PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 67 4th. Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT THURSDAY , MAY 14, 1970 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

May 14, 1970 Tape 11874 Page 1" ·· The House met at 10:30 A.M. MR. SPEAKER: Order: Ans~ers to Questions: HON. J. R. SMALLWOOD (Premier): Mr. Speaker, in answer to question No.(461) on the Order Paper of April 17, in the name of the bon. member for Burin. The answer to the first

part is; "yes." The answer to the second

part is "yes, ··both in the Press and within Government departments generally. All Government departments. And in answer to (

c) the answer is; "yes. For example the ''Financial Post, the Bank of Montreal in -London were asked to refer any Chartered Accountants who may enquire. And the answer to the last

part is: "Twelve, during the year 1969-70." And the answer to the final part Section (3) This can be of course only a matter of opinion. RON. L. R. CURTIS (Minister of Justic~): In answer to Question

(499) May 5, by the bon. member for Humber East. The equipment has been delivered and is being put into operation in certain Magistrates Courts, not in all. It is just being put in now, being installed. The bon. member for St John's East Extern, Question asked March 9, Question No.l95; I am tabling the answer. ORDERS OF THE DAY Motion,"that the House go into CommitteP. of the Whole on Ways and Means"- Debate on the Budget: MR.J.C. CROSBIE: Apparently nobody wants to debate on the other side, Mr. Speaker, so I guess I have a few words to say. So far everybody can agree with what I have said, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, this budget speech, or so-called Budget Speech is a eighty- eight page do'cument in Reader's Digest form, which of course is much more significant for what it omits than what it includes, because it does not include ~ery much as pertinent for the financial position of this Province. Now Mr. Speaker, when this Session of the House opened, I tabled a question which asked for information on our financial position. It asked for example - yes, it was question (44). As of January 1, 197<0, what was the smount of t.he gross funded debt of the Provi!lce less any sinking funds'l 'And as ~130

JW May 14, 1970 Tape 0874 of that date, what was the amount of the net funded debt of Crown Corporation involved in leasebacks? At the same date, what was that position with respect to bank overdrafts, temporary borrowing, due on new road machinery, road building contracts, hospital equipment contracts, other unfunded debt: And it asked what our position was with respect to guaranteed debt, debenture debt with : reference to Newfoundland municipalities.

With respect for other than Newfoundland municipalities, bank loans for municipalities, bank loans for other than Newfoundland municipalities, guaranteed by the Government, any other guaranteed debt. And what was the amount of any commitments? Mr. Speaker, the answer given to that question, a contemptuous answer, and no answer at all. The answer given is that this will be in the Budget. That is what the Minister of Finance s~id, that the information asked for in that question- Question (44) and in other questions that .the Leader of the Opposition tabled, would be in the Budget. Mr.

Speaker, you can look through all eighty-eight pages of this Budget Speech, and you will see not one iota of information with respect to those questions, as to what the debt position of the Government was at January 1, or at the end of March this year. What was the amount of its direct debt, bank loans, debentures, guaranteed debt and so on. Not one word is said in this so­ called Budget Speech about any of those matters. And it is financial matters that a Budget Speech is supposed to deal with. This Budget Speech is in the same category as the Budget Speech that we had last year, except that it is shorter.

But it omits far more than it includes, and it only includes certain selective things. This Budget Speech for example Mr. Speaker, says that there will be a surplus, or that there was a surplus in the last financial year on current account of $1,996,000 for the year ending March 31, _1970. That is what this statement says. We will know the correct position when the Auditor General gives his re~ort next year. But ~ven if that is the case Mr. Speaker. it should be remembered that the c~vetnment included in its revenue for last year, $1,900.000 •Jhich ~131

May 14, 1970 Tape #874 Page 3 were pension contributions from Civil Servants. $1,900,000, pension contributions from Civil Servants - that is six percent of the earnings of Civil Servants, their money. It is their money that they are paJd~~ in wages, or entitled to have in wages- was taken by the Government as a pension contribution and included in the general revenue, $1,900,000. And $865,000 pension contributions of teachers, was handled in the same way.

This money was taken from the salaries of teachers, not put in any trust fund, taken from the Civil Servants, not put in any trust fund, and put in the general revenue of the Province of Newfoundland. It is not our money. It is not the Government's money. It is money that is owned by all those Civil Servants and teachers. So $2,7.65,000 - the revenue of this Government last year is not really revenue. It was money that the Government in effect has borrowed from the Civil Servants and teachers of this Province.

Money that did not go into a trust fund, that went into the general revenue and that the Government spent. So there was no surplus last year - MR. SMALLWOOD: It is not revenue and should not be counted as revenue. MR. CROSBIE: Yes, the whole plan should be funded MR. SMALLWOOD: That is the bon. gentleman's opinion. MR. CROSBIE: The money should go -but if it is not funded, then the monies owned by the teachers and Civil Servants of this Province should go in a trust fund and earn interest until such time as it is paid out.

This Government is building up - I was a member of the Government, and when this matter came before the House of Assembly, I was not in the Cabinet, and opposed it. The legislation was brought forward in May 1968, and I oppose it now. MR. SMALLWOOD: It was a case of . funding it or not funding it, and the decision was not to fund it. MR. CROSBIE: These are trust monies that should go in a trust fund and should not go in the revenue of this Province. MR. SMALLWOOD: Similarly with the Unemployment Insurance fund. 4132

May 14, 1970 Tape 1874 Page 4 MR. CROSBIE: Because the pension scheme is not funded, this Government is building up an accrude liability for the Civil Servants and teachers of tbis Province. MR. SMALLWOOD: Talking nonsense.

MR CROSBIE: And in five or ten years time the strain on the Treasury of this Province, of meeting the pensions of teachers and civil servants who go out at much higher rates of pay, getting two-thirds or three-quarters of their annual salaries for the last three years of service, when they start going out on these high rates of pay there is going to be a terrific burden on ~he Treasury of this Province to meet it. So that is $2,765,000 last year, that should not have been included in the revenue of this Province. MR. SMALLWOOD: Utter trash. Trash. It is contemptible. MR.

CROSBIE: One would not expect anything else from the hon. the Premier. He is too old to learn Mr. Speaker. $2,765,000. The Government states that it had a surplus last year of $1,996,000. The Government neglects to point again that some eight or nine million dollars ·last year was ­ shifted out of current account sinking fund payment. Mbved out of current account and put up in capital account. For nineteen years, sinking funds payment - payments made to sinking funds to meet the obligations to repay debt of this Province was in the current account.

Last year it was changed, and went up from the current account to capital account, taking at the time, I think it was seven and a half, eight million dollars expenditure out of current account, and put in as capital account. If the accounts of this Province were treated the same way last year as the previous nineteen years, there would have been a deficit on current account of at least nine or ten miilion dollars. But that is being hiked out and put uP on capital account. The cost of servicing the public debt this year shows in capital account $10,137,000. That is the Estimates for this year, M~.

Speaker, show $10,137,000 in sinking fund payments as capital account expendituTe, where foT nineteen years it was tTeated as ~1~3

May 14, 1970 Tape f1874 Page 5 current account, and the Government tries to say of courAe, again this year, that there is going to be a little surplus, or there was going to be a little surplus in current account. If the accounting treatment had remained the same, the deficit this year on current account would start out $10,137,000 of sinking fund payment. So the pension contributions of Civil Servants and teachers, trust funds are ~aken by the Government and put into the general revenue. The Government estimates or estimated Hr. Speake~, a surplus in current account this year of $1,547,000.

That surplus is now gone. We will have more to say about that later, but that is now gone for ~he salary increases. So there is no surplus estimated by the Government in current accounts this year, none. And the Government has estimated increased revenue of $19,940,000 this year without any tax increases, without any changes in the rates _of taxation - $19,940,000 additional revenue, which I think includes about $5 million additional equalization payment from -Ottawa. Tremendous increase is expected in a personal income tax and other taxes, which seem to be overly optimistic. Hr.

Speake!, I prophesy now that -when the accountg for this year are brought in next year, this Province is going to have a substantial deficit on current account. A substantial deficit. At least four or five million dollars at the very least on current account, and that is forgetting capital account. The Governmen~ tries to pretend that a surplus on current account is all that matters, which is tripe. It is putting the current account and the capital account together, that counts Mr. Speaker. And the Government's financial adviser, Mr.

James Thompson, I can give as one authority for that - there are a hundred authorities for it. How can you say you have a balanced budget Mr. Speaker, when there is a deficit and money has to _borrowed to meet the deficit. Now James Thompson who vas a financial consultant to the Government for eighteen, nineteen years, reported to the Royal Commission on ' Economic Prospects, that is Page 427. He pointed out how the Provincial Budget put expenditures into two cate1~ories, current and capital, and shows a surplus eN current .account

JW Hay 14, 1970 Tape #874 Page 6 available for capital expenditures, and then I quote what he says: The financial consultant to the Government -''this is an artificial distinction, and . for the purpose of its exercise, current and capital expenditures have been combined in order to determine net general expenditures which after reduction of current revenues show net financial requirements to be financed by borrowings, receipts under the Canada Pension Plan new bond issues and so on.

This is an artificial distinction~And for his purposes he combines current an~ capital expenditures to get net general expenditures which after reduction of current revenue show your net financial requirements. That is the net amount you must borrow. And the Economic Prospect Report Page 427. If you look at the reports of the Bonding Houses Mr. S~eaker, it is no good looking at the Budget Speeches of the Government of Newfoundland to get financial information on Newfoundland, not at all.

But if you look at the prospective& issued by the bonding houses who act as agents for the Newfoundland Government you then get some financial information on the financial state of this Province, because they have to reveal the facts.

One that was prepared last year in connection with an issue of bonds of the Newfoundland Municipal Financing Corporation, this is January 1969, this particular prospectus, had it tabled showing what the consolidated deficits of a Newfoundland Government were for certain financial years. 1964 - none of this nonsense ab~ut surplus and current account and what not and this is wonderful. Consolidated deficit putting them both together, 1964 - $21,200,000. 1965 - $25,348,000. 1966 - $20,388,000. This was small stuff Mr.

Speaker, small stuff up until 1966. $20,388,000. 1967 - The consolidated deficit - $7~,921,000. 1968 - this was said then it was subject to audit - $88. million. The Public Accounts show that the deficit for the year ending March 31, '69 was $72.8 million. And the Estimates for this year show that there is going to be a deficit of $53 million, that is what is forecast now Mr. Speaker. It will be more than that. So never mind the current account surpluses. Never mind the trying to cover up and make things look better. 1967 ·· $75 million. 1968 - about $88 million, that was subject to audit.

That is $150 million. 1969 - $72 million, that makes it about $225 million. And this year th~ estimate is about $53 mlllion and that is just the estimnte.

t'.ay 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK - 1 UR, CROSJHE;.: the .esUmnte, and thh is only direct borrowing, Mr. Speaker, direct not indirect, not guarantees. And the Budget . Speech tries to pretend the Acting Hinister of Finance tries to pretend that everything is rosy in the garden, that there is a little surplus, that the Newfoundland Government says in its Budget Speech there is a surplus. What we have to worry about is .this, Mr. Speaker, it is the cost of servicing the public debt in this present year the direct debt of the Government and the lease-back, which is the same as direct debt, is $52,971,000.

It is going to cost the people of Newfoundland and the Government this year to paid interest on the debt, "to make payments to sinking funds, and other cost in connection with our debt are going to total $52,971,000, and of that $10,137,000 is going to sinking funds payments direct, and then there is so much in there for lease•back and so much for interest, $52,971,000. That is a very high percentage, Mr. Speaker, of the Government's net revenue. It is certainly ~bout twenty-five percent, I have not got the exact figures. And there will be other speakers in this debate that will have them.

But it c.f is at least twenty-five percent, _ the net revenues of this Government. And it is growing increasingly every year. This Government, Hr. Speaker, is in the position ~ere, the Government, just to stand still, the Government performing no new services at all, no new services providing nothing new, just trying to keep where it is today, that the Government must have a deficit to accomplish that. This Government must have a deficit just to stand still. The only thing that is keeping us going at all is increased monies from Ottawa.

The new tax equalization formula that was~.instituted in 1966 or 1967 saved the Government's bacon, Hr. Speaker, the Government in that year had a tremendous deficit despite the fact they got some $30-odd million more from Ottawa unexpectly, when the tax equalization formula was changed. Now on Page 8 of the Budget, the Government admit& that out of a total revenue of $300,978,000 this year, over $160 million of it comes from Ottawa, 54.3 percent of our revenue is coming from Ottawa. The Budget lpeech contains some really peculiar statements, Nr.

