Vol. 1 No. 41 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 p.m. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 1982

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2357 SD - 1 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please: Before we begin the business of the House this afternoon / it is a distinct pleasure for me to welcome to our gallaries today the hon. Paul Dawson, Minister of Commerces and Development; the hon. Gerald Merithieu and Mrs. Merithieu (Mr. Merithieu is the Minister of Natural Resources),and Mr. Sean Tobin ,who are here attending Marine '82 from the Province of New Brunswick along with a Trade 1ission comprised of some thirty-five New Brunswick companies.

On behalf of all the hon. members I indeed welcome you to our Legislature today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, today I am releasing the report of the Labrador West Dust Study to the public and before releasing the report I wish to inform the hon. members on the findings and recommendations of the study. Hon. members may recall that the study was approved by government in February, 1979, following evidence of gneumoconiosis among miners who worked at the iron ore mining operations in Western Labrador.

Pneumoconiosis, I should point out, is described in the report as 'the accumulation of dust in the lungs and the non-cancerous tissue reaction to its presence'. Following extensive dialogue with the two mining companies and the two union locals of the United Steelworkers of America, the Labrador Institute of Northern Studies of Memorial University was commissioned 4939

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2357 SD - 2 MR. DINN: to co-ordinate the study and an agreement was entered into with the Labrador Institute of Northern Studies to carry out a comprehensive seven point study into the dust problems in the mining operations in Western Labrador. The seven points were as follows: (

I) An independent body be appointed to co-ordinate a comprehensive study into dust problems at the mining operations of Labrador City and the Wabush areas. (II) An independent consultant be engaged to analyze dust level monitoring techniques and results of tests conducted both by government and the mining companies. (III) The independent body referred to in (

I) above to arrange for an independent engineering study if company engineering efforts have not achieved sufficient dust level reduction. (IV) An independent consultant undertake a medical reassessment of workers having reported diagnosed cases of dust related diseases. 4940

November 17, 1982 Tape 2358 NM - 1 MR. DINN: (

V) An independent ambient air survey of the area be undertaken. (VI) A community health study be undertaken by specialized consultants, with special reference to respiratory diseases; and (VII) If, as a result of the independent ambient air study referred to in (

V) and the community health study referred to in (VI) a health hazard exists or is recognized, a complete engineering study of all dust rources in the area be undertaken to enable the design of appropriate control equipment. The study officially commenced in September 1979 and was completed in July 1982 at a cost of S2,402,000. The study represents possibly the most major research ever conducted into the subject area in Canada and is expected to draw the attention of the international community insofar as the effects on dust control programmes in the mining and related dust exposure occupations is concerned.

The report consists of a total of 12 individual reports and is organized as follows: Level 1. Two executive summaries, including all findings, conclusions and recommendations of the study at the Iron Ore Company of Canada Operations and the Wabush Mines Operations. Level 11. Detailed reports of specific points of the study as follows: Point 1. Study organization and administration; Point 11, Inplant dust study; Point 111, Engineering audit; Point lV, Medical assessment; Point V, Ambient air study; Point VI, Community Health Study.

Level 111, All scientific reports and basic data banks gathered during the study, including statistics, records, computer printouts, etc. This information is being retained at the university for a minimum period of five years. 494 1

November 17, 1982 Tape 2358 NM - 2 MR. DINN Because of the voluminous nature of the complete report, I have provided you with copies of the Executive Summaries as these deal specifically with the findings, conclusions and recommendations. However, additional information contained in the level 11 and 111 reports is available to hon. members. These reports contain highly technical and detailed in Formation leadinq to the findings and recommendations of the study. The major finding of the study reveals additional cases of pneumoconiosis at both the Iron Ore Company of Canada anO the Wabush operations. A. S 92

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2359 ah-1 MR.DINN: In the case of the Iron Ore Company of Canada operations, 17 employees who had not been previously diagnosed or suspected of pneumoconiosis were identified. To put this in better perspective, the following statistics are quoted: The total workforce at 10CC was approximately 2,900;. 2,435 employees met the criteria of at least three months continuous employment; 1,946 employees actually participated in the on-site examination phase of the study.

