for it. Eight years in the making, I do believe.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am not finished yet - eight years in the

making.

I want to also congratulate the Department of Municipal

Affairs on the approach they took with respect to the changes to the

Municipalities Act in dealing with the Federation of Municipalities and the

local town councils.

There are a couple of points I want to make on this. I have

not seen the act yet, so I really cannot speak on the contents of it, other than

the outline that was given. If what the minister is saying is true, that the act

is more simplified, user-friendly, that is very important. Because often times

we get people elected to councils across the Province who have various degrees

of education, experience, age and what have you. It is good to see that point

addressed. Conflict of interest rules or regulations are going to be changed. I

think that is very important, not only with respect to the disclosure of

personal assets or whatever the case may be, but with respect to what is to be

considered a conflict of interest.

It is very important. I have had discussions with

representatives of the Department of Municipal Affairs in the past when people

from municipalities in my district came to me talking about conflict of

interest. As a matter of fact, I had the Auditor General go into one of the

municipalities in my district a few years ago, so that is another very important

thing.

Another thing is the autonomy. I have been requesting for

years that towns be given more autonomy and responsibilities and accountability,

because the people who are elected to these municipalities are the front line

workers, if you want to refer to it that way. These are the people who

understand their towns, know what the towns need, and know what the constituents

in their own local towns need. I think that is something that is very important

and needs to be addressed.

I really do hope that the municipalities and the people who

had the input were listened to. I will not know that until I actually see the

act itself. As the minister said, we will have ample time, I hope, in this House

of Assembly to address the concerns. If it is going to be discussed, if it is

not referred to a legislative -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker? In conclusion, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: I've not sat down yet, I say to the

minister. I can handle you yet. I can make a comment on - Mr. Speaker, I'm

trying to be as positive as I can on this.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Premier is trying to provoke me, I know

that, Mr. Speaker.

In the meantime, I want to say the definition (inaudible).

I'm sorry, Premier. Also, before I sit down - I will have lots of time to speak

on it -, but with respect to the time in the House of Assembly, I know that we

are going into night sittings tonight. The Government House Leader and the

Premier want us out of the House of Assembly as soon as possible. I know that.

Before I sit down, I want to congratulate the people in the

gallery who has input into this act. I hope that I will have no questions, I

suppose, with respect to the content of the new Municipalities Act in the

future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Justice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take this opportunity to advise members of

the House of Assembly of government's intention over the coming months to

undertake a comprehensive view of this Province's tax policy. As part of that

review, we will undertake an examination of Newfoundland and Labrador's

competitive tax position in relation to other jurisdictions.

Once completed, this review will serve as the basis for the

Province to move forward with appropriate changes to its overall tax regime. Our

approach is to develop a new tax policy over the next twelve months which will

facilitate a multi-year reduction in personal income tax.

At 69 per cent of the basic federal tax, plus a surtax of 10

per cent of provincial tax above $7,900, this Province currently has the highest

provincial income tax rate in the country. New Brunswick, which is next with a

rate of 60 per cent, pledged in its 1999 budget to reduce taxes to 57.5 per

cent. In Ontario, the government will further reduce the provincial tax rate

from 40.5 per cent to 38.5 per cent, and has pledged to further reduce it by 20

per cent, which will be effectively a reduction of another 8 per cent in the tax

rate over the coming years. The tax gap is widening and we cannot allow this

competitive disadvantage to grow.

As hon. members are aware, an integral part of this

government's mandate is to reduce taxes, including personal income taxes, when

it is fiscally prudent to do so. However, in doing so we must be careful not to

affect government's ability to provide services and programs.

During our pre-Budget consultations, many individuals and

groups maintained that tax reductions would stimulate our economic growth with a

consequent increase in employment. At the same time, most of those who spoke did

not want these tax reductions to come at the cost of decreased programs or

services. There is an acute public awareness of the delicate balance to be

maintained between revenues and expenditures. There is no strong public appetite

for deficit spending.

Over the past number of years, we have taken step to create a

more favourable tax regime. The introduction of the HST in 1997 represented the

largest single tax reduction in the Province's history: from 19.8 per cent to 15

per cent. In the 1999 Budget, we introduced the Seniors' Benefit, which will

provide a credit of up to $200 to qualifying seniors.

Government has also undertaken to provide a more favourable

business tax environment. Our corporate tax rate is among the most favourable in

the country. For the second consecutive year, we were able to raise the

threshold for the payroll tax which has exempted more than 500 employers from

the tax roll and provided a tax reduction for most other employers. This is in

addition to the substantial competitive advantage which the introduction of the

HST has provided to businesses located in the Province.

These initiatives are a good beginning, and we look forward

to being in the position to do more, but we must do so in a responsible manner.

Government is faced with the challenge of balancing the need to ensure adequate

revenue to provide vital public services, with the need to reduce taxes for the

benefit of all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

Government must endeavour to share our limited resources

among all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in an equitable manner. We feel that

the best mechanism to achieve this is through tax reductions.

We all deserve better tax policy. The people of our Province

deserve to have that policy implemented in a manner which is fiscally prudent.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy. It is interesting,

I say, that this government would now raise the issue of the Province's

taxation. In particular since we have the highest income in gasoline taxes in

the country, and the only province, I say, with a payroll tax. It is further

interesting that the Premier and this government should now raise this issue so

soon after an election when he scoffed at our proposal to reduce the taxes, and

before the ink is dry in this year's Budget.

I say the time for tax reform and tax reduction was in this

year's Budget. That is when it should have happened, in this year's Budget, but

now the Premier has finally realized that tax reductions are necessary. He

should now be more specific and not posture with vague statements by some

reduction in the next twelve months.

I say to the minister and to the Premier: Be specific, tell

us how much of a reduction there will be. In particular, tell us which taxes.

With respect to the payroll tax, I applaud the minister for finally realizing

that our policy statement was a sound statement. Because it stated quite

clearly, and I would quote from our policy document, that: "A PC government will

eliminate the payroll tax - a regressive tax on jobs that unfairly impacts local

businesses."

So I commend the minister for making at least some sense with

respect to the proposed reform that he is suggesting.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: More good news, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity today to

inform my hon. colleagues that the outlook for the Newfoundland and Labrador

fishing and aquaculture industries for 1999 is a very positive one. All

indicators this year point towards continued growth and strengthening of our

fishery. This growth is the result of many things, including professionalization

of the industry and our Quality Assurance Program.

Last year, the fishing industry pumped $700 million into our

provincial economy and I am proud to report that we are optimistic and we will

be experiencing an additional $100 million in export value this year. This means

an export value of $800 million for Newfoundland and Labrador fish products in

MR. TULK: How much?

MR. EFFORD: Eight hundred million in 1999.

This is great news for our Province, as the fishery continues

to be a major contributor to the economy.

Our continued improved industry performance, which saw

approximately 27,000 people employed directly in the fishery last year, is

largely due to our inshore shrimp fishery and crab fishery. The strong

performance of these fisheries has brought back increased confidence into the

industry. In 1998, the private sector invested $110 million in harvesting and

processing, and there will be eleven shrimp processing plants on stream in 1999.

I believe that if our shrimp and crab resources are managed properly and we

continue on with our trend to developing a multi-species fishery, the

opportunities to make a reasonable living for those who remain in the fishery

will continue to improve.

The 1999 quota for inshore shrimp was increased to 41,029

tonnes from 29,840 in 1998. The 1999 crab quota is increased to 61,185 tonnes,

up from 49,000 last year. The ground fishery is experiencing slow recovery

overall but there are signs of recovery in some areas including the stocks in

3Ps. The 3Ps cod stock has recovered to where a substantial commercial fishery

is now possible. The TAC for 1998 was 20,000 tonnes and we are anticipating,

with a recommendation from the FRCC, that the quota will be this year 30,000

tonnes.

With the increases in crab and shrimp quotas, and an

anticipation of an increase in the 3Ps cod stock, we expect approximately

285,000 tonnes of fish to be landed in 1999, with an estimated landed value of

about $450 million. We have worked hard to achieve a regional balance in terms

of the number of fish plants around the Province. I should say that when I

became minister in 1996 there were approximately 240 licensed primary processing

plants. The number of licensed plants has now been reduced to 169, with 127

showing production in 1998. I am confident that we will achieve further

consolidation in the processing sector through our core/non-core processing

licensing policy.

Peak monthly employment in the processing sector totalled

13,400 jobs in 1998 with a average monthly employment of 6,200. Our objective is

to increase, over time, the duration of employment for these employees. In 1997,

plant workers obtained 6.6 million person hours of work, and this increased to 8

million hours in 1998.

Our aquaculture industry is growing, Mr. Speaker, and it has

the potential for new opportunities in Newfoundland and Labrador. Like all new

industries, there are challenges, but we are confident about this industry's

future. In 1998, the Province's aquaculture sector produced 2,700 tonnes of

product with an estimated market value of $12.9 million. We are anticipating a

57 per cent increase in production in 1999, and a market value of approximately

$16 million.

Of the 2,700 tonnes of product last year, 1,000 tonnes of

mussels were produced for a market value of $1.9 million; and we are proud to

report that the mussel production is expected to double in 1999. Salmonid

production had a market value of $10.5 million last year and we are projecting

that amount to increase to $13 million this year.

It is important to point out that all aspects of our fishery

be managed in a quality manner. We have made major inroads in terms of our

quality enhancement initiatives and we are confident that only premium products

will continue to be landed and produced in 1999. The disciplined approach we

have been taking in producing and selling our products has benefited the

industry greatly and resulted in positive market response. Our quality assurance

measures ensure that we get the maximum value of our fish resources.