Speaker. ''The reputat£on of our Province stands high in_the, finaucial circles of North America, Britian and Europe.'' It is_"certainly well known.

May 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK - 2 MR. C. ~mLLS: It doeA not stand very high. ~IR. CROSBIE: I would not think it stands very hi~h, interest rates stand hi~h, its interest rates are among the highest, that is what stands high, the interest rates and the cost of the debt is very high, the highest of any province. The surplus mentioned for this year on Page 6 is gone now. Is gone. And on Page 7, the cost of servicing the public debt is given. It is a deception, ~~. Speaker. Page 7 - Servicing the public debt the cost is riven as $32,114,000, which is not correct, which is untrue.

The actual cost is almost $20 million higher, . $52, _971,000. That is only the amount in current account and does not include, Mr. Speaker, what is in the current for the lease-back. The cost of servicing the public debt is $20 million higher than is state 'd on Page 7. Payment to sinking funds and the lease-back, when you take the _interest and sinking funds and lease-backs. Mr. Speaker, just to follow the Budget Speech, pages 15 to 32 deal with the Government power policy. Pages 15 to 32 are deliberate deception, the Government's power policy, The Government refuses, Mr.

Speaker, to answer any questions tabled in this House that would elueidate the fact behind the Government's power policy. This policy of subsidizing the delivery of power to large industries at a price less than the cost to the Power Commission. Pages .. l5 to j2 6el1berate deception: When the policy was · first enunciated by the Premier, 1 do not know when three or four or five years ago, Mr.

Speaker, his policy was going to be that the revenue to come to us from the Upper Churchill, from BRINCO to this Province would be used to subsidize the cost of supplying power to industry, large industries, at a cost less than it would cost the Power Commission. That was the theory. But that theory had to be thro~m out Hr. Speaker, because when it waa~looked into it .was diAeovered that to sell power at two and a-half mils here in Newfoundland would require far more money than all the revenue we are going to get from BRINCO over the next twenty or twenty- five"years.

And~the theory was foolish any way, it was trash, because you ~1~7

l".ay 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK- 3 ~ffi. CROSBIE: do not decide what to do with revenue like that, if we had revenue coming from BRINCO, t.tt' II in the years ahead you just do not say you are going to use that for one purpose. Any sensible Government, Mr. Speaker decides what is the best purpose, what .. is the best use for that money. It does not take a decision years earlier and say that, that money is going to be used to subsidize power and nothing else. It was a silly theory, it sounded good) but did not stand up to analysis. t~ow, the bon. the Premier ln:,his ..

Bbdset Speech says that there is a different policy, there is going to be a cost-benefit analysis, and there must be a net cash gain to the Treasury over a period of twenty years from all the industries that it subsidizes. That theory will not hold good either Mr. Speaker. The Budget Speech says there does not have to be a net cash gain to the Treasury from every individual industry involved. t~y not? And then it takes twenty years to assess the benefits and the costs. ln tl-renty years time, Mr.

Speaker, if, th!s ··policy is continued as it has been in the past, we may very well be bankrupt. \.le cannot wait for twenty years to get the net benefits over the next cost~ because the g~eatest expense is going to be in the first few years. ~hat is when the costs are going to be incurred and the benefits are going to come much later. And if this policy is carried out 1 this two and a-half mils policy is carried out,the Province might very well be bankrupt before the twenty year period is over. MR. WELLS: The whole world will be bankrupt. MR.

CROSBIE: Yes, the whole l.rorld could be bankrupt. ln tl-renty years time the whole world could be destroyed, but how is that relevant to the issue? Here is an interesting sta~ement, Hr. Speaker, on paJ~:e 17, fort ·unately the Premier says, not too many power subsidizes were agreed to be paid to industries at that stage. He says tha:t the power policy,subsidy policy of the Governmen~was adopted at a time when interest rates and money were low, the cost of materials were much lower, the labour rates were lol.rer. It did not mat:er at the time, Mr. Speaker, what interest rates were, what the cost

l'!ay 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK - 4 MR. CRO~BU:: of materiAls were. what labour rates were, the Premier was going to fanatically institute that policy no· matter what. lle did not care whethet·:.it made economic sense or not, But nm" the Premier says he admits in this Budget Speech that the earlier power s~bsidy policy '"as wrong. Fortunatley not too many power subsidi~~ were agreed to be paid to industries at that stage. No, Hr.

Speaker, it is very fortunate, the Government agreed with ERCO two and a-half mil power to ERCO, and it is costing the ?ower Commission at least twice what they are charging ERCO, and the taxpayers of this Province are paying the difference the $3.mtllion odd a year for every Ne~oundlander~employed down at Long Harbour, the Government and the taxpayers of Newfoundland are spending seven to eight thousand dollars each year and every year to subsidize the sale of power to ERCO. It is fortunate there were not too many ERCO's• we are very fortunate 7 bef_ore the policy was changed.

Two and a-half mil power was promised to Hr. Shaheen and the Come-by-Chance Oil Refinery, that was in 1961 or 1968. And interest rates were high then and the rest of it was all high. But he has been promised it, and that is going to cost the taxpayers of Newfoundland about $1 ~illion a year at least. This power if sold to the Oil Refinery is two and a-half mils kilowatt hour, the taKpayer will have to make up the difference for possibly three or four hundred jobs at Come-by-Chance along with all the other things that are involved there. Power was promised to l-fr.

Doyle for the fourth mill at two and a-half mils • per kilowatt hour. By the way, Mr. Speaker, when I criticize this ERCO deal. I am not criticizing ERCO, it is not the company's fault. The Electrical Reduction Company of Canada was ~Rd~ available to come to this Province by the Premier who offered them two-and a-half mils. It is not there fault they are getting power at two and a-half mils.

They do not~bear~ any share of the odium, they came in respondence to advertisements and entered into aureement, so none of this criticism bas anything to do with ERCO itself, it is not their fault, it is the Government's policy that is at fault, not ERCO. Doyle and Shaheen. 41:39

May 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK - 5 UR. CROSBIE: On Page 17 on this power subsidy business, it said every authority consulted has confirmed and approved the methodolo~y used by ~he Government in preparing studies of the cost to the Newfoundland Treasury of giving power subsidi~S to industry. The methqdology that only means, J.tr. Speaker, how you go about doing the studies, that does not mean that they have approved the actual studies done. I say now that any study done that does not bear out what Mr. Smallwood wants it to bear out is ignored, thrown away or redone. I have seen it happen.

Why will the Government not give the members of this House of Assembly the results of the studies done and proudly announce a year or so ago by Mr. Smallwood, Stone and Webster, the Energy Board of Canada, International Engineers of California, all of those studies were being done to show whether the Government's policy was right or wrong, and the Government will not let us or the public see the results. The only reason can be, Hr. Speaker, that the result are against this mad power policy of the Premier's. Last year, Mr.

Speaker, April 22nd. 1969, Question 226, I asked had the Government of Newfoundland, not this year, last year, received reports from the Energy Board of Canada, Power Commission of Newfoundland, International Engineers of California, Myers and McClenn of London, England, the Economic Division of the Department of Finance, Stone and Webster, Department of . Fin&nce of Canada, Department of Energy of Canada, the Department of Regional Economic Expansion of Canada? The Premier said, then yes, some had been received.

I asked was it the intention of the Government to make available to members of the House of Assembly copies of reports and studies received from the firms and persons mentioned in Question 1 hereof. The answer was, yes, in due course. Yes, the answer was last year, it was the Government's intention to make them available to members. tVhen would they be made available? In due course. Would the Government recommend a select committee to consider a study ,o:[ them? Government policy would be announced in due course, :l.n the normal •Jay, that was last year. Last year the Premier said, they wo1lld be ~140

~AY 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK - 6 tm. CROSBIE: made available. The same question asked this year, the bon. the Premier says no, they will not be made available. They will not be made available to the members of this House. Why not? The answer is that these studies show his policy to be wrong. At least that is the only conclusipn that one can come to, unless these s~dies are produced. The future of this Province is at stake in this matter, Mr. Speaker, yet we are not given the fact, we are given camoufl@ge, we are given misrepresentation in the Budget Speech, in the methodology.

The Budget Speech pretends to give an analysis of the power subsidy policy as applied not to one enterprise, but to seven; Liner Board Mill, Mohawk Hockey Sticks, a Sawmill at Stephenville, a Sawmill at Hawkes Bay, Oil Refinery, Come-by-Chance, and a Paper ~all at Come-by-Chance, the Phosphorous Plant at Long Harbour. Each has been studies individually, page 18. But the House is only given the aggrega~picture, it is not said who studied them. In other words the Government would not give the picture for each individual one. Obviously not, Mr.

Speaker, because the study of the ERCO rlant at Long Harbour shows the cost far out-weighs the benefits to this Province. The cost of sudsidizing the power, building roads, building houses, guaranteeing bonds, far out-weighs, Mr. Speaker, the benefits gain ~ workers employed at Long Harbour,on the taxes they pay, or the commission they pay on beer and allLthe rest of it, far ou~weigh it. So everything else is taken and heaped to~ether. We did not know before that the Government has agreed to subsidize power to Mohawk, it must have, if they are included in this study.

Apparently the Government is subsidizing the cost of power to the ~~h~1k Hockey Stick Enterprise, and the Sawmill at Stephenville, and to the Sawmill at Hawkes Bay, otherwise why are they included in the study? We knew that it was two and •~half mila at Stephenville, at the Oil Refinery, at the auppoaed Paper Mill .at Come-by-Chance, and at ERCO, but apparently this has been agreed for these other three enterprises. And then the Budset Speech pretends to give the reault from the etudies of theae included altogethe~. P&Je 19, we know how much each of theae industries will buy, says tho Dudset 4141

Hay 14th. 1970 Tape 875 PK - 7 rm. CROSBIE: Speech. But the Government will not tell this House, will not tell this House how much power they are buying. The Government will not answer a question tabled as to how much power ERCO is using every year. Mr. Shaheen and his cohorts;.would not answer a q,uestion here several weeks ago, as ,to how much power the Oil Refinery is going to use at Come-by-Chance. The Government says they know how much. But the Government will not tell us and the public how much.

The Government says, we know the cost of producing and delivering that power to each plant, ,but will not answer questions in this House asking for that information. Contempt for the public of Newfoundland, we are taking our money and spending it in subsidizes and power, but we are not going to tell you how much it is costing you. What contempt, what arrograncet This is the most arrogrant Government, Mr. Speaker, that this Province has ever seen, and probably that the whole of Canada has ever seen, in its refusal to give information. So the rest of this analysis in the Budget Speech cannot be believed at all.

Page 21, their separate identies have been merged and lost in the aggregate picture, quite by intention, that is certainly right, that was certainly the intention. Now , }!r. Speaker, Page 21, the Premier was very pleased to report that the only year in the twenty that showed a :·net loss to the Government was 1969. Peculiar. The only year for which the figures are available. But according to·this study every other year is going to show a surplus. What tripe, what nonsense, who believes it? An insult to the intelligence of anybody who reads it.

Then there is a discussion about the Upper Churchill revenue, the revenue to the Newfoundland Treasury, and all kinds of figures are included in tiezt,reveune from construction workers. Really weak. The first revenue from the Upper Churchill is not until .1972, ~fr. Speaker, a million dollars according to the Budget Speech onpage 28. That is the only thing real about that table on page 28. The revenue does not come until 1972. And then there are figures given for Labrador, Wabush an·! Labrador City. Now, Nr. Speaker, on Page 33 4142

l'lay ~ltt]1 1 .L~/U Tape 8/b JM- 1 MR. CROSBIE: Page 33, the budget speech shows conclusively the absolute failure of the Smallwood policy for economic development, that is page 33. The Government admits, DBS figures show us that in March month of this year fifteen point three per-cent of our work force was unemployed, fifteen point three per-cent and it is actually much higher than that, at least twenty per-cent. After twenty-one years of howling and screeching and screeming and oratory by the Leader of the Administration; Mr. Smallwood, the jobs are carved on his heart and nothing but talking about jobs, Mr.

Speaker. This Province has an unemployment rate in excess of fifteen point three per-cent and tens of thousands unemployed because the Government Economic Development policy has been an absolute failure, a complete failure. What we need is a Government that will go about developing jobs and will not be out wasting all its time talking about it, a Government that will actually create jobs, sensible jobs, liable jobs, not just going blindly assisting a plant here and a plant there without any investigation, plants which after years of subsidization fail and close down.

