May 25,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 3

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

On behalf of all hon. members, I would like to welcome to the

House our colleagues from Fortune - Hermitage and Eagle River, who were sworn in

this morning.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I would also advise the House that I

understand, the Liberal candidate has been accounted the winner of the recent

by-election. I don't know what other proceedings may follow but, in due course,

the winner will be sworn in. I notice he is sitting in the gallery and I would

like to welcome him here this afternoon.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

DR. KITCHEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, an international event occurred recently which

brought great honour to this Province. Commissioner Bramwell Tillsley was

elected General of the Salvation Army by the Army's High Council.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

DR. KITCHEN: The High Council is a body of the most

senior officer administrators, holding the Army's highest rank, that of

Commissioner. The High Council meets in London, England every five years and its

only function is to elect, from amongst its members, an international leader,

the General. The General-elect and Mrs. Tillsley assume office in July. In the

Army, the spouse takes the same rank and is co-equal in status to her or his

partner. Therefore, Mrs. Tillsley, the former Maude Pitcher, who was born and

raised in St. John's, the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Jacob Pitcher, formerly of

Winterton, assumes responsibility for the Army's women's ministries, plus other

special services throughout the Army world.

The Tillsleys served as leaders of the Officers Training

College in St. John's and as Provincial Commanders during the 1970s. They

quickly rose through the Army's ranks and were assigned various senior

administrative positions throughout the world. Their last assignment was in

London,where the Commissioner was Chief of Staff, the top executive officer for

the international work of the Salvation Army under the direction of the General.

By the way, Mr. Speaker, all of the Pitcher family, four daughters and one son,

became officers. Their son, Arthur, also became a Commissioner, and therefore,

was a member of the High Council. Once, he was nominated for the Generalship,

but withdrew. He retired five years ago as a territorial leader for Canada.

I move, Mr. Speaker, that this House, through your good

offices, write a letter of congratulation to Commissioner and Mrs. Tillsley,

recognizing their contributions to Newfoundland and to the international work of

the Army, and as a tribute to the Pitcher family, whose children have brought

great honour to Newfoundland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, we would like to be associated

with the comments that have been suggested should be made by the Speaker on

behalf of all members of the House and with the words of the Minister. I didn't

quite get all of the information because we didn't have a copy of the statement

that he read beforehand, but we will read it in Hansard, I am sure. I am aware

of some other history with respect to the Salvation Army. There was, I believe,

a General Wiseman, also a Newfoundlander, and I have a limited knowledge in this

area only because of the fact that my grandfather was the first Corps Sergeant

Major of the Salvation Army in Triton many, many years ago - Archibald Simms. I

am proud to say, I am named after him. A lot of people did not realize that, I

guess, at this point in time. But I would like to associate our party with the

words of the minister and recommend that the Speaker send a letter of

congratulation on behalf of members of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join with the Minister of Health and the

Leader of the Opposition in sending our greetings and congratulations to the

Tillsley family, and to recognize that the Salvation Army has, indeed, made a

great contribution to this Province. It is very nice to see that Newfoundlanders

are able to make a great contribution to the Salvation Army movement worldwide,

and I would join with the other members of the House in asking that a letter be

sent to congratulate them on their contribution and achievement.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have some questions for the Minister of

Finance dealing with the estimates procedure as announced on Friday by the

Government House Leader. On Friday, as well, the Minister of Finance

reintroduced the Budget that he had put before the House on March 18, a little

over two months ago, but he did so on Friday without any revision to any of the

numbers.

Now, the minister would know that virtually every head and

every subhead in the detailed estimates of government departments has a vote for

salaries and benefits, but the amounts in the Budget he tabled on Friday have

not been adjusted to reflect the $70 million that the government says it intends

to save on employees' compensation, therefore, every head and every subhead is

actually wrong.

I want to ask the minister: Will there be adjustments made to

the departmental Estimates in time for the Estimates Committees to do a detailed

review of government's expenditure programs for this year? In other words, when

will the Committees have the revised numbers that they need in order to do their

job properly? Can the Minister of Finance tell us about those revisions?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, it is our position that the

Committees can now do their jobs properly. The Budget has been presented to the

House. It is in the process of being debated in the House. It contains a lot of

headings and subheadings and there is an indication in that Budget, that there

will be $70 million removed from the total salary and benefits package, so, Mr.

Speaker, that speaks for itself; that will be done as soon as we get the

agreements of the various unions.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I am talking about the Estimates Committees, the

elected members of this House being able to perform their duties and their

responsibilities in a proper and orderly fashion. Now, if they don't know what

the numbers are, it is very difficult for them to carry out that particular job.

Now, the Premier has said, you will find $70 million by

reducing employee compensation. How will the minister reduce the employee

compensation - will it be by the pension scheme proposed before the election,

will it be by taxation, or will it involve other measures, will it involve wage

rollbacks, will it involve any kind of unpaid leave options, will it involve

layoffs? What is the answer to that question? Can the minister tell us that?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I reiterate once again, that the

members of the House and the members of the Committees can do their jobs. The

expenditure heads simply indicate the maximum expenditure that we expect to be

made in these headings and that still stands.

Mr. Speaker, in every single heading and every Budget that

has been introduced in this House or any other House, in any time past, I

suspect that very few of the headings at the end of the year were met exactly,

and that is not a prerequisite for committees doing their jobs properly. The

headings, the amounts that the hon. member sees, and other members of the House

see in the Estimates for Salary and Other Benefits heading, will be the maximum

that we project will be spent during the year for these headings, so the Budget

is pretty straightforward.

Mr. Speaker, as to the rest of his question, I don't know

where the hon. member has been for the last number of months - we could discuss

that I suppose; but we have indicated that the $70 million will not be found

through increased taxes - that is part of his question. I mean, that is

something everybody has known, except for the Leader of the Opposition, that our

preference is not to achieve the $70 million reduction in terms of a planned

layoff in the public service. We have stated that very publicly and openly.

The mechanism we are attempting now to negotiate with the

various public sector unions - and that process was continuing over the weekend,

and is continuing today - we want to make sure that is given a full opportunity

to be successful.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me ask the

minister this question: Will any of the proposed cuts in employee compensation

affect any government programs that are now funded in his Budget that he tabled

on Friday? For example, if it were the pension option, the likelihood of

programs being affected is not very great. But if it weren't the pension option,

if it were some other option, if it were an option - for example, the Minister

of Education at one time was talking about eliminating the curriculum directors

people, the division in his department. He said so publicly. If something like

that were going to take place, then it would affect the entire program of that

particular department. Those would be the kinds of questions that the members

would need to have answered before they can perform their duties or their

responsibilities in a responsible fashion.

So let me ask him again. Can he assure the House that any

proposed cuts in employee compensation that they have talked about will not

affect any programs now provided for, funded, in his Budget that he tabled on

Friday?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, any government is free to make

changes and adjust programs as the need arises during any fiscal year. The hon.

member knows that. He has been a member of a government that has made many

adjustments during the year in terms of programs. So I can make no such

commitment that there would be no changes in programs. The only commitment I can

make is that as soon as we have concluded the negotiations with the public

sector unions, then this hon. House will be informed of the exact measures that

will be taken to achieve the $70 million reduction.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Leader

of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, let me move in another direction,

then. In March, the minister announced major cuts in his Budget for funding for

third party organizations. I heard him on the other day talking about it now

being extended to June, I believe, before final decisions are made. But I think

it was just before the election, one particular group had their funding

reinstated. Yet the Budget numbers have not been changed in this document that

he tabled on Friday. Why haven't the changes been made to the Budget documents

to reflect the government's backtracking on that particular issue? He knows the

one I am referring to - Daybreak. Three hundred and fifty thousand dollars, I

think, was the Provincial Government's share - or whatever it was. Why haven't

those figures been adjusted or changed to reflect those particular changes, and

what other programs have now been cut in order to find that $350,000? Can he

tell us that?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, we are in the process of

examining several options to indicate where the source of the funds are going to

be. There are many possibilities and this hon. House will know once our

decisions are made. We did make that particular mistake in the Budget process

and we were very quick to correct it. As for making a printing change that would

cost thousands and thousands of dollars to do, to change all the books, to redo

and reprint all of the information related to the Estimates simply because of a

small change, Mr. Speaker, is something I was not prepared to do. I think we are

all grown people here and if, for instance, it is necessary at some point in

time to go through a procedure to get a little bit of extra money to change the

headings we will do that process, but I do not intend to go through an extra

expense of tens of thousands of dollars to make a slight change that we all know

is there and will be openly discussed and will be identified when the time

comes.

MR. SIMMS: One final short supplementary, if I may, Mr.

Speaker.

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

MR. SIMMS: Can the minister tell us what other groups and

organizations have had their funding re-instated? Can he tell us, and by how

much? There were a couple that were announced, I think, during the election.

MR. BAKER: We are re-thinking some of the allocations

having to do with where the departments had choices as to which organizations to

sponsor for space. That process is continuing and must be completed before the

end of June so that the organizations can be notified. The funding is already in

the Budget for that amount of money.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question as well for the Minister of Finance.

Analysts are saying that the heavy tax increases imposed in the Ontario and

Quebec budgets will slow down economic recovery and economic growth for the

remainder of this year and next year. Some have already predicted that the rate

of growth will decline to 2 per cent from that forecasted at 2.9 per cent. I

want to ask the minister, since he predicted economic growth of 1.2 per cent in

this Province for this year would a 1 per cent percentage point drop in national

GDP wipe out the Provinces's growth that he predicted?

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

MR. BAKER: No, Mr. Speaker. In terms of our projections

we have tried to be conservative and take the conservative side of the range in

order to be fiscally responsible, number one. Number two, Mr. Speaker, I do

agree that tax increases would tend to slow down a recovery that may be

underway, but the stress is on the slowdown and there are many objections a

government must to examine to walk that thin line that every government does in

terms of budgeting.

Mr. Speaker, I am in constant contact with analysts who are

analyzing the Canadian economy and the numbers, I must admit, vary from one

agency to another, but if I were to have to make a decision right now at this

point in time I would suggest that perhaps the recovery numbers may be slightly

better than we have projected.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary

to the minister.

In his Budget the minister predicted an increase of nearly 4

per cent in equalization payments this year from Ottawa, and of course that was

reflected in the federal Budget. If the Ontario and Quebec Budgets have the

impact that is being predicted by some analysts and business people, will it

wipe out any significant growth in equalization payments that the Province would

receive this year? And what effect will that have upon the minister's Budget?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I cannot say at this point in

time exactly what impact these actions will have on the Canadian economy, which

is really the question that the member is asking. All I can tell him is that we

do not make decisions based on simply one estimate of what is going to happen.

