October

31, 1991

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.

XLI No. 64

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the mining industry is very important to the

economy of this Province. Last year, mining accounted for 6.6 per cent of the

provincial gross domestic product at factor cost and 4,420 people were gainfully

employed. In comparison, forestry accounted for 0.7 per cent of the GDP at

factor cost; fishing accounted for 2.2 per cent and pulp and paper accounted for

1.9 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, as most members of this House of Assembly are

aware, the mining industry in Newfoundland and Labrador is experiencing some

very difficult economic times. Low mineral prices, a high Canadian dollar, and

low demand for iron ore and other products have had a negative effect on the

industry resulting in mine closures and layoffs.

Mr. Speaker, while many of the factors contributing to the

current downturn in mining and mineral exploration are beyond the Province's

control, I believe there may be opportunities for further action by Government

which would assure that the mining industry is a healthy and sustainable

industry, operating for the long-term benefit of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, to address these opportunities, I am pleased to

announce the formation of a Ministerial Advisory Council on Mining and Mineral

Exploration.

The Advisory Council will assess the Province's ability to

attract investment in mineral exploration and mining and will make

recommendations on possible government initiatives to enhance our competitive

position relative to other areas of Canada, and the world.

I consider the establishment of this council to be

particularly important at this time because of the recent closures and layoffs

in the mining sector and because of the major reduction of activities in the

exploration sector.

The Advisory Council will comprise senior officials from the

mining and mineral exploration sectors, the mining service sector, labour,

investment agencies and Government.

The following people have volunteered to serve on the

Council: Mr. Peter Dimmell, President of the Newfoundland and Labrador

Explorationists Group (NALE) and Regional Exploration Geologist for

International Corona Corporation in St. John's, Mr. Bill Fotheringham, General

Manager of Hope Brook Gold Incorporated, Corner Brook, Mr. Reg Gagnon,

Vice-President of Operations Iron Ore Company of Canada, Labrador City, Ms.

Adele Poynter, Commissioner of the Economic Recovery Commission, Mr. Bernard

Sheppard, President of Maritec Limited, Springdale, Mr. Ray Smallwood,

Vice-President and Branch Manager of Wood Gundy Incorporated in St. John's, Mr.

Bob Young, the Atlantic Director of the United Steelworkers of America. The

Mining Association of Canada will be nominating someone externally, shortly.

The Advisory Council will be chaired by my Assistant Deputy

Minister of Mineral Resource Management, Mr. Paul Dean. Dr. Richard Wardle,

Senior Geologist for Labrador, Geological Survey Branch will be principal

secretary for the committee, and Dr. Byron Hynes, Manager of the Mineral

Economics

Section in the department, will be the principal financial resource

person.

I expect the council to meet regularly over the next six

months and to present a final report and recommendations in the spring of 1992.

I look forward to working with the members, and I thank all

of them for agreeing to serve.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Of course, I welcome

the announcement. It is about time. I suppose, like the old saying, it's better

late than never. I represent an area where the mineral exploration industry is a

major part of the local economy, and many of the companies involved find

themselves down to about 25 per cent or less of their normal activity.

I do hope, arising from the deliberations of this particular

advisory council will come some sort of incentive program, be it provincial

and/or federal/provincial to stimulate mineral exploration, some changes in the

tax structure, for instance, the payroll tax, etc., to encourage mining in our

Province.

So I do hope that, in the end, this particular advisory

council does some good, although I am rather disappointed that it has been

appointed so late, with not one single operating mine in the Island part of this

Province.

One disappointment, Mr. Speaker, the iron mines of Labrador,

which have contributed greatly to the economic wealth of this Province, are

having a tremendous problem, and there is no immediate plan to bring some relief

to that area which is experiencing tremendous troubles right now. I am

disappointed that that is not in there. Overall, I welcome it, and I hope it

does some good, late as it is.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure

today, to announce Government's continued support for the Special Sawmill

Assistance Program.

As hon. members may be aware, this program was established in

1976 to provide working capital loans at preferred interest rates to improve the

viability of small and intermediate sized sawmill operations in the Province,

and to stimulate production and employment in this industry during the winter

months. The rationale for the program rests in the seasonal nature of the

sawmill industry. Sales for the industry usually peak in the summer, resulting

in a negative cash flow during the winter months. Average profits in the

industry are simply not sufficient to support the inherent cash flow problem

induced by winter season production. It is because of this, and the low equity

base of most sawmillers, that commercial lending institutions are reluctant to

lend working capital to these operations - hence the need for a Government

sponsored program.

Up to 1989, Mr. Speaker, the Special Sawmill Assistance

Program was renewed on an ad hoc basis through formal references to Cabinet each

year. This created general uncertainty, and inhibited the implementation of

needed capital improvements in the industry. In recognition of these

difficulties, this administration decided in 1989 to offer the program on a

permanent basis, which marked a significant change in policy with regard to

Government's support for, and long-term commitment to, the sawmill industry.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that the Special

Sawmill Assistance Program for 1991-92, which was previously administered by the

Regional Development Authority, is now administered by the Enterprise

Newfoundland and Labrador Corporation. The Program will commence on November 1,

1991, and will continue to March 31, 1992. The maximum loan to sawmillers will

be $50,000 and it will be offered at the same preferred interest rate as is

charged under the Enterprise Corporation's Small Enterprise Loan Program. Loans

will be provided on an advance payment basis, and repayment schedules will be

set over the May 15 to October 31 period. This assistance, Mr. Speaker, is

restricted to sawmills that produced in excess of 75,000 board feet of lumber in

the previous year.

In terms of Government specific financial commitment to the

Special Sawmill Assistance Program this coming season, a sum of $700,000 will be

made available over the period November 1 to March 31. It is expected that up to

fifty small to intermediate sized operators will take advantage of this Program,

directly contributing to the creation of approximately 5,800 person weeks of

employment, which is equivalent to about 250 full-time jobs during the

five-month period when loans will be made available.

Mr. Speaker, my announcement today, regarding the Special

Sawmill Assistance Program reflects Government's commitment to this important

industry and our resolve to see it make an even greater and longer lasting

contribution to the rural economy of this Province. I encourage all eligible

sawmillers to participate in this Program and pledge Government's support to

ensure that the industry remains a vibrant and important sector in the overall

forest products industry of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Thank-you, Mr. Speaker.

This statement by the minister is, without question, a

positive statement. Its provisions will go a long way towards helping the

sawmillers in this Province. If programmes in other departments were as positive

as this, we would be in a lot better state than we are today, that I can assure

you.

The programme, as the minister stated, was established in

1976 by the former administration and, no question, it is an excellent

programme. Regardless of what programme is brought in, there is always room for

improvement, and this is no different. It is of a seasonal nature. The loggers

usually cut the logs in winter and bring them to the sawmills that are not

sawing in winter because of ice and other natural conditions.

I have a few concerns and I would like the minister to check

on a couple of points for me, namely, taking the programme from the Regional

Development Authority and putting it with Enterprise Newfoundland, whereby it

would come under the Small Enterprise Loan Programme. One question I have, and

maybe the Minister of Development can answer it later, is whether the rate of 3

percentage points below prime will remain the same, or will it be higher? I do

not know. Maybe the minister can answer that later.

The $50,000 limit per sawmiller is a fairly good limit for

maximum. However, I caution the minister that if a few sawmillers take maximum,

that would reduce the funding to others. But there should be some flexibility as

to the $50,000 versus the $700,000.

Also, I caution the minister on the March 31 deadline. Last

year, we ran into a problem. Because of the late spring and a lot of snow left

around last April, many of the sawmillers could take advantage of the weather

conditions and still buy the logs. So, it would be very useful to have some

flexibility there.

All in all, Mr. Speaker, it is a positive statement. The

logging industry in the Province is one of the few areas in which we can create

new jobs. The pulp and paper industry in the Province cannot create new jobs.

There are only x number of cords of wood going through the mill, period, but in

the sawmill industry there is always a new job that can be created because of

the production of lumber and the sale of lumber, so just keep that in mind as

that is one of the areas where we can increase production and increase our jobs.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the

Premier, relating to his statement in the House yesterday where he announced,

everybody will recall, that the Government was removing Newfoundland's local

preference policy. At that time the Premier gave us some estimates based on 1989

statistics, of the value of Government purchases and contracts which would be

covered by the agreement.

He also said the agreement would apply initially to

Government Departments, but would eventually be expanded to include Crown

corporations, municipalities, hospitals, universities, colleges and school

boards -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Yes, that is what I am saying - if the Premier

will give me a chance to ask the question, he will have his opportunity to

speak.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask him, when he does stand, if

he will tell me or tell the House, how much does each of those other agencies

spend on goods, services and construction? What portion of their expenditures

would be covered by this agreement? Will he also tell us if any studies have

been done by the Government at all, dealing with this particular issue as to

what the ramifications might be to Newfoundland and Labrador; and if there are

any studies, will he table them in the House immediately?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I do not recall having said

that it will affect Government agencies first and then later on bring in Crown

corporations. It is not so. It affects Government agencies now, once it comes

into effect, if we go ahead and sign it. We have agreed in principle that we

should sign it and if between now and next June 30th, all of the negotiations

that are entrained come into effect and we sign it, then it will come into

effect for Government and Government agencies.

Now if by that time the Maritime Provinces have also included

their municipalities, universities, schools and hospitals, then it will come

into effect in respect of that as well. If the Maritimes have not included their

municipalities, universities, schools and hospitals, it will not come into

effect for Newfoundland. But let us assume that it does, it will come into

effect for all, not just Government now and others some time in the future.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in terms of the numbers, perhaps I did not

make that quite clear yesterday. Some time between eighteen and twenty-four

months ago the first consultations were started with industry when we started

the initial discussions with the Atlantic Provinces on this proposal, and we got

a variety of reactions. Some were enthusiastic, some were opposed, and the

majority expressed concerns because they were afraid of the processes that were

in place in the Maritimes, that they would not provide our producers and people

with fair access. So we did not enter into the agreement then, and it was only

later this summer that we started to get into the agreement. So I just want to

make very clear that this process started some two years ago.

Now, the Leader of the Opposition asked about what studies

and assessments we have done. That was done at that time, and there were

assessments as to how it would affect and what would be the extent of the

effect. As a matter of fact, I just got a statement this afternoon as to the

level of the effect in the last year of the ninety-seven construction contracts,

over $100,000. There were ninety-seven construction contracts, over $100,000,

let by Works, Services and Transportation for the fiscal year 1990-1991. Only

one was awarded because of the local preference policy, and that was awarded to

the lowest bidder, which was not an Atlantic firm. It was a firm outside the

Atlantic Provinces altogether. So in terms of 1991 what we are doing would have

made no difference whatsoever to the construction contracts in 1990-1991. For

the years 1982 - these are the assessment that were done. He asked for it.