The success of our fish price settlement pilot project had a

very positive impact on our fishery last year, with early fishery openings and

orderliness throughout the season. The pilot project also proved very successful

in 1999. All parties involved in this process are to be commended. Fish prices

have been settled for a number of species and negotiations are ongoing for

others. This translates into our fisheries opening on a timely basis again this

year, thus providing maximum harvesting and processing employment opportunities

for people throughout the Province. As a result of our price settlement

mechanism, we are supplying the markets with premium products on a timely basis,

which is vital to the future of the fishing industry.

Mr. Speaker, we are optimistic that 1999 will be another

great year for the fishing industry in our Province - a professional fishing

industry that is now being driven by private sector investment. The

professionalization of our fishery will continue to contribute to the

development of a multi-species fishery.

In 1999 and beyond, we will continue working towards

obtaining full economic benefits from harvesting, processing and marketing of

our marine resources. Our fishery has always been and will always be the

backbone of the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Before I recognize the hon. member, I would

like to welcome to the gallery today a former Member of the House of Assembly

for the District of St. Barbe, Mr. Trevor Bennett.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Here again, we see the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture

getting up and patting himself on the back, talking about how wonderful things

are today and how bad they were three years ago before he took over this

department.

A lot of the positive things in the fishery today happened in

spite of the minister; in spite of the minister, I say. There is no doubt about

it that we are doing very well in harvesting shellfish in this Province. Some of

the harvesters of shellfish are doing very well, but there has been a terrible

price to pay at the other end when you look at the number of plant workers

employed today as compared to the number of plant workers that made their living

in the fishery.

When you hear the minister talk about the numbers of people

employed today, I say to the minister, there is a far difference today in the

length of time that those people have been employed than they were when we had a

ground fishery.

Yes, we are doing okay, I say to the minister, in most cases.

Yes, quality has moved a long way. We should be very proud and I compliment the

minister for his involvement in that particular issue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: I do not compliment the minister in what

he did with the crab processing sector, where he has put crab plants around this

Province - in one particular area, three crab plants within fifteen minutes of

each other on the Southern Shore, I say to the minister. All we have done is

transfer jobs. We have transferred jobs from one area of this Province to the

other.

It was only today that I spoke with a worker who works in

Bonavista. Most crab plants today have a tremendous appetite in order to do

product. In Bonavista today they are doing in excess of 250,000 pounds of crab

in one day, I say to the minister. Down in Marystown, 200 people got laid off or

will get their notices because of the new technology brought forward in the fish

plant down in Marystown.

While the minister stands and talks about the wonderful

things that are happening within the fishing sector, there is a price to pay on

the other end as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. EFFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, we have 61,000 tonnes of crab

being harvested this year. Do I understand from the hon. member that he is

calling for the closure of two plants up on the Southern Shore - two plants?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order.

What I am talking about is how the minister speaks from both sides of his mouth.

When he started to talk about issuing crab licenses, it was all going to be done

on a regional basis to improve quality. That is something that has not happened

here.

I say to the minister, last year there were 29,840 tonnes of

shrimp. Out of that 29,840 tonnes, there were only 44,000 pounds of shrimp left

in the water, one tractor-trailer load. So that can show again that we are

harvesting our product to almost 100 per cent which is good, which is the way it

should be.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: I say to the minister that when we look

at employment levels it is a far cry today from what it was a few years ago. I

only have to look at the plant in my own district in Port Union to see the

numbers of people that are unable to find a job.

So while we are doing very well, I think we should strive to

process every pound of fish, take it to the extreme to have it ready for the

supermarket shelves before it leaves this Province. That is still not being done

in Newfoundland and Labrador today. It is not.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, given the seriousness of this

issue I am seeking unanimous consent of all sides of the House - there are only

two parties here today, so I am sure my party will give consent - to allow the

hon. member more time to tell the House which two crab plants on the southern

shore the hon. member wants to see closed because he believes those licences

ought not to have been issued.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: This item is important. He has made the

statement, and I think he should now tell the House, and through the House the

people of the Province, which two crab plants should be closed on the southern

shore.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, pleas!

There is no point of order.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The PC caucus committee on education is continuing in its

first round of public hearings and we have brought solid evidence that this

government's decision to cut 182 teachers from the system next year on top of

hundreds in the system that have already been lost will mean cuts to programs,

increased class size and a diminishing of the quality of education that our

children receive. In short, it means a lower quality of education at a time when

students need and were promised a better education system.

My question is for the Premier. In view of his statements

yesterday that the government must do more and will do more, let me ask him:

Does he plan to wait until the year 2000 when the damage is done, or will he

make the commitment now to leave sufficient teachers in place next year to

ensure that programs are not cut, that class sizes are not increased, and that

education does not suffer?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let me respond to the hon.

gentleman in the same manner in which I responded to his colleague yesterday.

The Department of Education is meeting with the education

directors of all of the boards throughout the Province. We are listening to what

the boards are telling us, what the education directors are telling us. We are

going to do a thorough analysis on what they are telling us. As the Premier said

yesterday, we are listening, and I have the flexibility to address any

legitimate concerns out there, and we will do that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I agree in part with the minister when she says that the

Premier led the people of the Province to believe yesterday in the media and in

the House that he has flexibility to halt the erosion of teaching resources,

particularly in the rural areas where the cuts are hitting the system hard.

If he has the flexibility then my question is: Why doesn't he

use it? How much more time do you want, Mr. Premier, for our students to lose

time in the classroom? How much more uncertainty are you going to put our

students and parents through? If you have flexibility, why don't you act in the

same way when you act on matters with respect to tax cuts, or just recently the

taking down of signs in public places in this building? So, I ask the Premier if

indeed there is flexibility, why not exercise that flexibility and act now?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, what is contributing to a

great deal of the unease that is out there are the false and misleading

statements, and I would suggest politically motivated statements, that are being

made by members of the Opposition who are interested in creating an impression

of deep cuts and loss of programs which are not going to occur.

The Minister of Education has said repeatedly in this House

that the minister and her officials are reviewing the situation across the

Province with each board on a board-by-board basis, that the minister and indeed

the government are committed to a quality education for the people of our

Province, and that where action needs to be taken to deal with legitimate

problems which are identified, the minister has the flexibility to act.

If the member is genuine in saying that he wants to see

students in the schools, in particular, at this time of year, when it is

important for all of our children - and many of the members of this House have

children in school, and all of us are committed to a quality school system. If

he is serious about wanting to see children in school, I would ask he and his

party to quit repeating, in some cases manufacturing, statements which bear no

resemblance to reality when we are trying to go through a proper review process

and, where appropriate, take the measures necessary to maintain the quality of

our system.

I would join with him in encouraging students to be in the

classroom, reviewing and getting ready for final exams.

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

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I would ask the Premier not to question

the genuineness, or the sincerity or the intention of this exercise. I would say

to the Premier that he should listen to the genuineness, the sincerity and the

concerns of individuals who attended meetings in Stephenville, in Port aux

Basques, and last night in Corner Brook, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: How much more damage will the Premier do

to our education system? How many more students will have to do without the

courses they need, without the one-on-one teaching time they need, before this

Premier recognizes that the burden for educating this generation of students

rest on his shoulders? It is his job to ensure that they get an education that

allows them to compete. How much more time, Mr. Premier?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I did see a gentleman on

television at a Port aux Basques school. The last time I met him he sheepishly

introduced himself to me, when I was visiting the school, as the vice-president

of the PC association, making a presentation to a PC caucus committee. I think

the member opposite knows precisely what I am talking about.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, there are a great many people

today in the Province - students, teachers, parents - who are participating in a

variety of ways, expressing their concern about maintenance of the quality of

our education system, and they are doing so genuinely.

Some people are expressing the concern based on reports which

are false. There is a lot of false information out there. That is why the

Minister of Education has said: Let the department and the minister complete the

review that she is now undertaking with the boards of education across the

Province, and when all of the information is in based on the facts, and we see

how the teaching positions are being assigned across the Province, where there

are legitimate problems to be addressed those problems will be addressed.

Let me say something else. I said yesterday, and I would be

interested in the comment from the Member for St. John's East, that I believe

that as we move to develop a new formula for the allocation of teaching

resources in this Province that formula has to reflect the reality of rural

Newfoundland.

I am sure all members of the House would want to know where

the Member for St. John's East stands on that issue. Does he share my view that

we have to give special consideration to the reality that in rural Newfoundland

a teacher allocation reduction has a greater impact often than in urban

Newfoundland? Is he prepared to stand in the interest of the whole of the

Province and join with us in saying we ought to put a greater emphasis on the

rural parts of this Province? Yes or no?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Easy point, Mr. Speaker. Every single

student in this Province ought to be treated fairly and equitably, and where

need arises need has to be addressed, whether it is rural or urban Newfoundland.

I say to the Premier that he should immediately stop pitting rural against urban

or urban against rural. This is a question of need, I say to the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Where need is shown, need must be

addressed. In conclusion, my final question is: In view of what we have heard in

the last several days - and, I might add, close to 300 people at a meeting in

Corner Brook, constituents of the Minister of Finance and Justice, constituents

of the Member for Humber East, constituents of the former district of the

Premier, who showed up in numbers and voiced their concerns and troubles with

respect to education -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I ask the Premier once again, finally:

Will you act now? Will you act immediately to address the concerns in our

Province with respect to classrooms and education generally?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, when the minister completes

the review that the minister is doing, and we are certain of the information

that we have versus dealing with allegations and statements which are true, then

the government will take the action deemed appropriate to ensure a quality

education system in the Province.

I have to say to the member, we cannot duck in this House.

The reality is - and this is not a question of pitying urban versus rural

Newfoundland. I have represented urban and rural Newfoundland for all of my

political career. I have been a member for both urban communities and rural

communities.