That does not create jobs, that creates talk, it does not create jobs and this Government has not and the Government in the budget speech has to admit it. It says in the budget speech, the main fact is that we have the highest rate of unemployment in Canada today and that our need for jobs is accordingly higher than any where else: . in the nation. The facts point unerringly to New- foundlands need for new job giving industries, wage paying industries, productive industries, yes, Mr. Speaker. productive.

All that points up to the fact that with the slim resources we have in Newfoundland we have to get the most for every dollar we spend, not the mad approach of this Government, the momumental egotistical approach that because a certain party wants an industry it is going to go no matter what it costs the Treasury and the people of Newfoundland, that ts the present approach. AN RON. MEMBER: ~ou cannot keep a good man down. MR. CROSBIE: What man is that? Just look at ebme of the industries, Mr. Speaker, and what they have cost us that they should n~t have cost us.

In the supplement- ary supply d~bate the steel mill at Donovan's was mentioned, the Newfoundland Steel Company and the Premier got up and said how well it was doing now and we ~1J3

• ...,. 14th, 197G 'l'ape 876 JM- 2 Jill. CIGSBIE: ·all llope he u rtaht and it aee.s to be :lapro'Ving now but look what happened ellen. 'l'hla is the illuetrat:loa, HI'.

Speaker, of the bankruptcy, of the failure. al thte c..ern.ante econo.ic develop.ent policy, the steel mill originally ...,... .. to coat $2. ailllon or $2.5 aillion and a aroup of people come to the tw..ler v:lth,tha eugteation for lt and the Government is to guarantee $1. million • ... t heppeaa'P 'ftle1 10 ahead v:lth this steel alll, the Govenaent does DOt··ha•e ..,one :ln.asttcate it, no fesibility study done, no investigation made, no ..,.ntaloa of conatruct:lon so the group go ahead with the steel 11111 and it t•ra. out th., caanot aet an ADA grant because they used aecond hand equipment. ~ tt taraa out that they have to have aore 88sistance and it gets up to $5. •UUon or $5.5 aill:lon which the Cover~~~~ent has to guarantee, $6. million. ~en tha tn.lec:hu authorized ther atudiu to be done by ICatea, Peet, Harwick two ,..ra or a year aad a-half after the Whole thing started, after $4. million or $5 • .UMM:rvaa epent, after ve vera involved in it and if va did not follow up the __, w had loaaed ve were aotna to lose it all and va bad to give lllOre.

Then 0., wra .ppolnted, Kates, Paet, MaNick MaDagnent Couultai\ts, Atkina, Hatch, lteal expert• and enstneara and they do atudlea. They ahould have been asked &e ~ the atudlaa before the whole procue started ao What happened vaa the . a...n.ent had to follow alona and had tc;t arranae more aey, Mr. Speaker. lt tiW 110t vnt to 1oae $4. aill:ton, .,. atllion or $6. aill:lon.

There vaa a al:la •· ...... that if •n vee put ln it co\lld vork out eo now ve are up to $8.5 million that the tax payara of thia Prowlnca have ln the steal alll, aa..thlna that should hve ltaen there· ad could have bean there proltably for $2.5 alll:lon or u. allllon or $4. aillion. le chat the way to have econoalc develop~~ent1 Mr. Speaker, lt t. not.

It Sa aot eeoaah co waat to develop thia Province eeonoaicelly there baa to ba a rattoaal approach to ite lha ataal ail~ is a claaaic oaaa. 'l'h1 'l'hlrd Mill at c.. 1tJ ChaMa, over thrH 7un ap the Governaant auarantHded U. 5 ~llllon fer that .. tarprll8 at Coae tty Chane• end aoaa of the aonay 11 apanc on the ellltt ... llulldtqa that an on the a:tahc thtre or parte of ltutldlqa or clear• . &aa the ataht an• it 11 atl11 ao further ahead. If thla GoYernm~nt la aotna co ' ' ...... a~~~tu Uu that thM. Hr. Speaker, l aay the GoYernaent ahould own the 41d4

May 14th, 1970 Tape 876 .1M - 3 MR. CROSBIE: project or should share the ownership. What is the good of a promoter to us when we have to supply all the money and take all the risks? If we do that we should oWn the project so that if it is successful the people of Newfoundland will get all the gains from it, not just the jobs but the profits,if -successful. $2.5 ~illion gone down at Come by Chance on that third mill and no chance of ever getting it back unless the ~hird aill goes there. The Government is hooked in on the third mill, whatever Mr.

Shaheen proposes to this Government about the third mill to get it going the Government will accept, the Premier will accept because so many times there have been announcements that it was going ahead, so many times the sods have been turned, money is being advanced and Mr. Smallwood is powerless, he is in the hands of Mr. Shaheen on that third mill as well as the oil refinery and Mr. Smallwood will do whatever Shaheen tells him he must do to get those projects going. MR. SPFAKER (NOEL): Order please! Before the hon. member continues,! know it is inadvertent but the naming of members of the House is not in order.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible.) HR CROSBIE: Thank you, MR. Speaker, I am going to follow the hon. Minister of Welfare's good advice. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR CROSBIE: That is what I need, yes. MR HICKMAN: I think we need ·a Minister of Sodturning. MR. CROSBIE: Yes, a Minister of Sodturning is needed. Another enterprise, Mr. Speaker, that illustrates this hopeless approach the hon. the Premier has is the sea mining plant at Aguathuna .. Last year the Newfoundland Industrial Development Corporation had to pick up $300,000 in "" .. interest thatASea Mining Corporation was unable to pay.

The Government has loaned the enterprise $2,800,000 and it has been said in this House that they are looking for more money. Mr. Speaker, I say now that the Sea Mining Enterprise was never investigated by the Government before the guarantee was given, that there were no technical consultants asked in to advise on it, there were no management consultants asked in, that it was just gone ahead with on their say eo and with the Premier's backing. If we are in trouble with Aguathuna or Sea 41~5

May 14th, H7U Tape 876 JM- 4 MR. CROSBIE: Mining is in trouble there is no wonder. That is the way economic development is conducted in this Province, money wasted, money put in jeopardy, jobs created which are far too expensive that a sensible rational Government could have created four or five times the number of jobs that the present Minister of Economic De~elopment has created four, five or ten times.

A Bourassa approach or a Stanfield approach competent, not blowing their horn all the time talking jobs, proceeding with proper organization, the proper people involved, with planning, with studies, fesibility, management consultants that is how you create the jobs and small industry is not forgotten which this Government has forgotten altogether. There is no one in the Department of Economic Development that you would be bothered wasting your time with discussing a loan for a small industry. MR.. CHALKER: What about the heavy water plant in Nova Scotia? MR.

CROSBIE: The heavy water is a mistake they have made in Nova Scotia and this Government is delighted that they made the mistake so they have.this illustration of what is a fiasco and Manitoba's policy with reference to that Pulp Mill is exactly like our approach and it is Adisaater in Manitoba and it is disasterous here. International Fish Meal Plant at Stephenville, Mr. Speaker, another crazy project of the Leader of the Government, that Fish Meal Plant.

Two of the largest corporations in the world, Litten and Grace, with hundreds of millions in assets and this Government of this small Province with its limited resources putting up all the money for this Fish Meal Plant at Stephenville and now that Fish Meal Plant has to be moved, Mr. Speaker. For the fourth mill to opeEate at Stephenville the Fish Meal Plant must move unless engineering has changed it in the last year because the fourth mill cannot have its cardboard product i*Pregnated with the smell from a fish pla~t so the fish plant has to move.

Another crazy project with two of the biggest corporations in the world involved the Government of Newfoundland is putting up every cent,J·.buying trawlers and subsidizing the cost of operation of the trawlers. Marystown Ship Yard, Mooring Cove Fish Plant, both good projects cost­ ing at least one third more _than they should have because they were built in a ~1~6

May 14t-h, 1970 Tape 876 JM- 5 MR. CROSBIE: rush . as !_'tbetoe ; vas 3an. election :caming l,IP. The fish plant estimated the cost as $4. million or $5. million eventually costing some $8. million. The Ship Yard at Marystown estimated the cost as $8. million or $9. million eventually costing $15. million. Mr.

Speaker, this is a Province that cannot afford that kind of approach. ~e ship yard that should have cost $8. million or $9. million cost­ ing $6. million more, that is $6. million we could have borrowed and spent on some other enterprise or another enterprise, the fish plant costing $2. million or $3. million more than the estimate because of, the way construction was gone about, the great rush - 1966 the election year.

This gives those enterprises a very high, they have to have a very high revenue now to repay that debt, to pay the principal and interest on $15. million instead of $8. million or $9. million; It is much more expensive and the same with the fish plant. So you can go, Mr. Speaker, over most of these enterprises, Brigus Knitting Mill who knows what that has cost over the year, Koch Shoes and so on and what it has cost t·o be subsidized over the year or what could have happened had it been gone at differently or what will happen now. Well, that is the sad story, Mr.

Speaker ·, everywhere you look because this Government does not have a Department of Economic Development. It has one uneconomic developer, the bon. the Premier, no department. There was a question ask in this session, does the Department of Eeonomic Development employ an economists? The answer is no, the Department of Economic Development does not employ any economists. It is fantastic. We have no Department of Economic Development, we have no industrial estates as they have in Nova Scotia, we have a one-man 1uneconomic developer 1 who does not know how to negotiate. Mr.

Speaker, a hopeless negotiator who gives everything away at the start and is then completely in the hands of the promot~rs?from then on. Everything given . away, public announcements made. Before any agreements are entered into an announcement is made. An announcement was made about the oil refinery at Come by Chance days after it was suggested to the Premier by Mr. Shaheen · or at the most only weeks 1 before any detailed agreements were entered into an announcement is made there will be an oil refinery at Come by Chance ~967. Because the Premier has made that public 41.:7

May 14th, 1970 Tape 876 JM- 6 MR. CROSBIE: 1\I.L ~uncement from then on you are in 4claws of those promoters who know how embarrassing it will be to the Government if the Government has to announce it is not going ahead. So they come to the Premier and they say, "Premier this cannot go ahead great powerful interests are bucking it and trying to stop it, it .cannot go ahead unless you give us this guarantee extra, unless you give us power subsidized or unless it is all done by Crown Corporation so there is no taxes~and so and so~on it goes.

This Province is in no position to bargin because public announcements have been made and the Government politically or the Premier politically cannot afford to back-track on them. So from then on the promoters are in the drivels seat and it is the same in practically everything that the Department of Economic Development has done.How can you bargain . with your two hands tied behind your back?

Bargaining, what we need in the Government now is some people who are good at· bargaining, some more businesslike type, not the type who are emotionally caught up , in it, who is all emotion, all blind faith that no matter what has to be paid out it is all for the good anyway. AN HON. MEMBER: Turn it back to the merchant prince. HR. CROSBIE: Yes, turn her back to the merchant prince that is right where they are going, Mr. Shaheen, the modern day merchant prince and Mr. Doyle, the merchant prince and there are others. That is the merchant prince today not the retail merchants on Water Street, let us face it. MR.

NEARY: More lawyers in the House, that is what we need. MR. CROSBIE: You know that Mr. Bourassa has eight lawyers in his Cabinet, I happened to notice it in the paper the other day. There is nothing wrong with lawyers, some of them are good and some of them are bad and so on, · the same as everybody else, the same as union people, not much difference. Well, this has been the tragic record of our economic development, Mr.

Speaker, and anyone who wants to suggest how we could go about it bettPr is painted as a traitor for the Province, is painted as somebody who is too cautious and does not believe in Newfoundland, too conservative with a small ac". This is the kind of nonsense that has been talked in Newfoundland for the last twenty-one years but now the people of Newfoundland have to realize it is ~1~8

May 14th, 1970 Tape 876 JM - 7 MR. CROSBIE: their last chance to put a stop to it and get us back on the right course, get a Government who will go about developing Newfoundland economically not just talking about it and making poor deals with everyone who comes along with a good-sounding story and who is a smooth talker. Yes it is fortunate, the budget speech is right that not too many power subsidizes were agreeded to be paid to industries at that stage but we do not know today, Mr. Speaker, what subsidizes the Government is agreeing to pay. What is it now?