MR. SIMMS: Why don't you answer the question I asked?

PREMIER WELLS: Well, you better ask it again, because I

understood the question was, Mr. Speaker, what assessments or what studies have

been done as to the impact on Newfoundland.

MR. SIMMS: That is right.

PREMIER WELLS: Okay, here is the answer. The hon. Member

might not like it, but here is the answer.

For the years 1982 to 1991 inclusive, the average difference

between each successful bidder and the lowest bidder for contracts let by

Government funded bodies was only 2.75 per cent. That is the average difference.

For the fiscal year 1990-1991, the total number of contracts awarded as a result

of the local preference policy was 384. In the entire sector of some 116,000

different contracts, the total let was 384 for a value of $16 million which

represents three-tenths of 1 per cent of the contracts and less than 3 per cent

of the value.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, it never ceases to amaze. I do

not want to repeat the same question over again. I asked if they had done any

studies and would he table them? That is basically what I asked, and would he

table them? Now, there are other things, Mr. Speaker, that were not quite made

clear either by the Premier yesterday. He mentioned in his first answer that he

wanted to make himself clear. Well, let me ask him to clarify some other things.

In his statement yesterday he listed ten private sector associations which he

claimed supported the removal of Government's local preference policy. Then lo

and behold last night on the television news, everybody saw it, the President of

one of those ten associations said they did not in fact support this initiative.

Now, my question to the Premier is quite simple, was he yesterday simply wrong,

was he trying to mislead the House, or would he like to take this opportunity to

clarify his statements and tell us if in fact there are any others of that list

of ten who do not approve?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the initial discussions were

started a year and a half ago and as a result of the responses we did not enter

into the agreement. The Maritimes did but we did not because we said our people

are concerned about what is in place in the Maritimes, so we were not party to

the contract. Last May in the meeting with the other Maritime Premiers, they

asked Newfoundland to again consider joining, and I said to them, no, we cannot

because you do not have fair operations in place and we are concerned about it.

Our people say if you were prepared to alter certain provisions in your contract

and change certain practices we would be prepared to enter into discussions with

them. As a result of that we entered into negotiations with the other three

provinces and those negotiations have been going on since June, I believe, and

we have come to deal with the concerns that were addressed. Now, Mr. Speaker,

two weeks ago, as a result of these new developments, a meeting was called and

the ten individual associations that I read out here yesterday which are listed

on Page 4 of the statement, the Construction Association, Road Builders,

Manufacturers, etc., etc., a meeting was called, and that meeting was held, I

think, on October 23. At that meeting it became clear to the people who were

involved in the meeting, it was being run by the ERC in fact, that there was a

substantial consensus amongst -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER WELLS: Just wait. If the hon. Members want to

answer their own questions that is okay but if they want to know what happened I

will tell them.

There was a substantial consensus amongst the persons present

as to what should be done. In fact it was suggested that there should be a

statement of their position and they set about to draft a statement that would

reflect a consensus. Some of the members of these associations, not anybody

present from Government, not anybody from the ERC, said if the Premier is going

to this meeting with the Atlantic Premiers we should get this statement of our

position to him before he goes to the meeting. That suggestion came from those,

Mr. Speaker. Now, the news media, the Telegram in particular, I believe their

report says we were railroaded or something, an unsuccessful attempt to railroad

affirmation: Miss Campbell made it clear in a telephone interview with the

Evening Telegram that all involved agree in principle with the idea of

Newfoundland joining the Maritime Provinces in a procurement agreement at this

time in the area of goods, services and construction, all involved agreed in

principle. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what we did at the meeting in

Halifax and here is the opening statement by the four Premiers: The four

Atlantic Premiers have agreed in principle to expand the existing procurement

agreement to include the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. That is what

was agreed in Halifax, Mr. Speaker. In terms of the resolution that was drafted,

of the ten groups present, six will sign the resolution exactly as it was

drafted, the statement exactly as it was drafted, so I am told. I have not

talked to the individuals but I am told that six will sign it and a seventh had

one minor alteration that had nothing to do with the substance and that

alteration is apparently agreeable, so seven of the ten will sign that

statement. Now, there are three others and the three others are these: the

Construction Association and the Road Builders Association. Now, let me tell you

the concerns, Mr. Speaker, of those two associations. They want to bring -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the Premier that he has taken up a lot of time. I

realize that we are getting into a complicated area, and when the Opposition

asks these types of questions, they have to be prepared to get the full answer.

I believe, in the meantime, that the Premier has substantially addressed the

question raised by the Leader of the Opposition, and I think it is only fair

that I should give him an opportunity, if he wants, to address something else

that the Premier was addressing, or if the Premier could finish up in fifteen or

twenty seconds.

PREMIER WELLS: Well, Mr. Speaker, I can only say to you

that as I understand the Leader's question, it has not been answered. He wanted

to know what were the positions of the individual groups. I am about to give it.

Now, if he does not want it, I am quite prepared to sit down.

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, just one quick supplementary. I

will not debate the matter with the Premier. We know what he said yesterday in

the House - it is in Hansard - and now we know that he is backing off a little

bit from what he said yesterday.

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

continue with the question please.

MR. SIMMS: The supplementary is, Mr. Speaker: the Premier

also said yesterday that some of the business groups told him that they may not

be able to compete with Maritime businesses because of the higher tax burden

that exists in this Province. I know that the Premier holds out some hope of

negotiating a change in the equalization formula in order to get more money from

Ottawa, but that is not a precondition of this agreement, I think he said that

yesterday. So, I want to ask him: if in fact he is not successful in getting

that change to occur, how will the Premier then reduce taxes on the private

sector businesses so that they can, in fact, face Maritime competition? What

idea does he have in mind?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I just want to clarify for a

moment the terms and the concerns that those two associations had were including

the MUSH factor. That has been arranged for. The second one was the exemptions

in the Maritime Agreement. So the letter they signed indicated that they would

sign it if those two concerns were addressed. They have been addressed. That is

nine of the ten. The tenth is NOIA, as a concern. They wanted more detail about

commitments to address workers' compensation, and so on. Now, Mr. Speaker, the

question the hon. the Leader of the Opposition just asked was about tax

exemptions.

Mr. Speaker, the objective is to try and place Newfoundland

in the best possible position that we can. I am prepared to state to this House

that I have complete confidence that what we have done will achieve that, and if

we get the support of the Maritime Premiers, as they have indicated, I am

confident that we can persuade the Federal Government to include, as a factor in

determining equalization, the needs factor. That will enable us to set our tax

rates to be more in line with the Atlantic Provinces. Now, Mr. Speaker, the

Leader of the Opposition already knows the Government's commitment to address

the tax and reform the tax, and that commitment is there, but we still must run

the Province on a successful and sound financial basis, which we intend to do.

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

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday I asked the Minister

of Employment and Labour Relations about the Government's plans to assist the

hundreds of displaced workers being laid off in western Labrador. Now I

understand that they are in the process of establishing tripartite meetings with

the Government, union, and the head office of the mining companies concerned in

a couple of weeks, and I am pleased with that undertaking.

Mr. Speaker, I also understand that they are going to,

hopefully, go beyond the contractual agreements that the mining companies have

with their employees, and that they do indeed have a moral obligation to these

employees.

We also understand, Mr. Speaker, and my question is to the

Premier, we also understand in this Province that these mining companies are

competing in the global economy, yet within the provincial infrastructure, if

you will, especially with regard to taxation. I want to ask the Premier if he

has any specific economic strategy to improve the economic viability of the

mining operations in western Labrador?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I am not a metallurgist, Mr. Speaker. I

cannot improve the quality of the iron ore to make it more acceptable or more

valuable than it is. We do not run the mining operations. They are private

operations. We want to make sure that we have the maximum level of activity

carried on in Labrador City, and in Wabush. At the moment, Wabush Mines does its

pelletizing in Pointe Noire, in Quebec. The Iron Ore Company of Canada does its

pelletizing in Labrador City. We want to increase the economic value to western

Labrador, and to the Province as a whole, of the mining activity that takes

place there. But the biggest factor in the problem in western Labrador at the

moment is, Mr. Speaker, the steel industry, and the problems in the steel

industry, with major steel companies in Canada. You cannot sell the iron if

companies do not need the steel. That is really the fundamental problem.

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

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, I was hoping that the Premier

would be more forthright in answering a question, that is why I wanted to -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. A. SNOW: It is a very important issue to the people

in western Labrador, Mr. Speaker, and I would hope that the Premier would be

forthright not just with this House but with the people in western Labrador.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I would ask the Member to get on with his question, please.

MR. A. SNOW: I ask about the economic strategy, if he has

any economic strategy. I did not ask about his knowledge about the mineral

industry. But let me specifically ask the Premier if he would consider exempting

the mining companies from the Provincial payroll tax?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, what

economic strategy can there be, can this Government have, to improve the

opportunity to sell minerals in western Labrador? We cannot improve Algoma

Steel's operation, we cannot improve Stelco's operation, we cannot make the

automobile industry more healthy, to increase the demand for iron ore. The

relatively minor amount that is paid in payroll tax is not affecting in one iota

what is happening in western Labrador in terms of the iron ore operation. That

is determined by the demand for iron and the cost of producing it. Now that is

so minuscule in relation to the overall operation that it has little or no

bearing on it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Menihek on a

supplementary.

MR. A. SNOW: Well, since the Premier would not consider

exempting the mining industry from this payroll tax because it is minuscule, and

since the mining industry is the only resource industry not exempted from the

payroll tax, will the Premier put the tax revenues collected from the mining

companies into a special diversification fund or resource depletion fund so that

this fund could then be used to help diversify the local economy? It could also

be used in situations such as this to help the displaced workers.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the Government puts forward

its tax policy and the House of Assembly either approves it or disapproves of

it. We do so on the basis of managing and paying for the operations of

Government within the Province. We do not collect from a specific industry to

set aside for depletion in the mining industry or reforestation in the forestry.

We set our general taxes to allow us to get an adequate level of revenue to

manage the affairs of Government in the Province. The payroll tax was not

imposed to provide for the mining industry or any other sector of the industry.

It was imposed to enable us to generate revenue to deal with the impact of the

Federal Government cutting back on the health and education portion of the

established programme funding. That is why it was put into effect. Now it has

nothing to do with the mining industry per se.