In the case of Wabush Mines, 10 employees who had not been previously diagnosed or suspected of pneumoconiosis were identified.

AlT Wabush limes the following statistics apply: The total workforce was approximately 700; 67 employees met the study criteria of at least three months continuous employment; 499 employees actually participated in the on-site examination of the study, The study also concludes that if the workforce and dust conditions remain stable there are indications that an additional 5 to 10 new cases of pneumoconiosis can be anticipated at 10CC each year and 1 to 3 cases at Wabush Mines each year among the previously exposed workforce.

The clinical detection of these cases at a relatively early point in the life of the mining operations confirms the concerns which have been repeatedly expressed by the workers and others and more than fully justify the implementation of the recommendatilons in the report. However, it was concluded that present health effects related to dust conditions were confined to occupational exposure only. Community air quality as

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2359 ah-2 MR.DINN: measured for a one year period was within the yearly guidelines defined in provincial legislation, although frequent shrt term "upset" conditions occured. There is no evidence thaii the general respiratory health of the residents of Labrador City/Wabush has been affected by the mining, processinq or waste disposal operations. The report contains a total of 20 recommendations applying to both the Iron Ore Company of Canada and Wabush Mines operations.

The recommendations indicate the measures which companies and government should take in order to control and/or eliminate the sources of dust in the mining operations. Principally these recommendations call for improved and standardized dust monitoring procedures; better medical surveillance of the workforce; improved maintenance and repair of existing dust control equipment; improved housekeeping •and the close monitoring of both ambient air conditions and the health of residents in both communities.

November 17, 1982 Tape 2360 EC - 1 MR. DINN: As stated earlier, the total cost of the study is $2,402,000 and government through the Workers' Compensation Board has paid the full amount under the authority of

Section 62 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act. However, since the commencement of the study my department has consulted with the companies and unions with respect to their share of the cost and I can report that the Iron Ore Company of Canada have to date paid $500,000 towards the cost of the study and have agreed to pay a further amount.

Wabush Mines have not contributed to the study cost as yet and discussions held with senior executives of Wabush Mines this past weekend indicate they are reviewing their position on the basis of the results of the study and will confirm their commitment by December 15, 1982. The union locals of the United Steelworkers of America in Labrador City and Wabush have been asked to contribute a nominal amount towards the cost of the study. The nominal amount, by the way, Mr. Speaker, is $5,000 per local.

I believe it is obvious from this report that the Labrador Institute of Northern Studies has done a thorough and extensive job of assessing the extent of the dust problem and I want to commend the Labrador Institute of Northern Studies on behalf of government for their efforts. In acknowledging the contribution to the study, I would also recognize the impressive team of consultants and the study personnel that was brought to- gether to participate in this study. They represent some of the leading scientific professional and technical people in the country.

I should also make special mention of the staff of our own Memorial University, who contributed in a major way,and thank the companies and unions for their 4945

November 17, 1982 Tape 2360 EC - 2 MR. DINN: outstanding co-operation during all phases of the study. I am confident that with the implementation of the recommendations in the report, the dust problem in the mines in Western Labrador will be brought under control. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Terra Nova. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Hear, hear Mr. Speaker. The hon. the member for MR. LUSH: Mr.

Speaker, let me simply say that we on this side of the Ilouse certainly welcome this study, long overdue though it may he, and I expect many of us would wish - pardon the pun - that there was more dust flying in Labrador West today than there was when the study was initiated. I certainly hope that the fact that there is a temporary turn-down with respect to markets for iron ore will not at all diminish the efforts of the government to ensure that the recommendations of the study are carried out by the companies concerned so that we can make both these mines safe places for the workers involved. 96

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2361 MJ - 1 MR. T.LUSH: So, Mr. Speaker, we certainly welcome this report. We certainly hope, again, that this dust study does not become a further dust problem in becoming the dust collector. We hope , and I want to emphasize that, we certainly hope that the government intend to see that every recomendation is carried out to the Nth degree for the benefit of the workers because the study certainly verifies that there is a flealth problem. We commend the minister for having the study done and we can only hope now that the recommendations wil 1 be acted upon promptly and immediately.