Is it two-and-a-half mills, two mills, three mills, three and a half, what is the bon. the Premier holding out to the aluminum company he is dealing with, Kayser Aluminum1 What are they being promised? Are they being promised power at two-and-a~alf or three or three-and-a-half mills? We have not heard about that yet and the other people that he is negotiating with.

They do not want to tell the public, they do not want to tell the members of this House anything, give them no facts, nothing, just blind faith in a Government whose record over twenty-one years is a dismal failure in economic development, the greatest failure of the Government is in economic development and it is the greatest failure of the Leader of the Administration. Now we are going on to even more grandiose projects, Mr.

Speaker, $165. million at Come by Chance,-our credit involved $155. million,'direct guarantee $30. million and the rest the Crown Corporation which means it is our credit to employ 350 or 400 people. A fund of $165. million, Mr. Speaker, if we had that put into a fund and used the revenue from it each year to develop industry in Newfoundland to assist smaller businesses and industry in Newfoundland we would create in a year thousands of jobs with that money, not just 300 or 400 for the whole $165. million.

We could create l,OOO_t~ 1,500 a year in small industries alone, develop a smaller possibility, in just the income from it, the income from $165. million at nine per-cent these days that would be about $14. million a year. If the Government just had a fund or voted each year $1. million to assist people without equity but with suggestions for small business and so on we would create more than 300 or 400 jobs a year. Mr. Speaker, the unemployment rate is fifteen point three per-cent admitted by the Government, DBS statistics. If it takes $165. million, Mr. Speaker to 41~9

May 14th, 1970 Tape 876 JM - H MR. CROSBIE: · create SSO to 400 jobs, that is what this Government is doing. that is $400,000 a job it is costing. To create 10,000 jobs in Newfoundland at that rate it would require an investment of $4. billion. $4. billion at that rate, $165. million for 350 to 400 jobs, 10,000 jobs $4. billion. HR. BARBOUR: Is that not important to help people find jobs? MR. CROSBIE: Is the member for Bonavista South not listening? My remarks are all about the importance of creating jobs and that this Government is not creating them and there is much better ways to create jobs.

Yes, my whole speech is about the importance of creating jobs. MR. BARBOUR: I do not care how much it costs so long as the people find employment. MR. CROSBIE: Exactly, exactly, and neither does the bon. the Premier. You do not care how much it costs but what about when we run out of money. You do not care if it is $400,000 a job. If $400,000 ,can.· create 100 jobs instead of one is that not ~tter, is that not a better use of the aoney. '• 4150

May 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 1 -- apb MR. CROSBIE: If $400,000. cannot create, spent in another way 100 jobs is that not better than using the $400,000. to · create one job. HR. BARBOUR: You said if MR. CROSBIE: I not only say if, I say it can be. What nonsense, you do not care what is costs to create a job. We have to care, we are not made of money here in Newfoundland. The Government has not unlimited resources. You must care. If $10,000. can create a job that is much better than having to pay $400,000. to create it, because, then you can create 400 more jobs or 40 more. HR.

BARBOUR: But as time goes on all this money comes back into the pockets of the people. MR. CROSBIE: Ohhhh, the member for Bonavista South is HR. BARBOUR: The member for Bonavista South is very much alive,when it comes to finding employment for the people of not only Bonavista South but of the whole of Newfoundland and Labrador. HR. CROSBIE: If the member for Bonavista South will continue to listen 1 hope that he ~ill see my point. If-he does not, we Will just have to disagree and I still like the bon. member anyway. Now Mr.

Speaker, the credit of Newfoundland and the money that this Government is spending on economic development is being mis-spent. That is the tragedy of it and we do not h~ve it in Newfoundland to mis-spend. That is the tragedy of that. Now we have a chance with this DREE program, we have a chance with the DREE program to improve the public services of Newfo~dland and to create the conditions so that jobs can be' created here even more easily. Is that opportunity to be wasted also?

Is this opportunity that is coming up in the next year or so going to be wasted by this administration continuing in power with the crazy policies it has now? We are not going to have more than one more chance Mr. Speaker. We are not going to have more than one more chance. Our resources are limited. We have to use them to the best advantage. We have to develop our natural resources all industries and the rest of it. 4151

May 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 2--apb Not on all large capital intensive industries like the oil refinery. The oil refinery would be wonderful Mr. Speaker, if that refinery was being established with the promoters money, wonderful. But, when it ties up $155 million of our credit, when involves us in building roads, when it involves us in subsidizing electricity, when it involves us in providing water and sewage and housing and all the rest of it, then the costs out we!,gh the benefits. The Premier has been captured by the promoters he deals with. Be is a prisoner of Mr. Shaheen and Mr.

Doyle and any one else who he deals with, Well that is enough on the power policy in industry, Then as the Budget Speech goes on with the usual "hoopla" and nonsense, false figures about what is being spent and what is being spent on education and the rest of it the Government, there is so much foolishness in the Budget Speech it is hard to know what to pitch on next. I will leave education to someone else because as the member for Burin pointed out the other day, the only meanful figure is the figure per pupil and not the figures given on page 39 and 40. Salaries I will come to a bit later Mr. Speaker.

You see in the whole Budget Speech there is hardly anything, there is nothing to get your teeth into, no solid facts,all misinformation. The Government is going to go into collective bargaining and I will come to that later. On page 75 Mr. Speaker, the Government tries to pretend that it is only going to borrow during the year $29 million. The Government is only going to borrow $29 million by the sale of debentures, when in actual fact the Government has to borrow some fifty odd millions. Canada Pension Plan $15 million, DREE $11 million, C.M.B.C. $561,000., and so on.

What a pitiful attempt to fool the peot'le of this Province Mr. Speaker, ·to c~aim you are only going to borrow $29 million when in actual fact you are going to borrow $56 million• and have to borrow $56 million, and when in actual fact Mr. Speaker I will prophesy now that when the results of this year are turned out it will show that the Government has a deficit of over $~0 million at the end of this year. ~1tl2

May 14, 1970, Page 3, Tape 877, -- . apb Will you listen to this Mr. Speaker, page 83. Perhaps more than in any other Province in Canada today our Province shows more encouraging signs of economic progress and expansion at this very time. That Hr. Speaker, is just utterly untrue. There ha!i never been such unemployment in this _Province as there is at the present time. MR. STRICKLAND: Go back to the thirties, go back to the thirties man MR. CROSBIE: I am talking about recent times. Go back to the thirties. We all know that during the thirties there was practically no one employed. MR.

SMALLWOOD(J.R.): Go back ten years MR. CROSBIE: Hundreds of people Hr. Speaker as every member of this House knows are contacting members looking for jobs .today and in the last few months and ·cannot get them. Yet there were never ~re encouraging signs of economic progress and expansion. Pipe dreams, pipe drea11s. The only expansion this year will be the money that the Government is going to spend here and the money. that this Government can scrape up because an election is coming. MR. STRICKLAND: When? MR. CROSBIE: It is coming between now and the end of 1971. MR. NEARY: That is the bon. members swan song MR.

CROSBIE: This maybe my swan song, that will be up to the electorate to ~ decide. Any one of the bon. members on the oppos~te side can come and run against me, There is none of them that I am worried about that can run on the other side. MR. WELLS: There will be a lot of swans singing before long MR. CALLAHAN: He can run against me, I will MR. CROSBIE: I will accept that challenge MR· WELLS: The bon. gentleman is not going to run in Port au Port again is he? MR. CROSBIE: Is it Port au Port or St. Barbe North? We hear that the bon. gentleman is fleeing to St. Barbe North, to a safe berth. MR.

CALLAHAN: No. it is Port au Port and I will welcome any one to run against me. 4153

May 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 4 -- ~pb MR. CROSBIE: In Port au Port he t'l'ill not come to port the next election. He is going down, he may as well take an anchor with him and jump into the harbour out there. MR. CALLAHAN: Come out and see lffi. CROSBIE: I would love to run out there but there are :other people out there who want to run against you. Mr. Speaker it states in the Budget Speech that the major expansion program at St. Clare's will be concluded within the next year or so. If it say or so it may be true.

It is going to end up with a total of 320 beds the hospital there at a total cost to the Province of some $14 million. About $8 "million of that money will have to be found in the next two financial years. What we have to look at Mr. Speaker is the obligations btiilding :~ up which this Government has to meet. St. Clare's hospital alone in the next two years about another $8 million. The Government has promised to build, to improve the hospital at Comer Brook that is an expenditure of :· three, four, five million dollars in the next couple of years.

The Government has promised to build a new hospital at Carbonear that is four or five million dollars ip the next couple of years. The Government has promised to put a new hospital in Twillingate that is three of four million dollars at least over the next couple of years. The Government has promised to build a new hospital at Carbonear that is four or five million dollars over the next couple of years. The Government has promised and must do substantial work at the General Hospital in St. John's, that is at least two or three million dollars over the next couple of years.

The Government has itself tied to the medical school at Memorial University and I noticed an

article in the paper last night that said that capital works had to be put off till 1971. But that medical school Mr. Speaker, and the University hospital if it ever goes there is going ,)."' to Cost us fifty or sixty million hess a Federal contribution of about twenty or thirty million dollars over the next three or four years. On every side there are these big obligations building up and the Government's revenue decreasing. The Government in a position where is has to

May 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 5 -- ~pb borrow money just to stand still. Ottawa is not always going to perform miracles for this Government by giving it money. The Government has to fa·ce realities. There is nothing in the estimates for a new hospital at Carbonear, .There is a very small amount in in conn~ction with the hospital at Corner Brook, just for plans, some few thousand. There is not a cent in the estimates for Twillingate hospital. A very little amount for the General Hospital at St. John's. All of these things.

Now we will be told that it is all going to be done next year like the teachers are being told. They are going to get a salary increase next year. They are not being dealt with this year, they arc going to be dealt with next year. Mr.

Speaker, how is the Government going to increase the pay of teachers next year, all the teachers of . the Province, and give a general five per cent increase to all public servants, non-Government hospital workers and the rest, do all that next year without raising taxes, when the Government said this year repeatedly, ." we cannot give more than 4.3 million, we cannot give more thatn $6 million, we cannot give more than $7 million without raising taxes." Yet, next year. after the election the Government hopes, next year the Government pretends it is going to increase the teachers salary and give a general five per cent increase without having to raise taxes.

If taxes had to be raised this year to meet the salary demands then ·-they certainly will have to be raised next year to meet the promises the Government has now made ln connection with salaries. The tax increases are coming but not until! after the election. Not till after the election. They have to come, the Government has no choice. MR. COLLINS: They do not propose to increase taxes. MR. CROSBIE: Yes, but the Government plans to do it if it gets back in. Do you promise not to. MR. NEARY: MR. CROSBIE: cannot avoid. Sure Well the new Government may find it has committments that it

May 14, 1970, TApe 877, Page 6 -- apb MR. ROBERTS: Put it down for coalition MR. CROSBIE: The new Government may have committments that it cannot avoid. so· the members of the new Government should be worried about that. MR. NEARY: The hon. member from Humber East had a .grievance last night on television but it did not work ••••••• MR. WELLS: What is he talking about, what is he talking about MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, we do not mind these interuptions from the nursery.

Every now and then we hear a few squeals and squawks and baby talk from the nursery corner of the - there is a kiddies corner in the Cabinet but the hon. minister was just a bit too old for that so he is in the nursery corner. The hon. Minister of Community and Social Development, and the hon. Minister ofr Supply, and the bon, Minister of Health they are in the kiddies corner, but the hon. Minister is in the nursery corner. There is somebody there too who is in his second childhood with him. One of the middle age, one older but both in the nursery corner. Now Mr.

Speaker, I do not want to discourage the interjections by the Minister of Welfare MR. NEARY: Social Services and Rehabilitation MR. CROSBIE: So it is not changed yet is it? Social service and rehabilitation. No it is not changed yet. Now let us get on Mr. Speaker time passes. Mr. Speaker here is a little item that the bon. member for Gander is going to have to worry about if his party forms the Government next year or this year. lm. CALLAHAN: No need to worry MR. CROSBIE: No need to worry, the hon. gentleman has no more in Port au Port than the bon. the Premier has in Humber West and that is none.