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

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question was to

the Minister of Social Services, but in his absence, since it relates to labour,

I will ask the Minister of Labour. On Monday I questioned both Ministers. The

Minister of Social Services indicated that some of the money of the $5 million

that you announced was already spent. Is the Minister aware that several people

who are clients of the Department of Social Services were called last week and

informed they had a job; subsequently the next day the field workers called back

the clients and informed them that there were no jobs available because their

money had already been spent? Is the Minister aware of this?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am not aware of any

specific incidents that may have occurred, such as that, in relation to the

Department of Social Services and contact with field workers. It is quite

possible that may have happened on one or two occasions when you look at the

scope of the problem and the number of people who are trying to be assisted and

addressed through this emergency employment response programme, and the fact

that through Social Services close to $5 million was given in additional funding

to the community development program part of that particular department, because

that is an existing program that already had a backlog of applications before it

that could not have been funded under ordinary budget measures for the year. It

was identified that it was something that could readily put people to work

almost immediately. In fact, it is possible that in one or two cases, somebody

may have been told there was a job to start in a certain area tomorrow, and then

there may have been changes. That will have to be confirmed or denied in the

House by the minister responsible. But, if it did happen, it would not surprise

me that it could occur in the sense that there was, indeed, on file a

considerable number of applications and projects under the community development

program that we tried to implement immediately and have had considerable success

with. If anything, myself and the Minister of Social Services are very proud of

the fact that we did not have to sit on that kind of money for weeks or months

but were able to start the flow of the money almost immediately so that

individuals could benefit from the expenditure of the money right away.

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

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary to

the same Minister.

The minister in his release said, `The criteria for this

program will also be extended. Not only will social assistance recipients be

eligible to apply, but many others may avail.' What was the criteria for others,

and how does it apply to future community development programs? Are these going

to also be included in this new expanded criteria? Is that going to be the way

the department is now going to operate?

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

Labour Relations. I got it right this time.

MR. GRIMES: Yes. Thank you again, Mr. Speaker.

In response, the expansion of the criteria is on a one-time

basis for purposes of this emergency employment response program only. To date,

in information and in discussion with the Minister of Social Services yesterday,

the indication - because we have been checking and trying to verify these

numbers on an ongoing basis - is that close to 30 per cent of the people who had

been put to work across the Province throughout the Island and Labrador, under

the community development program, related to the emergency employment response

additional money, have been for people who are other than the regular social

services clients, people who are already on social assistance.

So, in fact, I do not know the numbers, but of those who have

been put into positions, so far, the numbers given to me by the Minister of

Social Services as recent as yesterday, is that 30 per cent of those placements

are for people with the expanded criteria. Is it the intention for that kind of

criteria to become the norm for Social Services in the normal Budget and in

their normal program on an annual basis? The answer, to my knowledge, is no.

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

MR. WINSOR: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker, to the

Premier.

For a number of days, we have been trying to get information

on this particular programme. I ask the Premier if he will undertake to have the

appropriate ministers in each of the departments to inform the House of the

number of jobs that have been created, the location, and the duration of each

job, and will they be made available to this House in its next sitting?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I am sure, if they are here,

they would make it available to him right now, today, perhaps, if he wants it.

There is no trouble giving any information that is available. I do not have to

direct ministers. All hon. members have to do is ask questions, the ministers

will answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

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

My question is to the Minister of Education. A few days ago,

the Premier mentioned that he thought legislation would be brought in this

session to bring together the Marine Institute and Memorial University. The

following day, I believe, the minister confirmed this.

Seeing that the courses not leading to a degree will be

transferred to the Cabot Institute, and all other courses will be transferred to

Memorial University, will the minister tell us if the students who will be

affiliated with Memorial University will be paying the same tuition fees as are

now being paid by the regular students registered at Memorial University?

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

DR. WARREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

correct a little bit of information in the hon. member's

preamble. No decisions

have been made on which programs will be where. We are working out the details

of where there is overlapping between the present Cabot Institute and the Marine

college. There are some programmes which are duplicates, and eventually, we will

decide where these are going to be. Fees, Mr. Speaker, will be determined in the

same way they are now, depending on programmes. No proposal has been made or has

been accepted, whereby the fees for non-degree programs would be the same as the

fees charged by the University. These will be decided in due course.

MR. HEARN: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. HEARN: Mr. Speaker, the minister is evading the

question. I mentioned courses being transferred to Cabot, which the minister

knows is going to be done, that is the plan. But I asked him, Will those who

will be affiliated with the University, in relation to degree-granting courses,

be paying the same tuition fees as the students who are in the regular

university programs?

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, a year ago, actually more than

that, in February, 1990, we issued a White Paper on the future of post-secondary

education in this Province. This Government does not go from day to day, month

to month, we try to look to the future.

Leadership it is called, vision; and one of the things we see

happening, Mr. Speaker, is that, in this Province, the University, ultimately,

will offer degrees in the area of Marine and Fisheries-related studies, in

addition to all the other programmes that are now offered. When these degrees

are determined, I am sure fees will be set in accordance with the requirements

of the degree.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. HEARN: When I asked the question, Mr. Speaker, the

President of Treasury Board said, yes, so I presume that is the answer, but,

will the minister put it on record? Will the students who are being shuffled out

of the Marine Institute into the University, be expected to pay the same tuition

fees as the students who are presently in the regular university programmes, yes

or no?

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

MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I wish the hon. member would

clarify his question. If he is talking about non-degree programmes, if they are

part of the University, the fees will remain as at present with the normal

increases. All fees are going to go up.

If degree programmes are developed in the future, the fees

will be developed in accordance with the degree programme. I cannot now say that

the degree programmes are going to charge x dollars. These fees will be

determined at the time the degree programmes are developed.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, I will defer, since there is

only one minute left in Question Period.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member cannot defer.

The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. SIMMS: He cannot defer, if you don't want to ask, you

don't.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question

for the Minister of Mines and Energy.

There has been some talk, let us say, chatter, whatever, in

industry and media circles as to whether or not all is well at the Come By

Chance refinery, and I wonder if the minister could bring this up to date. Is

all well at the Come By Chance refinery?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To the best of my

knowledge, all is well; Come By Chance is, right now, about half-way through

an annual turnaround or maintenance review and I understand

that will be completed next week.

They have changed supplier of crude oil; they have recently

gone through a change of supplier from the previous supplier and I understand

that there is crude available on site now from that new supplier, and will be

there for when the start-up is due to occur again, as soon as the maintenance

turnaround is over.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay, on a

supplementary.

MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the Minister

of Employment and Labour Relations. I am wondering if the minister could report

that, from the point of view of his portfolio, all is well at the Come By Chance

refinery?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can just report to

anything that has been brought to my attention. There are no outstanding

difficulties other than anything that has normally been going on at Come By

Chance.

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

is time for a quick question.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question

for the Minister of Fisheries.

I am sure the Minister of Fisheries is aware of problems that

have been experienced at the Belleoram fish plant, some snags with the lease of

Daley Brothers, and operators since then. I am wondering if the minister could

inform the House, whether or not he has looked seriously at trying to resolve

the situation with regard to the lease, which I think is presently held by Daley

Brothers at Belleoram, and if that matter will soon be resolved?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, the plant in Belleoram has been

leased on a number of occasions and thus far it has not been too successful. It

is under a lease to a company and we have talked to the principals of that

company to endeavour to get them to release their hold on the building; to date,

we have not been too successful, but we are now negotiating with another

company, and negotiations are ongoing with the people who have the lease on the

building.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has expired.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of the hon. the Minister of Justice, I give notice

that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act

Respecting The Consolidation And Revision Of The Statutes Of Newfoundland."

As well, I given notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The Application And Effect Of

Certain Acts Passed In The Present Session Of The Legislature Upon The Revised

Statutes Of Newfoundland."

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

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

In The Statute Law."

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

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

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

Act, 1971."

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

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting Colleges Of

Applied Arts, Technology And Continuing Education."

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution:

WHEREAS mining is the only industry in the resource sector

subject to the payroll tax; and

WHEREAS minerals are a non-renewable resource and the

economies of mining communities are vulnerable to the depletion of the resource;

BE IT RESOLVED that payroll tax revenues collected from the

mining companies and from companies which service the mining industry be

invested in a special fund, and that expenditure from the fund be directed to

the diversification of the economies of the mining towns and the assistance to

persons affected by the economic dislocation in the mining industry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Orders of the Day

MR. BAKER: Motion 3, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Urban And Rural Planning Act,"

carried. (Bill No. 45)

On motion, Bill No. 45, read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 4, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act To Establish The St. John's Centennial

Foundation," carried. (Bill No. 41)

On motion, Bill No. 41, read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 5, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act To Revise And Consolidate The Law

Respecting The Prevention Of Fire," carried. (Bill No. 53)

On motion, Bill No. 53, read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 6, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act To Facilitate The Amalgamation Of Certain

Municipal Authorities And Municipal Services In Relation To The Northeast Avalon

Region," carried. (Bill No. 50)

On motion, Bill No. 50, read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Order 4, Mr. Speaker.

On motion, a bill, "An Act Respecting The Office Of The

Auditor General And The Auditing Of The Public Accounts Of The Province," read a

third time, ordered passed and its title be as on the Order Paper. (Bill No. 1)

MR. BAKER: Order 5, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Orders 5, 6, and 7?

MR. SPEAKER: Orders 5, 6, and 7, by leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

On motion, the following bills, read a third time, ordered

passed and their titles be as on the Order Paper:

"An Act To Ratify, Confirm And Adopt An Agreement Between The

These Governments And Their Agencies." (Bill No. 8)

"An Act To Amend The Hearing Aid Dealers Act." (Bill No. 10)

"An Act To Amend The Optometry Act, 1981." (Bill No. 9)

MR. BAKER: Motion 2, Mr. Speaker.

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform the House that

I have received a message from His Honour The Lieutenant Governor.

MR. SPEAKER: To the hon. the Minister of Finance: "I, the

Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland, transmit Supplementary

Estimates of sums required for the Public Service of the Province for the year

ending the 31st day of March, 1992, by way of Supplementary Supply and in

accordance with the provisions of the Constitution Act, 1867, I recommend these

Estimates to the House of Assembly."

Signed: James A. McGrath (Lieutenant-Governor)

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

MR. CHAIRMAN (L. Snow): Order, please!

Bill No. 44.

The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

A few days ago, when we were on this bill, the more we got

into the different headings the more we realized the magnitude of the concerns

that were there concerning some of the expenditures.

Perhaps, the one that highlighted discussion last day was the

one on Municipal and Provincial Affairs, from project funding to community sport

facilities, grants, and so on. However, there are a number of others, and the

one I want to start on today, is the one on social services. Now, it is

unfortunate that the minister is not here, but I am sure we can continue it some

day when he is here.