We have to face up to a truth in this House which has for too

long gone ignored. That is, there is not equality between urban and rural

communities. There has not for a long time been equality between urban and rural

communities. If we are going to target additional resources and look at the

formula, we have to be ready to start giving more attention to rural

Newfoundland where a lot of the programs that people are talking about saving

are not available now, have never been available, and perhaps ought to be by

tweaking the system to assist those who live in the rural communities of this

Province. That is going to be the plan of the government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, today my questions are for

the Minister of Education.

Minister, I have returned, I guess, for show-and-tell time. I

understand the Premier indicated that we are out manufacturing, but I tell you

that I am not manufacturing the examples that I am going to show and I am going

to tell right at this particular time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, I do not believe that this

government is convinced that teacher cuts are negatively impacting on

programming in schools for September of 1999.

St. Francis Xavier, Deer Lake, 1999 school year, half-time

library and counsellor, cut; three classes of Grade VII instead of four; thirty

two or thirty-three in a classroom; math enrichment cancelled; math remediation

cancelled; phys ed cancelled. Is this manufacturing evidence, Minister?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, now I think we can all understand

why parents and students are protesting and upset. This is the type of

information they are being fed. This is exactly what they are being told by

those out there who are supposed to be administering the system.

What I want to find out is, how much of this is for real? If

these are concerns because of the way that the school boards are allocating the

teacher units that are given to them, then I want to know that. This is why we

are having the ongoing discussions with the education directors. I do not need

the Opposition bringing back information to me from their road show.

We will find out information from the education directors who

allocate the teachers to the schools, who can tell us exactly how they have done

that. Then we will determine whether or not they have allocated them properly.

Interestingly enough, as The Western Star says here:

Ironically, three of the members of the Opposition who are on the board are

former high school principals.

Why are I not surprised with the information they are

bringing back?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, example number two, Pasadena

Academy, Pasadena: music, from a full unit to a half unit, reduced; library

resource eliminated; class sizes increased; technology eliminated; phys ed

reduced; guidance counsellor time reduced. That is real, Minister. Again this is

real, not manufactured. This came to me last night. This came from a parent and

it is addressed to you, Minister. What are you going to do about it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, the parent would not have known

that if the information had not come from another source, and the source

certainly was not the Department of Education.

Mr. Speaker, you talk about reinvesting in education. Well,

if the hon. member opposite wants to rhyme off what may happen if these things

take place, let me tell him a few examples of what this government has done to

try and make sure that these things do not happen.

We have put in an additional $24.2 million to eliminate

school board debt, so the school boards will be able to invest more in education

and not have to absorb that debt themselves. Operational savings from the

consolidation of 472 schools to 365 have been reinvested in the system. School

boards maintain their operating grants at 1996-1997 levels. An additional $2.5

million was reinvested for computers in our schools. Funding for student

assistants has increased from $6.4 million to $7.4 million. We put in fifty

additional special education teachers that have been provided to school

districts. I could go on and on, Mr. Speaker.

While he would like to stand up and give me examples of what

may or may not happen out in the districts, I will give examples any day about

how we have reinvested in education to ensure a quality program for the students

in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, example number three: Herdman

Collegiate have been advised that they will be losing four teaching units as of

September of 1999. A number of the students stood before me last night and said

to say to the minister that because of these cuts, courses - especially AP

courses - will have to be dropped.

This dropping of the AP courses will mean that their entry

into post-secondary institutions will be possible but they will be forced to do

courses in sciences and maths to prepare them to move further.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

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

his question.

MR. HEDDERSON: Are you willing to place added financial

burden on these students, increase time spent in post-secondary, increase the

debt load of students in the future? Are you willing to do this, Minister? Are

you willing?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let me assure you, I did not ask

the members opposite for any examples. They are the last ones I would look to

for examples. I can get all the examples I need from meeting with - or, I would

like to think -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: I would like to think, Mr. Speaker, that I

could get all the examples I need from speaking with the education directors;

but let me refer to this particular school board, the education director of this

particular school board, and the difficulty that we are having in getting the

information that we need. In fact, it has raised a real question for us in terms

of that particular school board, in terms of the quality of the information we

are getting back based on the discussions that we have had so far.

Mr. Speaker, I will say again, I will be speaking with this

gentleman personally because I am not happy with the information we are getting.

When I look at pupil/teacher ratios here, if you are looking at Elwood Regional

High in Deer Lake, where we have students out protesting, where the parents and

teachers have condoned that students are out of the classrooms instead of in

studying, that is regrettable, I would think, to have students out when they

could be in their classes and actually preparing for their exams. Elwood

Regional High in Deer Lake, the pupil/teacher ratio, seventeen students to every

teacher.

If you want to look at Northshore Elementary in Meadows: 16.8

students to every teacher. Look at St. James Elementary in Channel-Port aux

Basques, where we had the principal stand up and speak, we have 16.7 students to

every teacher. At St. James Junior High, 14.6 students to every teacher. Why are

they complaining, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, a final example: Northshore

Elementary School, Meadows, a parent last evening in Corner Brook pleaded that I

pass along to the minister this plea about her son Matthew, a special needs'

student, who because of cutbacks will have to have his individual program

adjusted.

She asked you minister: Are you willing to place Matthew's

program in jeopardy, putting him at risk of perhaps ending up not achieving his

potential and perhaps ending up as a high school dropout?

That is what the parent is asking of you today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, I empathize with every parent and

every student out there who is being given this misinformation. I empathize with

every one of them who are out protesting. I would probably do the same thing if

I were a parent and being told the things that the members opposite are coming

back and telling us.

We will get the information from the boards. I guarantee you

we will get the information and we will do a sound evaluation of that

information. I stand here and repeat again today that where there are legitimate

concerns this government will address them, because we want a quality education

program in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are, again, for the Minister of

Transportation concerning the Gulf ferry service. We started on some questions a

couple of days ago and we talked about the Atlantic Freighter

specifically. Is the minister aware of an internal review done by Marine

Atlantic themselves talking about the Atlantic Freighter ? That was one of

the recommendations, I understand, to the federal minister already. They have

presented that to the federal minister, and they did indeed get back a negative

response with respect to the Atlantic Freighter .

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yes, I am aware of that, and in consultation and dialogue

with the Chair of the Board of Marine Atlantic they have shared some things with

me. That is general knowledge so that is not a difficulty to acknowledge. What

they have really said to me, through the Chair, is that if we can in any way

strengthen their hand in the proposition that they need a larger and a better

replacement for the Atlantic Freighter , then that would be helpful.

As I shared earlier, I will be travelling to Ottawa later

this afternoon to meet with the federal minister tomorrow. We will be making the

case that substantially, I believe, the board has already made. We will see to

what extent we can make some progress in impressing upon the federal government

that we are not prepared as a province to accept anything less than full and

fair transportation opportunities on the Gulf, consistent with the obligation

that they undertook when we joined, as a province, the Federation of Canada in

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

Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: I couldn't agree with you more, Minister. We

have been saying that for many years, and so have many groups in this Province.

I guess since Confederation we have used the same argument, what the minister

referred to yesterday as us being treated as second-class citizens when it comes

to the ferry service to this Province.

That is just one aspect and one of the issue that we have

talked about in this Province in the last couple of years. I would like to ask

the minister: What other specific issues will you be raising besides the

Atlantic Freighter with the minister when you meet with him in the next

couple of days?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Unfortunately, I will be raising with the minister a number

of issues we have raised on many occasions in the past, and issues that the

board of Marine Atlantic have been raising. There are issues regarding capacity,

issues regarding the level of service, issues with respect to their ability to

respond when service is disrupted because of stormy weather and that sort of

thing, issues with respect to management of the fleet generally that we want to

deal with. These are the issues that we have been pressing the case on for many

years, and certainly pretty hard for the last couple of years.

We have had some success, I would say. We have seen the

relocation of employees from Moncton to Port aux Basques. We have seen a

commitment to equalization of representation on the board of Marine Atlantic.

Whereas it was once upon a time a New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, P.E.I.,

Newfoundland, composition of a board, now it is Nova Scotia and Newfoundland

alone. That is progress. It is not where we want to get it necessarily but we

have made progress on a number of fronts. We acknowledge that on behalf of our

representation in the federal government. We think there is more room for

progress to be made. That is why we are going to press the case on all fronts

that we think appropriate.

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

Baie Verte.

MR. SHELLEY: I say to the minister, there has been little

progress as far as I am concerned, and as far as a lot of groups are concerned.

They really question the real commitment of this federal government to put an

adequate service in this Province.

One of the things - and the minister touched on it a little -

was a debate that was carried on in this Province some time ago about the CEO,

and the fact about the personnel. There are two things I will ask the minister.

First of all, is it true that the CEO is still only in an acting capacity? The

federal government has not seen fit to put a permanent CEO in place. Is it still

true, Minister, that over 60 per cent of the personnel for the ferry service to

this Province is still in Nova Scotia? Is that true?

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On the first part of the question, yes, Mr. Darrell Weaver

was appointed acting president and CEO last year. The federal government has not

yet named him or anybody else as a permanent replacement. We would like to see

that happen and I will take that up with the minister as well, but that is not

the substantive issue. The substantive issue is with respect to capacity and

level of service. We will move in pressing these issues, as I have said earlier,

to the maximum degree that we think is appropriate. Hopefully we will achieve

success sooner rather than later.

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

MR. T. OSBORNE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are for the Minister of Environment and Labour.

Minister, could you tell the House the status of the environmental assessment

for the Marystown Shipyard? How long before we see it, and what is the

approximate cost to the people of the Province to carry out the remediation at

the site in Marystown?

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

Labour.

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure if the member is referring to the committee

that I set up some time ago along with the union, government, the municipality

and Department of Health, to investigate the workers' health out there at that

particular facility. As far as the clean up is concerned, I have no idea of

where that is at this particular time.