It is disappointinq, Mr. Speaker, to hear that one of the mines involved, Wahush Mines, has not yet seen fit to come up with their portion of the money, and again we hone that this will be forthcoming. It is the company's responsibility, I believe - both companies- to have shared the major portion of the cost of this study and I certainly hope again that the government will pressure this company into paying their just amount.

I am not so sure that the unions should be forced to pay, I am not sure it is thoir problem,but again the minister has only mentioned a nominal amount and I do not see this as much of a problem. But certainly Wabush Mines should be forced to pay their share of the cost of this study. So, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion we on this side of the llouse,and I am sure along with all people in Newfoundland and Labrador, welcome this study and hope that its recommendations will be acted upon promptly and immediately. MR.SPEAKER (Russell): Are there any more Ministerial Statements? ORAL QUESTIONS MR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2361 MJ - 2 MR. S. NEARY: Government house Leader (Mr. Wm. Marshall) could inform the House how the government intends to deal with the statement on the economy and the financial mess that the administration has gotten us * into in this Province in the last year? Could the hon. gentleman tell us what format will be used to make that presentation to the house tomorrow? MR. WM. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the President of the COuncil. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I will ignore the hon. gentleman's reference to the mess. I wish I could ignore the hon. gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, the government will be presenting an economic statement to the fIouse and this will be dealt with in accordance with the normal way that statements are dealt with,and then the normal business of the House will give adequate opportunity for inquiry into the statement and examination of the statement. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. $ 4 94 A

November 17, 1982 Tape 2362 PK - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, do I understand from the hon. gentleman that how the government intend to handle this is via a Ministerial Statement procedure? Is that correct? Is it just going to be a Ministerial Statement on this matter or is the hon. gentleman going to ask for unanimous leave of the House to have a statement by the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) and then a debate on that statement?

Because obviously it is going to be a very controversial statement,and we would like to have an opportunity to respond or to ask questions of the minister? Or will it be brought in the form of a mini-Duthjet or a full fledcjed Budget? How does the hon. gentleman intend to deal with it? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, we will be dealing with the matter.

I can say to the hon. gentleman that thanks to the reforms that took place as a result of this party taking over the administration some ten years ago and since,there is now adequate opportunity in this Flouse at all times to debate matters of public importance and, of course,the economic statement is a matter of pullic importance I am not going to say at the present time specifically what procedures are available because that is up to the Minister of Finance when he makes his statement tomorrows If i made certain statements as to specifically how it will be handled I would be tipping the hon.

Minister of Finance's hand and I certainly would not want to tip the hon. Minister of Finance's hand, because he is quite capable of announcing these things himself. 4949

November 17, 1982 Tape 2362 PK - 2 MR. MARSHALL: But the thing that I would like to impress, Mr. Speaker, is that we in this government, as we always have, will be bringing the statement of the financial affairs of the Province openly before the public through the people's House, the House of Assembly. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Heir, hear! MR. MARSHALL: And as a result of bringing democracy back to Newfoundland there will be adequate opportunity from the rules that have been brought in by this administration,to debate it and examine it as thoroughly as is necessary. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER(Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition, a supplementary. MR. NEARY: The hon. gentleman says out of One corner of his mouth, this is the crowd that brought democracy back to Newfoundland, and then he tells us it is a top secret. It is a secret today, the eve of this statement on the economy,the hon. gentleman tells us it is a secret of how the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) is going to make the statement to the House. Well,perhaps the hon. Minister of Finance can tell us how he intends to make that presentation to the House.