In Question Period today, Mr. Chairman, the Member for Fogo

talked about some of the problems being faced by people who were referred to go

to work on some projects sponsored by the Department of Social Services. Some

time ago, as a little bit of history, Government brought in $14 million, I

believe was the amount, as an emergency job creation program. The major problem

with it, of course, was that, in some cases, it was just making up for what they

had taken away in the last Budget. This heading here, Social Services, certainly

fits in there, because they are only replacing part of the amount axed from the

community development projects that was usually there in the past few years to

help create jobs for those who are less fortunate than many others who find work

in the Province.

However, this year was an extremely bad year, not only for

those who are always on the borderline of trying to find employment but for some

long term workers. So the Government brings in a programme which they figure

will cost around $14 million or $15 million and they talk about creating all

these jobs. It is going to be, of course once again, fairness and balance right

across the Province. People who are on social assistance will qualify and people

who are on the borderline, people who have run out of social assistance, people

who have never received social assistance, all will be able to go on these

programmes.

So what happened, Mr. Chairman? Well, we are going to find

out what happened one of these days when we get a list of the projects that were

approved and we see where most of the money was spent. The same thing happened

that has been happening ever since this Government took power, they looked after

themselves. When we hear about them talking about fairness and balance, the

facts and figures speak for themselves. Because there was never a government in

the history of this Province that was more blatant in patronage than the present

administration.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. HEARN: I get a kick out of the person who is

disrupting me, the Member for Port de Grave. Because if there was anybody who

talks negatively about this Government more so than the people on this side it

is the Member for Port de Grave.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, a number of people who are social

service recipients, who depend upon social assistance to keep them going, wanted

to take advantage of this programme. Because when you go to work on these

programmes you are actually out working. I mentioned yesterday when I was

talking about the perhaps guaranteed income, that a lot of people want to sit

home and take handouts from governments, whether it be the Federal Government or

Provincial. Most Newfoundlanders have a sense of pride and want to work, even if

it means going to work on programmes sponsored through the Department of Social

Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. HEARN: Mr. Chairman, there is a tremendous amount of

noise. I cannot even hear myself.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. HEARN: Years ago when we had very little social

assistance in the Province it was looked upon as dole, I guess from the word, it

is sort of doling out or a handing out something to people who were really

destitute. Most people who were in the work force would not even accept such a

handout because it seemed as if somebody was doing them a favour. We have seen

changes now in our Department of Social Services, and it is not looked upon as a

department whereby you only go if you cannot find any - it is a department that

is there to help people. Supposedly to help people. The Department of Social

Services, to assist you in your different social needs, and that includes

assisting you at a time when you just cannot make it on your own financially,

economically.

So these programmes came out and people wanted to go to work

so that they could at least better themselves somewhat from accepting the

monthly cheque from the Department of Social Services. Most people who qualified

went in, registered at the local offices, and in some cases were told: no, you

know, you may be well down the list because there are people who are much worse

off than yourself. But many of those who were legitimately qualified to go on

these programmes were told: yes, you qualify, we are referring you to work on a

certain project. These people went home, well pleased, knowing that they would

be back to work within a few days. However, they did receive a call within a few

days. It was to tell them: we are sorry, you cannot go to work on the project

because all the money is used up.

Now, the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations when he

was speaking today said that: this can happen. You know, sometimes in the haste,

or there might be a couple of examples whereby this happened. I say to the

Minister that there are many examples where it happened. Not a couple, or not a

couple of dozen. We could probably say there may be more than a couple of

hundred. There are all kinds of examples from all kinds of areas in the Province

whereby people were actually referred. Not only did they sign up, thinking they

were qualified, and then told they could not get a job - that might be logical.

There may be more demands than the amount of money available to take so many

people on. But when you are told, yes, you qualify and you are going on a

certain project only to be called and told, sorry, we cannot put you on, this

sometimes can also be understandable if it happens on a few occasions, but when

it is widespread and blatant then we wonder where is the management in the

entire project.

Something that is a lot more serious than that is the fact

that in certain parts of the Province where the local Social Service offices

applied for projects, or sent in ideas they had for local and regional

organizations such as Rural Development Associations or councils sent in

projects, immediately after the announcement was made they had been told: sorry,

you do not qualify because we have no money left. They are told that after all

the money has been allocated: not because you were not in early enough. They are

basically being told - if they were told the truth they would be told: you do

not qualify because you are not in a Liberal district.

In one district in this Province there are three local social

welfare offices. One office did not get any money at all to spend on job

creation programmes even though the need is great. The second office had

projects in, the local or Regional Development Association in the area had

projects in, and they were told: sorry, we have no money. The third office,

however, did get lots of money, all kinds of money. The only thing about it, the

people who were registered at this office from the Tory district were told:

sorry, we made a mistake, you cannot go to work tomorrow as we told you, we are

out of money. Yet the

section of the office covered also a large

section of a

Liberal district. In that district, that

section of the area covered by the

office, people were lined up in droves being referred and going to work on the

projects. Somebody told me it is like the old days when you lined up to go to

work on the base. One fellow went in and signed up. He said they told him there

was no job available for him. All the money was gone. And he said there was a

bunch there from next door and just because they were across the line everyone

was going to work. He said: What is wrong? What am I?' And the problem was he

was a Tory and consequently he did not get a job.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HEARN: And if you do not think it is factual then we

will wait until the Premier brings in the list of projects, the people who went

to work, the number of jobs created and the areas in which they were created,

and then we will see whether or not what I am saying is factual. Now it will be

interesting to see if the lists are doctored over the next day or so, but the

point is I expect to see a flood of people from my area being hired this evening

to offset the mistakes that have been made.

I do not know whether the gentlemen opposite know it or not,

but what is happening certainly in the field of social services - I cannot speak

for the other areas, we have not any forestry up there to be worried about.

Municipal authorities of my area I know did not get any money to spend on job

creation projects. They did not get any money period. Two of them have had to

resign because they cannot even get a response from their phone calls to the

Minister's office.

But on the social welfare projects people who live next door

are lined up going to work, and people on the other side of the line are being

told: sorry, we referred you but the money is used up. You cannot go to work,

but the people over here can. The people who work for the department are

themselves extremely concerned. They said they had never ever seen the like of

it. The social workers have referred people because they met the qualifications,

because they had been told they had x number of dollars to spend, they referred

people to jobs and they were told that these people had to be called and told

that they could not go to work because the money was spent. If that is not being

blatant then -

AN HON. MEMBER: Shameful.

MR. HEARN: It is shameful. The President of Treasury

Board says it is shameful, and I hope he calls the Minister of Social Services

in and takes him across his knee - now, that would be something to see -and has

a hard and fast chat with him. Because that is exactly what is happening in

relation to the field of social services.

So when we are asked to approve $4.5 million to create jobs

we would like to know where, we would like to know how many, we would like to

know the qualifications, and we would like to know, of course, whether or not

the money is being spent with fairness and balance. If it is, then we will say,

a job well done. However, as of now the facts, I think, will speak for

themselves.

There are a couple of other topics here that we would like to

get into, Mr. Chairman, but I am sure there are others who want to speak, so we

will wait a while.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I was very interested in the comments of the Member for St.

Mary's - The Capes. I have been expecting that at about this point in time they

would start asking the usual questions concerning supplementary supply and the

details of programmes and so on. I know about those things, Mr. Chairman,

because I sat in Opposition for four years and we went through the same process,

exactly the same process. The more things change the more they remain the same.

Mr. Chairman, there is one big difference this year - one big

difference this year. In four years sitting in Opposition asking for details of

supplementary supply, asking for details of programmes and so on, I do not think

I got a single answer, not a single answer in four years. However, things

changed today. Today there is going to be a flood of information, a veritable

avalanche of information, specific details of projects, an avalanche of

information to members opposite concerning the supplementary supply bill, an

avalanche of information, something that in four years in Opposition I could not

get. I could not get any details at all in four years.

Now then, there are two explanations actually, Mr. Chairman.

The first explanation is that it is only right the Opposition should have it.

That is the sensible approach, it is only right the Opposition should have it.

The second reason is that in one particular instance in this supply bill - and I

would like to very briefly run through it in terms of the general amounts. In

terms of Fisheries, Forestry and Agriculture, the expenditures in Municipal and

Provincial Affairs, and in Social Services, these expenditures are related

primarily to the new programmes, the programmes that we started. These

particular departments really do not have a problem, an urgency, in terms of

pressures of time. They do not, because there are monies that can be transferred

and we can wait for the next two or three weeks or a month until the

supplementary supply bill gets through the House.

However, there is one lot of projects here under Environment

and Lands that we really need approval of that money today. So, one of the

reasons that the information is going to be given from all departments, in

addition to the fact that it is only right to do it and the members have asked

for it, is because of that particular segment of the programme administered by

Environment and Lands having to do with environmental cleanup grants and

subsidies to organizations around the Province. In that particular case we need

the money approved now because commitments have been made to development

associations and so on out of that $500,000 that we cannot hand over to them

until the supply bill actually goes through the House. The reason this is

different from the other departments is that in Environment and Lands there is

no other money to transfer in from other votes. There is simply no extra money

at this point in the year in Environment and Lands.

So, two reasons why you are going to get all the information:

One, because it is right to give it; and the second because I would like to have

the supplementary supply bill, especially the allocation to Environment and

Lands, through today so that we can give the money to these development

associations tomorrow. It is as simple as that.

So, Mr. Chairman, for the remainder of the afternoon I expect

that my colleagues will be extremely anxious to get up and go through project by

project, amount of money by amount of money, exactly what has been happening in

the response programme. Mr. Chairman, you are going to be impressed, you are

going to be really impressed.

The speed with which the programme was put into action, the

speed with which thousands of people have been put to work, is absolutely

amazing. The departmental officials have been very excellent in terms of doing

their job and getting the programmes in place. Members opposite have had some

criticism about one department, Social Services. I can tell Members opposite

that Social Services was very quick in getting a lot of the money allocated

simply because they had on file from their regular programme, lots and lots - as

a matter of fact, enough to spend maybe $8 million or $10 million extra. They

had on file applications to their regular community development programme. So

they could very quickly get into gear. I would like to congratulate them and the

other departments for doing such a superb job at very quickly responding to some

of the needs that are out there.

So, Mr. Chairman, I am sure that between now and 4:00 p.m. or

4:30 p.m. Members on this side will gladly give all the information that Members

opposite want, and be very happy to give it, all of it. It is an indication of

the kind of attitude that we believe should be followed in the House of

Assembly.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Menihek.

MR. A. SNOW: I am pleased, Mr. Chairman, to have the

opportunity to speak to Bill 44, and respond to the remarks made by the hon.

Member for Gander, the President of the Treasury Board.