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

John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, the minister still does not

know how much it is going to cost the Province to sell the Shipyard for $1. It

is a good thing you guys are not on commission.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, if government were

environmentally responsible they would have some idea of the cost of the

environmental clean up of the Shipyard before it was transferred.

Minister, how much longer before we see environmental clean

up work started at Marystown?

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

Technology.

MS KELLY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In response to the hon. member's question, the environmental

clean up and the study stages are at the second stage. The Marystown Shipyard

portfolio is in under my department. The second stage of the environmental clean

up information that we need has been received and is being reviewed by my

department, and at the next stage now, the costing of it will be done in stage

three.

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

John's South.

MR. T. OSBORNE: Mr. Speaker, normally when a site that

houses hydrocarbons and other toxic substances is to have a transfer of

ownership an environmental assessment must be carried out before the transfer is

complete. I ask government: Why the double-standard? Why can government get away

with this when private interests have to follow the rules?

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

Technology.

MS KELLY: I think there are other examples that you ought

to be looking to and to understand, like St. John's Shipyard as it was

transferred, but let me tell you that government is following the rules. The

assessment is being done, the priorities are being set, and we will be

addressing it.

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

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are to the Minister of Fisheries and

Aquaculture. Last week or a few days ago we saw the FRCC report released. In

that particular report there was no recommendation made at this time for any

recommendations of what activity would take place as far as groundfish activity

goes in area 2J-3KL. I ask the minister when we can expect to hear that

announcement, and if he has made any recommendation to the FRCC or to his

federal counterpart in Ottawa as to what the commercial quota might be in that

particular area?

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: First of all, to answer the first part of the

question, we are expecting it next week, some time between now and the end of

May, but more than likely next week.

Have I made recommendations on what the quota should be?

Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. I have no scientific background, no knowledge of

what the stocks are. We leave that up to science. One scientist recommends that

about a 35,000 to 40,000 tonne quota would be a reasonable quota for that

division. Another group of scientists say it should be much less than that, and

that is the reason the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans said that he would not

make the announcement for that area at the same time the FRCC submitted a

report; it would take a couple of weeks to look at both reports. That will come

down, but I suspect it will be much less than has been requested by the

fishermen in that area.

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

Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Another issue that was not addressed at the release of the

FRCC report as well was, I suppose, something that is on everybody's mind in

rural Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is the food fishery - whether we are

going to have a food fishery this year or not. I ask the minister when he

expects to have that announcement released, and if he again has made any

recommendation to his cousins up in Ottawa whether there should be a food

fishery or not.

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

Aquaculture.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of cousins out in

Port de Grave but none in Ottawa.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, just imagine; the hon. Member

for Bonavista South made a recommendation today to close two crab plants on the

Southern Shore. Now he is asking me, before a commercial quota comes down for

the fisherman along the Northeast Coast, to make an announcement on the food

fishery. Let's make sure that we understand exactly what is out there. Let's not

repeat any mistakes of the past. The first people who should have access to the

fish are the commercial fishermen.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

MR. J. BYRNE: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Cape St.

Francis.

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

In Question Period today, when the Member for St. John's East

was asking questions of the Premier, the Premier stood and answered the question

and used the words: false and misleading statements and manufacturing

statements.

In Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules & Forms , on page

145, false statement is listed under Unparliamentary Language. On page 148,

misleading is also listed under Unparliamentary Language. I ask the Premier to

withdraw his remarks.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I do not believe I made any

such reference to members in this House. I made reference to false and

misleading statements being made which would cause people to be alarmed.

In deference to the long-standing reputation of the member

who has just spoken as one of the most succinct, well-spoken and careful members

of this House, and given the example he set for all of us on so many occasions

for quiet demeanour, non-heckling and proper language, I accede to any request

he makes. If anybody in this House on any side thinks that those comments may

have referred to them, I would happily withdraw them to exemplify the example of

the member himself whenever he is on his feet.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Topsail.

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

I rise today to report on behalf of the Government Services

Committee to the House to advise the House that we have considered and approved

without amendments the estimates of expenditure of the following departments:

Finance; Works, Services and Transportation; Government Services and Lands;

Municipal and Provincial Affairs; Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation;

Public Service Commission.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, I would like to present the

following petition: We, the undersigned, teachers, parents and students of

Herdman Collegiate, petition the hon. House of Assembly to listen to the

concerns we have for school programming next year in view of the fact that

Herdman Collegiate's teaching allocation will be reduced by four teaching units.

We believe our school staff has been scaled down unfairly and

unjustly. Our teacher losses will mean: course selections offered at Herdman

will be more constrained and limited; advance placement courses may not be

offered; the position of educational therapist will almost certainly disappear;

class size will dramatically increase.

We believe these cuts do not conform to the expectations of

constituents who supported school reform. We urge government to adopt a teacher

allocation formula that guarantees quality education, and that the priority is

on school programming.

I will speak to the petition. This petition was presented to

me last night by a student who stood in a public meeting and went down through

the concerns that he had regarding the loss of four teacher units from the

allocation for next September.

Again, the population of the school is going from 598

students of last year to 580 students, a difference of eighteen students.

Indeed, if four teaching units are lost, that will mean at least twenty courses,

forty credits, will certainly not be offered next year at the particular school.

A course selection, of course, is very important to make sure that these

students get every opportunity to move forward, especially to post-secondary

education.

The big concern of this student was indeed advanced

placement. With regard to the advanced placement courses, the student was very

much concerned that as he moved forward into the post-secondary he would not be

given the opportunity, perhaps, to go right into the courses that he needed to

go into with regard to his particular discipline. He then would have to take

courses to prepare him for taking additional courses. Again, this would

certainly put an added cost because of the extra courses; it would cost him more

in time because of the extra courses; and, of course, it would cost, at the end

of it all, more money with regard to his student debt.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HEDDERSON: A third particular area that these parents

and students were looking at was with regard to the educational therapist. The

educational therapist position is designed to assist students who, for whatever

reason, cannot - and they struggle, I suppose - function in a school

environment.

Under a behaviour modification program outlined and carried

out by the educational therapist, these students can participate in their

particular courses and indeed they can move forward in preparing themselves for

eventual graduation.

Another concern that this student brought forth was the

actual class sizes. Realizing that if course selection is going to be limited,

if indeed the courses are going to be cut down, one of the strategies that the

administration could use would be, I suppose, to increase class sizes to try and

attempt to give the same quality programming next year as they did this

particular year.

The school council, the parents, and all of the investors in

this particular school community, certainly urge the government to look at the

allocation formula, as they ask in the petition, and make sure that it is dealt

with as quickly as possible so that these students can be assured that the

programs they entered into in Level I - when you enter in Level I, of course,

you look at your three year program, but let us hope that they can continue on

with the program that they have certainly done.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HEDDERSON: So again the priority is on school

programming.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased -

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has recognized the hon. Member for St. John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise and

support the petition that has been presented by my colleague the Member for

Harbour Main-Whitbourne, stating that the teachers, parents and students at

Herdman Collegiate petition the hon. House of Assembly to listen to the concerns

we have for school programming next year in view of the fact that Herdman's

teaching allocation will be reduced by four teaching units.

The students and parents who, in fact, signed this petition

go on to state that it is their belief that their school staff will be treated

unfairly and unjustly. In their belief, as shown in this petition, teacher

losses will mean course selections offered at that school will be more

constrained and limited, advanced placement courses may not be offered, the

position of educational therapist will almost certainly disappear, and class

size will dramatically increase.

This was one of approximately thirty presentations that were

made just last evening at C.C. Loughlin Elementary in Corner Brook, a meeting

that was attended by approximately 250 people. Mostly parents, I say. It was

interesting the different meetings that were attended.

The meeting in Stephenville was largely attended by and

presentations made by administrators. In fact, we had a past president of the

Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers' Association, the present day branch

president of the Appalachia branch of the Newfoundland and Labrador Teachers'

Association, and also guidance

counsellors and school principals: in fact, one principal

himself, who is the head of the administrators' group in the western region of

the Province.

That meeting was interesting from the point of view that the

information was factual. It was supported by a lot of statistics and a lot of

information which went to support the position that the proposed cuts envisaged

by government and being imposed upon the school boards in the Province would, in

fact, have significant detrimental effects upon the various boards and the

schools within the jurisdiction of each board.

In contrast, the meeting last night in Corner Brook was

largely attended by parents. These were parents whose children attend a variety

of schools in the district, in particular in Deer Lake, Pasadena, in the Bay of

Islands area and in Corner Brook. These particular parents went through specific

examples similar to the examples that were expressed by my colleague the Member

for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, who pointed out in great detail how their

particular child or children would be affected if in fact the proposed cuts were

to proceed.

I know yesterday in the House of Assembly in Question Period

there were specific examples given with respect to schools in school District

#4; schools, for example, on the Port au Port Peninsula, in Stephenville and the

Codroy Valley area and the southwest coast. Specific examples as to how children

and classrooms would be negatively impacted.

All that has to be done is simply ask the parents. I mean,

this is not a situation where members or individuals that are holding a meeting

are saying: We must have your information. We are simply saying: We are here to

listen. We will take your concerns, we will take your questions, and we will ask

the minister and the Premier exactly how they would respond to the questions

that are being raised.

At last night's meeting, when you have thirty parents who

just of their own volition come forward and make representation with respect to

their particular child in their particular class room, that is a number that

ought to be of some concern, I say to members opposite. When parents just

voluntarily attend a meeting and speak genuinely and in earnest with respect to

the welfare of their children that ought to be of some concern. Now, it can be

said that would be expected anyway, and that is true. What is interesting is

that the information and the details and the negative impact is the kind of

information that this government has asked for. It is now being provided, and

the obligation is now on this government to deal with this immediately.