Is it going to be in the form of a Ministerial Statement or is the hon. gentleman going to ask leave of the House to debate a matter of urgent public importance? Get your act together. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. NEARY: Perhaps the hon. Minister of Finance can toll us how he intends to deal with this matter. I mean a statement of this magnitude, Mr. Speaker, of this importance warrants more than just a routine Ministerial Statement. 4950

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2363 SD - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: I did not say there was any secret as to how the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) was going to do it. The Minister of Finance was going, I said, to give an economic statement. The Minister of Finance gives an economic statement from the minister ergo ,therefore, it is a Ministerial Statement which will be given. Now there is no secret about it, Mr. Speaker. The only secret is in the minds of the Opposition an to how they will deal with it.

What I am trying to point out to the Opposition is that there is adequate and there will be adequate opportunity through availing of the normal rules of this House for the Opposition to discharge its dutyhowever it foresees its duty,to inquire into the financial affairs. There will be a full relevation of the financial affairs through the established procedures of this House. MR. NEARY: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: That is not good enough, Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: Well, that is too bad. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, Statements by Ministers, let me show hon. gentlemen what the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) is goinci to force this House to do. Statements by Ministers have now been given a recognized place in routine proceedings. The standard order is specific but considerable latitude has been left to the Speaker to set limits on the participants. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! I will remind the hoe. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) that we only have thirty minutes for the Question Period. And it appears to the Chair that he is attempting to get into a debate and make a speech 951

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2363 SD - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): on what is certainly an important topic, but I certainly request him to be more specific with his questions. The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Well perhaps Your Honour should give the House some directions as to how we should deal with this matter. Is the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) aware - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. NEARY: Is the Government House Leader aware that the Speaker can only allow brief comment and a few questions of the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) on any Ministerial Statement?

And if the Ministerial Statement, Your Honour, conveys or encourages debate / that the hon. gentleman is not permitted to make that kind of a statement during Statements by Ministers. And, Mr. Speaker, it is not good enough. Can the hon. gentleman tell us, be more specific, can the hon. gentleman be more specific, Mr. Speaker, on how we can debate this matter, a statement on the economy, how the Opposition can debate it tomorrow , not the next day or the day after or under routine business of the House? Will we get an opportunity on tomorrow to debate that statement? MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: It is not my task or my duty or my inclination, Mr. Speaker, to tutor the Opposition on how theyconduct their Froirs in this House. But all I have said, and I mean it, is that there is going to be a full relevation of the financial position of this Province by the Minister of Finance. That will be done in accordance with the rules of this house. There will be quite adequate opportunity for the hon. gentleman - MR. NEARY: When will we get the opportunity? 495?

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2363 SD - 3 MR. MARSHALL: I will just give one example, there are many examples but I will just give one example, it is foreign to the hon. gentlemen because they never had a Question Period in the House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Right on. MR. MARSHALL: This is one area. The only House in Christendom, in the British parliamentary system anyway, certainly1where there was not a Question Period. When we were over 14953

November 17, 1982 Tape 2364 NM - 1 MR. MARSHALL: on the opposite side of the House, if you got up and asked a question-you were not allowed up -but if you managed to sneak up on your feet and some well-meaning minister would get up and try to answer a question,they would be trampled on and told to sit down. There was no question reriod. So question period is one, but there are many other avenues, Mr. Speaker, there are many other avenues that are available.

If there is one thinq that this administration is not lax about it is giving full and complete opportunity for there to be full revelation of the financial situation of the Province, and a full debate of it by all elected representatives and responsible people in society. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: The hon. Premier picked the right man to be his hatchet man when he picked the hon. gentleman.

The hon. gentleman is pooh-poohing this now the same as he pooh-poohed the Ocean Ranger information that was given to him in January of last year that could have prevented anaccident effshore. He is pooh-poohing this the same way. So, Mr.

Speaker, let me ask the hon. gentleman, in fairness to the people of this Province, to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, will the hon. gentleman undertake to have the regular order of business of this House suspended tomorrow so that we can deal with a matter of urgent public importance, namely, a statement on the economy, so that the House will be given an opportunity tomorrow, not the next day or the day after, but on tomorrow to debate this very important matter? MR. MORGAN: What about Saturday and Sunday? MR. WARREN: Yes, if you people want to stay here. '954

November 17, 1982 Tape 2364 NM - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, this government,as I say, has provided an adequate opportunity for the full debate of every matter that comes before it,and I am not by way of giving undertakings or taking directions from the hon. gentleman there opposite. If the hon. gentleman cannot use the rules of the House in the way in which they have been set out for us - MR. NEARY: What arrogance: 'Jhv do you not let television cameras into the House? MR.