Mr. Chairman, this Government since they have come to office

and campaigned on a slogan of 'a vote for a real change,' I believe it was -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: - and fairness and balance. I have been

reminded by the hon. Minister of Finance and the Member, that such fairness and

balance, they have campaigned on that.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I want to speak specifically about my

district, about the fairness and balance that has occurred since that day, April

20, I believe it was, 1989. One of the first things that occurred was the public

debate in western Labrador about commitments made by the then Premier of the

Province, Tom Rideout, and the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Wells. Commitments

made during the election with regard to the establishment of the Labrador West

campus of the Labrador Community College, but more specifically the first-year

university programme to be located and set up in western Labrador.

The hon. Minister of Education announced that they would not

be establishing a first year university programme in western Labrador. After a

concerted effort, led by local citizenry, the Premier forced the Minister to

live up to the commitment made by him while he was leader of the Opposition, and

we indeed do have a first year university programme being offered through the

Labrador West campus of the Labrador Community College in Labrador City. It is a

very good facility, a facility that is being made available to residents of

western Labrador who for years had not had the opportunity of attending a first

year university programme and staying at home in Labrador City or Wabush.

As a matter of fact we are getting people to relocate from

other areas of the Province, moving in there to attend the school. They have a

tremendous faculty, a good facility, and I want to commend the Government for

coming to the help of the residents of western Labrador with our insistence and

the insistence of course of local citizens who lobbied and pressured this

Government into living up to their commitment. But some of the other things that

have occurred in western Labrador since that day, April 20th, 1989; I will not

list them in chronological order and neither will they be in order of

importance, I will just list them and talk about them as they come into mind.

One of which is the closure of a Motor Vehicle Registration office, an office

that had been set up there - I believe back in the early 70s - and local people

could make use of this facility to be able to register their motor vehicles. In

the cost saving measure the Government said: well, we are going to make it more

efficient, we are going to shut down the one in Wabush and shut down the one in

Clarenville and make it more efficient for the people of Labrador and the people

of Newfoundland.

Now, Mr. Chairman, they may have saved some money. I think

the saving was around $30,000 in the case of the office in Wabush, but the

amount of aggravation that has caused the people of Labrador City and Wabush,

the $30,000 is ridiculous, Mr. Chairman, considering the millions and millions

of dollars that are hauled out of the people's pockets in western Labrador, and

this Government, this regime saved a paltry $30,000, by shutting down that

office which provided a tremendous service to the people of western Labrador.

They conducted approximately, I think it is something like 30,000 transactions

in a period of a year.

Now, Mr. Chairman, that is a tremendous amount of local

service to be offered to a community and that service is no longer available.

You would be amazed at the amount of aggravation that causes local citizens with

regard to licensing their vehicles or acquiring drivers permits, that type of

thing that the Motor Vehicle Registration office provided for years to these

people who produce more wealth for this Province per capita than any other

electoral district in this Province, Mr. Chairman. The miners in western

Labrador do that.

I can quote where the Minister of Finance has said that very

same thing in his speeches I believe to the Board of Trade in St. John's or

somewhere in Halifax, and the people of western Labrador are very proud of that.

But, Mr. Chairman, what they would like to have is fairness and balance; they

did not want to see the $870,000 cut that was given to the Captain William

Jackman Memorial Hospital which meant they had to cut back service. They did not

want to see that, they wanted to have an improved service; they did not want to

see their service cut back in western Labrador to the extent that this regime

has seen fit to do, because it is unfair.

The Government here does not recognize the function, the

specific functions that that hospital does differently in my district than it

does in the other districts in this Island portion of the Province. We live so

far away from another hospital; it is very expensive for people to get to other

areas of this Province, more specifically to the Island portion of the Province

from western Labrador than it is from a place like St. Anthony or Corner Brook

or Deer Lake. So, I do not believe that they specifically recognized the

importance that should have been placed on the geographic considerations, if we

can call them that.

We see million of dollars dragged out of western Labrador in

the form of not contributing the amount of municipal grants that would have been

accruing to the towns of Labrador City and Wabush, if the previous grant

structure had been left in place. I believe the Town of Labrador City is going

to lose in the vicinity of $2 million over the next three or four years. If the

previous grant structure had been left in place the Town of Wabush, indeed would

probably lose in the vicinity of around three-quarters of a million dollars-

MR. GRIMES: That is the only place that happened, was it?

MR. A. SNOW: - and the hon. Member for Exploits has

suggested that, that indeed is not the only place that that is happening and I

will agree with him, that it is just not my district that has been treated

unfairly; there are thousands of people being exploited by his lack of concern -

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, exploited, good word; exploited.

MR. A. SNOW: I wonder if that is where the naming of his

district is coming from ?... because of the exploiting of the people, the

exploiting of the people that is occurring since that day, April 20, 1989. There

are thousands of communities being affected in this Province by the changing of

the municipal grant structure. I can remember being up at one of our local clubs

in western Labrador at a function.

AN HON. MEMBER: The Kiwanis Club.

MR. A. SNOW: No, the Labrador West Caribou Hunter's

Association Club. The name of that club could probably deceive you in one sense

but it represents a rod and gun club type of mentality person, if you will. We

are concerned about fish, animals, and wildlife so we get together up there. I

am a member of the club and proud to say I am a member of the club.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you for or against gun control?

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Chairman, one hon. Member has asked

whether or not I am for or against gun control. I am in favour of a lot of the

things this club is articulating, as a matter of fact, asking this Government to

change some of the fishing regulations in this Province and how they affect the

tourist industry in western Labrador. The fishing regulations have to be

changed. I knew that would catch the Minister of Development's ears because this

club -

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I will be over next week.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Chairman, I want to take a few minutes to

talk on this particular bill that is before the House of Assembly. In relation

to the taxpayers of this Province and what they contribute towards this House of

Assembly and the salaries paid to the people, which we have to be very careful

of in this day and age because of the shortage of money in the Province,

especially for the essential needs, especially health, education, and social

services of which I was Minister for a couple of years before I was removed from

that position. Nevertheless the problems in social services remain there even

though I am no longer there. It is incumbent on every Member in this House of

Assembly to be honourable in his position in the House of Assembly when it comes

to the rules and regulations set down by this Legislature and the effect it

would have on the taxpayers of this Province. I refer particularly to the Morgan

Report. It is too bad that the part-time Member left his seat. I would have

hoped that he would have stayed but I guess he knew I was getting up so he ran

out. I want to refer to Page 34 of the Morgan Report.

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that a part-time job?

MR. EFFORD: I do not know who he is. 'We re-emphasize in

closing, the fact that to be a Member of the House of Assembly today and to

fulfil the functions required both to the Legislature and the constituents is a

full-time occupation.' Mr. Chairman, I have been a Member since 1985 and I can

assure you that it is a full-time occupation. In fact you must spend day and

night, seven days a week in order to look after your constituents. On Page 13 it

very clearly says that: a Member needs to contribute all of his or her time and

efforts to the task and if there are Members who because of business or

professional reasons cannot devote themselves full time to their responsibility

they should be honour bound to inform the Speaker what proportion of their time

they can devote to their duties. Their indemnity and their non-taxable allowance

should be prorated accordingly.

Every single year, Mr. Chairman, since I became a Member of

this House of Assembly I reported my investments, what monies I have in what

firms, how much stocks I have, and it is printed on the front page of the

Evening Telegram or some newspaper every single year. I was told to do that by

this House of Assembly, by this Legislature, and I followed that, and I would

assume that every other hon. Member in this House of Assembly would do the same

thing. Now, jokingly a lot of people accuse me of being the richest man in the

House of Assembly but I do not mind the jokes.

AN HON. MEMBER: But aren't you?

MR. EFFORD: I am not the richest but I am also not the

poorest.

No, I am not the poorest either. But I tell you, in checking

with the Speaker's office, I have found out, beyond a doubt, that there has been

no member - no member in this House of Assembly - who has reported anything to

do with the Speaker in regard to their occupation otherwise outside of this

House of Assembly. So we basically go on the assumption that every MHA in this

House of Assembly is a full-time member. We go under that assumption unless we

have information otherwise.

If, for argument sake - if, i-f - if for argument sake, there

is a member, or members, earning monies, not through interest or not through

investments, because he does not work at that, but earning monies out working in

a firm on a day-to-day basis, then he or she would be assumed to not be a

full-time member. It is only an assumption, a hypothetical statement, if I were

running a business, then I could not be a full-time member. If I were running a

business, and I were not a full-time member, and the Morgan Report very clearly

says than I should report that to the House of Assembly, to the Speaker, to the

Chairman of the Internal Economy Commission. That has been here in this

Legislature for two years. Every member, he or she, should know, must know, the

rules of the Morgan Report. Therefore, if I know the rules of the Morgan Report,

and I am working in a business, and I am not spending full-time as an MHA, and I

am clearly, clearly, intentionally not reporting it, I know what I am doing, I

am receiving monies under false pretences. That is a criminal offence, number

one. It is inappropriate for any member of this House of Assembly to do that. It

is not honourable for a Member of the House of Assembly to do that. But apart

from what is expected of a member, what the appropriate or inappropriate action

is, it is a criminal offence to receive money under false pretences,

intentionally, knowing full well that it is the law.

I am shocked to know, Mr. Chairman, that no member of this

House of Assembly - and we are setting the examples for the rest of the Province

- I represented fishermen this year who, forced through darkness and forced

through fog, had to try to save their full year's investments, their full

lifetime's investments - not full year - their full lifetime's investments, and

sneak around the fog to try to get some fish. They were accused by people in

this House of Assembly, some of the members who I suspect are working otherwise,

of breaking the law.

A person goes into a shop and picks up an

article and does

not pay for it, and he walks outside; that is breaking the law. A person takes

something belonging to somebody else; that is stealing. That is breaking the

law. Are we saying that Members of the House of Assembly are exempt, and can do

as he or she wishes with the taxpayers money; fill their pockets to their own

delight, and they are not breaking the law? They are not breaking the law? Is

that what we are saying? We are exempt from breaking the law? We can do what we

feel like? You hear the jokes on the street that all politicians are crooks. I

am beginning to wonder if that is an actual fact.

What do I publicize my investments every year for? I do not

get any great pleasure in people making statements on the street, and people

saying that when you go to look for (inaudible), look who you are; you do not

need anything. You have lots of money. You do not need this. You do not need

that. So, you put up with that sort of thing, but it is my responsibility. It is

unfortunate that a politician has to place (inaudible) and everything he has

personally and privately is public, but you know that before you get elected.

You know, when you run for public office, what is expected of you. You know that

you have to make that thing publicized. When this Morgan Report was printed, Mr.