The Premier said yesterday in the House of Assembly, as has

been reported by the media, that there is some flexibility. If there is some

flexibility, and if the Minister of Education has the flexibility, I would say

to the hon. minister: Exercise that flexibility and deal with the concerns of

these parents on a forthwith basis.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

MR. GRIMES: Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to have just a few words in response to the petitions

so ably presented by the hon. member. This is just to point out that the

initiative being undertaken by the Minister of Education at this point in time

is the correct and proper approach, to go to the school board officials and find

out exactly what options they have looked at.

Anybody can look at a circumstance at a school in Port aux

Basques, as the committee did a couple of nights ago, or a school in Corner

Brook. What we already know, from even just two examples that the hon. member

have brought forward, the instances mentioned with respect to Port aux Basques,

none of those, not a single one of the issues raised, is as a result of any

teacher reductions this year.

What the president of the PC Association for Port aux

Basques, who managed the campaign of the candidate who ran against the current

member for Port aux Basques, did at the public meeting organized by his buddies

opposite was to spell out a five-year history of some things that had happened

in the Port aux Basques-Cape Ray area, and suggested that some things have

changed.

Absolutely. Everybody understands that some things have to

change when you have drastic declines in your enrolment. He talked about a

school that had been built and used to have 560 students, and is now housing 460

students. The other thing that was conveniently omitted was the fact that even

with 460 students today they have more teachers in that school then they did six

years ago when they had 560 students.

Those kinds of things are left out when you have politics

dragged into the debate deliberately by the members opposite, who would go out

and confess to all, dripping of sincerity, standing there in the meeting,

sitting down at a PC meeting with the PC president of their association,

espousing a five- or six-year history of declining enrolment.

The other thing in Port aux Basques is it had nothing to do

with reform because they never, ever had multiple systems. They have always had

only a single school system. All that has ever happened in Port aux Basques is

the proper and appropriate dealing with drastic declining enrolments. The number

of teachers is greater today than it was five years ago for an equivalent number

of students. Everybody wants to try to ignore that because it is not politically

to their advantage.

Last night in Corner Brook at Herdman Collegiate it was nice

to talk about a plan for Herdman Collegiate. It is the same school board that a

year ago made a decision to keep the school in Cox's Cove, close the school in

Cox's Cove, and send them off to Lark Harbour. That went to court. Up the road,

in the same district, they made a decision to keep two schools open across the

road from each other that were closer together with smaller populations. The

school board has several options available to it in that Corner Brook and the

lower part of the Northern Peninsula area where they can still consolidate. They

do not have to lose any programs. By sending twenty or thirty students ten

minutes across the road they still have the available option of closing a school

and increasing the program across the street.

Last year that same school board made a decision to keep the

school in Cormack open. When the school year started the parents closed the

school themselves, because they said: We cannot get a decent education with

thirty students here in Cormack, a twenty minute bus ride away from the schools

in Deer Lake. Even though the school board was not willing to exercise the

option the parents themselves took it in their own hands to move their students

into Deer Lake so they could get access to programs they had never, ever had

access to in their lives before.

If you want to just look at Herdman and say: My goodness,

Herdman is done in isolation, well, Herdman happens to be in a school district

where there are thirty-five other schools. That school board has many options

available to it, which is what the minister is exploring with the board to say:

What have you done with all of your options? Don't talk to me just about

Herdman. You have a right and a responsibility to run the whole district. Tell

us your plan for the whole district.

The real plan is this. With a few exceptions, which will

become known to the minister, there are more than enough teachers in the system

if the appropriate decisions are made to make sure that students get increased

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. minister's time is up.

MR. GRIMES: - as the members opposite are trying to

suggest, because it is not real. In most cases, Mr. Speaker, the real answers

will be uncovered by the minister by dealing with school board staff -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. minister's time is up.

MR. GRIMES: - not dealing with Tory buddies of the

members opposite who run their campaigns and run their district associations.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, I say to the new Minister of

Education that her first step in solving the problems of education would be to

divorce herself from the former Minister of Education.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get on with his petition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to present a petition. The petition reads:

To the hon. House of Assembly in the Province of Newfoundland

in legislative session convened, the petition of the undersigned residents of

Newfoundland;

WHEREAS Route 235 from Birchy Cove to Bonavista has not been

upgraded since it was paved approximately twenty-five years ago; and

WHEREAS this

section of Route 235 is in such a terrible

condition that vehicles are being damaged, including the school buses serving

schools in the area, and school children are finding their daily trips over the

road very difficult;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to upgrade and pave the five kilometres of Route 235

from Birchy Cove to Bonavista.

Mr. Speaker, this is another petition being presented here

today. They are arriving just about every day, from students and concerned

citizens in the Bonavista, Upper, Middle and Lower Amherst Cove, Birchy Cove,

Newmans Cove area, putting their plea forward to government to ask that the five

kilometres of road that connects the community of Birchy Cove with the town of

Bonavista be upgraded and paved. It measures five kilometres. Two-and-a-half

kilometres of this particular road is in terrible condition. The other

two-and-a-half kilometres is a little bit better, I have to confess.

At the public meetings I have attended with the students,

with the principal of the school, with the bus operators, with the parents in

this particular area, the plea came forward loud and clear that if we cannot get

the funds to complete the upgrade and pave the five kilometres of roadway, then

maybe we can attend to the two-and-a-half kilometres of roadway which is in

terrible condition.

Other roads in this particular area, and certainly a lot of

roads in my district, are in really bad condition. This is probably the busiest

stretch of roadway in the district that needs to be immediately upgraded and

paved. Because of that the residents of surrounding communities of Birchy Cove,

Upper, Middle and Lower Amherst Cove and Newmans Cove are saying: Look, if you

are going to spend some money in this particular area, and if you do not have

enough money to attend to the roads leading through our communities, then for

God's sake look at this particular piece of roadway and attend to that first,

because this is the roadway that the children use everyday.

The community of Upper Amherst Cove, in the wintertime there

are days and days when the children have to leave the upper end of the cove and

walk approximately a kilometre, where the bus would normally pick them up, up

over the hill leading to the community.

It is very seldom that a telephone call comes in, in the

wintertime, complaining about this. They would rather walk to the bus stop than

having the bus take a chance going down over the hill and causing an accident or

causing injury to the students using that particular bus.

It is not like they are looking for somebody to attend to

their every need. They have put up with many handicaps already. They have put up

with many shortcomings already. While they would like to see the road through

their community upgraded and paved, and brought up to a standard that we, I

suppose, have become accustomed to accepting today, they are satisfied if they

can get this particular piece of roadway that they travel over on a continuous

basis, every day of the week, back and forth to the schools in Bonavista, namely

Matthew Elementary and Discovery Collegiate.

The concerns of this particular piece of roadway are not only

brought forward by the parents in the area there. We have had complaints from

service and delivery trucks using this piece of roadway on a daily basis -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: - where they have to make their route

into Bonavista and into the communities going up and down Route 235.

Those particular delivery men also echo their concerns about

the problem they are experiencing with the roadway there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition

as presented by my colleague from Bonavista South. That makes probably three or

four petitions that he has presented in the last number of days concerning this

section of road in his district. He talks about damage to cars, the condition of

the road and so on, but I believe what we really should be considering here -

and it is probably more important than anything else - is the fact that small

children have to travel on a bus and the bus ride has become, according to the

member, very difficult and very uncomfortable. I believe for that reason, and

that reason alone, we should certainly correct that

section of road in his

district.

As I said, that makes - I do not know how many petitions the

member has presented. Every day he speaks out for that particular

section of

road. That

section of road certainly needs to be done and it should be done.

I compliment the member for doing that. After all, that is

one of his responsibilities as the member and he certainly does not shy away

from that responsibility.

I stand today just to say a few words to support my colleague

from Bonavista South and to implore the government to fix this

section of road

so that students can have a much better trip to school.

While I am up, I would be remiss if I did not thank the

Minister of Mines and Energy for getting up a few minutes ago and responding to

a petition. I thought, while he was in Houston, Texas, somebody had cut out his

tongue. I am glad to see they did not and I look forward to him, over the next

couple of days as he gets his tongue and his energy back, being on his feet more

often.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Placentia & St.

Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased today to stand and

present a petition on behalf of residents concerned about the divided highway

extension out in the Whitbourne area.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why? That is not your district.

MR. MANNING: Mr. Speaker, they cannot get the Member for

Bellevue to present it so they called upon me to present the petition. That is

the truth, I say to the hon. minister.

I would like to read the petition: To the hon. House of

Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland, in Parliament assembled, the petition

of the undersigned residents of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador asks

for the House of Assembly to accept the following prayer:

We, the undersigned citizens of the Whitbourne-Trinity South

region, hereby draw your attention to the existing unsafe conditions as they now

exist on the Trans-Canada Highway near the Whitbourne-Blaketown exits;

WHEREAS it is the duty of government, through the enactment

and enforcement of the Highway Safety Act, to protect its citizens not only from

commuters but also from unsafe highways and;

WHEREAS the safety of the travelling public must be the

number one priority of any government;

THEREFORE your petitioners ask that government take all

measures necessary to ensure that a divided highway continue past the

Whitbourne-Blaketown exits and that the twinned highway include the Argentia

Access Overpass;

As in duty bound your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, this petition was forwarded to me by residents

of that area who are very concerned about the safety, about what is happening

out in the Whitbourne area. I would just like to allude, if I could.

Over the past number of years there have been several

accidents in that area, caused by the fact that the divided highway does not

continue on and address the safety concern as the number one concern.

I say to the Member for Bellevue that it is too bad that

representatives and constituents of his have to come to me to have a petition

presented in the House of Assembly on such an important issue.