No hope, nil, not a chance of being elected. · The hon. Premier is going to leave Humber West and the hon. gentleman is going to leave Port au Port. MR. CALLAHAN: Come out and see, we will show them ~m. CROSBIE: Now Mr. Speaker, here is something that these hon. gentlemen are going to have to worry about. 4156

May 14, 1970, TApe 877, Page 7 -- a~b MR. COLLINS: The hon. member is going to try one of the St. Barbes next time. HR. CROSBIE: Yes, St. Barbe North. The bon. ~1inister of Public Works will be · retired and the hon. Minister of ~lines, Agriculture and Resources is going to try St. Barbe North. But there, the people of St. Barbe North will solve that problem too. Here is a problem Mr. Speaker that the Government has that the Government is not concerned MR. CHALKER: I think I heard my name mentioned and that I '~as going to be retired.

It is an excellent idea, but I have no thought or intention of retiring or releasing my district to the bon. member at my left. MR. CROSBIE: We do not want to see that bon. gentleman retired Mr. Speaker, . we want to see him over here in the next House. Now Mr. Speaker, quite seriously, here is something that the new Government must worry about that the old Government does not worry about, because, the bon. ~he Premier does not worry about little matters like this, it is only $100 million. Mr.

Speaker, between this year 1970, well 1970 is only $2 million, but really, in the year 1972 or 1971, 72, 73, and 74, in those four years the Government has to repay, this Province has to repay $98 million in indebtedness. In money borrowed by the Government in the last couple of years which has no sinking funds, which is unfunded, $98 million. In 1971, there is $32 1 Ht 260,000. coming due. In 1972, there is $2 million plus two . is.fouz; plus five is nine and another twenty-seven.

There is no use in giving the individual figures, but in those three years $98 million of indebtedness of the Province of Newfoundland is coming due unfunded, without any sinking funds to help meet that obligation. The Government is going to have to go out and borrow the money again to repay that $98 million. While it is doing that the Government of that day is going to have to be borrowing money for its own purposes and it is going to have to ba guarantee~ng •money for other purposes. For municipalities and the rest of it.

I have heard the Premier say on that great program "monologues with the master" or conversations with the Premier some call it, I have heard him say " we will just roll over this money. This is no problem, we will roll it ~1~7

May 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 8 -- apb over." The theme song of the Government seems to be " roll me over" with respect to the funded debt of this Province. We will just roll it over, but, while that is being rolled over Mr. Speaker, the Government of the day is going to be unable to borrow money in the same amo~t for purposes of that time. That is $98 million that the Government must borrow in three years, from 1972 to 1974, or 1971 to 1974. The Government is not worried, just roll it over.

Yes, but while they are arranging to borrow that $98 million again how is the Government going to be able to borrow the $50 million or $60 million that it needs each year just to keep the Government services going. without doing • anything really new? The period from 1964 to 1970, deficits are around $290 million and the red debt was incurred by the Government, $290 million. That is forgetting altogether Mr. Speaker, about the guarantees given to everyone under the sun. The Government is not worried and it is not worried about the $98 million borrowed without sinking funds.

Four to five year loans over in Europe in Euro dollars, and what they are costing us. They are costing us nine and ten per cent a year, and the fact that is all has to be rolled over and repaid in a three year period. The Royal Commission on economic propsects were worried about it, was concerned about it, but not this Government, not at all. Look at Supplementary Supply. Contempt, the Government has nothing but contempt for the rules of Parliamentary democracy, nothing but contempt.

Deliberately the Government keeps the estimates low,knowing that it does not have enough in the estimates just to carry the Government for the year, thinking with its great majority it is able to blast through a Supplementary Supply Bill when the next year comes along. That is what the Government has done this week, and what it has done every year for the · last ten and probably before that. Interim Supply, complete arrogance in Interim Supply. The Government does not worry about Interim SupJlly or how much it needs. It has A 1~"~ the majority, it is going to force it through anyway. Interim Supply, like ~ u ..

~wy 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 9 -- apb this year, $60 million bullied through this House in one day and a night in ~reb so the bon. members could go off to Paris and the rest of it. Nothing but contempt, and then Mr. Speaker, they will not even give you the order of business. They will not let the Opposition know wha.t business is going to come up next. We were lucky we learned yesterday that the Budget Speech was going to start today. What time did we get to prepare for it? Last night if we had the strength after being here all Tuesday from 10:30 a.m. to 11:00 p.m., and this morning up to 10:00 o'clock. AN liON.

MEt-ffiER: Is this not the twenty-third of April? MR. CROSBIE: Oh the twenty-third o'f April Sir, we have been in this House and getting ready for other debates and reading legislation. It is a darn good 'thing we did read legislation. The trustees Act has been changed because we pointed out deficiencies in it. The Department of Supply and Services Act, the Newfoundland Teacherls Association Act, and the Ombudsman Act, and one or two others have be~n changed because we spotted clauses that even the Government did not want in them. MR. ''!CHALKER: i: . .:.~ mistakes. MR.

CROSBIE: Other Oppositions in the last twenty-one years pointed out I·am not saying anything about other Oppositions. I am telling the bon. minister what we have been doing for the last 'several weeks. The hon. minister suggests we could have spent the couple of weeks getting ready for the Budget Speech. Well we are not all supermen. MR. CHALKER: They are all on this side. ~m. CROSBIE: There was an editorial in the Evening Telegram last night. That is all I will say about that. Supplementary Supply. Who was upset, the bon. minister?

When I asked the other night what museum $3,000. was for, I was told by the Premier with supreme arrogance "the museum" and he would say nothing else. The minister of the department concerned would not even tell me when I asked him what museum it was. MR. CHALKER: Does the bon. gentleman need to be told? MR. CROSBIE: Why does the bon. gentleman think I was asking? 41r>9

May 14, 1970, Tape 877, Page 10, apb MR. SMALLWOOD (J.R.): That is another •••••• MR. CROSBIE: Ah! there is the great dictator on the other side. When the dictator says " do not give them any information"that is it, nobody is allowed to say a word. He is going to go down with _the ship in the next election. HR. SMALLl\'OOD: The hon. gentleman does not say that in private, he only says that for public effect. Privately he says something very different. HR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I think that the bon. gentleman got me bugged. Apparently I cannot whisper around this Province but he hears what I say. MR.

SMALLWOOD: Do you know what the hon. gentleman says privately about the next election? Who is going to win it, and how many seats? MR. CROSBIE: After the conference in Gander on April 25, the very successful, the truly liberal conference, the hon. the Premier had a list of everybody who attended. Imagine, he was so interested in the conference Hr. Speaker, that he had a list. showing who was there, from what district, and he got on V.O.C.M., and he said there was so many from this district and that. Intense interest •••••••.••••••••••• ~160

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 1. we would have invited the hon. the Premier to come and he could have met thelllll'&ll personally, and taken the details down personally if we had known!,< J.,,J such intense interest in the Reform Liberal Movement. He should have because his party needs to be reformed. And the biggest reform needed is the replacement of the Bon. the Premier by someone like the Minister of Health who has saved the Government the last few days, despite, despite the ultimatums thrown out by the bon. the Premier.

MR.HtCKMAN: There is a plot .- it is coming out now- there has been a meeting between the MiBister of Health and the bon. member for St. John's West. We have heard about it - MR.CROSBIE: I am not going to confirm or deny. MR.HICKMAN: I knew it.I heard about it tonight. The secret meeting between the Minister of Health and the bon. member for St. John's West. MR.SMALLWOD: ~ ... The bon. gentleman~going to the Tory Convention tomorrow] MR. HICKMAN: Yes, are you coming along? res, I am going. MR. SMALLWOOD: The bon. gentleman is going to the Tory, what about the NDP Convention?

MR.BICKMAN: No. no they have not invited me. MR.SMALLWOOD: Just the Tory so far'l MR.BICKMAN: Jdst the Tories, yes, that is right, t~t is right just the Tories. MR.CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I hope you will deduct a couple of minutes from my time • Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to refer to the report of a speech that was made MR.HlekMAH; That is what they call in football)injury time, in soccer it is referred to as injury time, fhe1 deduct it. MR.CROSBIE: This is a speech made on January 14, 1970 by one of the ministers of the Crown. And bow he could stay in" the Government if these are his beliefs is beyond me.

Because what he said is sensible and sound. ~e said ; .... ~ .. refusal to face realism,,great danger in the seventies. Now Mr. Speaker, just what the Government opposite refuses to do is to f.ace reali11111; and that is the great danger in the'seventies. He says that the Province h .. a reached turning point. The Minister ~f Health made a speech at the Kiwanis Club of Cabot in the Battery Motel: one of the most sensible he has mad.e and 4161

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 2. I quote from him:, ·~r. Roberts stressed the answer to jobs does not lie in ~assive industrialization or resource based industries. The answer is not to pin our hopes on some miraculous intervention in the form of an indwstry. We might get one but the cost might be so high as to leave us further back than when we started, Mr. Roberts said. Exactly: Ezactly! Exactly! when I resigned from the Cabinet, when I resigned in May of 1968 the letter says something exactly the same as that. The answer is not to pin our hopes on some miraculous int~rvention in the form of an industry.

That is what this Government is pinning its hopes on the miraculous oil refinery or the micaculous third mill or the miraculous aluminium plant. That is not the answer. The cost of those things are going to outweigh the benefits to Newfoundland. They are not going to create enough jobs. to meet the costs that we a~e suffering, to get them. ERCO. not Erco's fault, but Erco on any cost benefit analysis cost Newfoundland more than we gataed from it. He said the resource based industries must be developed more highly. But this development is not the solution t~ the Province's economic problems.

True. not resource based industries alone. Increasi~y our effortt ·and our money must go into that great middle area. It is hard to be specific. But it is easy to see in the advanced mode~ econom~es that the real pay off, the pay off in jobs comes in the soft industries and in the finishing and processing he said. That is a very sensible statement. And how the bon. gentleman could stay in the bon. Premier's eabinet if these are his views baffles me. Or how the hon. the Premier can keep him, because his views and the bon. Premier's are diametrically opposed. The Ron. the Premier believes in miracles.

That something must come here to Newfoundland because the bon. the Premier wills it. After twenty­ poe years he believes the bon. the Premier, that if he wills something it will happen. It must happen. It shall happen. The resources of the people of Newfc•urtdland and the Government will make it happen no matter what. it costs. That is what he believes. But"that is not what we need Mr. Speaker. We need 4102

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 3. something much different from that. We need a government that will use all of our resources in the best and most effective and efficient way. A govern- ment that will decide on priorities~which this government hates. the budget speech last year laughed at priorities. The Government hates priorities. attempting That will cease/to bluff the people of Newfoundland like the recent highway programme Mr. Speaker. Amonumental~bluff delivered in this House bJ the 1 minister of Highways. A highway programme outside DIEE areas costing about a hundred million dollars, to be implemented.

And estimates for that minister's department are $29 , million which is $10 million less than last year. Stop that kind of bluff. Stop using DREE as a milch cow, as a milch cow for each district. ~ Use1for the purpose it is meant for. Stop schemdng~up white papers quickly, March and April, for the ~orthern ?eninsula instead of leaving it to the Minister of Community and Social Development. in whose jurisdiction it should be. The park is in the Mines Agriculture and Resources the rest of those proposals should be with DREt. And if we ever get those things that are going to come through DREE,·not through Dribble.

And Dribble is the Minister of Mines Agriculture and Resources Department. DREE is where it should be. Stop trying to bluff the people of this Province. Get a department of -Economic Development that has a staff capable of performing research and investigation functions and supervisory functions and the rest of it. Let us have the feasibility studies and the management consultant studies before we assist the industry, &o we know whether it has got a chance for success or not.

Let us cut out making annonncements about new industries until everything is agreed and we have them tied downythe legal binding agreements covering every point. So they cannot come back later on and embarrass us and say now it is going, we have to stop unless you do more for us.Because that is happening, it has happened in the third mill, the fourth mill, the oil refinery and everything else that I know about. That same kind of thing has happened. MR.NOLAN: Mr. Speaker, would the bon. mecmer permit a question? MR,CROSBIE: Yes. 41G3

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 4. . -. MR. NOLAN: Mr. Speaker, surely the bon. member is not suggesting that in the negotiations for any or all industries, or is he, that all the negotiations be carried out and when all of it is finalized and_ everything 1only then should this House hear about it? MR.CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, what I say is practically that. All the negotiations and all the important points should be decided and agreed upon and signed before it is announced publicly. Now then to implement them you may have to come to this House and get its approval.

The Government has a majority;it is going to get approval in the House anyway. But the important points should be covered and signed and agreed to. So that the promoters . cannot then come weaseling in~as they do now, saying how much more they need there and you feel that you have got to give it to them because of/being public announcements before these things were settled. That has been the history in the past. I _ am sure the bon. gentleman knows it. That is the kind of approach.