MARSHALL: - that give them an opportunity to examine into the affairs of the Province, to ask questions, to comment and what have you. But I want to again assure the hon. member that, as we have done in the past, we will give adequate opportunity through the rules of this House, the accepted procedures For their to be an opportunity for full and complete examination. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LtJSH: Mr. Speaker, I have a question or two for the Minister of Education (Ms. Verge).

The minister will recall that last Spring when the budget was brought down it was announced that there was going to be $12 million allocated for new facilities for the reorganized high school programme. There was quite a furor throughout the Province among school boards, (4955

November 17, 1982 Tape 2365 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: which expressed deep concern that this amount of money might not be sufficient to take care of the needs for bringing in the high school programme, particularly with respect to school construction. Now, of course, that we are into the first year of the reorganized kligh school programme, I wonder if the minister could indicate whether any problems have surfaced to indicate that this $12 million was indeed insufficient to meet the built in requirements for the programme? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Minister of Education. MS VERGE: Mr.

Speaker, this is actually the second year of the reorganized high school programme. It began in the last school year, 1981-1982, at the Grade X level. It will be fully implemented in the next school year, 1983 - 1984, when the first of our students to complete the programme will graduate from Grade XII. The programme has been received very well. The total amount of money provided by govern- ment to expand high school facilities to accommodate the programme was $20.3 million provided in three instalments over three fiscal years. In the present fiscal year the bulk of the money, or $2 million, was provided.

The final instalment of $3 million will be provided next year. Now, Mr. Speaker, that $20.3 million of government money was designed to build classrooms to accommodate the extra students who will be in school because of the extra grade Startifl(J next year, but also to build what are called proqranime support rooms such as libraries, multi-purpose rooms for subjects such as art and home economics,as well as laboratories. In fact, about 60 per cent of the money is designed for

November 17, 1982 Tape 2365 EC - 2 MS VERGE: those programme support facilities. There are many construction projects underway and it is expected that the students next year, including the Grade XII students, will be well accommodated. There are a couple of places in the Province, namely, Mount Pearl - Newtown and Conception Bay South, where there has been overall population growth and where the start of Grade xii next year will accelerate a problem uhich would have existed otherwise because of the overall population expansion. Those areas are ::o ivo to 1tV 4957

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2366 ah-1 MS.VERGE: going to have to have new schools and those are decisions to be made by the church authorities with the money to be provided by government.But it has to be stressed that the pressure on school authorities in Mount Pearl - Newtown and Conception Bay South is not created by the reorganized high school programme. It is created by the overall population growth in those areas. And those areas, Mr. Speaker, are the exceptions.

The rule across the Province is student enrolment decline,and this decline is coinciding with the phase-in of the reorganized high school programme,and classroom space which had become freed up because of the decline will be used in part to accomodate the Grade Xll students as well as the new facilities being built costing $20.3 million worth of government money. SOME !ION.MEMBERS: hear, hear MR.SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I apologize for having said that it was the first year of the high school programme when the minister says it is the second year.

But judging from the ignorance on the other side one would have thought it had not begun at all. By the first year we meant , of course, it was the first year there was any retention of students, that it was the first year that we had gone into Grade Xli. But, Mr. Speaker, in view of the government cutbacks , in view of the deficit, can the minister assure this House that there will be no cutbacks in the $12 million that have already been allocated for the grade Xll, for the new reorganized high school programme and that there will be no cutbacks in this year to further impede the introduction of this programme?

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

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2366 ah-2 MS.VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I can give that assurance. The $20 million of government money for constructions of high schools has already been paid and construction projects are underway using that money. And I have to emphasize that the $12 million is only part of the government money for now facilities for the high school programmes. it is the second installment and the total being naid in three installments 1S $20.3 million and that is over and above government grants for other construction needs.