I was out in that area last week, and this issue is certainly

ongoing. It is a major concern. I have been receiving several phone calls.

People are very concerned that back a number of years ago, back in 1996, the

government enlisted Davis Engineering to do a $40,000 study into coming up with

a plan for that highway. A short time later, that plan was presented to the

people in that area at a public session in Whitbourne. There were three plans

put up on the wall, and people had the opportunity to discuss this and look at

those plans and advise government what they thought was the number one plan for

that area.

A few months later the minister of the day, now the Acting

Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, brought in a whole new plan, a

whole new set of plans for that highway out there, without any public

consultation with the people of that area. The people of that area are very

concerned about the fact there has been no public consultation, and that the

safety issue has not been addressed. I think that is certainly one of the major

concerns that people in that area have.

Mr. Speaker, in November of 1998 there was a meeting held in

Whitbourne. Among other things, it was learned that night that the plan that is

going to be put in place, the plan that is going to be going to tender, is not

one of the plans that was presented to the people of Whitbourne at the public

meeting they had.

It has been known right across this country that a 100

kilometre divided highway is much safer. It is a national standard that we put

on highways across this Province to address the safety issue. This standard is

known as the Rural Arterial Divided Highway Standard, for a speed of 100

kilometres.

We get back to 1996, when the government hired Davis

Engineering. They hired them to come up with a plan that fell into this

standard, the national standards that were put in place by the RAD 100.

The plans that were presented in Whitbourne in 1996 were

following the national standards. The plan that is going to be presented today,

the plan that is on the table today for the development out in that area, does

not address the RAD 100, does not address the safety concerns, and definitely

does not address the concerns of the people in that area.

Down in the district, many small communities are commuting in

this area. There is a new school planned for that area in the next few years and

a lot of people from communities will be travelling into that area for the new

school. There will be a lot of people who have to cross over this divided -

well, it will not be a divided highway; that is what we had hoped it would have

been, but there will be a lot of people pass over here.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: A lot of people are concerned about school

bus safety, very concerned about children's safety as it relates to the highway.

It is too bad, it is sad, that we have a government that has gone back on its

word to the people of that area and has changed the plans from what were

originally put forward in that area.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MANNING: That is why I stand here today, and I am

very pleased to present this petition on behalf of the people in that area.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bellevue.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: No, I have to get up because I want to set

the record straight. I hate for misinformation to be presented to this House.

The people who circulated that petition misrepresented the

facts. There were three or four people out there who circulated that petition

that had nothing but lies in it.

The former Tory government, when they gave away the Railway,

signed an agreement with the federal government to give away our railway for a

few paltry dollars, as part of the plan was to divide the highway from St.

John's to the Argentia Access Road. This government changed it. The major reason

they changed it was because, if we were to divide the highway to the Argentia

Access Road we would eliminate 125 or 130 jobs out of that area.

This government is interested in providing jobs. The former

Premier who signed that agreement, it did not matter to him. He collected his

pension, went to B.C., and found a job!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: And you are circulating this kind of garbage

and presenting it in the House.

I have been elected in that district four times. This issue

has been around for years. I have been elected four times in that district. I

did door-to-door in Blaketown, Old Shop, and South Dildo, in the last election

campaign. The divided highway was never brought up. Never! I pulled more votes

in these three communities than I ever did, because this member represents their

views. The people who have 120 jobs there want me to fight for their 120 jobs,

and to save those three businesses.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: The Tory government closed down Holyrood,

closed down Deer Lake, closed down Corner Brook, but they are not going to close

down Whitbourne as long as I am the member. I can assure you of that!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: We have addressed the safety. When you talk

about the safety, I have been asking Works, Services and Transportation about

the safety in that area for years. I have requested a street light to be put

there. If you travel across Canada, you travel the Trans-Canada, you travel

through Laval in Montreal, you stop on the Trans-Canada at street lights. The

traffic is a lot busier than it is in Whitbourne.

I parked once at the Whitbourne Irving for three hours, and

eight cars turned down the Argentia Access Road. In the last three or four years

in Bull Arm, there were 6,000 workers in Bull Arm. Very few accidents occurred

in that area. Most of the people came out of Conception Bay -

MR. MANNING: One death is too many.

MR. BARRETT: One death is too many. You have to remember,

hon. Member for Placentia & St. Mary's, there will an overpass on that road as

it is redesigned. That intersection will be eliminated.

Did the people who circulated the petition tell the people in

that area that? No. They said there would be left-turning traffic going

everywhere.

When you present something in this House, make sure you get

your facts right. I wish the Member for Whitbourne would stand up and speak for

the people of Whitbourne, because they do not support this particular petition!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BARRETT: Do you want to tell Monty's, do you want to

tell Moorlands, and do you want to tell the Irving service station: Close you

doors next week because we are going to divide the highway.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BARRETT: Get up and speak and express you point of

view! The Member for Placentia & St. Mary's who got elected the last time didn't

get back the last time. If you want to get back in this House, represent the

people who elected you. Do not go travelling around the Province listening to

lies about schools being closed and teachers being laid off. Get out in

Whitbourne and represent the people who elected you!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEDDERSON: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne, on a point

of order.

MR. HEDDERSON: The hon. member just directed lies towards

me. I am not collecting lies.

When I want to stand on my feet I will stand on my feet and

do what I have to do, not by the prompting of someone on that side.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

To the point of order that the hon. member raised, I do not

think there were any accusations hurled towards the hon. member. There was

really no point of order.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Orders of the Day

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I call Motion 8, first reading of

a bill, "An Act Respecting Municipalities", Bill 14.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act Respecting Municipalities", carried. (Bill

14)

On motion, Bill 14 read a first time, ordered read a second

time on tomorrow.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Motion 2, to move that the House

resolve itself into Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain

resolutions for the Granting of Supply to Her Majesty.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole on Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

CHAIR (Oldford): Order, please!

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, if I could get the attention of

the Government House Leader - well, the Opposition House Leader, the hopeful

Government House Leader.

AN HON. MEMBER: They haven't got either one other there;

the deputy, deputy, deputy, deputy.

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. TULK: I call the Heading of Executive Council.

CHAIR: Order, please!

We are debating the Estimates of Executive Council.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I am only too glad to stand today and ask a few questions

with respect to Executive Council. Before I get into that, Mr. Chairman, I want

to make a comment about a few comments that were just made.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). You have to be relevant.

MR. J. BYRNE: It is all relevant, because we are talking

about Executive Council. This is a money bill. We are talking about money, Mr.

Chairman. There is a lot of latitude given for money.

With respect to the Whitbourne intersection, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I ask the member to take his seat just for a second.

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01 of Executive Council.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Anyway, with respect to the explanation about relevancy,

about the Whitbourne highway intersection and the money that is going to be

wasted on that intersection, because this is another option that has been put

forward. They had three options, Mr. Chairman. This one was not one of them, the

one that is being put forward now.

The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation has

already admitted that there will be more money spent on that intersection down

the road. So why not do it right the first time? That is all we have been asking

for, and that is what the petition has been asking for, Mr. Chairman; do it

right the first time. They are going to waste $3 or $4 million on that

intersection, come back in a few years time and change it again. Now, does that

makes sense? I don't say it makes sense.

With respect to the comments of the Minister of Health, Mr.

Chairman, saying they are going to get a copy of Hansard and send it out to

Monty's, the comments made by the Member for Bellevue: We can stand in this

House of Assembly and say what we want to say any time of the day when the House

is open and send that to Monty's also, and give the right and truthful

explanation, Mr. Chairman, of what is happening with respect to that

intersection and who is for it and who is against it. That is the reality of the

situation.

Now, with respect to the Estimates of the Office of the

Executive Council, Mr. Chairman: I expect the President of Treasury Board is

going to be answering questions on this topic; and I would have questions for

the Premier. Also, I would imagine the Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs

would answer questions because his department falls under this too. Is that not

right?

AN HON. MEMBER: He doesn't speak.

MR. J. BYRNE: He doesn't speak? He doesn't speak often,

we know that, Mr. Chairman, but we know you do speak.

Mr. Chairman, I am going to go on with a few comments. One

thing I would notice, Mr. Chairman - I went and got the Estimates for the year

1996, and in those Estimates were the previous ones for 1995-1996. Now, that was

the year that the present Premier took over. I wanted to compare what was

happening when this Premier took over and what is happening today.

One of my first concerns, I will say to the President of

Treasury Board, is the Premier's Office. I noticed here in the Premier's Office,

salaries of $732,900. That was in 1999-2000, but back in 1996-1997 there was

$99,800. That is a difference of some $650,000 in the Premier's Office. I know

there has to be a legitimate explanation for this vast, vast difference. I am

sure all the political buddies of the Premier cannot be hired and put in the

Premier's Office. I know the Premier would not do that. There has to be some

reasonable explanation.

While the minister is looking at that, I can give her some

indication of what has happened here, because $951,000 was spent on the

Premier's Office, in total, in this years' Budget. Back then it was some

$930,000, but there was no

section in the Premier's Office for administration so

I am wondering what is happening there.

Executive Support is in a different location also. Now I am

curious. If the President of Treasury Board can answer this - she may not be

able to answer it today, but if she could answer it or check with the Premier -

I am curious to know the staffing of the Premier's Office. How many people were

there with the previous Premier, and how many people are there with the present

Premier? Is it the same number? Has it increased? Has it decreased? If you look

at the salaries, you would certainly believe that there has been an increase in

the staff in the Premier's Office.

Now we know, if you look at the salaries, that the Premier's

staff, the staff in his office, have had some increases while civil servants'

salaries were frozen. While their salaries have been frozen for the past eight,

nine or ten years - since this government took over - we know that the staff in

the Premier's Office have had increases in salaries.