Now industrial estates perhaps it would be best to have an industrial estates corporation as they do in Nova Scotia, as they have in Manitoba. perhaps it would not 1 but we need a department with a mintster who spends his full time at the job. Not the Premier, the Premier should not be minister of Economic Development. The Premier has enough to .do, supervising and directing and coQrdinating the whole policy of the Government, without being minister of a department also. We need an active minister in that department with a staff, economists, co11111erce graduates, people experienced in management consulting.

People experienced in·tdoing coat benefit studies all capable of doing all these things before a project is approved. We need a division of that department that has competent engineers and chartered accountants whose whole job is to supervise what the industries are doing that we are helping. Watching What Sea Mining is doing. Watchinc what the Steel Plant is doing. Watching what the Newfoundland Hardwoods is doing, although that been a long time in operation probably nbt necessary.

Watching what is happening at the fourth mill in Melville, day by day watching. are they coming within their costs, or are the contracts tbey are letting all right. So on all these details it bas to be watched for 41G4 ·

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 5. by the Government and all that should be done in Economic Development and we should have good trained competent people to do it, hard-nosed,tough~ vho make sure they stick to their agreements and o~ligations. This 1~ vhat ve need. And this is vhat we do not have. This is what we do not have. But the Government needs._ It is not going to get it unless there is a change of administration. The leopard does not change his spots, Mr. Speaker. And there is no sign of any change since the member of Humber East and I left the Government. Now, Mr.

Speaker, have you e·ver heard that song I have been a wild rover. "I have been a wild rover, diddle, de, dum, di,da. I have done my 'roving see." The wild :.:rover has settled down over here with the Liberal Reform Party and that is where he is staying until there is a change of Government and the Liberal Reform Group forms a nev Government. ·That might be next year, five . years, ten years, twenty, I might be as old as the minister of Public Works then. Now, Mr.

Speaker, my ninety minutes will soon be up so I want to move 7seconded .by the member for Humber East 7in connection with the resolution that we are now debating o~ the motion. MR.N!ARY: You were trembling a long time ago. MR.CROSBIE: There is nothing to tremble about. You are an arrogant Government, you are a contemptuous Government there is nothing to tremble about. It is only good1common sense we are 8oing to move now. You do not want to worry about it. I wish I had had time to prepare·· my budget address. Now. Mr.

Speaker, I move,aeeonded by the member for Humber East? that all the words after the word ."that" to the end of the question be omitted and the following substituted therefor. This is rather lengthy because it covers an empty sitQiltion Mr. Speaker. tt covers·~ the greatest retreat since Napoleon left Moscow. The retreat from Moscow. The greatest retreat sinee~then has b~en the Premier's retreat from his ult~•ciums in connection vith the salary question over the last three weeks.

In view of the fact that for some months there vas obvious government employees and non-government employees paid from government funds especially hospital workers, the d1G5

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 6. Newfoundland Constabulary, Fire Department and other security personnel were expecting an increase in pay and improvements in working conditions, That with respect to non-government hospital emplo~ees at Corner Brook and Grand Falls conciliation boards had unanimously recommended pay increases and improved working conditions retroactive April 1 1969, That the Government fails to negotiate with the employees or their representatives before the budget speech was brought down April 2l,1970.

That in the budget speech the government declared that the government can only allocate an amount of $4,700,000 for wage increases in the present year. With a new classification programme to be implemented from April 1 1970. And on April 29, the Government declared $6 million could be made available for wage and salary increases, with police, firemen and other security personnel to receive an increase of $100 a month across the board. Other custodian employees $50 a month across the board.

With the remainder of government and non-government workers to receive 135 a month across the board, as well as the annual increment now restored by government. That the Government from April 23, 1970 until May 7, 1970 failed to communicate with or to negotiate with the Canadian Union of Public Employees and other duly constituted representatives of the workers involved.

But rather ·make statements only in the form of ultimatums, that on May 6 1970 Premier Smallwood stated that the said amount of $6 million was all that would be available for salary increases but that otherwise the full weight of the law would be invoked ff any strike occurred in hospitals.

On May 10, 1970 the Government again reversed its position stating that $7. 25~111lllion would now be available for wage and salary increases with the result that public service employees including non-government hospitals workers were then offered salary increases of $45 per month across the board together with the annual increment of approximately $8.33 per month for the present fincal year.

That the Government has continually misrepresented and obscured tl1e true financial position of the government and its ability to meet the rr!quested wage and salary increases • That the Government has stumbled from criain to crisis in connection with vital public services since April 9, 1970. ~1G · 6

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 7. thereby creating great hazard to the public interest froa the possible cessation of vital public serviees. Through withdrawal of services by employees. And that all of these matters could have bean resolved if the Government bad bargained collectively, with the representatives of all the workers involved previous to the bringing down of the budget on April 23, 1970 since reasonable improvements in working conditions and wages were obtainable without any increase in provincial taxes.

Be it resolved that this House declare that it has no confidence im the ability of the Government to administer the affairs of this Province. That is the motion I move Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, I wish to speak on the non-confidence motion. MR SPEAKER: The bon. member's time is up. He has finished his speech on the non-confidence motion. He has no rightT as I understand it, to speak on the non-confidence motion. He has not been recognized by the Chair anyway, as yet.

If any bon. member thinks that I can look at this for the first time and say whether this amendment is in order - MR.SMALLWOOD: Your Honouf, is a Dlembe~; supposed to be standing while Jour Honour is speaking? MR.SPEAKER: I will say again that I do not think that any bon. member or the House collectively can expect the Chair to take two pages of an amendment to the motion that I do now leave the Chair, and to accept it just like that as to whether it is in order or not.

I will have to take the amendment under advisement and look it over to see if in my opinion it is an appropriate aDiendment at this particular time. MR.CROSBIE: Well then what do, that being the procedure do we go on with the main question now Mr. Speaker1 MR..SPEAKER: May we proceed with another order while we are waiting, 1 cannot make a decision onlthis now. MR.SMALLWOOD: We could go ~a the main motion, the debate on the debate Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER: We can continue the debate an the Dlain motion, I think, but I 41G7

May 14 1970 Tape 878 page 8. have to make up my mind whether I can accept this motion or not. And until ~ accept the amendment, and until the amendment is accepted and put before the House there is to be no debate on it anyway. MR.CROSBIE: When Your Honour makes that decision then I can speak on this amendment I have introduced. MR.SPEAKER: I will give my ruling on that - MR.CROSBIE: Oh yes, it is in Beauchesne. MR.SPEAKER: I will give my ruling on that at the same time. MR.MURPHY~ Mr.

Speaker, on that point I do not see how we can go on now with the regular~debate when there is an amendment before the Chair and the ame~dment should be debated in my opinion and it has always been the custom in this House - MR.SPEAKER: The amendment is, I will remind the bon. member the runendment is not before th~ House yet~t has not been accepted by the Chair. I have not had an opportunity to look it over and see if it is in accordance with the rules.

Therefore the amendment is not before the House and l ask the House to defer consideration of this matter until I have~ad ti~ to .· look at it at leisure and in the meantime . it would be more appropriate to continue with the debate and I will give my ruling later. MR.MURPHY: An amendment has been proposed, the Hon.

Speaker has to consider whether he will accept it to put before the House and before that is done I suggest that we go on to another order because I do not see any purpose in continuing the regular debate until the amendment has been brought before the House to be voted on and that is - MR.SPEAKER: The question is this. That when we go, when this 41G8

Hay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK - 1 ~m. SPEAKER: The Amendment has been made and proposed, it is not before the Rouse until it has been proposed from the Chair. I am not in a position to do that as yet, until I have read the motion and:looked it over to see if it is in accordance with the rules, at which ti1_11e, we can resume debate on the Amendment. But in the meantime, the Budget Debate a person can speak on it, it will not bar him from speaking on the Amendment when it is proposed from the Chair. MR. S:t-IALUlOOD: Mr.

Speaker, I take it an bon. gentleman having occupied the time that is permitted him under the rule; and within that time toward the end of it moves an amendment, he has exhausted his right to participate in the debate. HR • . SPEAKER: I will make remarks concerning tha. t; : vben:.:I~tbave considered whether the amendment itself is in order. I suggest in the meantime to return to the debate on the Budget. MR. CROSBIE: Hr •.

Speaker, on the po_int raised by the bon. the Premier who is now trying to impose closure- . on me, if you Honour is considering that point, then I suggest that we ·. address .some argument to Your Honour on that point, if Your Honour is considering that I cannot speak on his non-confidence motion that I move. Or if the hon. the Premier is going to argue that, then there should be ••• ~fR. HELLS: He has argued it. MR. SPEAKER: There will be an opportunityfor all hon.members, I already said -that.

There will be an opportunity to decide this question after I look over the Amendment to see whether I consider it to be in order or not. :1-fR. l.JELL S : On a point of order, I am a bit lost. How can. we . intelligently discuss the main motion, when there is a motion to amend it before Your Honour. I agree it has not been accepted by Your Honour, I agree that, that is so. But how can we now intelligently discuss,when we do not know whether we are going to be.: debatinf! an amended motion, or debating the amendment or what, the idea is changed as soon as the motion is put, and perhaps ••• 41G9

Hay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK - 2 NR. SPEAKER: Continue to debate the main motion, that the Speaker do now "leave the Chair, if the motion is accepted, if the amendment is accepted then every hon. member will get an opportunity to.speak to the amendment when it is proposed and put before the House f~om the Chair. rm. S}~LWOOD: Every bon. member who has not spoken. ~m. SPEMCER: Any hon. member who has not already spoken. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I point out that I am speaking now, I have not concluded my address. The time was up after I moved the address, not only that,Hr.

Speaker, but it is customery to allow a member to continue his speech as the bon. Minister of Educatd!on and othe .rs. MR. SPEAKER: Order, order please. MR. CP.OSBIE: Ignorance. MR. SPEAKER: Well I suggest now we have no further debate.

I will take this amendment under advisement, and when I make the ruling I will comment on whether the person is speaking on the amendment or on the main motion, in the meantime, we can continue with the · main motion that the Speaker leave the Chair, _ which is the debate!on the budget, and when that decision is made, we will then put the amendment before the House, I think, it is in order and then a person who is permitted to do so under the rules will be able to talk on the amendment, but in the meantrume-we could go on without wasting time by talking on the main motion that the Speaker leave the Chair.

Nobody is deprived of his rir,ht to talk. MR. ~~LLS: On a point of order, Your Honour, something just came up and again I do not know what is goi~g to be the situation. If for example, I now speak to the main motion while Your Honour is considering this amendment, when the amendment is being discussed will I not be able to speak to it. Mi. SPEAKER: Surely, of course. ~m. ~~LLS: Of course, fine. Well this is a statement made by somebody that it was not possible. 4170 •

Hay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK - 3 HR. SPEAKER: We will now continue with the debate on the Budget. MR. CROSBIE: I will continue with my address on the Budget. Do I have the consent of the hon. Premier. The hon. the Premier will not consent, ah? Hill not consent. MR. S?-11\LLHOOD: Ask Humber East? MR. CROSBIE: Will not consent. :1-IR. SHALUlOOD: Ask Humber East. MR. CROSBIE: Closurer. He hates to hear the .truth. He is afraid to hear it. }!R. SPEAKER: Order, order, please~ This is completely out of order now. We will continue with the debate on the Budget Speech, and the only way fo~ tbe~hon. member for St.

John's Heat to continue is with unanimous consent of the House. May we continue;with the debate on the Budget? MR. SHALLHOOD: Contrary "nay" 1-m.. ~mRPHY: Hr • . Speaker, I do not know if I am in Order, but to my knowledge it is the first time I have seen this happen in the hon. House, that the amendment was not debated before the speech went ahead. I would like to move that the House recess for sufficient time to give the to decide Speaker ample opportunity to try~in his wisdom whether this amendment is in order or not.

It has been established that the amendment was debated before the main-order of business was discussed. I would like to make the motion that the Speaker now recess the House to give him sufficient time to bring back a judgement on whether this amendment is in order. MR. SMALLWOOD: Hr.