Chairman, and was commissioned by the House of Assembly, it was commissioned for

a reason, to make sure, and to ensure that Members of this House of Assembly got

what was rightfully theirs; got compensated for the job which they were doing in

fulfilling their position as a Member of the House of Assembly, not only

financially, but in the things that he or she needed to do that job. It was done

for that reason. But it was also done for another reason. It was also done to

protect - to protect - the taxpayers of this Province; to put some ground rules

down, to put some laws down that would ensure that every person elected to the

House of Assembly would do the honourable thing and make sure that he or she did

not do anything to conflict with the laws of the land and the laws of the House

of Assembly. And, Mr. Chairman, that is the clear thing.

Now I am not a lawyer by any means, I have no legal expertise

whatsoever. I hardly know about paying a parking ticket. I know that I have to

go with the money, but as far as the legal implications, I do not even bother

with it. I have no expertise there whatsoever. But I know I can read, and

section 362 of the Criminal Code clearly deals with the false pretences and what

false pretences constitutes in the way of breaking the laws -

section 362. And I

see heads on the other side, I see the way they are looking, and there is no

reason for anyone to look dismayed or shocked. Nobody has anything to be afraid

of or guilty of whatsoever. I am only making a statement. I have not accused any

individual. I have not accused one individual. I have not named an individual.

The only thing I said in the press the other day when the press were trying to

get me to name someone, I said they referred to one individual, one Member on

the other side, and I said, 'Sure, I have heard other names.'

I referred to the Member for St. John's East. His name was

mentioned in the press last year. That same Member requested that Members on

this side of the House of Assembly would make public their expense account

because he tried to say his expense account was very, very small and he wanted

everybody else to publicize their expense account. He did not tell them that

Members on both sides got so much money every year to buy a computer and they

spent that money to buy a computer, but his computer was given to him by the

House of Assembly. He never had to buy it out of his expense account, so he came

off looking good by saving $5,000.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. Member's time is up.

MR. EFFORD: By leave, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: No leave.

AN HON. MEMBER: A good speech John. That was very

informative.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) another minute.

MR. EFFORD: Another minute?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave by

leave.

MR. EFFORD: Just to clue up, Mr. Chairman.

So, Mr. Chairman, it is very clear. Next Wednesday when the

House of Assembly re-opens I will be reconvening in the House in Question Period

hopefully - I will try to get recognized. If not on Wednesday it will be

Thursday, and if not Thursday it will be Friday, but I can assure this hon.

House that I will stand until I get recognized, and I will bring out to this

hon. House of Assembly exactly what is happening in this House of Assembly and

let the chips fall where they may.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I want to continue on Bill 44, Mr. Chairman. It is most

interesting that there is one department in particular, the Department of

Development. Today in The Evening Telegram I noticed that the Minister of

Development came out - and I would like to quote what was quoted in the Evening

Telegram today, what the Minister is alleged to have said. The first headlines

say: Furey denies withholding report on Government's Labrador stores. It goes on

down and it comes to: But Mr. Furey said Mr. Warren's statements are just

another example of his usual misrepresentation of the facts. He said the general

contents of the study were released in March and many of its recommendations

were implemented. In Phase One, the Minister said, six options for the future of

the stores were recommended. The most acceptable was the co-operative.

Now, Mr. Chairman, let me go ahead and say to the Minister

that the Minister has not told the truth to The Evening Telegram.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. WARREN: The Minister did not tell the truth to The

Evening Telegram because, Mr. Chairman. In the report, Phase one does not

mention one thing about public consultation, and the Minister of Development did

not tell the truth to The Evening Telegram, I will repeat again, Mr. Chairman.

He said Phase Two: a government committee made up of representatives from the

Department of Development, Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador in the Labrador

Region, the Economic Recovery Commission and Intergovernmental Affairs. Now, Mr.

Chairman, the minister could not have read the report, because Phase 2 does not

mention anything about this committee as the minister said! So, after all, the

release that I made public the day before yesterday is factual, because the

minister is not following what the report says. In fact, Phase 2 says: `A key

task force required in progressing towards this objective will be the

establishment of a transition team headed by a third party.' Headed by a third

party - outside of Government altogether!

Now, what he has done is, he has composed a Committee of

Government. So you can see the minister is not doing anything that is in the

report. What does it say? It says, `identify parties interested in assisting

with the programme; examine the feasibility of establishing local advisory

committees; select a member of each local advisory committee; organize a

discussion of new ownership; meet with the union.' Mr. Chairman, let me just

tell the House what happened yesterday. Now, here is how sneaky and slimy the

minister was in the last twenty-four hours.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. member is using unparliamentary language and I ask

him to withdraw it.

MR. WARREN: Mr. Chairman, if I used any words that were

unparliamentary I definitely withdraw them, no problem about that at all.

I will say, just look how crafty the minister was yesterday

evening. I got a call last night, I say to the minister, from my district, about

the Government store report. All of a sudden, a person in one particular

community said, `Mr. Lawrence O'Brien was here yesterday, and he told me that he

has been asked to check out the future of the Government stores. Since I brought

the report out, in twenty-four hours, the minister goes and gets one of the

members of his staff to go to the Coast, just as quickly as that.

Now, the report was not released in March. But I advise the

minister, and I have no doubt the minister will do likewise - I have eight

copies here now, and this report is going to be released to all of the media

today. Because I think they need to have this report to know what it contains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WARREN: Now, Mr. Chairman, let me say to my hon.

colleague, the Minister of Development - and I want to be a bit complimentary to

the minister, this time, because I believe that this report does have good

recommendations in it. But, it is no good to have the recommendations in there

when the report says it should take eighteen months for those stores to be

turned over to a co-operative, if the consultation process is carried out.

The Labrador Inuit Association has been asking the minister's

office, ever since March, for a copy of this report, and his office has refused

to give it.

Back in August, the minister said, and was quoted in the

famous "Evening Telegram", that shortly he would be taking the report to

Cabinet.

Now, how could he say that he had started on the report back

in March when Cabinet had not decided in August? And, apparently, Cabinet has

not decided yet. So the report, apparently, has not been sanctioned by Cabinet.

But, I tell the minister this, that each and every person in my district where

those five stores are located does know by now what is contained in that report.

A few days ago, the minister looked across at me and said,

You got the report illegally. I think that was the comment the minister made.

Now, I say to the minister, when that report was delivered to me, it was in a

brown paper bag, almost like the $50,000 that was delivered to the Confederation

Building in brown paper bags. Unfortunately, the person involved is no longer

employed, because he would have been fired, anyhow, so he is gone.

I want to say that this report does contain recommendations

that need to be talked through with the people in the five different

communities. Hopefully, the minister will see fit to make sure that the report

is implemented as efficiently and as quickly as possible. Subsequently, then, we

can see those stores operating more efficiently.

I say to my colleagues opposite, until we get the list of all

the projects from the Departments of Municipal Affairs, Environment and Lands

and Social Services, we will not let Bill 44 go through.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Chairman, I welcome the opportunity to

make a few brief comments on this bill in Supplementary Supply. Previously

approved, of course, under the Estimates, was a little over $1 million, which

would include community water service districts, and also under recreation

capital grants, some $1.7 million. So, altogether, we previously had approved

some $1.9 million, in that vicinity - ballpark figures - between community water

services and recreation capital grants. We were fortunate to add to that, under

supplementary supply, some $1 million, which would incorporate both community

water services and recreation grants.

I am pleased to be able to announce that in Labrador,

specifically, which would interest the Member for Torngat who just spoke, we

have already announced the spending for Labrador. Just to give you some

indication, I can give you the detail. In Nain, we are constructing a 100-metre

shooting range, $15,000, 70/30. Labour is over $10,000 there, thirty-eight

person weeks in that project.

In Makkovik, in the bowling lanes area, we are repairing the

roof, $15,000, and, again, there are thirty-eight person weeks. The labour cost

is $10,500, and the materials, $4,500.

In Charlottetown, we are doing renovations to the rec centre,

which is also $15,000, with thirty-eight person weeks; Pinsent's Arm, completing

the recreation centre, $10,000. Again, $7,000 of that is labour, $3,000

materials, twenty-five person weeks; In St. Lewis, we are completing an outdoor

rink, $10,000, $7,000 of which is labour, $3,000 materials, with twenty-five

person weeks.

In Lodge Bay, repairing doors and painting the rec centre,

$10,000, twenty-five person weeks; West St. Modeste, playground equipment and a

trail - trail work, $15,000, thirty-eight person weeks; L'Anse-au-Loup, concrete

pool and outdoor rink, $15,000, thirty-eight person weeks. The regional board,

itself for the region, repairing the Zamboni and painting the arena, $15,000,

thirty-eight person weeks; Happy Valley - Goose Bay, providing some dollars,

$15,000, to clear the Snow Goose Ski Slopes, thirty-eight person weeks; In

Hopedale, upgrading the outdoor rink, $15,000, with thirty-eight person weeks.

So, altogether, of approximately $1 million, assuming we do a

50-50 breakdown of the $1 million available between community water services and

recreation, we are spending, in Labrador, $150,000. So I think that is a major

contribution to recreation and badly needed projects in communities. Looking at

that list of communities, they all badly need the work involved and certainly

badly need the projects, because they have been prioritized. We have already

made this announcement, and I can assure you, it is being well received by the

people of Labrador.

I welcome the opportunity of making these few brief comments

on work that we have announced so far and, a little later, as we announce more

projects, I will be happy to announce those to the House, as well.

AN HON. MEMBER: Table it.

MR. GULLAGE: Yes, I can table this.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Chairman, the minister has just confirmed

in spades what we suspected had happened in those projects. I just made some

notes going through. I see there was some funding for Nain and some for

Makkovik.

AN HON. MEMBER: How much?

MR. WINSOR: Fifteen thousand dollars for each one. But

then, we go on down the list, Pinsent's Arm, St. Lewis, Lodge Bay, West St.

Modeste and a number of other places, and I think they may all be in Eagle River

district - a great number of them, two are in the district of Torngat Mountains.

Now, I might have missed one at the end because I was trying to write them down.

Mr. Chairman, it is very obvious what has been going on, when the minister has

chosen only to release funding for the Labrador districts.

Now, the minister said there was $1.75 million for community

water services. We would also be interested to find out how that money was

spent. Perhaps, the Member for Gander, who, I think, got a fair chunk of that

money -

AN HON. MEMBER: What!

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Chairman, the Member for Gander did quite

well out of that $1.75 million that was allocated last spring for community

water services to a town in his district, to the east of Gander. He did quite

well out of that money. Perhaps the member, when he gets up, will tell us what

portion of that money -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WINSOR: Now, Mr. Chairman, perhaps he can tell us

what portion of the money went there.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Yes, of course, because we were fair and

forthright in dealing with people.