We know also that the government tried to explain it in the

way that they were reclassified. If the people in the Premier's Office should be

reclassified, wouldn't people in the civil service be entitled to be

reclassified also? That is the question I would like the minister to address

when she gets up.

The Premier' Office also - here is another one - under

Transportation and Communication, 2.1.01.03, there was $145,000 budgeted. The

previous Premier, a little over three years ago, $58,000 - a difference of

$97,000. That is quite a lot of money, I say to the President of the Treasury

Board, $97,000 in a matter of three years. Why would they require so much money

for travel?

We all know that the Premier likes to travel. When he was the

Minister of Fisheries in the government in Ottawa, he was the most expensive

minister there. He spent more money on travel than four or five other ministers

combined. Transportation and Communications, $145,000, up from $58,000.

MR. BARRETT: He accomplished more than any other minister

(inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Does that make sense to you, I say to the

Member for Bellevue? Do you support that?

MR. BARRETT: Yes.

MR. J. BYRNE: You support that?

MR. BARRETT: Yes.

MR. J. BYRNE: Let it be on the record that the Member for

Bellevue supports extravagance in the Premier's Office. That is what the member

for Bellevue just said.

MR. BARRETT: I didn't say that.

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, that is what you told me.

MR. BARRETT: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: You did. You just said you supported it, an

increase of $58,000 up to $145,000, I say, Mr. Chairman.

To me, what other explanation can it be but abuse of travel?

know that the Premier goes all over the world looking to

create business, he says. Where is all the business?

MR. BARRETT: A point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Bellevue.

MR. BARRETT: The hon. member said that the hon. Member

for Bellevue supported extravagance in the Premier's Office. That is not what I

said.

You were talking about when he was Minister of Fisheries and

Oceans, and what I did say was that I supported him when he was Minister of

Fisheries and Oceans because he accomplished more than any other Minister of

Fisheries and Oceans in our history.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. BARRETT: When his political cousin was the minister,

he closed down the fishery. He tried to open it all up. Do not misrepresent what

I am saying here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I never heard your ruling on that point of order. What was

that?

CHAIR: There is no point of order.

MR. J. BYRNE: No point of order?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, I am really surprised. The Member for

Bellevue must be taking lessons from the Government House Leader, I say, on

points of order.

AN HON. MEMBER: A point of clarification.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, point of clarification is more like

it.

I say to the present Treasury Board also - I hope she is

making notes here now because what we could do... I do not know if we should ask

a question, sit down, and see if the President of Treasury Board wants to get up

and answer it. At this rate, I am going to be here for quite a long time.

MS THISTLE: We have all night.

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh yes, but what I am afraid of is that the

President of the Treasury Board will not keep accurate account of my questions

and respond to all my questions. We get up and down, so I expect that when I sit

down after my ten minutes -

MS THISTLE: I am a good note taker.

MR. J. BYRNE: Okay, I will take the President of the

Treasury Board at her word, that she is a good note taker.

Also under that section, they have Supplies. What was

budgeted in that

section for Supplies under the Premier's Office, I say to the

President of the Treasury Board, was $19,400. They actually spent $30,000 and

they had $19,400 budgeted again. To me, I would like to know what that extra

$11,000 was for, in the Premier's Office under Supplies.

Mr. Chairman, also, we know now to run an efficient office

you have to have supplies, no doubt about that. If you have it budgeted for

$19,400 - again you would assume that the Office, from previous experience,

would know what kind of supplies they would need. Obviously, if they went up to

$30,000, it is an abnormality. An explanation was required, Mr. Chairman. It is

an abnormality. It is not consistent to what has previously been budgeted for

and what is budgeted for this year, so that is an abnormality. That is on page

16 under 2.1.01, under Supplies, .04.

Also, under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, there was

budgeted $5,000 and they spent $5,600. They have $5,000 budgeted again. I would

like to know why we have to budget $5,000 each year for the Premier's Office. Is

the carpet worn out that much from people in to see him, back and forth, that he

has to replace the carpet every day? Why do we have to have $5,000 budgeted for

Property, Furnishings and Equipment in the Premier's office every year? I have

been in the Premier's office once or twice. Not with the present Premier. I was

up there a few years ago when I was begged to run for the Liberals in 1988. I

did not run. I had enough sense not to. I remember the office as being very

plush.

When I was mayor of Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove I had an

occasion to visit with the former premier. The office appeared to be very plush

to me at that time. I walked in and sank to my knees in the carpet. Now they are

looking for money for furnishings.

MR. TULK: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: I cannot believe what I am hearing. I know the

hon. gentleman must be speaking in jest. To stand up there and say that the

former premier, the Chief Justice of the Province, would have an office that was

full of plush carpet. The truth of the manner is that the man went in -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TULK: I can say to the hon. gentlemen I was there

more than one time.

Mr. Chairman, I can tell you that the hon. gentleman, the man

who is the Chief Justice of this Province, serving in such an august position,

cut everything to the bones. I know the hon. gentleman would not want to mislead

us. If he wants to go back before 1989, I can tell him there was a smell of

cigar smoke. There were fumes from the big limousines whistling around.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: I just had to correct the hon. gentleman and

tell him that since 1989, when the Chief Justice of this Province got elected -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

CHAIR: Order, please!

MR. TULK: I am on a point of order.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. gentleman is on a point of order.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Sit down and wait until I finish, and then you

can get a shot at it.

Mr. Chairman, I have to tell him that since 1989 things have

changed dramatically in this Province, and the Chief Justice was one of the

first people who started it off.

CHAIR: Order, please.

There is no point of order.

MR. MANNING: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: On another point of order, the hon. the Member for

Placentia & St. Mary's.

MR. MANNING: Mr. Chairman, I would like to have

clarification from the Government House Leader. Did the former premier call

people to his office when he told them they were not going into Cabinet?

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) if I could (inaudible) -

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Chairman, we have the Government House

Leader up trying to correct me. Yes, I was exaggerating slightly to make the

point. I was not to my knees in carpet, I was up to my ankles in carpet.

(Inaudible), to my ankles.

CHAIR: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave?

CHAIR: Does the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

CHAIR: By leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: That is pretty deep carpet then, isn't it?

Deeper.

I ask the Chair a question. We are up ten and ten. I

understand that is the way it is going to be. If I ask a question and someone on

the other side gets up to answer, do I start my new ten minutes again?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. J. BYRNE: So once there is an intervening speaker my

ten minutes starts again. Is that correct?

CHAIR: Points of order don't count, though.

MR. J. BYRNE: Points of order don't count. I am on leave

now anyway. I just wanted to clarify that.

Mr. Chairman, I was going to speak and ask a few questions on

Government House. I decided I wouldn't address the Government House estimates. I

think the Members for Bonavista South and Conception Bay South are more

interested in asking questions on that topic. I am just going to pass off on

that in this point in time unless, of course, they don't ask certain questions

that come to my mind and don't come to them. Then I will ask a question.

Let's go to what is under the Cabinet Secretariat, I say to

the minister, under Executive Support, 2.2.01, the Salaries are $684,600. That

is down somewhat from the previous year, but if you compare that back to

1996-1997 we have $660,000. It is still gone up by some $24,000 there. Again, is

that due to reclassification within the Executive Support salaries, or is it a

new position hired from that time?

Also, under that same section, I say to the President of

Treasury Board, under Supplies, here is a curious one. Because we have budgeted

- or government has budgeted; I shouldn't say we have budgeted - $57,600. Under

the previous administration it was $24,100. That is significant. There is some

$33,000 more for supplies. I would like to know what those supplies would be and

why such a drastic increase, I say to the President of Treasury Board.

Also, under Professional Services, you spent $10,000 last

year and this year you have $32,700 budgeted, an increase of some $22,700. I

would like to know what those Professional Services are, and why the necessity

for such a large amount of money.

Purchased Services has gone up by $20,900. Again, I would

like to know what those Purchased Services are.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: She doesn't want to.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Okay. I will just give you leave.

MR. TULK: Mr. Chairman?

CHAIR: The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: I move that the House not adjourn at 5:00 p.m.

and that we would take a recess for supper from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.

CHAIR: The motion is that the House not adjourn at 5:00

p.m.

All those in favour, `aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye!

CHAIR: Those against, `nay.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Nay!

CHAIR: Carried.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Under the same

section 2.2.01, Executive Support, under

Purchased Services, I was asking before I sat down what those Purchased Services

were and are, and why it is gone up to $20,900.

Also, under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, I have a

question. Again, I am always intrigued by this subhead, 2.2.01. It has gone up

from $5,000 that was spent last year to $20,000 this year.

I have asked the minister a fair number of questions. I want

to give her an opportunity to answer, and then I will get up again with some

more, maybe.

CHAIR: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Before I respond to the Member for Cape St. Francis, I would

like to just give you a general overview of Executive Council.

Today we will review and debate the Estimates for the

Executive Council heads of expenditure which includes the Lieutenant Governor's

establishment, Office of the Executive Council and Treasury Board Secretariat.

To begin I would like to make a few short comments on each of

the programs we will be considering today. The Lieutenant Governor's

establishment's costs are self-explanatory and need little comment since they

are the costs associated with the operations of the official residence and

associated salary costs.

The Executive Council is responsible for the overall

operation of the public service of Newfoundland and Labrador. Funding is

included for Office of the Premier, Cabinet Secretariat, Intergovernmental

Affairs Secretariat, Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs Secretariat, and the

Communications and Consultation branch.

The funding relates to the salary and the operating costs of

the Premier's Office and the support costs associated with the operations of the

Cabinet and its various committees. Appropriations are also provided for the

administration of the Offshore Fund, Economical Renewal Agreement Administration

costs, costs associated with the Advisory Councils on Economic and Social

Policy, and various Protocol expenditures. Funding is also provided for such

initiatives as the Strategic Social Plan and Women's Policy initiatives. All of

these activities are described in the Estimates and need no further comment at

this time.