We do not make decisions based on what happens in one month. We make decisions

based upon an analysis of all of the estimates over a period of time, and I

cannot guarantee this House that when we get our mid-year re-estimates in

October - I cannot guarantee this House Leader there will not be any changes.

There very well might be, but the numbers that we are looking at now, and the

advice we are getting now, indicates there will be no changes.

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the

Opposition House Leader.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. A

final supplementary to the minister.

Is the minister as confident now as he was on March 18th that

he can hold the deficit for the fiscal year 1993-'94 to the $51 million? Is he

as confident now as he was then, in light of what has happened in Ontario and

Quebec? We all know how that impacts upon the transfer payments, the

equalization, from Ottawa to us. Is he that confident about that now as he was

then?

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

MR. BAKER: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, on Friday, May 21, the Minister

of Education announced the postponement of school board elections to coincide

with the restructuring of the Newfoundland school system. The minister further

indicated that these restructuring changes would not occur until 1994.

In view of the fact that at the AGM of the School Trustees

Association recently, there were complaints of lack of consultation, I would

like to ask the minister if he could inform the House of the restructuring

models under consideration by his department and what protocols are in place to

assure all stakeholders that they will be consulted in the restructuring

processes?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, for one thing that gentleman is

no Eric Gullage. It is obvious. I can see that.

Mr. Speaker, hon. members will know that it has been

announced many times that after the Royal Commission made its report there was a

Committee of Principals made up of church leaders and a Committee of Ministers

which are the P and P ministers of government. Both committees have been meeting

occasionally, but we have a working group of committees who are, at this time,

reviewing the skeleton of a model which was put forward by the officials on the

DEC's. No firm action has been taken, of course, on anything yet. We are sort of

reviewing the thing as it is put forward.

The other question the hon. member raised is the involvement

of other stakeholders in these discussions. Mr. Speaker, if we were to follow

the strict letter of the law; if we were to strictly stay within theory,

education in this Province is solely the realm of church and state. So if we

were to follow the letter of the law, all we have to do is sit down and talk to

the leaders of the churches; however, practical realities make that impossible.

We recognize that we have to talk to the parents, who are very important in any

changes which are to take place. We have to talk to the trustees associations.

We have to talk to the Newfoundland Teachers' Association, Mr. Speaker, and

there is a committee in placed called the General Advisory Committee to the

Minister of Education. This committee is made up of Newfoundland Teachers'

Association, the School Trustees Association, the Parent/Teacher Association,

and I met with them last week. We had an in-depth discussion on the Royal

Commission. We agreed, in that meeting, that the general advisory committee

would be the forum in which the other stakeholders in the system would have

their input into any action that we might take on the Royal Commission, Mr.

Speaker.

We also agreed that if there are any other groups which are

not represented on the general advisory committee, that they too would be able

to come and give advice and make suggestions. At the end of the day all

suggestions will be taken under consideration and in due course we will come up

with the best education system in North America today, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Waterford -

Kenmount.

MR. HODDER: I thank the minister for his comments. We all

recognize that all of the restructuring that we plan on doing, or government

plans on doing, if it's going to be acceptable there has to be a way in which

all of the stakeholders have a sense of ownership. In that connection, will the

minister assure that before the final decisions are made that there will be a

discussion paper presented to the general public, and will there be public

hearings so that all partners in the educational system can have an input into

the final decisions?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I don't want to specifically say

which forum or which mode we will use to make sure that everybody has an input

into it. I wouldn't want to say we're going to go with a special discussion

paper or anything. I will assure the hon. member that it is the intent of

government - which if the hon. member were to follow the way we have acted over

the past four years, we are the most open government this Province has ever had,

Mr. Speaker. We will continue -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DECKER: We certainly will be continuing in that

direction, Mr. Speaker. Every single stakeholder who has something to say, and

every single Newfoundlander and Labradorian who has something to say about

education, he or she will be heard and will be listened to. At the end of the

day this government will have to evaluate all the suggestions, all the

discussions, all the input, and we will have to come up with the final decision

at the end of the day. That's the open government. That's what they talked about

four years ago when they wanted real change. They wanted open government where

the people are heard, Mr. Speaker, and that's going to continue. The hon. member

will be quite pleased to hear that, I'm sure.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for

the Minister of Health. I want to ask the minister whether he is aware of any

claims by individuals in this Province that they have contracted the HIV virus

through contaminated blood received in this Province, and if so how many

individuals so claim?

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

DR. KITCHEN: The question is, how many people in this

Province have contracted HIV through blood transfusions? I don't know how many

there are, Mr. Speaker, but I have asked our people to inform me about this

matter and to see if it warrants any further action. I'd like to report that we

have in the Department of Health an advisory committee on infectious diseases,

and I have a report from them today - it's because they met on this issue - and

they do not recommend any large-scale search and HIV testing for people who

received blood transfusions in the Province in the early 1985s. So we won't be

carrying forth any of this testing of people who've had blood transfusions. The

risk is extremely low and we won't be - anyone who suspects that they have HIV,

either through taking blood or from other ways, from needles or through sexual

intercourse, or whatever, is quite at liberty to get a test. We won't be

pursuing it.

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, my question was quite specific

as to whether or not individuals had already come forward and made a claim to

the government that they had contracted HIV through the blood transfusion. I

don't know if the minister's prepared to answer that question right now, but

would he tell the House whether or not his government is party to an agreement

with other provinces recently discussed by and broken by the Province of Nova

Scotia to stay mum on the issue of compensation rather than open up discussions

with people as the Province of Nova Scotia has done on the issue of compensating

victims.

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, the member I believe, is

confusing two issues. One is the question of haemophiliacs, and the other is the

question of people who receive blood transfusions, who may not be haemophiliacs.

The question of the haemophiliacs is under legal review, and their case is in

the courts so I will not be able to answer questions on that, but I was

answering the question on the broader issue of people who have received blood

transfusions over the years.

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

for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, either way I guess, it would not

be hurting the legal process to tell us how many claims there might be, and

perhaps he could answer that while he is also answering the question as to

whether he has satisfied himself that the issue raised in the St. John's Evening

Telegram of today, concerning blood transfusion bags, can he tell us what

information he has about where that came from, and how it might have been found

located in the St. John's water supply area, as reported in today's, St. John's

Evening Telegram?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I am not an avid reader of The

Evening Telegram, and so I am not sure just how accurate it is, but I have asked

people to look into this question.

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

Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: My question is for the Minister of

Fisheries.

The minister knows there is considerable anger among crab

fishermen over the price being offered for crab in this Province. The fishermen

can get sixty cents as compared to $1.50 to $1.75 in the Maritime Provinces;

does the minister believe that this is a fair price differential, and has he

made an effort to find out why it exists?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I have had representations made

to me by the fishermen's union and others involved in the crab fishery, all of

whom ask the same question: How can the differential, the alleged differential

be explained? It is reported that companies in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick are

in fact paying a higher price for crab than our Newfoundland firms, and I

undertook, Mr. Speaker, to appoint a committee that would investigate and that

committee is now in the process of investigating, in fact, there is a steering

committee appointed on which the fishermen's union have nominated I believe, two

or three members, a couple of members from the processing sector and Dr. Les

Harris, who has offered to serve on the committee as an independent member. The

committee is being chaired by my deputy minister and work is already proceeding,

Mr. Speaker, on the part of that committee to determine once and for all, if in

fact, there is such a wide difference in the price being offered by Nova Scotias

and others, and to determine as well, if we are talking about the same kind of

crab, is there a difference in the crab for example, that might bring about that

differential in price offered?

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

Bay.

MR. SHELLEY: First of all, this committee that is struck,

of course timing is crucial now as far as the fishery goes, the crab fishery, so

when do you expect reports from this committee?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, there is a problem that has

arisen in that, there is now a strike ongoing with respect to the crab fishery.

The fishermen have, I believe, indicated that they are not going to fish for the

amount being offered, and that then of course places the committee in the

Province in a rather awkward position, because you do not want to be perceived

as interfering with the due process of collective bargaining, but nevertheless,

Mr. Speaker, that committee, the steering committee is due to meet I believe, it

is tomorrow, to agree on the terms of reference, and to start the process of

studying the entire crab industry.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Health.

Last winter, the minister found some funding to reduce the

long waiting list for heart surgery in this Province. I ask the minister: has

this emergency funding been withdrawn, and is the waiting list for heart surgery

now growing again?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There was a fairly long waiting list for cardiac surgery and

we did put some extra money in there to reduce the waiting list, which has now

been reduced to acceptable proportions, Mr. Speaker, so we have no plans to put

any additional funds in there.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my

understanding that there are long waiting lists still. I ask the minister, does

he have any long term plans to deal with the problem of such long delays in

patients being able to get heart surgery?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Sir, I guess the hon. member must have

sources that are greater than ours, he manufactures long waiting lists where

there are no long waiting lists. I am wondering where he is getting his

information.

AN HON. MEMBER: From where you should be getting it.

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

for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are getting

reports that senior citizens are being denied heart surgery, not because they

are not physically able to undergo surgery but because surgical procedure is

being rationed and they are being excluded. Now, I ask the minister is it true

and are otherwise fit seniors who could benefit from heart surgery being sent

home to die, is that what our health system is coming too?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I guess the new critic is very

much like the former critic. The former critic basically stirred up public

concern where there was no need for concern. I will say this though to the hon.

member, if he knows of any case, I wish he would refer it to me and I will have

it looked into.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes concerns have

been brought to my attention regarding -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: It has been brought to the attention of

cardiologists, Mr. Speaker, and recently - in fact a person who had to wait days

to get in just to have an angiogram and other testing done was told that because

of age that person may not be possible when a lot of the younger people being

employed are on waiting lists also. So, I ask the minister, is this what our

system is coming too? The minister seems to take all his questions under

advisement, probably more questions under advisement than the President of the

United States has taken in the last twenty years, so I ask him will he look into

this and see if the waiting lists are increasing and let us know exactly what

the waiting lists are?

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I will not be looking into the

waiting lists. If the hon. member has concerns of an individual person he should

bring it to the attention of the Minister of Health who would look into it. It

is no good for him to pretend he is a cardiologist and all of this stuff, he

should bring his concerns here to me and I will have them looked into.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The minister stated

here in this House just recently that there are no long waiting lists. So, is he

now saying that there are no long waiting lists for heart surgery?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. SULLIVAN: Did I hear the minister correctly so

Hansard will quote that?