Speaker, Oft this matter, may I say this categorically, that in the twenty years prior to this session, the House has debated amendments and the main motion alternately throughout the debate, and members have stood ,, and said, I wish to address my~elf to the amendment or they have stood and said, ''I wish to speak to the main motion·:· '!'his has happened at least .In half the session~. It is not a rule that the amendment has to be debated first and disposed of before ~he main motion is resumed, that is not so. It has happened repeatedly in this House in the last twenty years, that when an amendment is 4171

?fay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK - 4 UR. S?·1.AU.h'OOD:made to a main motion, the debate may be on the amendment or on the main motion, and each member is allowed to speak twice, except for "the one who moves it. So that is what has happened, so we oppose this motion. HR. SPEAKER: There is no amendment before the llouse at the present time. The motion has been proposed and it has been given by the bon. member for -St. John's West, it is not before the House for discussion until it is proposed from the Chair and I have not said whether I am going to accept: .the amendment or not. MR. MURPHY: Hr.

Speaker, this is the point I am speaking on , if it l.:ere before the House, whether it is allowed or disallowed, then we could carry · on. But the Speaker is reserving the right to rule on this thing, this has happened a dozen times on the amendment. Everybody knows what I am j';) talking about whether i~an amendment or constitution or anything, Mr. Speaker. And I would move that this House recess to give the Speaker time to bring in a judgement as to whether this amendment is in order at this time. It is a motion, that is all. MR. SPEAK,ER: Moved and seconded that this House recess.

I might say it it twenty after twelve, and I presume we rise at one. Will the House recess ..,~~.e? for any~ I am not going to say how long it is going to take in order to do this. MR. MURPIIT: Well, why not recess until 3 o'clock. MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed? Those in favour - I ~m. CA~: }~ • . Speaker, it is a fact that in this present session of the House in the debate from the Speech from the Throne there were at least on three occasions amendments which were debated concurrently with the main motion. Now there is the precendent the bon. gentleman is asking for. MR.

SPEAKER: This is not the question now, the question now is that this House recess. Those in favour "aye", contrary "nay". MR. CROSBIE: Divide. ~m. SPEAKER: Call in the members. 4172

May 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK - 5 f-IR. SPEAKER: Will all those in favour of the motion, please stand: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. Hr. Collins, Hr. Earle, Mr. Hickman, Mr. lolells, Mr. Crosbie, Mr. Myrden. Those against the motion, please stand: The bon. the Premier, the hon. the President of the Council, the hon. }fr. Lewis, the hon. the Minister of Highways, Mr. Noel, the hon. the Minister of Labrador Affairs, Mr.

Strickland, the bon. the Minister of Education, the hon. the Hinister of Public Works, the hon. the Minister of Hines, Agriculture and Resources, the hon. the Hinister of Community and Social Development, the hon. the Minister of Provincial Affairs, ·the hon. the ~finister of Public Welfare, Mr. Barbour, the hon. }~. Hill, the hon. Minister of Supply, Mr. Saunders, Mr. Wornell. The motion is lost. May we continue with the motion before the Chair, that the Speaker do now leave=the Chair, or some other order. MR.

HICKMAN: May I first direct a question f# the Chair, I was unavoidably out of the House for the passed five minutes, ~e we now debating the motion that is before the Chair 9 by the bon. member for St. John's West, or the motion that is before the Chair. HR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, this information now is it in order to put the question with a motion that is being proposed and to be ruled on by the Speaker, is it in order for ~he bon. Speaker to put the question or shall we have to wait until'l MR.

SPEAKER: You have to wait until· I put the amendment before the House, I have not ruled whether it is acceptable to the Chair or not at the presen~ time. MR. MURPHY: Well the question cannot be put at this time. MR. SPEAKER: The question cannot be put or cannot be discussed at the present time. We concur. Any bon. member has his right to return to the main motion and debate that• __ after the motion is put1 and I have made my decision on it, and it is put before the House, that will not bar any bon. member J,i:, right in speaking to the amendment. tfR. SrlALL~·lOOD: 1-fr.

Speaker, is Your Honour telling the House that the main motion cannot now be gone fovard with Your Honour is not. That is ri~ht? 4173

J1ay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 Pk - 6 ~!R. SHALLWOOD: Your Honour has not. ~!R. SPEAKER: l-rhat I am trying to say; you are perfectly right to go ahead with the main motion. }ffi. SMALLWOOD: That is right. Now then if there is no one who wishes to speak to the main motion now, does Your Honour not put it? ~m. HICKMAN: No, no. MR. SMALLWOOD: I asked Your Honour the question, I did not ask the hon. gentleman across, I asked ¥our Honour. MR.

SPEAKER: I have reserved my judgement, I cannot give the judgement as to whether the amendment is acceptable before I put the main motion. ~~. 5}1ALLWOOD: Your Honour, if no one wishes to speak to the main motion, that completes the debate, does not any question of an amendment fall? ~m. HELLS: I would like to address Your Honour before there is a.ruling made on that. ~m. SMALLWOOD: I have the floor. MR2 WELLS: I would like to address Your Honour on those remarks. }ffi. S~~LWOOD: I have the'floor. Is Your Honour not obliged when the debate is completed to put the. motion? MR. WELLS: No. MR.

S¥.ALLWOOD: Is Your Honour not obliged, is Your Honour not bound. and obliged when the debate is completed on a motion to put the motion, when no one else wishes to speak to the motion, is Your Honour not bound to put tl1e motion? And if no one wishes to speak to this motion, I ask Your Honour to put it. ~. \·:ELLS: I want to address Your Honour on that, the main motion , an amendment has been moved by the hon. member for St. John's West, so it is quite obvious from our own rules, from ~eauchesne, there is no way that the main motion can be put until the amendment has been disposed of. Now I

May 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK- 7 MR. HELLS: appreciate Your Honour's position that he cannot decide whether · or not it is acceptable at this stage and he needs time, it is quite sensible ~nd quite understandable. But the main motion can~ot possibly be put,as the Premier is now suggesting 1 until that amendment ·has been disposed of. Now if Your Honour cannot make a decision now, then we will wait, lf no one wants to preceed )Wtf to debate the main motion, then presumably lV'e will go to another order of business or we recess or we will adjourn, but there is no way that the main question can be put, and all the Premier has to do is look at Beauchesne, it is quite clear, I can refer him to

section 208, from 203 right down through to 208, and it makes it quite clear that any amendment or _·sue-amendments, the amendments to the amendments, must be dealt with before the main motion can be put. He is trying to close of the debate now, what nonsense! HR. SI'I..ALLWOOD: Mr. Speaker, all that is applicable when there is an amendment. There is no amendment. 'HR. WELLS: There is an amendment. MR. SNALU100D: There is no amendment, Your Honour, there is no amendment, there is a motion. If no one wishes to speak to the motion, is Your Honour not bound to put the-motion?

If the debate on the motion is completed, completed in the sense that no one else wishes to speak to it, is Your Honour not bound to put a motion, and is he barred merely because someone has suggested an amendment? Which amendment to Your Honour, he would have ample opportunity to put on another occasion? 1IR.. WELLS : No. HR. SPEAKER: No. MR. SHALLWOOD: He would have ample opportunity to putrthe same .mottos of lack of confidence, it is only a lack of confidence motion, this can be done.

If it is not done now, it is only an amendment that the House go into Committee of the lfuole, that is not the only t;lmeO!a lack of confidence motion 0. can be put. I suggest strongly, Your Honour, that when there is this motion 41~'5

Hay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 l'K -8 MR. S'I-!ALLHOOD: and the debate on it has completed, Your Honour has no choice under the_rules, but to put the motion to the House. And is not barred from so doing merely because an amendment has been proposed which Your Honour has not yet accepted. And especially in the light of the fact that the same motion,lack of confidence that is all it is, can be put at any time. At anytime for the remainder of the session, this same motion can be made~ Wo one is being stopped from making that lack of confidence motion whether it be put as a motion or as an amendment.

No one is barred, Your Honour would not be barring that opportunity, the opportunity would still be there, in the meantime there is this motion which no one wants to debate. What can Your Honour do but put the motion. ~IR. 'HURPHY: Hr. Speaker with reference to the Premier's remarks, there is no one being barred from discussing this if they want . too, there are twenty members over there to carry on with this. But we are standing on our rights that we have pro?osed an amendment • . HR. SMALLli700D: We, we, we, who is the we? 1-IR. MURPHY: Us. MR. StA'.ALLHOOD: l17e, us. we1us and company. We have. MR.

WELLS: The people who sit on this side of the House, do not be naive. MR. SPEAKER: Order;.- please;. the baa. -·~he .• l.eade.r of the Opposition has the floor. ~m. MURPHY: An amendment has been proposed, that the Speaker is not prepared to rule on at this present time. We are on this side, and I am going to take

part in this debate, we are waiting for the Speaker's ruling and as I see, if we want to move to the motion itself, there is nothing to prevent anybody from on that side of the House~ but on this side, and I speak for my colleagues and myself, that we would perfer to _wait for the amendment, and I do not see how we can go on and discuss it without our concurrence in this thing. Because I think we have as much right as anybody else for the ruling of the hon. Speaker. There is nothing to bar any member on the Government side from debating this, we will not object. 4176

Uay 14th. 1970 _Tape 879 PK -9 MR. CROSBIE: Hr. Speaker, I have moved this amendment, it is in the form ·that is given in Beauchesne, there is nothing wrong with the. amendment.,.that I know about in any event, but in the meantime, Hr_. Speaker, you want to consider whether this is in the proper form or not, and the perfectly lo~ical thing to do is that if the Government do not want to move on to another order, that we adjourn while Your Honour maksyour decision.

What is happening now is that the Government is trying to force the clossre of this Budget Speech or else force all members on this side of the House to speak first, so that all Government members are left to speak afterwards. On this side of the House, I have started the debate. The normal practice and custom in this House is that I would be followed by a member from the Government side of the House. }ffi. S~~LWOOD: On a point of order, what is this? ~~at is this? }ffi. CROSBIE: Th~s is a cowardly attempt of the Government to force everyone on this side of the House to speak first, UR.

SMALLWOOD: It is a political argument. Mll. CROSBIE: so that Goverrunent can follow. 1-IR. SPEAKER: Order! order, please! l·ffi. CROSBIE: The Government called - MR. SPEAKER: To a point of order, please. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker the Government called the order today for the Budget Speech, there are members of the Government p£epared to speak on it, and we stand on our rights in this side, we do not wish to be forced to speak until Government members have spoken also. And my point of order, ltR. SHALT.WOOD: h'hat kind of - ~m. CROSBIE: I am speaking to a point of order. Page 176 of Beauchesne,

Section 208, when a motion, an amendment to ·the amendment ha~ been proposed the Sp~A~er will first of all take the census of:t~e House by saying: Is it the pleasure of the House to adop~~the amendment to the amendment~ After this has been disposed of, another may be moved as soon as the Speaker has 4177

Hay 14th. 1970 Tape 879 PK- 10 ,. MR. CROSBIE: proposed the question, is it the pleasure of the House to .. adopt the amendment, or the amendment as amended .to the main motion? After this has been disposed of, the Speaker will propose, "'is it the pleasure of . ,. the House to adopt a motion or the motion as amended? Then a member may · move . another amendment, any number of amendments may be proposed in this way. Now lfr. Speaker it is quite clear that Your Honour cannot pot7e tr.e motion before first deciding whether th:ts amendment is in order, and then before first putting the amendment.

And that is our position, it is substantiated in Beauchesne, there have been no authority cited by the hon. the Premier e~cept his own word, and we do not accept that as being a Parliamentary aut~ority. MR. SHALLlvOOD: Mr. Speaker, all that the hon. gentleman has cited from Beauchesne has to do with one simple thing, the order in which Your , Hono~r muet put these motions and amendments, and sub-amendments, not the order of . . speaking.

Not the order of speaking, not the order of debate, it has only to do with the order in which the Speaker puts the motion or amendment or amendment to the amendment, but not the order of speaking in the debate on them. MR. llELLS: Nobody suggested othetwise~ 4178

·. May 14, 1970 Tape 18~0 Page 1 MR. WELLS: Your Honour it is quite clear from Paragraph (208) that the main question can in no way be put onto an amendment that had been proposed, · bas been disposed of. That must be done first. MR. SMALLWOOD: That is as to voting on it, not as to speaking on it. Carry on with the main motion, go ahead. MR. WORNELL: Mr. Speaker, may I suggest without being presumptious, that the previous question may be called and that would preclude any amendment. MR. WELLS: On what authority? MR. WORNELL: Standing Orders, read it, read it. MR. WELLS: What paragraph? MR.