As President of Treasury Board, I have the responsibility of

ensuring that the public service has sound fiscal and administrative policies

that support the effective delivery of government programs. The fiscal pressures

of the 1990s forced all government departments, including mine, to be innovative

in providing high-quality programs to our clients. I am pleased to say that we

have continued to support our clients with high-quality human resource,

information technology and financial management support. This is a credit to our

employees.

My department comprises four main lines of business which

are: Budgeting and Systems, Human Resources, Strategic Human Resource Policy,

and Office of the Comptroller General.

The responsibilities of the Treasury Board Secretariat are

many and considerable varied. In addition to the support provided to government

departments many of our activities, particularly those relating to fiscal

management and human resources, have significant external impacts. As a result,

we are keenly aware of the impact that our decisions have on the public.

Some of the important services we provide include:

negotiating collecting agreements with thirty-seven bargaining units; developing

policies and standards for government departments and agencies in the area of

human resource management, information technology, financial management and

compensation; performing job evaluation services for departments and agencies;

preparing and monitoring the annual financial plan for the Province; leading the

development of important information systems that allow government departments

to better manage their resources; accounting, auditing and other financial

supports to departments.

With respect to the department's budget, Treasury Board, like

all other government departments, has significantly reduced spending since the

mid-1990s. We will continue to spend prudently while providing the best possible

service to our clients within government and also externally to the taxpayers of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Now I will endeavour to answer the many questions presented

by the Member for Cape St. Francis so far, as I am quite certain there will be

many more to follow in the evening hours.

His first questions dealt with the Premier's Office, and that

would be found under Executive Council, page 16. The first one he referred to

was the salary division. I would have to say to the member opposite that the

full amount under that estimate was $951,300. Salaries relates to the cost of

fifteen permanent and one contractual position, and it also reflects the

non-recurrence of the twenty-seventh payroll period. I have indicated the number

of people that are employed today. I do not have the Estimates from 1996, but

what I would say to the member opposite, if he would like to put - or maybe I

can rely on the Hansard. If you would like the information of the employee level

compared from 1996 to 1998 I will be able to present that to him later.

The member opposite made a reference also about salary

increases through reclassification. I would have to say to the member opposite

that reclassification occurs all the time. We get requests for hundreds of

reclassifications through this department, so that would not be an unusual

event.

Regarding Transportation and Communications, I would have to

say that under travel, the execution of the roles and responsibilities of the

Premier's Office require that the Premier travel within the Province and outside

to represent the Province's interests. With regards to travel, these are normal

costs that include telephone costs, fax machines, cellular phones, and it also,

I would like to say, includes funding to cover the cost of travel by any member

of the House of Assembly authorized to represent or accompany the hon. Premier

at official functions.

With reference to Supplies, supplies are basically routine

office supplies, which would also include working lunches. They would come under

that heading as well. Under Property, Furnishings and Equipment, that would be

the normal cost of office furniture and equipment.

The next questions came under the Cabinet Secretariat. That

would be referenced under page 16, heading 2.2.01. I think you pretty well

indicated almost every heading there. Salaries represent eleven permanent and

one contractual position. Again, I have to say it also reflects the

non-reoccurrence of the twenty-seventh payroll period.

CHAIR: Order, please!

I would ask the minister to take her seat. It being 4:00 p.m.

on Thursday I have to read the questions for the Late Show.

The first question for today's Late Show is: I am

dissatisfied with the answer provided by the Minister of Developmental and Rural

Renewal re my question on post-TAGS funding. That is from the Member for

Lewisporte.

The second question is: I am dissatisfied with the answer

provided by the Minister of Education re my question on school reform. That is

from the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

The third question is: I am dissatisfied with the answer

provided by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs re my question on

Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. That is from the Member for Cape

St. Francis.

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MS THISTLE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The next question under Cabinet Secretariat, 2.2.01,

Executive Support, was referenced in Supplies. That amount there represents

routine office supplies. Funding is also provided to cover the cost of working

lunches and dinners for Cabinet and its various committee meetings.

Let's go to Professional Services, 2.2.01.05. These are

anticipated consulting services on issues that arise throughout the year. For

Purchased Supplies, 2.2.01.06, the cost involved there is related to meeting

rooms rentals and all expenses associated with Cabinet and its various committee

meetings, official entertaining, photocopier charges, and printing costs for all

division of Cabinet Secretariat.

Your final question in that heading, 2.2.01.07, under

Property, Furnishings and Equipment, relates to the purchase of office furniture

for all divisions of Cabinet Secretariat.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I have just a few comments on the answers by the President of

Treasury Board. Under 2.1.01, the Premier's Office, I asked her about Supplies.

It went from $19,400, which was what was budgeted, up to $30,000. She said that

would include working lunches. We have about $10,000 spent on working lunches

over the past year. That is just from that one office. They must spend some time

in that department.

Also, under Executive Support, under Supplies, I asked her

about going from $24,100 up to $57,600 -

MR. TULK: Point of order.

CHAIR (Smith): Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: The hon. President of Treasury Board said no

such nonsense. The hon. gentleman knows it. Neither did she bring up about the

$40,000 that was spent in one month for cigars between 1989 and 1990. Cigars and

- I will not name the rest. She did not bring that up either, but we will bring

it up if he wants us to!

CHAIR: Order, please!

There is no point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

Further to that, I say to the Government House Leader, under

Executive Support, 2.2.01, under Supplies, it has gone from $24,100 up to

$57,600. In that she said that included working lunches also.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am only saying what the minister said.

Mr. Chairman, when the President of Treasury Board stood she said, about the

Lieutenant Governor's establishment, that it would require little comment on the

Lieutenant-Governor's budget. I would expect and imagine that there will be

members on this side of the House who will have a few questions on that, and it

may require a bit more than a little comment.

Also on her comments, she talked about the public service and

it being an efficient delivery of services. With respect to the public service,

let me talk about the Public Service Commission. Yesterday, I had the

opportunity to go to the Estimates Committee with respect to the Public Service

Commission. I asked questions of the Minister of Finance a couple of years ago

when they changed the policy, for what reason, in hiring. They went from the

Public Service Commission to the line departments, and they do not have to go

through the Public Service Commission anymore. They tried to rationalize that by

saying that the departments know who they want to hire and they would know more

about the individual.

Back in 1974 the Public Service Commission was established,

and it was established for a good reason, and that was to keep the political

tentacles out of the hiring of the civil service. Now we know that in the civil

service today there are many people hired under contract and there are many

people hired on temporary. Why are they hired there? Because they do not have to

go through the Public Service Commission, so they can have political

appointments all over the place.

There are departments now, people hired -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Listen now, can you imagine? The Member for

Carbonear (inaudible). I was not here. I can't complain about what you did two

years ago, for what the Premier did before you were elected. You had no say in

it. I can say this: you stood in your place and voted against the nurses. That

will come back to haunt you, I will say. I don't expect you will have a nurse's

licence plate on your car, will you? That will come back to haunt you, I would

say to the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). What's his name?

MR. J. BYRNE: Whose name? Listen to this now, Mr.

Chairman. Can you believe this? Just listen to what is coming from that side of

the House. We have the previous administration that hired the Public Service

Commission, that put the Public Service Commission in place back in 1974 so that

politics would not get involved. We had the previous administration that put the

Public Tender Act in place that we saw ripped apart last year. Why?

AN HON. MEMBER: What did they do?

MR. J. BYRNE: Ripped apart the Public Tender Act -

AN HON. MEMBER: You did.

MR. J. BYRNE: You did! Yes, you and a few more of you on

that side of the House. Now I can't say that the Member for Carbonear-Harbour

Grace did that or the Member for Bay of Islands, he had nothing to do with it,

but -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: You were here. You were part of the

government that did it. Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What did you do? You made amendments. You

were a small part at that time. How did you do it? You made amendments to the

Public Tender Act. You changed the Public Tender Act, that is what you did, and

you were part of the government that did that. You were part of the

administration that tried to sell off Hydro and supported the former premier,

your buddy, to the hilt. You supported him. Everybody on that side of the House

supported him, everyone. Even the member for -

MR. FITZGERALD: No, the Member for Bonavista North did

not support the (inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Not Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi. That fellow

there. What are you the member for? Virginia Waters! The Member for Virginia

Waters. I thought he was going to oppose it.

MR. FITZGERALD: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.

CHAIR: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: I would like to just make one thing clear

here for the hon. Member for Cape St. Francis, Mr. Chairman, my colleague, that

when he refers to the Member for Bonavista North supporting the former premier,

the former administrator of this Province, he is 100 per cent wrong.

CHAIR: No point of order.

The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

MR. J. BYRNE: When I say that he supported the previous

premier I don't mean that he supported as a buddy, not with his arms around him,

`huggy-kissy,' that type of thing, but he did not speak against it. He did not

stand and get in the media and speak against it.

So we have the previous administration putting in the Public

Service Commission, the Public Tender Act -

AN HON. MEMBER: Tell me something. Who was it said

(inaudible)?

MR. J. BYRNE: I would not have a clue. I was not around

here. I mean, that was when I was just out of high school. It wouldn't be Mr.

Maynard, would it? (Inaudible).

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, I remember when I went to work for the

civil service. I worked in the Howley Building on Higgins Line. I had to go for

an interview at the Public Service Commission, with three people interviewing me

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)?

MR. J. BYRNE: Seven years. Yes, I pulled it all out.

Seven years I worked at the Howley Building on Higgins Line, and I left it and

started my own business. I went out and created jobs in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador. As many as forty or fifty people I hired on in the

summertime. That is what I did.

I had to go to the Publi