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

DR. KITCHEN: My information, Mr. Speaker, and I have

checked, is that there are no long waiting lists for cardiac surgery. No waiting

lists that are not appropriate.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

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

Minister of Social Services. What I would like to ask the minister, Mr. Speaker,

is it true that his department has now decided to go after the sick and the

suffering in this Province and as a result have asked social workers to have the

budget for home care to the sick reduced?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, again that is a perennial question

raised by the hon. member. I can tell the hon. member that the sick, the

suffering and the disadvantaged are well looked after in this Province by the

Department of Social Services.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is:

have social workers been instructed to cut the budget for home care to senior

citizens? That is the question and I ask the minister to answer it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I advise the hon. member that

nothing has been done to bring any further discomfort to the sick of this

Province and if there is any kind of a cut than I am sure that it has been a cut

that has been asked all departments to do that is in proportion with the

expenditure of the department.

MR. SPEAKER: Question period has expired.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Mr. Speaker, I will on tomorrow ask leave

to introduce the following resolution.

WHEREAS Canada was granted a 200-mile limit on the basis of

sound fisheries management principles; and

WHEREAS the federal government has ignored such principles to

the detriment of our people and our communities; and

WHEREAS the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans promised to

reform the system; and

WHEREAS the proposed Atlantic Fisheries Board is directed to

follow principles which would eliminate us from our own fishery;

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly endorse the

principles of adjacency, relative dependence of coastal communities, historic

use, economic efficiency, and fleet mobility, as the basis of resource

allocation in the fishery of the future.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce

the following resolution.

WHEREAS traffic congestion in and around the city of St.

John's is a major concern; and

WHEREAS construction of the Outer Ring Road will provide a

much needed boost to an ailing economy; and

WHEREAS funding for the construction of an Outer Ring Road is

being provided by the federal government;

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the government take the steps

necessary to ensure that the construction of the Outer Ring Road will commence

no later than the spring of 1994.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Petitions

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

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to present a petition from thirty-four residents of

the community of Beachside in my district of Green Bay. Some hon. members who

were here before dissolution of the old House will recall that I brought a

petition before the House with regard to the state and colour of the water in

the community of Beachside, even to the extent of bringing in a bottle for

display in this particular Chamber, a display of which I was told at the time

was out of order. Nonetheless, Mr. Speaker, the problem remains and after the

House was dissolved and an election was called I received an additional

thirty-four names asking that another phase of the water and sewer system be

attended to, to resolve the problem we now have in Beachside. Of course there

was no House of Assembly at the time so I wrote back to the council and

indicated that if re-elected I would bring forward the remaining thirty-four

names, which I am doing today. The problem, Mr. Speaker, is one of

discolouration and silting. It is in the water supply in Beachside and it is in

the water supply in Port Anson. It is a problem that I have recently written

about to the new Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, and one that I

hope he will look into.

Mr. Speaker, I support this petition and ask that it be

tabled and given to the appropriate department.

Thank you, very much.

Orders of the Day

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, could we do Motions 3 through 6

first, please?

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 3.

Interruption in tape.

MR. ROBERTS: Two through 6 are first readings. Let us get

them out of the way.

Interruption in tape.

MR. SPEAKER: We can do all five at the same time with

consent.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Education to introduce a

bill, "An Act To Amend The Memorial University Act". (Bill No. 2)

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and

Technology to introduce a bill, "An Act Respecting The Department of Industry,

Trade and Technology". (Bill No. 4)

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Tourism and Culture to

introduce a bill, "An Act Respecting The Department Of Tourism and Culture".

(Bill No. 3)

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Taxation Of Utilities And

Cable Television Companies Act." (Bill No. 5), and, "An Act To Amend The

Municipalities Act." (Bill No. 6)

On motion, Bills Nos. 2, 4, 3, 5, and 6 read a first time,

ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I propose to ask Your Honour to

call the Budget Speech. My friend for Mount Pearl is absent for a short time

attending a funeral I'm told, so we're prepared, if another Opposition speaker

wishes to come forward and make his speech, to pick up with the gentleman from

Mount Pearl when the gentleman from Mount Pearl gets back, if that's in order.

What I would ask is whoever's to speak now finish his speech, which would be a

normal twenty minute speech, and then we'll let the gentleman from Mount Pearl

have at us again. If that's in order and with the consent -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Half an hour, is it? With the consent of

members, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, Mr. Speaker. We're not sure when

the Member for Mount Pearl will be here. So hopefully it will be before the

first speaker concludes, but if not, if you don't have a speaker, then we'll put

up another one.

MR. SIMMS: Lots of speakers here. Amendments.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: I don't think we need to put it to a motion

of the House. I think we can accept that the difference in process will be

followed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Agreed.

MR. SPEAKER: Agree?

MR. ROBERTS: Motion 1, then, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion, 1, the Budget speech.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today in

the people's House with a great deal of pride and commitment. Pride from the

fact that I am very proud to be able to sit in this House and represent the

district of Bonavista South, and commitment from the fact that I think the only

promise that I made during the election was the commitment to come and serve the

people to the best of my ability. I can assure you there were a lot more

promises made in the district of Bonavista South in the last election than those

promises that people like myself were capable of fulfilling by their own wisdom

and their own effort. I didn't make them.

I thank the good people of Bonavista South for their faith in

me. I thank them for showing me their trust in electing me on May 3. I would

like to reflect back on the election for a few minutes if I may.

In the election of 1989 I contested the same seat which I

lost by twenty votes. There are all kinds of reasons why I lost that election,

but I won't go into that at this time. This election was won through

organization and through people wanting a change in the district of Bonavista

South because they weren't represented in the way that their hopes and their

concerns were being addressed. When I went down into the district of Bonavista

South and I heard of some of the people who were there campaigning for the hon.

member, I must admit that I was in fear of mudslinging. Those fears were

unfounded and it didn't happen, and I think the election we had in Bonavista

South took the high road, and I thank the hon. people who were involved for

doing that.

A lot of the issues that were raised at the doors in the

district of Bonavista South were not any different from the issues that were

raised in other parts of the Province. Employment and jobs are the main concerns

of the people, and I can assure you that they want them now, and not twenty

years from now. Youth unemployment, something that we're faced with every day;

tuition fees to the post-secondary institutions come September will probably

have gone up in excess of 50 per cent. I believe that as long as we make

education only available to the rich and the well-to-do that our unemployment

rates will continue to soar and to exist at the 20 per cent levels.

In Bonavista, the town of Bonavista and surrounding areas, to

go back to the youth unemployment, I think it's unheard of in the history of

this Province to know that there's been something like six suicides in the past

eighteen months. Those suicides, Mr. Speaker, are happening because of the lack

of hope, and the despair of our young people.

The other issue I continued to hear as I knocked on doors was

the fact that government is not listening, and this is the biggest shame of all.

Mr. Speaker, I think we will find, if we go out into the districts and listen to

the people, not just the people who are involved in industry and occupation,

that not only do they know the problems, if somebody took the time to listen,

they would know the solutions, as well, but that is not happening.

The uncertainty about the future in the fishery - in my

district there are approximately 1,800 people who work in the fish plants on the

Bonavista Peninsula. Those 1,800 people are facing an uncertain future, not to

mention the fisherpersons. If and when the moratorium is over in 1994, Mr.

Speaker, the fisherpersons know, I believe, where they will be going if the

resource is there, but the fish plant workers are not afforded that luxury.

Mr. Speaker, with respect to those fish plants on our

peninsula, I believe the decisions are known as to which plants will open and

which plants will close, and I think that the people should be made aware of

that so they can make wise decisions and train for their future.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West

brought up the topic of social services to the hon. minister. This is a concern

that is very, very big in my district, and to hear some of the stories that

people relate to you almost puts a knot in your heart.

As I was driving from - I used to drive home from Bonavista

back to my hometown in the nighttime during the election; it is about an

hour-and-a-half drive, and it gave me time to relate and to think back on the

things that happened during the day. Mr. Speaker, one thing that burned in my

heart was the stories I heard about the employable handicapped out there, people

who have no reason to get up in the morning; people who are employable - no

reason to go to bed and no reason to get up in the morning because there is

nothing there for them. I think this is one area where we should seek

adjustment, one area where, in the Budget, there should be money available to

have those people looked after and put in the work force to do things that are

meaningful.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: I don't mean passing them a brown

envelope, Mr. Speaker. I don't think that is the solution to their problem. I

think they should be allowed to work in communities, do community work, to give

them a reason to exist and a reason to go on. Mr. Speaker, it is totally

unacceptable to have approximately one in every nine people in our Province on

social assistance.

During the election, also, I remember walking down the street

in one of the larger communities in my district and meeting this lady. She was a

professional person and she asked me what our party had decided to do to try to

solve the $70 million - the elusive $70 million that is being talked about all

the time. One of the things I mentioned to her was the fact that we would try to

get people on social services back to work. Her comments were quite quick and

she said: You can't do that because you would have Human Rights against you.

Human Rights would pick up on that.

It showed me how out of touch people can be when they are

okay themselves, because I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that most of the people

out there on social assistance are not there by choice, but of necessity.

Mr. Speaker, I was informed on Friday that this is the first

time in the history of the district of Bonavista South that it has been

represented in the House in Opposition. That was an issue during the election,

as well. A lot of people said to me: What would you do if you were in

Opposition? My comment was that you should ask the other person, as well,

because it is a general election and that is something you should put before the

other candidates; but after the election, I left my campaign headquarters and

went down to the Liberal headquarters to wish them all the best, and I stated to

the people who were there at that time -

MR. SIMMS: You went down to the Liberal headquarters.

They didn't come up to your headquarters?

MR. FITZGERALD: No, I took the courtesy of going down and

wishing them the best. That is the kind of fellow I am, Mr. Speaker. I am a

people person.

MR. SIMMS: I know that, but I thought they would have

come up and congratulated you.

MR. FITZGERALD: I went down and said to the people who

were there at the headquarters: Forget Liberal and forget PC, and I will forget

the badges that were worn. When I go into the House of Assembly, I will

represent everybody in the district of Bonavista South -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: - not only the people who came out and

supported me, but everybody from the district. And I don't think the Premier and

his government, he being the reputable person that he is, will do any different.

The Premier and his government, is the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador,

not the government for Liberal districts, and I am sure they wouldn't

disassociate themselves from the Progressive Conservative districts.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Come on over, boy, you are in the wrong

place.

MR. FITZGERALD: Mr. Speaker, somebody told me to come on

over, I am in the wrong place. In fact, I have been hearing this several times.

In fact, one of the hon. members from the other side mentioned that she had

heard it. The only way I am going over there is if all of these people go with

me.