CROSBIE: In connection with the amendment. MI.. SPEAKER: The hon. member. from St. John's West in my opinion, has concluded his speech. The time is up, and unless he has unlimited time when he concludes his speec~when he concluded with his amendment_ his time was up. We have had this before. I would ask all hon. members when I am making a ruling, would they please sit down so we do not have to have the matter questioned. Has the bon. member unlimited time? This is the question that 1 talked about just now. MR.

CROSBIE: The point is this, that under the rules in speaking on the Budget Speech, there is a time limit of ninety minutes, unless you are the leader of the Government, or the leader of the Opposition. During my ninety minutes, I have moved an amendment to,the non-confidence motion, an amendment to the Motion, and under the Standing Orders, as the mover of a non-confidence Motion, ~ have unlimited time to debate. I just have to look up the

Section here now. Standing Order Number 49 says, "no member except the Premier and the Leader of tbe Opposition, or a minister moving a government order, and a member speaking in reply immediately after such minister, or a member .making a Motion of no confidence in the Government, and a minister replying thereto, shall speak for more than ninety minutes at a time in any debate." Now Mr. Speaker, I have moved a Motion of non-confidence, and I therefore submit that I can continue on with the debate of this Motion. 4179

May 14, 1970 Tape #880 Page 2 MR. SPEAKER: A person in Opposition replying to the Motion, the original matter · I agree to the fact that the person replying immediately after - if he is speaking in opposition to the Motion that is before the House, then his time is not limited to the ninety minutes which is set down in our Rules. MR. WELLS: Mr. Speaker, and I would like this clarified. It seems to me Your Hbnour, and I ask Your Honour for an

interpretation of Rule 49. That under that heading the hon. member for St. John's West has unlimited time JW from two points of view. He is the first member ~~plying to a Government motion, the first one. He is the first speaker in this House that is replying to ~ government motion. And under Rule 49, he has unlimited time for that reason. He is also a member moving a no-confidence motion, and again under Rule 49, which limits ordin~ry debates to ninety minutes, does not apply, because it is an exception. So I ask Your Honour to interpret Rule 49 to mean that the bon. member for St.

John's West has unlimited time on both those counts. MR. SPEAKER: I think Rule 49 is quite clear. I do not think the hon. member for St. John's West - I do not think his time is limited. MR. CROSBIE: Well Mr. Speaker, this non-confidence Motion is in relation to the whole situation which has occurred since the beginning of April in this Government, or-in the House. Mr.

Speaker, What it refers to is this, it is my submission - it is our submission that the event of the last month, or the last five weeks, demonstrates I think beautifully, that this Government does not have the necessary competence or ability to administer the affairs of this Province.

That the events of the last four or five weeks in connection with Government and non-Government workers, and their salary position in relation to the Government - the salaries that are paid by the Government, prove beyond the shadow a doubt that even in the ordinary administration of the business of this Province, this is a Government that is lurching from crisis to crisis, that is incapable of even the most rudimentary actions of government. And this is a Government that has lost the confidence, should ~6se the confidence of all the members of this House, that has lost the 4180

' JW May 14, 1970 Tape 1880 Page 3 confidence of a great majority of the people of Newfoundland, We have no confidence in the ability of the Government to adainister the affairs of this Province. Why not? Now I will come to the why not. Mr. Speaker, and it was known for months, it vas known for months that Government employees and non-Government employees were expecting substantial wage increases and improved working conditions from the Government. It was known since last Fall that the Newfoundland Constabularly for example were expecting increases in pay and improvements in working conditions.

In February of 1970, that was known indisputably because there was a cessation of services. They were through their services for a day or two in February, because of the incompetence of the Government in dealing with them, and failing to negotiate with them. And at that time, the Government of Newfoundland promised them substantial wage increases, and in fact they were told the Government was not afraid of $150 a month. ~e bon. the · Premier told them $150 a month did not scare them. But it later scared them. It scared thea to a much different proposal but he got scared up again to $100 a month.

So it vas known that the Newfoundland Constabularly and the S~curity Employees of the Government were expecting substantial increases. Then Mr. Speaker, non-Government hospital workers, ,~ whatAthe position with respect to non-Goveraaent hospital workers? The position with respect to the non-GoVernment hospital workers 7 represented in this Province by the Canadian Union of public employees 7was indisputably known.

The Canadian Union of public eaployees is certified as a bargaining agent for the Central Newfoundland Hospital at Grand Falls as bargaining agent for the employees at the Western Memorial Hospital and at Twillingate Hospital. Mr. Speaker, on November 4, 1969, the Minister of Labour appointed a conciliation board'to consider the matter of the Central Newfoundland Hospital Corporation and the Canadian Union of public employees, Local 990. And this board reported not too long thereafter, the 17 of December, 1969, the board reported. I cannot figure out all the names there, Mr. Mackenzie - it looks like Mr.

Smith vas the chairman. 1 have a copy of their report. The board reported that the parties to the conciliation was in complete agreement in principle. The Union had 4131 .

"" May 14. 1970 Tape 0880 Page 4 asked for wage increase of thirty dollars per month for each classification mentioned in the agreement, plus a percentage increase equal to the percentage increase in the consumer price index for the previous years reported by DBS. The Hospital Corporation believe the request of the Union to be fair and reasonable, however it could not conclude an agreement for reasons explained to the Board.

And these reasons were; that the source of funds for the Central Newfoundland Hospitals was mainly Provincial Government, and they did not have any money - they could not have the money unless the Government provided it. Page 2 of that Report, the Corporation, the Board says has been informed by the Government that the monies available to it in 1970 this year, will remain at 1969 levels. And those facts meant that the Corporation could not give an increase, the wage increase. The Board unanimously recommended Mr.

Speaker, unanimously recommended when collective agreements be entered into, on the·basis that for the first year the workers should get an increase of thirty dollars a month for all classifications, plus a percentage equal to the··percentage increase and the cost of living index for 1968. And in the second year a similar percentage increase based on a DBS figure for '69. They agree on overtime, recommended overtime, the work week be reduced to thirty-seven and a half hours. And said, these recommendations are subject to /funds being made available to the Corporation by the Provincial Department of Health.

Now this is interesting Mr. Chairman. The Board heard evidence from Dr. Leonard Mtiler, Deputy Minister of Health, vho explained that as a matter of policy, wages to persons in hospitals are frozen until a report on wages and classifications is made to Government by a firm of consultants nov engaged •. The minister later denied that that was the Government's position. That is what the Board said. So the Board in the case of the Newfoundland Hospital reported on December 17, recommending the wage increases that the Union had asked for.

In connection vitp the Western Memorial Hospital, a conciliation board vas appointed November 4132

., .. May 14, 1970 Tape. 11880 Page 5 7, 1969. The report is dated December 16,1969, long before the Budget was brought down. And the Board was deciding the position between the Western Memorial Hospital Corporation and Local 488 of CUPE. The collective ag~eement had expired March 31, 1969. The Board pointed out how peculiar the negotiations were between the hospital and the Union. They said the history of negotiations between the Union and the hospital has been one of frustration not only for a Union but for the hospital as Mell.

This frustration stems directly from limitations which the Minister of Health in implementing certain aspects of government policy placed upon the hospital in negotiating this particular selective agreement. While oM the hospital apparently~to negotiate in certain areas, it is not free to negotiate on financial matters without the consent of the Minister ~ of Health. That is th~ ~osition. And on Page· 3, they go~to say the Government would not consent to the hospitals bargaining on wages. Now Mr.

Speaker,·this is tragic, because how can you collectively bargain, how can two groups collectively bargain when~) the employer has to get his money from the Government, and the Government would not consent to them bargaining on wages - a complete waste of time ~ And the Conciliation Board Report goes on to show how poor this system is and to recommend changes. It is an excellent report, this Conciliation Board. The Chairman by the way was Judge P. Lloyd Soper in the District Court in Corner Brook. They point out that these anomalies depend and require legislation and the initiative of the Government to change.

So the hospitals told the Board that it could only confine itself to a statement of why it could not negotiate. And there was again mention of this great survey of positions and salaries under way at ·all hospitals. Now the Board recommended unanimously that the wages requested by the Union be given. A general increase of thirty dollars a month, plus a percentage increase equal to the increase in the consumer price index for 1968-69. The Union also asked that the increases be retroactive to April 1, 1969, which is when their previous agreement had expired, and the Board agreed to that. 4183

Hay 14, 1970 Tape. #880 Page 6 The Corporation agreed to the Report or to the proposals. The Corporation agrees to pay the Union employees at the rate that the Board is reimbursed by the Government. In the meantime the Board accepts the Union's demands as being reaaonable and has agreed to notify tbe Government to that effect, and to request reimbursement at that rate. So in this case too, Mr. Speaker, a Conciliation Board recommended what the Union has sought, thirty dollars a month plus percentage increase based on the cost of living increase. And that it be retroactive April 1, 1969. So that was the position.

That was the position as far as non-Government hospitals workers were concerned. The Government kneW this Mr. Speaker. The Government knew it, the Minister of Health knew it, the Minister of Labour knew it. They had the reports, the press knew it - the Conciliation Report ~elease to the press. So this was all known, and 41B4

" May 14th, 1970 Tape 881 JM- 1 KR. CROSBIE: this was all known and it was known or should have been known that the Laborato .ry Technologists had put in a brief to the Minister of Health eighteen months eariier looking for increases in pay. Laboratory Techonologists and X-ray Technicians, without them, Mr. Speaker, you cannot operate hospitals today. Eighteen months ago they put in a brief pointing out that they needed increases and if we are to keep them in Newfoundland they must be paid an equivalent at least of what they can earn on the Mainland. MR. WINSOR: Who has been the Minister of Health? MR.

CROSBIE: The Minister of Health for the last year has been the bon. member for White Bay North. AN HON. MEMBER: Who was the Minister of Health before that? MR. HICKMAN: Oh, I was. MR. CROSBIE:~ The Minister of Health then was apparently the bon. member for Burin. MR. NEARY: The bon. member for Burin had a habit of putting things in his top drawer and locking them up. MR. CROSBIE: The bon. member for Bell Island has a habit of talking nonsense. MR. HICKMAN: Let me deal with that. The bon. member for Burin put nothing in his top drawer and would you like for me to tell this bon. House where I put it? Right!

Then I would be very happy too. Just open the door just a little tiny bit. MR. CROSBIE: I suggest you discuss that when you speak on this motion! Now, Mr. Speaker, the bon. Minister for Rehabilation always gets me confused. Now I was on hospital workers. Right, so that was known, the Minister of Health knew about the Laboratory Technologists brief and the X-ray Technicians request and the Government knew that the NGEA were looking for increases and the Government knew that the teachers ·were also e.nxious to have increases but the teachers agreeded to wait until next year. So it was known by everybody, Mr.

Speaker, that they were expecting increases. Now what happened, what happened? The Government did not get in touch with CUPE, it did not get in touch with representatives of the hospital workers before the budget was brought down, the Government did not get in touch with representatives of the 4105

May 14th, 1970 Tape 881 JM- 2 MR. CROSBIE: Constabulary not from February on1after the crisis arose in February. There was never any bargaining between the two parties since the strike got settled in February there was no bargaining. They were not told anything about what they were going to get, they were led to expect $150.a month which the Premier said he was not afraid of, nothing frightens the Premier even $165. million. He said he certainly was not frightened by $150 a month so nothing was said to them that they were not going to get $150 a month increase.

NGEA, I do not know if any negotiations were held with them or not but certainly CUPE which represents the hospital works and who had received conciliation board reports in December were waiting anxiously to"see what was going to come of it all. Then what happened? AN HON. MEMBER: Why did it happen? MR. CROSBIE: Because it shows the total incompetence of the Government and why this cannot be allowed to happen again. The Government must be changed to prevent it happening again. Mr.

Speaker, on April 9,collective bargaining - ~.lle~~~ve bargaining, and people will not be allowed to strike and there will n~t be binding arbritation, and you call it collective bargaining. The Premier's ultimatiums on television, is that collective bargaining? April 9th, 1970 the statement delivered in this House by the Premier, the first statement, duri~g the whole course of the last five weeks the Premier has made seven major statements each one contradicting or each one retreating from the previous statement he has made.

He must be twisted almost like a cork screw he has had to twist and turn so much in the last few weeks making these state- ments. April 9th, 1970 in this House, Mr. Speaker, he points out to the. -. employees of the Government that they are not going to get their anno81increment this year, this fiscal year. They.-· are not going to get their annual increment of $100 or $180 that is being traditional but they are going to get something else, they are goi