Now, Mr. Chairman, we want that list. Since the minister

wants to table this, perhaps he should show us where the $1.75 million went

throughout the district.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) program.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WINSOR: No, no, no. The President of Treasury Board

was not present. The minister said, We are adding $500,000 to the previously

committed $1.75 million. Now, we have never seen a listing of where the $1.75

million went.

MR. BAKER: (Inaudible) the bill.

MR. WINSOR: No, it has nothing - except the minister

referred to it, so I have to refer to what the minister said. Now, the President

of Treasury Board is uncomfortable, and I wouldn't wonder that he is

uncomfortable if he knows what I know about the money that was allocated under

water community services. Let me tell you, what was spent throughout the

Province was not in fair proportion compared to what was spent in the minister's

district.

Now, that is not to say that the community of Benton did not

deserve some money for water and sewer. They have terrible water and sewer

problems there and have had them for a number of years.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: He got more than $50,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) he said.

MR. WINSOR: He said - I know different, though.

The minister went on to say that we spent - this is going to

bring up nearly $1.7 million spent on community sports facilities. Now, you

would almost believe that the minister approved $1.7 million, last year, for

community recreation facilities. Now, Mr. Chairman, he did not approve one cent,

not one dime; those were ongoing commitments that had been made three, four or

five years ago, not one dollar in the last two years. This year, 1992, is the

first time that there have been applications sent to municipality recreation

commissions throughout this Province, inviting their submissions, the first

time, Mr. Chairman, since this Administration took office, that this has

occurred. And I might add that some of the guidelines are pretty ludicrous, too.

Mr. Chairman, I don't know where they built outdoor rinks, I don't know what

kind they have built, but I tell you that no child in Newfoundland will skate on

a rink for which you are going to have estimated costs of $30,000. You would not

even put a light on a rink for $30,000, let alone build one. A total cost of

$30,000 for a skating rink is in his guidelines.

AN HON. MEMBER: Where?

MR. WINSOR: It is in the new guidelines sent out to

communities. They have to come up with 25 per cent, up to a maximum of $30,000

funding from Government.

Now, Mr. Chairman, we could go on with a considerable -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) in Labrador.

MR. WINSOR: Yes, we know it is only a list of projects in

Labrador. Do you know what I suspect we are getting here, Mr. Chairman, a sting

operation, another sting operation, because there are reasons why that list is

not revealed, and we are waiting. It is supplementary supply and you may have to

wait a little longer, maybe until next Wednesday, if that list is not -

MR. SIMMS: The Government House Leader just told me that

all of the projects have been approved.

MR. WINSOR: They have all been approved. What about the

$5 million in social services?

AN HON. MEMBER: What about all the recreation

(inaudible)?

MR. WINSOR: What about the $5 million in social services?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: That is just in recreation, oh, yes, we know,

only in recreation, but the environment ones should be coming, because we know -

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that all that has been spent in

recreation?

MR. WINSOR: We did not get anything on water services.

The minister's department keeps saying that they don't have them approved, yet

the minister's officials, on October 9, said applications had to be in the next

day, because programs had to start immediately, since, they said, they wanted to

do it before the snow came. Now, Mr. Chairman, that was over three weeks ago and

the minister has yet to announce publicly - we do not know what is happening

behind the scenes in some Liberal districts as to what announcements have been

made. We know about $300,000 in Labrador that he announced some time ago, and he

just announced $110,000, so there is another $200,000 or so that the Member for

Eagle River knows about, that we have not been able to get access to here in

this House, Mr. Chairman.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Now, the Member for Eagle River says he can

give it and I have no doubt that he can, because, according to this list, the

bulk of it went to his district, anyway. So, there is no doubt about it, he can

provide the list, having seen what we have just seen here.

MR. SIMMS: Are we going to get the rest of the lists when

they are ready?

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Chairman, the Government House Leader

made the commitment some time ago that the total list of the money allocated

would be provided this evening. Now, it is getting late in the afternoon -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: What is that?

MR. SIMMS: That is under the $14 million dollar programme

he is talking about, now.

MR. WINSOR: It is the total $14 million programme we are

looking at.

AN HON. MEMBER: That is what we (inaudible) the

programme. That is only half of it, as I understand it.

MR. SIMMS: The water is.

MR. WINSOR: That is half of that programme, $110,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: (Inaudible) from the recreation portion.

MR. WINSOR: Yes, but he only named - just let me see the

list.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is all from Labrador.

MR. WINSOR: Yes, it is $110,000, the minister said; the

total comes to $110,000.

MR. SIMMS: How much was approved for recreation? Is

$110,000 all that was approved? Is that all that is going to be approved?

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that all that is going to be approved

for recreation for the whole Province?

MR. BAKER: This is not Question Period. We will answer

all this.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Chairman, this is of vital concern.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) will give you the answers

now.

MR. WINSOR: This is a farce, Mr. Chairman.

MR. SIMMS: The minister will answer it.

Okay, the minister is going to answer. I will defer to the

minister.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Mr. Chairman, as the President of Treasury

Board indicated earlier in this debate, in Committee, we would like to provide a

substantial amount of information regarding the expenditures that are outlined

in Bill 44, Supplementary Supply, particularly as it relates to the Emergency

Employment Response Programme. I will just clarify a couple of things that have

been discussed and brought up by the previous speaker, before, in the absence of

the Minister of Social Services, I take this portion of the allotted time to

discuss, in some detail, the social services component.

The list tabled by my colleague, the Minister of Municipal

and Provincial Affairs, outlined, if you take the totals, I believe, $150,000 in

terms of recreation grants for Labrador. These have been allocated early. In our

co-ordination of the programme, we wanted to get projects on the ground in

Labrador, because of weather conditions and timing and everything else, so we

asked the minister, in his department, to prioritize the funding of projects in

Labrador.

In the minister's department, there is $1 million total for

the Emergency Employment Response Program in Municipal and Provincial Affairs;

the intention is that it be fifty/fifty, half for recreation and related

programs and half for local service district water services and those kinds of

things. Again, there may have to be some flexibility depending on what it is we

can deliver and I have asked the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs,

other than the Labrador component, again, to wait a little while so that, along

with the little bit of money that we have in my department, between us, we can

actually fill in the gaps in terms of looking at where the money has been

allocated through Social Services, Forestry and Agriculture and Environment and

Lands and we will try to fill in as many gaps as we can with the remaining $2

million dollars.

MR. SIMMS: The remainder of the funds allocated to his

department have not yet been approved without (inaudible).

MR. GRIMES: We have been looking at them; they have been

assessed and re-assessed and we fully expect that within the next week or so we

will have all of it done. And, at the time, as the President of Treasury Board

indicated, we would like to be in a position to present to the legislature, to

the House of Assembly, a list of the projects approved in each department, how

many projects, how many jobs if we can identify that specifically, how many

person weeks of work and also how many individuals were positively affected and

assisted by this program.

MR. SIMMS: You will give us a list today, from all four

departments, of those things approved, is that correct?

MR. GRIMES: As many as we can, we will indicate to the

legislature in the time remaining in this debate. On that basis, I would like to

provide, if I could, some preliminary information, at least, from the Department

of Social Services. There are a couple of things I would like to point out in

relation to this.

First of all, the initial indication when we made the release

on October 4th and announced the Emergency Response Program, was that we would

fund social services an additional $5 million for community development

programs, because they could identify them fairly quickly and they are projects

that we could put in place almost immediately.

As we went through the projects and also found that we were

having a great deal of success, particularly in Forestry and Agriculture and

with Environmental projects in putting projects on the ground and in action

right away - and the minister, I am sure, in this debate, if given the

opportunity, will indicate projects that are up and running and have been, some

for as many as two weeks now, with people employed and working, and how many

persons have been impacted and so on - they, because they have had experiences

in previous years delivering those programs, were first off the mark along with

social services and the community development programs.

Just to point out a couple of things, because it has been

raised, and it is a little disappointing, I guess, to see the inference that

some hon. members would suggest there are political overtones to decisions that

are made here -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. GRIMES: The hon. the Member for Fogo indicates that

the list provided for Labrador shows that, which is the furthest thing from the

truth. You have to remember that in Torngat Mountains, the smallest district in

the Province, with only six communities, two of the six were given funding out

of that Labrador money from recreation, in terms of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs.

In Employment and Labour Relations, in the $1 million that is

there for short-term make work projects, in the department of which I am

minister, which will not be tabled today because it is not in the Supplementary

Supply Bill - we are using monies already there; it is not related to this bill

- in fact, we have covered four of the other communities. One is also already

approved under Fisheries response. The only one we know of, to date, in Torngat

Mountains, where there is no project identified to be funded, is Davis Inlet,

and mainly because, so far, we know of no request. In most cases, the members

for the districts have come forward, along with constituents and with

development associations and councils, and so on, with bountiful requests. For

some reason, there has been none for Davis Inlet. Each of the other communities

in Torngat Mountains has been taken care of, in one department or the other,

with at least one program in the community. The same thing cannot be said to be

true for Eagle River, where there are twenty-one communities. Maybe half of

those might be taken care of, but that is all.

Let me deal for a few minutes, if I could, Mr. Chairman, with

social services. Just to give an overview, first of all, up to the latest report

this morning, there are some 129 projects approved in social services, providing

job placements for 1,851 individuals. To date, well in excess of 300 people have

actually already started work, and over the life of the project, over the next

ten or twelve weeks or so, the other 1,500 will go to work and qualify in one

form or another for assistance throughout the remainder of the winter. The

difficulty with that is, through the organization in the regional offices, that

allocation totals a little bit more at the present time than the $4.5 million

asked for in this bill, so we have asked the minister, again, as we continue to

monitor this programme, to go back and rearrange a couple of the projects to

bring it back to the $4.5 million, because that is all he has authority to

spend.

In relation to remarks made earlier about some kind of

political overtones associated with this, it is true that there are half a dozen

of the regional offices that did not have any of their projects approved. The

minister is checking into it, as to why that occurred. The initial expectation

is that, because of the case loads within those offices, and the work load, they

were a little later than many of the other offices in getting their community

development projects in. In fact, the monies were largely allocated up to the

total of the $4.5 million. As I indicated, we are slightly over that now, and

trying to move back to the number which is permitted to be spent. Strangely

enough, though, the suggestion was that in those areas they would all be - I

call them Progressive Conservative districts, but members on the opposite side

refer to them as Tory districts, so I guess I can say that, too. But they were

suggesting that all those could be attributed to being whether you are sort of

Liberal, Tory, or whatever. I might point out that in the Western region, for

example, in Flowers Cove - and I am never too up-to-date on this map as to where

all the stuff is, whether it is Liberal, PC, or anything else, because that is

not a consideration in our decision-making, but Flowers Cove is in a Liberal

district, I believe - in Flowers Cove, there were no projects approved. St.