Mr. Speaker, back in the 1989 election, I think the Liberal

party at that time talked about having water and sewer available to everybody. I

think they made a - I do not know if it was a promise, but I know it was an

election issue, where they talked about having a corporation for water and

sewer. I can assure you that this has not happened in the district of Bonavista

South. In fact, one community there - and they are not looking for cadillac

water and sewer systems, they are looking for a supply of clean, potable water,

and a way to properly dispose of their sewage. In one community, the water

supply is available for two hours a day. That is the length of time it can be

turned on because of the leaks in the water line - never ever addressed, never

attended to.

In the Town of Bonavista, fire protection is a big issue -

fourteen hundred households, and they are left today with one obsolete fire

truck which will cost $20,000 to repair and another 1972 fire truck to serve

1,400 people in the town, in excess of 1,700 people in the surrounding areas.

Mr. Speaker, those are concerns that are real and that need to be addressed.

Mr. Speaker, it is all very well to come and be the

government and talk about rolling back wages and making cutbacks - that is the

easy way to run a government. What we need is somebody who will go out and

create some initiatives and get people back to work. I believe this can be done,

but I think a lot of time and effort and a lot of listening will have to go into

that.

The fishery on the Bonavista Peninsula has been the mainstay

ever since Newfoundland has been Newfoundland, and I don't see it changing

within the next three or four years, but there is one thing that we have to do.

We have to make sure that we get every dollar and every hour of work from our

fish plants and from our fishery so that our people may once again be gainfully

employed.

Tourism is one area that the people on the Bonavista

Peninsula look forward to, with a lot of optimism. I, too, believe it is an area

where we can create jobs, and I believe that in it there is a place for

optimism. The "500" celebrations which will take place in 1997, Mr. Speaker, is

very important, and I believe a lot of time and attention needs to go into those

celebrations, and I think we can get a lot of our people back to work and

involved in the tourist industry if we go about it in the right way.

Mr. Speaker, the government continues to talk about the home

industries - the craft shops - in rural Newfoundland. In Bonavista this past

number of years, there has been a craft shop operated in the facility known as

the Bonavista Lighthouse. In March of this year, the hon. the Minister of

Tourism and Culture sent a letter asking them to vacate the premises

immediately, Mr. Speaker, with no reason or justified cause why they should do

that. This is one area, Mr. Speaker, which employed five students with plans

this year to have a coffee shop to employ an additional two students. I think

this is unheard of and I ask the minister to take it under consideration -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: I asked him to take it under

consideration to rethink that issue. I understand that there was some concern by

a local business that operated in the area but from talking to the people

around, those concerns were not valid reasons to close that shop.

Mr. Speaker, as I have stated, my district has many needs and

concerns. The people of Bonavista South are honest, sincere, hard working

individuals who struggle every day to earn a living. Their concerns and

frustrations are my concerns and, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that I will

continue to speak up in this House and voice their concerns and I will not be

stifled by government or anybody else in the decision making process. Thank you,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, first of all I want

to thank - the Government House Leader is not here - but all hon. members of the

House who unanimously agreed to allow me to continue speaking, I think -

AN HON. MEMBER: It was not quite unanimous.

MR. WINDSOR: Not quite unanimous but they were browbeaten

at least into agreeing to allow me to pick up where I left off. I was

unavoidably absent due to a funeral in my district, a good friend of mine, Mr.

David Squires, who passed away at a very young age as a victim of cancer and I

felt it important that I attend the funeral in Mount Pearl this afternoon. I

know all hon. members will join with me in extending sincere sympathy to his

wife and family on the passing of Mr. Squires but I do want to thank hon.

members for allowing me the right to continue speaking having not been present

to take up because of that unfortunate circumstance this afternoon.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I again thank hon. members but I really do

not intend to take a great more time. I spoke for some four-and-a-half hours, I

think prior to the prorogation of the last Assembly and I have had two hours

speaking to this topic on Friday past and there is not a great deal more that I

really wanted to say, one could speak forever I suppose if one wanted to on this

particular Budget. My friend from Grand Falls need not panic, I do not intend to

speak forever. One could go on forever but one has to say: well what is the

point? I made most of the pertinent points here and the most pertinent of those,

I simply want to reiterate, is that we are talking about a document that is

totally incomplete. It has not been finalized, we do not know yet where $70

million will be cut from this Budget, who will be victimized by that. The

minister did give us a broad concept of some of the agencies, some of the

funding groups, some of the departments that would be the victim of his cuts but

he has another $70 million that he asks this House to accept that he will find -

that he will find that $70 million and hold the deficit for this year to $51

million, hardly something to be commended for, Mr. Speaker, that he should hold

it to $51 million. The real question, I guess, at this point in time is now that

we are two months into the fiscal year, is the minister still quite so convinced

that he can indeed even hold it at $51 million, assuming that he is able to find

$70 million from the total compensation package of public servants?

Now, Mr. Speaker, as I have said before there is only a

couple of ways that he can find that $70 million from those particular

sub-heads. He either has to reduce the number of employees and, it is doubtful

that he could save a great deal there because of severance packages because of

the time required for notifications and so forth that it would be very difficult

to save a lot of money by laying-off people, a lot of money in this fiscal year.

It would be effective for next year but not for this particular fiscal year.

The other way he can do it of course is by rolling back wages

and benefits. In other words reducing the present salary levels. Now, there was

an option on the table of looking at payments in the pension plans that leaves

the salary levels where they are but it reduces the pension benefit that has

been purchased. That is a possible way of doing it, but we have every indication

that the labour movement is not prepared to accept that. I do not know if the

minister made any statements today at the opening of the House as to any success

that he might be having; my friend from Grand Bank tells me that he did not, so

we can only assume that there is no great breakthrough with negotiations yet

with labour unions, as it relates to saving a chunk of money, a block of funding

from payments to the pension plan by skipping for one year or for six months, I

think it is, payments to the pension plan. That is something you can do once.

The real question, if that were to be the option chosen, if

that were to be that option, what would the minister then do next year, because

next year he has to reduce that $51 million to a more acceptable level, but

first he has to find that $70 million again, so next year we would be looking

for $70 million plus, at least some portion, I would suggest maybe half of that

$50 million if not all of it, but certainly half of it he will have to reduce

the deficit if he is to retain any credibility in the financial markets

whatsoever, and we saw last week from the Dominion Credit Rating agency, what is

happening to the minister's and this government's financial credibility in the

bond rating market.

Mr. Speaker, that is a matter of real concern and I know this

minister is concerned about that, but what concerns me is that he has not done

anything about it. He simply asks us and perhaps even more importantly, he is

asking the bond rating agencies to accept the fact that he will find $70

million. Now the history of this government is not good when it comes to doing

what they said they would do at Budget time. We saw the former minister come in

with three, if not four Budgets, and at the end of the year in fact, on a couple

of occasions, in the middle of the year he had to come back to this House and

admit that his projections were so far wrong that he had to make additional

changes; last December we had huge tax increases imposed, we had massive cuts in

the public service programs and some serious layoffs in the public sector.

The record of this government in predicting what the

financial situation will be, and in sticking with a Budget, has not been very

good, and now they are asking this House and they are asking the credit rating

agencies to accept the fact that at the bottom line of the Budget document,

there is a $70-million item which simply says: to be reduced from public service

total compensation packages. That is a blank cheque, Mr. Speaker, that this

government, this minister is asking this House to approve, while at the same

time the expenditure side of the Budget, at least as it relates to the Interim

Supply which is approximately one-third of the total Budget allocation; those

expenditures, Mr. Speaker, are based on a $120 million deficit at this point in

time, and government departments are spending on that basis, and he has lost two

months of this year within which to try to make some expenditure savings to

bring the Budget to what he says is the acceptable level of $51 million.

Well, Mr. Speaker, as we have said on several occasion, maybe

it is $51 million, maybe it is $31 million, maybe it $71 million, whatever it

might be, what is seriously lacking here is a long-term plan. Once again this

minister has come in with a snapshot; he says that this point in time we have a

$121 million dollar problem. He has said on top of that, I will find $70

million, trust me, but he has not said: here is the problem that we will have

next year, and the year after and the year after. He has not given this House

projections for the next four or five years; he has not come forward with a plan

to reduce the deficit and balance the Budget over a four or five-year term, or a

two-year term if that were possible or a one-year term.

He has come in once again with a snapshot. Here is the

situation for this year and he basically said: we do not know how to solve it,

but we are asking you to believe that we will find $70 million of that problem

and we are prepared to accept the $51 million deficit. When is this government,

Mr. Speaker, going to come forward with a solid plan of economic development, of

managing the finances of this Province in a manner that will regain for us the

financial credibility that this Province had enjoyed for many years but this

government has managed to lose over four short years? They've taken us from a

surplus situation in 1989 to record deficits every year, including 1989, when

they predicted they would have a surplus. Basically it's the surplus that the

previous administration passed over to them. They ran it that year, if my memory

serves me correctly, to about $117 million deficit by the end of the fiscal

year. We've had similar deficits, record high deficits, ever since.

That's not to say that borrowing has decreased. It hasn't.

It's not that we've spent money and invested in business and industry. We've

spent less. It's not that we've built more roads and more water and sewer

systems. We have not. It's basically mismanagement. This government has to

reckon with that. This minister should have come forward now - not only should

he have done it two months ago, when he originally introduced this Budget

document, but now more than two months later, having gone through an election

campaign, having had the opportunity hopefully during that campaign to listen to

thousands of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, what their problems were and what

suggestions they might have to help government through a difficult period, he

has come back with no new ideas after two months. Yet when he introduced the

Budget he said in his Budget speech: we will by the end of this fiscal year -

being the end of March of 1993, he said - by the end of March, by the time we

get through - because the Budget was brought in somewhere around the first week

of March, March 7, 8 or 9, something of that nature. He said: by the end of this

month I hope to have a solution to that $70 million problem.

Here we are now, almost three months after that, and he still

has no idea how he's going to solve it. He still has not told this House. He has

come back again with the same Budget, with no changes, no new ideas, no new

initiatives whatsoever. Instead of coming back and saying: we had a $70 million

problem - $120 million, but we were going to find $70 - we said we thought we

could do it but we haven't, we have been turned down by two or three collective

bargaining agencies, so now we have to take a different approach. We have to

take action that will save that $70 million or whatever part that is not going

to be negotiated with the public sector.

He has not done that. He has come back with the same

document. No new initiatives, no new ideas, no new mechanisms to try to deal

with the problem, and no plan, no programs, no policies as to stimulate the

economy of this Province to get the private sector moving, to create employment

for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. His answer again is increase taxes and cut

services. Whatever happened to stimulating the economy, creating jobs and

creating revenue for the Treasury? That's the other side of it.

There are two ways to create revenue. One is to tax. We all

know that thanks to this particular government over the past four years we are

now taxed beyond the point of diminishing returns in this Province. We are

seeing it in many areas, particularly in liquor and tobacco taxes, the so-called

sin taxes, where we're actually now starting to receive less. So that's one way,

is to raise taxes. The other way is to increase revenues. The way to do that is

to stimulate the economy, get Newfoundlanders and Labradorians back to work.

We've got 20,000 more people now depending on support programs, social programs,

than we did four years ago. We have to question the legitimacy even of these

estimates when the minister says: we need $10 million less this year for social

assistance payments even though we have 20,000 more people on social assistance.

The mathematics just doesn't add up.

So not only do we question the legitimacy of the expenditures

and the revenues, we have to question the fact that there is no plan in place to

deal with the root of the problem. He's simply trying to deal with the symptoms

by increasing taxation and by decreasing expenditures, reducing government

services, and putting a tremendous measure of that on the backs of the public

servants of this Province. Mr. Speaker, I think this Budget is a total admission

of failure. It is an admission that this government is bankrupt of financial

ideas, is bankrupt of ability to manage the finances of this Province, and is

not in a position to lead this Province forward over the next four years.

Unfortunately, they have a mandate to do so and we are just going to have to

suffer with it.

Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Let me begin by thanking the people of St. John's East Extern

for giving me the honour and privilege of representing them in this hon. House

of Assembly. I look forward to taking on the responsibilities of MHA and I hope

that I can live up to their expectations. I know I have some pretty big shoes to

fill. The former MHA, Mr. Parsons, and I were campaigning in Flat Rock and one

day I decided to drop into his House. Jokingly, I slipped on one of his shoes

and it was like putting my foot into a canoe, so I have some pretty big shoes to

fill. I also want to thank my campaign workers for a job well done and for the

time and effort they put into it. We were very successful and I appreciate that

very much.

AN HON. MEMBER: Were you against Confederation?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, I wasn't around at that point in

time. I am not as old as some of the members here.

I would also like to congratulate Premier Wells, who is not

here right now, and the Liberal Party, for a job well done on May 3.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: It was a job too well done for my liking,

but then again, we have to give congratulations and credit where credit is due,

so congratulations. I would also like to congratulate the hon. Mr. Simms for

bringing our party from 12 per cent to 42 per cent in the polls in a very short

span of time.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: The previous election was 49, wasn't it?

MR. J. BYRNE: Well, don't worry about it.

I would also like to congratulate Mr. Simms on attracting a

very good slate of candidates to our party this time around and giving the

people a real decision to make. I would like, as well, to congratulate my

colleagues on this side of the House for either getting elected or being

re-elected to the House in these very turbulent times in our Province.

I would like to congratulate Mr. Speaker and the Deputy

Speaker. I look forward to working with you in keeping honour and decorum in

this House - doing my

part in that.

There is a group of people who need to be mentioned,

appreciated, and thanked - they are the candidates of all three parties who did

not get elected. Without these people the democratic system would fall short.

I look forward to working with both sides of the House in

getting this Province back on the road to recovery. I, and I believe most people

here, realize that governments are elected to govern and Oppositions are elected

to keep the government on their toes, so to speak, but I believe we can work

together and do some great things for this Province in the next four years. I am

of the view that what is good for my country is good for my Province, and what

is good for my Province is good for my district and, in turn, good for the

people living in my district, so if we work together, I am sure we can

accomplish some great things.

Newfoundland and Labrador, and Canada, have gone through

three very difficult years. Private industry has cut back and has streamlined,

causing thousands and thousands of jobs to be lost. I have been in private

industry for the past ten years and I know the problems that private industry

and the people in business go through, and I sympathize with them. Small

businesses and companies make the world go 'round. They create new monies and

new dollars in the economy which, in turn, create revenues for the provincial

treasury. Companies have been hit hard, really hard, particularly in this

Province. Taxes have increased. The payroll tax for one, in my mind, is

counterproductive and has been. It has cost jobs to be lost. I know companies

out there who will not hire because they will go over the limit. The basic

amount, I think, is $100,000 now. It started out at $300,000. Maybe the

government can look at, either increasing the basic amount or cutting out that

tax altogether.

We have to work together to get the economy rolling. One of

the main things I see that needs to be done is we have to create some confidence

in the public sector. The people who are now working in the public sector find

that their jobs are not safe anymore. They are quite nervous. They are afraid to

spend a cent. They are afraid to go out and buy large ticket items such as a

fridge or a stove or a car. We have to get these people to feel that their jobs

are safe, and encourage them to get out and start purchasing some items, and

that, in turn, will create monies in the economy and, hopefully, create jobs.

Governments have to work together. I don't know - I may be

accused of being naive here, but is it possible for the Federal, Provincial and

Municipal Governments to work together when they are preparing their budgets?

Because one depends so heavily on the other. Is it possible?

One thing, I believe, can be done - but I imagine I would get

a lot of argument on this: Is it possible for government to consider reducing

the retail sales tax by one point to stimulate the economy? These are some

questions I will just throw out.

When I was campaigning in St. John's East Extern, a number of

issues were raised that I had concerns about myself personally beforehand. One

of them, of course, mentioned here today, was the Outer Ring Road. People in

East Meadows and Woodlands and Northlands and Wedgewood Park and Torbay asked:

What is the story on the Outer Ring Road? Why has it not been started? Studies

have shown that it is environmentally safe. It is required. It will alleviate

traffic problems in and around St. John's, yet it is not started. I believe, if

it were started, it could create jobs. It would create jobs, of course. Funding

is available. Let's get it started as soon as possible.

The fishery has been very important to towns like Torbay,

Flat Rock, Pouch Cove and Bauline. Historically, these towns have depended on

the oceans for their livelihood. The people in these communities have

traditionally been very strong, independent, and self-sufficient. They have seen

their way of life threatened by the collapse in the fishery. We have to start

now - planning - to let the people know where we are going as a Province. The

people have to know who is going to be involved in the fishery and who is not

going to be involved in the fishery, so they can plan their lives. They have to

be given the opportunity to plan their lives and the future for themselves and

their families. They have to be given the opportunity to take advantage of

various programs such as the educational programs. They have to be encouraged to

educate themselves.

A topic that came up on the campaign trail was amalgamation.

Now, personally, I have been very opposed to amalgamation for various reasons -

the way it was done, or whatever the case may be - but I find the people in

those towns and those communities are very opposed to amalgamation, also. It

caused many problems a few years ago, so I sincerely hope that amalgamation has

been dealt with and will not raise its ugly head again.

Another topic: the Agricultural Review Commission made its

report last Fall. There were some very good recommendations in the report with

respect to boundary changes. Mr. Simmons made some very good recommendations

which would affect, in particular, the people in the town in which I live, Logy

Bay, Middle Cove, Outer Cove, and the Town of Torbay. I would encourage the

Minister of Forestry and Agriculture to implement those changes as soon as

possible because they would have a very positive effect on the running of the

municipalities involved. They will help the towns become more self-sufficient

and, in turn, will allow them to plan their town properly.

Another problem that has arisen over the past number of years

for the towns is downloading - downloading by the Provincial Government onto the

municipalities. I realize that we all have to share our burden in the deficit

problems these days, but I honestly believe that the towns have been hit too

hard - really, really too hard. The debt requirement for towns like Pouch Cove

and Torbay to have water and sewer has increased as much as 170 per cent in

three short years. The municipal operating grants have been cut by as much as 50

per cent, with the roads component cut from $2,200 per kilometre per year down

to eighty dollars per kilometre per year. It's just too hard on the

municipalities. It has to stop.

Property assessments for the towns was another issue brought

up to me by some of the councils in the area. The assessments were promised for

1992 - didn't come. They were promised for 1993 - didn't come. It looks like now

they may not be coming for 1994. This causes problems for the municipalities. It

causes undue increases in the mil rates, it causes the towns to lose revenues.

So I would ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs if he would look at possibly

allowing the towns to contract out assessments. Municipal Affairs has over the

years given reasons for the consistency that they don't do that but I don't

believe there's any consistency in the way that the assessments have been done

and are being done.

Another very important topic that's come up, and it's due to

legislation that was passed here in this House a year or two ago, a year and

half, and that's the regional fire fighting. That's caused some major problems.

Four towns in the northeast Avalon have had their costs increased as much as

1,000 per cent. In my district, the town of Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove had

theirs increased similarly. The town itself - and I know, because I'm quite

familiar with it - has increased their payments for that service 100 per cent in

1992 and another 100 per cent in 1993. This is being done unilaterally. The

formula that's being charged by the regional fire committee is based on assessed

value. It does not take into consideration the reduced services that the towns

and the municipalities get in the region because of lack of water and sewer or

response time, or whatever the case may be.

Also, the formula that according to the legislation has to be

approved by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, has not been done. Yet the town

of Logy Bay-Middle Cove-Outer Cove has increased its payment for that service by

150 per cent because they believe in paying their fair share. I would like to

personally sit on any committee or whatever the case may be to work out

something that's more fair and reasonable to all concerned in that area.

Another problem that has arisen, and this concerns

Environment and Lands. As we all know, the City of St. John's closed Robin Hood

Bay to the disposal of septic waste at that site. For technical reasons, but

anyway it's closed to neighbouring municipalities. All towns on the northeast

Avalon. Environment and Lands has required that all septic waste is to be

disposed of at the waste transfer site in Foxtrap. Of course, this has caused

the rate that was being normally paid by the home owners in the districts to

increase by as much as ten times, from sixty dollars up to between $600 and

$800, for one load to be dumped at this site.

Because of that reason it now appears that people are

actually dumping the waste in inappropriate areas in the countryside. I know

that there is legislation in place that causes penalties to be pretty severe for

that type of action, but if the people can't afford to make that kind of

payment, as much as $600 per year, or every two years actually, then they are

willing to take the risk. I believe we should look at possibly subsidizing the

home owners for that service. Seeing that it was forced upon them.

Tourism in St. John's East Extern is sadly lacking, the

promotion and involvement of tourism in that district. We have thousands of

tourists visiting St. John's each year who travel the scenic Marine Drive from

Logy Bay down through Outer Cove, Middle Cove, Torbay, Flatrock, Pouch Cove and

Bauline. If you drive that area you'll find that there are very few places, if

any, for someone to haul in and have a cup of tea or a cookie or whatever on

their tour. I know of one young lady who was walking in Torbay one day last

summer and there were three different people stopped in the span of an hour and

asked where they could go to get a lunch. She couldn't give her any place. I

think we have to work together.