Anthony has zero, I do not know what happened there. I guess, if we were doing a

patronage thing, we did not do a very good job of it. There are others. If we

look in an area of the Province that is near and dear to myself, I think if we

were going to do something with patronage and pork barrelling, I would ask the

minister to do a little better job than this, because Botwood, which is in the

district that I represent, has one project approved, and Grand Falls, a district

up the road, represented by the Leader of the Opposition, has three.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. GRIMES: Three projects have been approved in social

services.

MR. SIMMS: Do you know which ones they are?

MR. GRIMES: I will get to the details of that in just a

second.

If, in fact, the minister were going to be involved in some

kind of blatant pork barrelling or patronage, I would ask him to do a lot better

job than this.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order.

Is the minister saying there are three projects, under social

services, approved for the District of Grand Falls or approved for the Grand

Falls - Windsor office? Because it is Grand Falls - Windsor office, these days.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

There is no point of order, it is a point of clarification, I

guess.

The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

As the Member for Grand Falls and the Leader of the

Opposition know, of course, the regional office in Grand Falls covers the Grand

Falls - Windsor area, as well as Bishop's Falls, in the district of Exploits.

In fact, the three projects that are approved through that

office, at this point in time, are for some interdepartmental support staff or

the council which covers the newly-amalgamated Town of Grand Falls - Windsor,

for some work to be done at the golf club which services all of the residents of

the Grand Falls area.

MR. BAKER: Is the golf course in Windsor or in Bishop's

Falls?

MR. GRIMES: The golf course is, I guess, technically in

Winsor - Buchans. It is outside of Grand Falls - Windsor on the way to Badger.

And, strangely enough, it also covers the Red Indian Lake Development

Association that has a project which will occur in the Millertown -Buchans area,

because that office covers that area, as well.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can give more

details at a later point.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have

just a few remarks on the Supplementary Supply debate, and specifically, since

today we are seeing the presenting and tabling of information -

MR. SIMMS: He did not table it.

MR. MATTHEWS: Well, we hope he is going to. He has not

finished yet, so I suppose he will speak again and hopefully, then, he will

table what he has.

MR. SIMMS: What about the Minister of Forestry? I thought

they wanted the bill today.

MR. MATTHEWS: The specific request to the Government

House Leader was that we get a list of projects approved -

MR. SIMMS: Communities.

MR. MATTHEWS: - with location, that means communities,

amount of dollars per project, and number of jobs created. Now, that was the

request to the Government House Leader, so I hope that he is going to -

MR. SIMMS: He is not listening.

MR. MATTHEWS: - provide that information to us.

First of all, before I get going, I want to say to the

Government House Leader and to the ministers, that they finally realize they are

governing in Newfoundland and Labrador and not somewhere else in Canada or the

United States. The Premier gives me a strange look, but I have a reason for

saying that, because we all know that he spends a fair bit of time in Upper

Canada. But we are dealing with Newfoundland and Labrador and it is going to be

important for any government, regardless of political stripe, to provide for

short-term work in this Province. The Government, for the first two-and-a-half

years, denied that you would even consider that. You have to do both when you

are governing Newfoundland and Labrador. You have to look at the long-term

objectives, Mr. Chairman, to prepare for the long-term and try to get long-term

work, long-term industry in the Province. But, as well, there has always been a

need in this Province, and I suggest there always will be a need, to provide for

short-term employment, and that is because of the nature of our Province. And

the Premier alluded to it yesterday, when he talked about the size of our

Province and how sparsely we are spread, and the geography and the coastline. We

all want the services and we all want the jobs, so it is very important that

whichever party governs this Province realizes that. And, finally, this

Government realized that there was need to provide funds for short-term

employment, which I am very pleased with.

Now, having said that, the reason why I made the request to

the Government House Leader for the list of approvals, the location, the amount,

and the jobs created, was that we are receiving considerable feedback from

around the Province that there are some significant problems with the mechanics

of the program, that people were called to go to work and told, `You will be

starting work on Monday' - now, this is not an isolated case, there are many,

many people - `You are supposed to come to work on Monday.' I know cases where

they were called last Wednesday, and then, Monday, were called back and told,

`I'm sorry, we don't have a job for you, now.'

MR. TOBIN: The minister should be listening to this.

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, the Minister of Social Services should

be listening, because most of the feedback coming into our offices is about the

community development program. People were called and told, 'Sorry, you cannot

now come to work on Monday. The department has overspent. Our district office

doesn't have the money it thought it had,' or `It has to send back some of its

money,' that it is not there for them to spend and, consequently, they have

over-employed, I guess, is a way of putting it. And, of course, the Minister of

Employment and Labour Relations, today, has confirmed that, that really they

spent more that the $4.5 million, I guess.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: They overspent by $400,000. The minister

has confirmed, really, what those people had been told, these individuals who

thought they had a job, that, indeed, the department has overspent, as the

President of Treasury Board says, by about $400,000. Now, that is little

consolation to those people who were called last Wednesday or Thursday and told,

`Come to work Monday.'

I have had a number of calls from my district which is served

by the social services district office in Grand Bank, from people who thought

they were going to work on Monday, and were called Monday morning and told, `You

can't come to work because the department has overspent.' That is just in mine.

The Member for Fogo said he had a number of calls, the Member

for St. Mary's - The Capes has probably had the most on this side, and I am sure

there are members opposite who, in their own areas, have found the same thing

has happened - people who thought they had a job, were called Wednesday and

called again on Monday and told, `Don't come to work, boy, because the

department overspent and we can't hire you.'

So, I say to the Minister of Social Services that the

problems we are experiencing is with the Community Development programme, for

the most part.

Now, I want to say to the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs that he has tabled a list here, today, dealing with

recreation capital grants, I guess, you would call it, from his department -

Labrador-oriented. But they are very heavily slanted towards the Member for

Eagle River's district. Now, you can get up and try to justify that any way you

want. I am not suggesting for a moment that the money is not needed in Eagle

River. I am not suggesting that at all, because I am sure it is, or I would hope

that the Government would not spent it if it is not needed there. But, when you

look at the balance of the money spent, in Labrador where most of it has gone,

to Eagle River, on the surface that does not look very fair. So, we have that

concern about the programme, as well, not only with Municipal and Provincial

Affairs, but with the other departments administering the employment programs

that were announced by the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations a week or

two ago. We have those concerns because feedback is coming to us on that.

So, these are the questions we want answered. And we are

dealing with Supplementary Supply. We realize Government is anxious to have the

bill passed to have supplementary supply granted, but I want to go on record

here as saying that until we get the list -

AN HON. MEMBER: Broken down.

MR. MATTHEWS: - broken down, with location, amount,

number of jobs, then we are not going to deal with this piece of legislation, we

are not doing it. I hope the Government House Leader realizes -

MR. SIMMS: And the Premier.

MR. MATTHEWS: - and the Premier; of course, the Premier

was asked in Question Period, today, and I know ministers are attempting to give

some answers.

MR. SIMMS: They are still playing games.

MR. MATTHEWS: I saw the Minister of Forestry and

Agriculture rise in his place, I guess, he is going to give, hopefully, some

answers, and table projects that have been approved by his department.

I want to go on record, Mr. Chairman, as saying there is no

way we are going to allow this bill to pass through this House until we get the

information we have requested. Because we want to see where the taxpayers' money

is being spent. We think that is only being responsible, particularly when we

have calls coming to our offices complaining, I say to the Premier, from people

who were called last Wednesday and Thursday and told to come to work on Monday

and then called back and told, `I am sorry, you can't come to work because the

department overspent.' We don't think that is good enough, and until we get the

answers to those problems and those questions, we are not going to have the

granting of supplementary supply.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. BAKER: Just one minute. I would like to point out to

members opposite that, in one of these departments, Environment and Lands, there

is a real problem in terms of being able to pay development associations money

before the Supplementary Supply Bill is approved. I explained that to members

opposite, and they are going to have to answer to the associations for those

amounts of money that cannot now be sent to them, if they fail to approve

supplementary supply today.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BAKER: I was getting to that.

The only thing we can lay on the table today is a list of the

projects that have been approved, and so on, and we are in the process of doing

that. The only ones available from the Department of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs, at this point in time, you have; the Labrador ones were done very

quickly because of the season, and that is the only thing that has been done so

far. You have that. You will have all for Forestry and all for Environment and

Lands in a few moments, if you will be patient. There is a problem with the

Social Services -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. BAKER: Well, are you going to listen or not? I just

want to explain to you that on the forms that the minister has, there is a

$400,000 overrun, which means that some of these have to be removed. So, in

actual fact, that is not the list of the projects. I believe some of them have

to be removed, that is my understanding - a $400,000 over expenditure there.

So, if we were to give this out - now, we can let hon.

members have a look at it, I suppose - if we were to make this public, and then

things were removed, this would cause problems. As soon as we know what has to

be removed, we will table the full and complete list from every single

community. So, there is a problem with the social services ones, a $400,000

over-expenditure.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. BAKER: That was explained. A half-million of the

original $5 million was put into some forestry projects that were ready to go

immediately. So there was only $4.5 million extra, ultimately, put in the

Department of Social Services in the Community Development Program, and an extra

$500,000 in the Forestry programme. So, $4.5 million extra is available in the

Community Development programme, but there is an over-expenditure.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. BAKER: No, not really. There was $5 million approved.

We took $500,000 out, and, in the process, afterwards there happened to be an

over-expenditure, or a planned expenditure in social services that was $400,000

over the $4.5 million. The sequence was wrong, that is all.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Chairman, time is drawing nigh, and we

made an agreement to see the Lieutenant-Governor at 4:30 p.m., but I do want to

make this point.

The Government House Leader cannot come into the House, and

all of a sudden, issue little threats. I mean, he called us today -

MR. MATTHEWS: This morning.

MR. SIMMS: - this morning. He called the Opposition House

Leader this morning and said, all of a sudden, `We need the money for the

Environment and Lands projects.' Now, `this morning'- it is not like he called

us several days ago and we have been hanging this up, or anything like that. He

called this morning, and we - we, being the caucus - collectively, said: `Fine.'

We have no problem agreeing with that request. We have no problem at all being

co-operative, as long as they are co-operative with us.

So, we made a simple request. Following up on questions we

asked a couple of days ago for the same information, we asked if he would

provide us with a list of projects approved, the numbers of jobs, the amount of

money, etc., from each of the departments involved in that special $14 million

project that was announced by the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Well, I say to the minister, we are not going

to give the Government - they had all day. What we have been seeing is ministers

getting up and playing little games, like the Member for Exploits, who got up

and ma