I am proposing, and I have done this over the past number of

years to some of the municipalities, that all the towns in that area which would

include St. John's, Logy Bay- Middle Cove- Outer Cove, Pouch Cove- Flatrock-

Torbay, to get together and create some sort of tourist commission to promote

the area, to help create small businesses in the area to promote it, and hook

into the tourism industry and create some jobs; maybe we could entice some of

the fishermen to hook into the fishery in some way or other, especially if they

are not going to be opposing the moratorium and we can create jobs for those

people, let us get at it and I am certainly willing to help out in that area.

Also, Mr. Speaker, St. John's East Extern is both rural and urban and that in

itself is going to create some problems for me as MHA in the area, but I am sure

that I will live up to the task as MHA for St. John's East Extern.

Mr. Simms, the hon. Mr. Simms, has appointed me critic for

Environment and Lands, and I gladly accept that appointment. I look forward to

trying to help keep our air, water and land in good, clean condition by keeping

on top of legislation that may be going through the House or anything that may

be put through by the Minister of Environment and Lands and I look forward to

that. We have to keep our atmosphere, our water our land clean and in good shape

for generations to come.

Many of you ministers and hon. members of the House have seen

me from time to time sitting in the galleries of this House. I have been

interested for a long time in politics in Newfoundland and I have read many

books on Canadian politics and politicians, including recently one on the hon.

Premier Wells, which, I found quite interesting. I believe that everything comes

to he who waits, so here I am. Mr. Speaker, I will do my best to honour the

traditions of this hon. House and to represent the people of St. John's East

Extern in an efficient, effective and professional manner.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

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

I want to have a few words about the Budget debate as well. I

want to certainly say that it is a pleasure today to sit and listen to two new

members standing and getting involved in the Budget debate, and I certainly

encourage all new members to do so, and I think the presentations made by my

colleagues from St. John's East Extern and from Bonavista South, all hon.

members will agree, that they were excellent presentations by two new members.

I want to, as well, avail of this opportunity to congratulate

or to extend best wishes to the hon. Member for Humber West on his election as

Speaker of this Assembly; to the Member for Trinity - Bay de Verte and from

Bellevue on their elections to their respective positions. It is nice, let me

say, to see the Member for Port de Grave back in Cabinet. I think that there is

a role for him to play in the Government of this Province and I am delighted to

see that he is there. I want to, as well, commend my friend from Carbonear on

his selection by the Premier, to serve as Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs. I am sure that it is a very challenging department, one that has a lot

of divisions but one in which, I am sure that he will serve well.

To the Member for Bonavista North, I certainly wish him well

in the Department of Social Services. I know the decisions to cut the Budget to

home care by 30 per cent was not his decision, it was a decision made before he

came to the department; I realize that, but I hope he will be able to stop it,

however, I do wish him well in that department. Mr. Speaker, I also want to

congratulate all of the new members who have been elected to the Assembly and

certainly to all those who have returned. As a matter of fact, not a whole lot

has changed in some regards, however, having said that, Mr. Speaker, there is

work to be done. There is work to be done in this Province, and the Budget,

brought in by the Minister of Finance, re-introduced by the Minister of Finance

is not going to do a whole lot to stimulate the economy of this Province. It is

not going to do a whole lot for the people who are on social assistance; it is

not going to do a lot for the people who are on Unemployment Insurance trying to

get work.

It is not going to do very much for any of these groups of

people; but, Mr. Speaker, I think that as you go through the Budget and see what

has taken place, only the Member for Gander could introduce that Budget. There

is no one else in this Province as bold-faced, as brazen, and takes such

satisfaction in attacking the poor, the suffering and the sick in this Province

as the Member for Gander. It is only him who could introduce this Budget.

It is a bit different for me, Mr. Speaker. I want to say one

thing. One thing I forgot when I stood up to speak and commended all of the

people for the positions, I forgot to extend my best wishes to the Member for

St. John's South - to my friend, the Member for St. John's South, on the

position that he got as parliamentary assistant to the Premier. There is no

doubt that the Member for St. John's South will serve that position well. There

is no doubt. It is a good position, and I say he is the right person for it, and

I think he will do well. I see he has experience in some of the aspects that are

needed in terms of being a parliamentary assistant. As a matter of fact - I am

not sure, Mr. Speaker - but for awhile, I believe, he was sort of an assistant

to Mr. Vic Young at Fishery Products. I understand that he went around with Mr.

Young and helped him out on several occasions, carried his briefcase, and I

think with the experience that he had from FPI, in that same type of position to

the executive -

AN HON. MEMBER: Gofer.

MR. TOBIN: Well I do not know if he was a gofer for FPI

or not. I would not say that, Mr. Speaker. I would not say that, but if the

member wants to call himself a gofer then he can do it, but I think it is an

excellent position. I served in it. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and I know the

Member for St. John's South will enjoy it as well. I am sure that whenever he

goes on to do other things, and looks back at his years in this House, he will

probably remember with the greatest memories his time as parliamentary assistant

to the Premier because it is a good position, I say to the Member for St. John's

South.

There is only one thing. It is a bit different to have to

speak in the Legislature these days because my old friend from Placentia is not

here - my old sparring partner from Placentia - and in this Assembly I will

probably miss the Member for Placentia more than anyone, because as most members

who were around in the last session, I am sure Your Honour realizes, that myself

and the Member for Placentia, while we were good friends, we always could bring

out the best of the debate in this Assembly. I really enjoyed having the

opportunity to work with him, as I did with the other members on both side of

the House who are not back. They all did well in serving the Province and their

constituents.

I want to, before I get in too much, again express my

gratitude to the people of Burin - Placentia West for returning me to represent

them in this Assembly. It has been an honour and a privilege now to have been

elected four times by the people for Burin - Placentia West, and I look forward

to -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Gander might have

run four times, but he has not been elected four times. He ran five times -

twice for the NDP, once for the PC's, and twice for the Liberals. Mr. Speaker,

who would his seat mate be? Who would be more appropriate to be his seat mate

than the Member for Twillingate, in terms of running for parties and getting

elected? I suppose, in terms of holding public office in this Province I would

suspect the Member for Twillingate has the record, whether it be in - when you

put the two Assemblies together - I would suspect he has the record in this

Province in terms of serving the people as members here.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, he served a term as -

AN HON. MEMBER: Deputy Mayor.

MR. TOBIN: He was called Deputy Mayor of St. John's, I

believe.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you going federal (inaudible)?

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, that is a decision that I will

make at the appropriate time, I say to the Member for Gander, but as of now I

have been elected to serve the people of Burin - Placentia West in the House of

Assembly and I intend to do that. There will be lots of time to go federal

because I am still only a very young person, I say to the Member for Gander.

Like him - he has to make the decisions rather quickly, but I do not have to do

that.

In terms of this Budget that was brought in by the Member for

Gander, Mr. Speaker, when you look at, for example, the last department, the

Department of Social Services, last year the Department of Social Services spent

$172 million and this year they are going to get $157 million. There is $15

million cut off the Department of Social Services and the caseload in this

Province has increased almost twice as much as what it was when this group came

into power, Mr. Speaker. That is what is happening in this Province.

The Minister of Finance, for some reason, has decided that

the people in this Province who are on social assistance have to do with $15

million less and I do not know how the minister is going to do that. I do not

know how the new Minister of Social Services is going to be able to cope with

it. For example, today in this Province there are social workers going door to

door trying to determine those people who are getting care - the Member for

Harbour Grace knows what I am talking about, those people who are getting care,

where there are people in the homes who are bedridden and who have home care

going in for their families. Today there are social workers in this Province

being sent door to door to tell people that they have to be cut. If you have

three people in your home on a twenty-four hour basis for someone who is

bedridden, unable to look after themselves, unable to do anything, the social

workers in this Province today are being sent by this minister and this

government to go in and take away home care from the people who need it most.

That is what is happening in this Province today, and that is the Budget.

Every man and woman in this House will be asked to vote for a

Budget that is instructing social workers in this Province to take away home

care from the sick and suffering, to take away as high as forty or fifty hours

from bedridden men and women in this Province who are aged, sick, and suffering.

That is what you are going to be asked to vote on. I say to new members

opposite, have a conscience when you stand in this Legislature and think about

your constituents who are today, I say to the Member for Eagle River, calling my

office, and probably his office, complaining, are more concerned about that than

who I am voting for in a leadership convention.

I say one thing to the member, it does not matter who I vote

for in the leadership convention because Chretian cannot beat either one of

them. That is what I say to the member opposite. It does not matter who I vote

for because Chretian cannot beat either one of them so it is not important, but

it is important in this Province to see how people call you. I had a sixty-four

year old man call me yesterday about his ninety-one year old mother who is

bedridden. She is unable to get out of bed and he is not able to care for her

and the government of this Province have decided to take fifty hours a week home

care away from that lady. That is what is taking place in this Province. That is

what all you members are going to be asked to vote for, and all of us in this

Legislature, so if you agree with taking away home care from the sick,

suffering, and the aged in this Province vote for this Budget. If you think they

should not have the proper care vote for this Budget I say to the new members,

but if you think they should have care vote against it. That is the decision you

will be making.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I do not know why he is so

worried about Rompkey because he is not going anywhere anyway. I think your

record of getting votes in the western part of Labrador was proven when you ran

a couple of times down there and you got something like sixty-one votes. I do

not know why you should be all excited about running against Rompkey. Your

record outside of Eagle River has been put to the test I say to the Member for

Eagle River.

MR. SIMMS: He will not run against Rompkey, that is for

sure. He might undermine him but he will not run against him.

MR. TOBIN: Well, he has done it already. Was he the first

to run against an incumbent?

MR. SIMMS: I do not imagine he was the first.

MR. TOBIN: I do not know whether or not he was the first.

I know he was not the last.

MR. SIMMS: He was the first Liberal for awhile, was he

not?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. TOBIN: You won by acclamation did you?

MR. SIMMS: (inaudible) nice young fellow from up there

run against you. What happened to you when you ran in Menihek? Give us your

record up there, tell us about the slaughter in Menihek?

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, that kind of cockiness and

arrogance, I say to the Member for Eagle River, is the reason why he is back

with his head against the wall and not in the Cabinet, I say to the member. That

type of arrogance, that no one is running against me, that is the reason why you

are beating your head off the wall over there and will continue to beat your

head off the wall over there and not live up to the front benches like the

Member for Carbonear and the members from other places, Mr. Speaker, you will be

back against the wall, I say to the Member for Eagle River unless you change

that -

MR. SIMMS: And the Member for Bonavista North, never

interrupts -

MR. TOBIN: The Member for Bonavista North, it is time for

him to get a front seat, Mr. Speaker, he certainly earned it when he was speaker

to be put in the front benches. He served -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: As the Member for Carbonear earned the right

to be there and the Member for Port de Grave earned the right to be called back

but with the type of arrogance that the Member for Eagle River gets on with, he

will never earn the right to get there, I will say to him. The Member for

Pleasantville will get there before you.

MR. SIMMS: Glenn, do you think you might get the Member

for Eagle River a job with Chuck?

MR. TOBIN: The Member for Pleasantville is over there

smiling away, Mr. Speaker, he should smile too, I would say to him. He should

never again deny the Member for St. John's East the right to speak in this

assembly, he should never again.

AN HON. MEMBER: Did you hear the rumour?... they are

putting in a full row for the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Why did he demote you?

MR. TOBIN: Demote me? Most of my life I have been

demoted, I say to the Member for Eagle River. I would say to the Member for

Pleasantville that he should never again deny the rights to the Member for St.

John's East, nor should the Member for St. John's South by the way, nor should

the Member for St. John's South when you look at the vote that the NDP had and

what he got elected by because if it was not for some of them thousand dollar

candidates, Mr. Speaker, some of you might not be around. Who has the thousand

dollars?

AN HON. MEMBER: Do you have a thousand dollars?

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I will tell you something, there

was no one - I took the union - I say to the Member for St. John's East that I

did not get a thousand dollars worth of union dues from anyone in this Province,

I say to the Member.

MR. SIMMS: The Member for St. John's South is tied up

with the Premier, he cannot make it right now.

MR. TOBIN: No, the Member for St. John's South is not

tied up with the Premier, he is over there, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SIMMS: Oh, he just came in.

MR. TOBIN: The Member for St. John's South is not tied up

with the Premier. I saw the Premier passing by and his shoes were shining and

his tie was straight, Mr. Speaker, and the Member for St. John's South is no

longer tied up, I say to the Leader of the Opposition.

In any case, I would say to the leader and to a lot of other

people, that a lot of them would have liked to have had the opportunity to serve

in that great position, as parliamentary assistant to the Premier.

MR. SIMMS: That is not what he used to say about you.

MR. TOBIN: He was not there when I was there. Well, Mr.

Speaker, if there is anything you can say about someone being humiliated in this

House, it was the Member for Exploits on two occasions.

MR. SIMMS: At least two occasions.

MR. TOBIN: At least two occasions. When he had to stand

up a few weeks ago and apologize to the Premier. That was bad enough but when

you apologize to the Minister of Education, then I tell you something that is

hitting rock bottom, That is hitting rock bottom, I say to the member. When you

apologize to the Minister of Education for saying something about him, that is

hitting rock bottom because there is nothing you can say about the Minister of

Education that you should have to apologize for, I say to the member Opposite.

The other time he was humiliated was when the Premier stood

up in this House and he said: Roger have you still got that Jeep? Give me the

keys. Bring them up and give them back and he came to the House the next day and

reported, it was gone.

Now, Mr. Speaker, as we continue to operate in this Province

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Is there any way of gagging the Member for

Eagle River?

We continue to debate the real issues in this Province, the

economic issues that basically are nonexistent. The Fishery, Mr. Speaker, that

this government has done absolutely nothing for, the only contribution that this

government has made to the Fishery is to constantly attack Ottawa. There is

nothing in this system, Mr. Speaker, that they have done for the fisheries. The

Minister of Education shouldn't start banging his desk too hard either. He

should be on his knees thanking Fraser March for getting him re-elected, I say

to the Member for St. John's West.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I'm sorry, St. John's Centre, not St. John's

West - boy, the Member for St. John's West, that was a surprise, you know. I was

surprised with the Member for St. John's West.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What's the Member for Fogo saying? Mr.

Speaker, in terms of the fisheries, I say it again, this government has done

absolutely nothing for the fisheries. There are people in this Province today

where the fishery is operating who cannot even get help with a community stage

that the governments always used to help out with. Cannot even get top-up money.

Absolutely nothing for the fisheries.

In terms of the Department of Energy, I'd say that they have

a competent minister, I'd say that much. I'd wonder what role they are playing

in the energy field in this Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, if she did I don't know what

you'd say will happen to the other thirty-five members in this Legislature.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I'd say to the Minister of Health, my majority

was a bit bigger than his. I won't get into that, Mr. Speaker, I don't want to

be boastful. In any case, I wonder what purpose some departments in this

Province are serving. The Minister of Health today got up in this House and

didn't know how to answer a question sensibly, when my colleague for Ferryland

asked him a question. He admitted to this House and to the Province that he

didn't know there were people waiting for heart surgery. He didn't know, a

minister of health didn't know. The last minister of health, the only thing he

knew how to do was jump lines, was to go in where there was a wait - he didn't

know much about a waiting list, because all he did was jump lines. Go in when he

came to the bottom of the line, went to the top, and left people in the waiting

room. That's what took place in this Province. I don't think the present

minister would do it but the former minister did it.

The Minister of Tourism, the fellow who wants to destroy the

bird sanctuary for political reasons.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: That's another issue, Mr. Speaker. Bring in

the Puffin Act and then want to destroy the bird sanctuary in Cape St. Mary's.

That's the kind of hypocrisy and incompetence that department has seen from the

minister. Then there's the old chop himself, the Minister of Education.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I must say, I'd say to the

Minister of Education or to the Minister of Health, that I don't know a lot

about the Department of Education, neither does the minister. On Thursday

coming, I guess, the Minister of Energy and the Premier and Mr. Crosbie and Mr.

McKnight and officials from the oil companies and other people will be in Bull

Arm to launch the official pouring -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, I got mine too, Tom. To launch the

official opening....

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: If I tell you, you won't be going out there

either. You be quiet. You're over in the second row too.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, there will be as I said people

going out, and the Minister of Energy will be there, to pour a project that was

put in place by a government that I was part of, I would say to the Member for

Fogo, and at times -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. TOBIN: Yes! At times, Mr. Speaker, there were times

when the Member for Fogo stood in this House and voted against -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What's that?

AN HON. MEMBER: You were the premier's gofer, then.

MR. TOBIN: Talk to the Member for St. John's South about

that. I can say to the Member for St. John's South, I know someone over there

would loved to have been the Premier's gofer, I say to the Member for St. John's

South. That I know someone over there who would loved to have been the Premier's

gofer, to the Member for Fogo. I say that to the Member for Fogo. You'd have

crawled up over the stairs backwards if he had to offer it to you. Don't be

telling me. You called the Member for St. John's South a gofer.

Mr. Speaker, that was a project that was brought into place

by the Peckford administration, make no mistake about that. Carried on by the

Wells' administration - no doubt about that - but I would say one thing, if it

were not for John Crosbie I do not think that Hibernia would be going today. I

do not think that Hibernia would be going today if it were not for John Crosbie.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I thought you were going to be Minister of

Fisheries. You told everybody in Fogo you were during the election campaign. Why

do you not solve the problems?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: You told everybody in Fogo you were going to

be Minister of Fisheries, did he not?

AN HON. MEMBER: That is what we heard, yes.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, if it were not for John Crosbie,

Hibernia would not be going ahead in this Province today, because I do not think

that anyone else in the federal government of the day, or anyone else in the

federal government anytime, would have gotten the federal government to buy

shares in the Hibernia project after investing several billions of dollars in

the project in the first place, and I think that credit should be given to the

man for the tremendous effort that he put into getting the Hibernia project on

the go, I say to members opposite.

The Minister of Mines and Energy knows what I am saying is

true. What is that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Jake Epp? Well probably he did play a role in

it. Here is a group that is talking about the Hibernia project, and they are not

prepared to give John Crosbie any credit for putting that package together. That

tells you the hypocrisy that exists on that side of the House.

Now on Friday after they leave Bull Arm they will be coming

to Marystown for the official opening of the Cow Head facility, I say to members

opposite - a beautiful facility funded through the Offshore Development Fund.

Now where did that fund come from? Where did that fund come from, I say to

members opposite? It was not a fund that was brought in by this government. It

was a fund that was signed by the Mulroney government and the Peckford

government - put in place.

AN HON. MEMBER: Taxpayers' money.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, taxpayers' money. Sure it is. That is who

is paying your salary and mine.

Now, Mr. Speaker, on Friday they will be opening the Cow Head

facility, and it was four years ago when myself and my colleague from Grand

Bank, and my colleague from Mount Pearl, who was then the Minister of

Development -

AN HON. MEMBER: How many years ago?

MR. TOBIN: Four-and-a-half years ago. Myself, the Member

for Grand Bank, who was the Minister of Career Development, and the former

Minister of Development, Mr. Windsor, went to Marystown, together with John

Crosbie, and announced that the Cow Head facility would be put in place.

I want to say publicly now that I am delighted that this

government continued to ensure that that facility was finished. I think it was

the right thing to do. I do not think they need any bouquets for it, or any

accolades to be thrown in their direction, but because of the record of cutting

and slashing and cancelling programs, we can only say how lucky we are that they

left that one going, because it is probably the only one. It is probably the

only one in terms of economic stimulus in this Province that was not slashed.

Now - and I would like for the members of this House to be

able to come down on Friday - all of them hopefully will be invited - to come

down and just see what that facility looks like, and the state of the art

equipment that is in that facility that will make it one of the best facilities,

with the best qualified work force anywhere in this country or on this

continent, because that is the state of the art equipment, and the work force,

most of whom have been trained in Norway, who are registered in - the Member for

St. John's South knows whatever it is called. I know there are three or four

different types of registration for welders and pipefitters and all of that, and

they have reached -

AN HON. MEMBER: MED.

MR. TOBIN: No, no, not MED.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, I thought you were talking about

(inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, no, no. It is a Norwegian approval that is

acceptable to the oil industry. That is what it is.

AN HON. MEMBER: What is it - DME (inaudible)?

MR. TOBIN: It could be something like that, I guess.

Anyway, it is the Norwegian equivalent - it is being tested in Norway through

this training program whereby they have now reached the standards acceptable to

the oil industries to work on the GBS. And, you know, that is a good project and

Cow Head is a good facility. The workforce at Cow Head, and all the people of

this Province - but because of the training they have received, the workforce is

there ready to go. Now, I also want to say that the place in Cow Head was built

for mechanical outfitting, and what mechanical outfitting will mean to this

Province is probably 800 direct jobs - that is just to do the prefabrication in

Marystown and then it will be brought to Bull Arm, where it will be passed over

and installed and where there will be a lot of jobs, as well.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, but there will be a lot of spin-off jobs

throughout the Province; but there will be 800 direct jobs for two or three

years, in terms of being involved with it.

AN HON. MEMBER: What will be the spin-off?

MR. TOBIN: I guess the spin off will be around two or

three to one, in terms of what you are doing. So that job is very important to

this Province, and we are the only Newfoundland company that has bid. There have

been submissions from all over the place, I think probably from Calgary East -

we have MIL out of Quebec, they bid through one of their other companies even

though it is done by MIL; you have Fox out of St. Catharine's, you have Dominion

Bridge coming from some place else. So a lot of people have bid in this from all

over the world, but certainly, from all across Canada, and I hope that work will

be done in this Province. I know that the Federal Government are going to do

everything they can to entice that type of work; I know that this present

Provincial Government are going to do everything they can to try to entice that

type of work, and I know that all members of the House of Assembly and, I am

sure, all Newfoundlanders, are pledged to seeing that project committed to the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and I sincerely hope it happens.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, in conclusion then, let me say

that -

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave, I have a supplement to

(inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No. I am speaking on the Cow Head facility and

I would just like to conclude on it by saying that, it is a good place, it is

built to create work, a project 75/25 cost-shared by the Federal Government and

the Provincial Government; it is state of the art, the best workforce and we

cannot see it wasted. It has to be used for the purpose for which it was put

there, and that is, in my opinion, mechanical outfitting.

It is nice to see people like the Premier and Mr. Crosbie and

others committed to doing their best to see that the facility is utilized to the

fullest extent possible, and I am grateful. I had the opportunity to discuss the

Cow Head facility with the Premier the other day, and the type of work we would

like to see carried on there. And there is no doubt in my mind that the Premier,

like Mr. Crosbie, and, I am sure, the Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations and all members of this House, will be doing their best to ensure that

that type of work goes there. It is important, not just for Marystown, not just

for the Burin Peninsula, but for the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and

I sincerely hope that the oil companies, in their wisdom, who will be making the

final decision, the Hibernia management team, will see fit to address the needs

of the economic plight of this Province and put that portion of the development

of Hibernia in Marystown.

Mr. Speaker, my final comments are to the Minister of

Finance: For God's sake, come to your senses, stop attacking the sick and

suffering in this Province; the children, the education system because it all

boils down to this: It was you who read the Budget and you must take most of the

blame. Because the Minister of Education knows absolutely nothing about

education. The Minister of Education hardly knows it is a department, so you

have to take responsibility when you have a minister who doesn't know what he is

doing. The Minister of Health, Mr. Speaker, doesn't know what he is doing, and

the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, I would say to the Minister of

Finance: Don't pay any attention to what he says because there is a good chance,

he will be in the House apologizing for it. So it lies on your shoulders, and I

ask you to do what you can to ensure that you stop attacking the sick, the

suffering and the poor of this Province, and do something to stimulate the

economy. Come to Marystown on Friday and see something good for a change.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. L. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am

delighted this evening to be able to rise in this august Chamber and deliver my

first words as the sitting MHA for the district for St. John's North. I must

confess, Mr. Speaker, that I have been suffering with the 'flu all weekend, and

I did not come to the House this afternoon with the intention of delivering what

is, I suppose, commonly referred to as one's maiden speech. However, after

having arrived, and having seen the spirited animation of my colleague from

Burin - Placentia West, my spirit could no longer be restrained within me, so I

thought it best to deliver that which was on my soul, say that which I had to

say, to this point, with full knowledge, I think, that the thirty minutes I am

allocated will suffice for me to do that.

I want to congratulate Mr. Speaker, wherever he is at this

point in time, and you, his deputy, and the Committee Chairman, upon your

election to the post that you have been elected to fill. I am sure that you will

have my co-operation, as well as that of the other members of this House

throughout its duration as you carry out your duties.

I would like to congratulate Premier Wells and the members of

his party who were elected during this recent general election on May 3. I

believe that the endorsement the Premier and the party have received speaks for

itself, really, in that it is a vindication of the course, of the program, of

the direction that the Premier has laid out for this Province, and the one in

which I am sure he will, with all members of his caucus and the co-operation of

others in the House, pursue and see fulfilled during his term of office.

I would like to congratulate the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition, Mr. Simms, and the members of his caucus, for the election campaign

they ran, that concluded with the May 3 election. I would have to say that from

where I operated and from the district within which I ran, it was a very clean

campaign and a very decent effort on their behalf. The results, I am most happy

with, of course. The only difficulty that I encountered throughout the election

campaign with respect to my worthy opponents who ran against me, was the problem

of signs on the Prince Philip Parkway. It seems as though the message got to

them incorrectly, and probably inadvertently, that signs on the Parkway

translated into votes in the ballot box. I want to assure them that confirmation

has been received by virtue of the election count on that night that the signs

on the lawns and the signs in the windows of the residences speak infinitely

louder than signs on the Parkway. So, while it caused me a little frustration -

not on my part, but my workers became very concerned that voters were going to

take to the Parkway recognition rather than the real places where the votes

were.

The people in St. John's North were very well represented in

the last House of Assembly by a very capable individual and my predecessor, the

hon. Dr. Phil Warren. I would like to go on record in this House as saying on

behalf of the residents of St. John's North that they appreciated that

representation, and that they were pleased with what they saw from their member

during the previous four years, to the extent that not only did they do me the

honour of electing me with a number of votes equal to the number he had, but

they also did me the honour of electing me with a clear majority, that is to

say, more votes than the other two candidates put together and more votes than,

believe it or not, the previous member had on election night.

So I thank the people of St. John's North for their trust and

for their faith, and I assure them this evening that I will represent them

fairly, I will represent them honestly, I will represent them as vocally as is

needed before the chambers of government to ensure that their needs are brought

here and that their opinions and whatever they have to be said in government is

said by me on their behalf in a professional and a clear way.

I would like to thank the workers of my campaign team, who

worked so hard and so diligently to ensure our election, and to the electorate,

of course, whom I have already referred to, I want to thank them again for the

trust they have placed in me.

The election in St. John's North and the election throughout

the Province, as I have already indicated, I believe, is clear recognition that

the course set by the Government of Premier Wells is one in which the voters

have confidence. It is the one that they believe is the right course for these

difficult times in which we live. It may not have been a politically astute way

or mandate on which to approach the electorate, but the people of the Province,

I believe, think that it was the proper way to go. They believe it was the way

that we should proceed in these difficult and somewhat uncertain economic times.

For the record, I would like to say that in my discussions

with the electorate, and in my experience in the business community, I would

have to say in all honesty that I believe that the days of probably biting the

bullet, the days of probably alluding to the fact that our glass is half empty

rather than half full, I think are behind us substantially, and I believe that

the time is upon us when, if we stay the course, and if we co-operate with the

Minister of Finance, and if we co-operate with the agenda of the present

government, that before long we will be in a position to take advantage of the

economic benefits that a turnaround in our economy and in the Canadian economy

will have there for us. All is not lost, Mr. Speaker. All is not doom and gloom.

All is not for naught, and the hard decisions of the past, I believe, will

translate into positive and beneficial opportunities in the future for the

people of our Province and for the people of my district.

Mr. Speaker, St. John's North is a rather unique little

district to represent. It does not consist of a lot of geography, it does not

consist of a lot of miles to cover, but it has all of the things and all of the

factors and all of the types of issues, really, that are found in most districts

in the Province. We have average people living there in the district. We have

people who need substantial help from the government because of their

circumstance, and we have, in particular, in the district of St. John's North,

an abundance of students who come from all parts of the Province. And I can tell

you that throughout the election campaign, I had the honour of speaking with

many thousands of students - yes, that is right, thousands of students who were

housed in the many apartment buildings throughout the district, and they come

from all parts of the Province. Their needs and their questions and their

aspirations are all very, very similar. The question that was asked time and

time again is: 'What, Sir, if you are elected, will you do for me in terms of

employment opportunities? What will you do for me in terms of my ability to be

able to get a job and practice the trade that I am studying, or to take

advantage of the education that I am trying to accrue to myself?'

The answer to that question, to be very honest, is not very

easy to give. I will give to you the answer that I gave to them. That is this:

If we will but again stay the course and take the hard decisions in the

short-term, the opportunities will be infinitely more available in the long-term

for them to take advantage of. We cannot create employment instantly, but we can

do the prudent things that will give every opportunity for employment to be

created.

I believe that, substantially, it is not the role of

government, necessarily, to create jobs. Rather, it is the role of government, I

believe, to set out parameters for the private enterprise sector to encourage

them to be able to do the investing, take the chances, assume the risks that are

necessary, so that they can take advantage of the economic benefits that will be

upon us, I believe in a very short time, so having the opportunity to represent

the district of St. John's North I want to assure you that the people in that

district are appreciative of the direction, as I said earlier, that this

government has taken. One of the interesting things I noticed while going

throughout the district was this, that while St. John's North encompasses part

of Memorial University it also encompasses something that is way, way down on

the other end of the spectrum, if you like, in terms of educational

institutions, and that is a little place called the Rabbit Town Community

Centre. This is a little area where morning after morning eight or ten people

get together of their own volition, and because of their own initiative, to

learn how to do the very basic things in life, and that is to learn how to read

and write. Nobody forces them to come. Nobody ensures they are there on time,

nobody pays their way to get there, but they come with scribblers and exercise

books and try to help one another to develop the skills of literacy and

numeracy, so I think we should be reminded in this Chamber that while big things

happen at big universities small things that are really big, if you analyze

them, happen in community initiated projects.

I would submit, Mr. Speaker, that one of the roles of

government is to encourage our citizens, our people, the members of our

districts, the members of our towns, to put a little into, give a little back,

if you like, to the community in which they live so that their fellow man, their

neighbours, so that their friends can probably benefit a little from some of the

things they have gained through education, through employment, through being

just a little better off than probably others would be. It is, I believe, the

role of government to encourage people to give a little, to invest a little, to

sacrifice a little, so that the common good can be enhanced and so that we can

be the better as people for it.

Mr. Speaker, the issues of employment are very much on the

minds of people in the Province and on the minds of people in St. John's North.

As I have said already I believe this government has embarked upon a course, a

responsible course, that will ensure that employment opportunities will come and

will be increased in the near future. One of the other issues in St. John's

North, and it has already been alluded to today by one of the hon. members from

the other side of the House, is this issue of the Outer Ring Road. Now, that is

a road, for the benefit of those who may not know it, but I am sure there are

none that have not heard of it, that has been slated to sort of circle the city

of St. John's and enhance the transportation routes coming in and out of the

city.

In St. John's North, of course, there has been a particular

concern about this road because St. John's North borders upon the area known as

the Pippy Park, one of the most beautiful, one of the most accessible, and one

of the most enjoyed pieces of acreage within our Province. The result of that

road, if it goes through in its present form and as it is presently being

considered, will have a negative effect upon that park as it exists today, and I

am not at all sure, Mr. Speaker, that the Outer Ring Road, as it is presently

proposed, is the thing we need.

What we need in St. John's North, I would submit, is not a

road to get people