In that category we are providing $10.8 million this year, so the total government money to the churches for school construction this present fiscal year, which is in the process of being spent, is $22.8 million. And, Mr. Speaker, to repeat this is the second year of the reorganized high school programme. Students now in grades X and Xl are participating in that proqramme and it will be next year, 1983-84 that the Province will see the first grade Xll graduates. SOME HON.. MEMBERS: hear, hear MR.SPEAKER (Russell) The hon. member for Terra Nova. 45q

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2367 MJ - 1 MR. T. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the minister could inform the House as to whether or not there will be any cutbacks in any department in Education in this fiscal year? Will there be any cutbacks anywhere in terms of reduction in programmes, reduction of staff, whether there will be any cutbacks at all? MS. L. VERGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Minister of Education. MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance (Dr. J. Collins) will be announcing to this Hon.

House tomorrow adjustments that are being made to the budgets of all government departments and I will be happy to comment on that statement once it is made by my colleague. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR. NEARY: Ask her wmen we will get a coov of the Ministerial Statero MR. SPEAKER Order, please! Order, please! The hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR._LUSH: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the minister can indicate whether there will be any cutbacks with vocational schools throughout this Province1 either with respect to staff, support staff, teachers, instructors and programmes? Will there be any cutbacks in those areas? MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Education. MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I have already answered that question. The Minister of Finance will give his statement tomorrow dealing with adjustments to the budget for the Department of Education and all divisions of the Department of Education ,and after that statement is 4960

November 16, 1982 Tape No. 2367 MJ - 2 MS. L. VERGE: made, Mr. Speaker, I will be happy to expand on any of its contents relating to the Department of Education. MR. T. LUSH: A further supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the minister says that whatever cutbacks or whatever measures that will be taken in Education will be announced tomorrow. It seems as though we have already heard through the news media about some cutbacks ,and I wonder if the minister can indicate whether or not there will any cutbacks in adult and continuing education?

MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER. The hon. the Minister of Education. MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I am happy for the opportunity to comment on some erroneous reports carried by the news media. There never has been and there is not now any intention on the part of the government or the Department of Education to end the successful programme being run at the Leonard A. Millier Center for handicapped adults to get the equivalent of elementary school and hiqhschool educations. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS.

VERGE: That programme is being operated 4 by the Education Department in co-operation with the Department of Social Services, as well as the Canadian Paraplegic Association and the Hub, and it now has about fifty or sixty students. Mr. Speaker, there is one full-time instructor and a number of part-time instructors. That programme will continue. There never has been any intention of ending that programme. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Terra Nova. 1R. LUSH: Well, Mr. Speaker, T 4961

November 17, 1982 Tape 2368 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: thank the minister for the answer. I have been asking the questions the wrong way apparently, so I will rephrase my question again about the vocational school. Is there any truth to the fact that the Department of Education plan to have cutbacks in vocational education in terms of instructors and the programmes offered? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Minister of Education. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I have to say again that we will have to wait for the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) to give his statement tomorrow.

It is only a day away and then the hon. the member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush) can ask all the questions he wan.ts about the contents of that statement; because we all know what the statement is and I will be able to elaborate on it and answer all kinds of questions about the budget of the department. MR. LIODDER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Port au Port. MR. DODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Prertier. i1en I was or my way to the House of Assembly today, I received an invitation to a function tonight.

And i want to ask the Premier, in light of the fact that we are cutting back on the sick and the elderly and while we punish people in the Province, many of whom already are below the poverty line, can it be that on the eve of a financial statement which is cutting back on the finances of this Province that there is a cocktail reception between 7:30 and 9:30 tonight at the Fort William room Can the Premier explain this? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. 962

November 17, 1982 Tape 2368 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I wish to thank the hon . the member for Port au Port (Mr. Dodder) for asking that question. It gives me a great opportunity to respond. First of all, I want to go on record in this hon. House, Mr. Speaker, as congratulating the Minister of Development (Mr. Windsor) and the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) for a fantastic exhibition down- town that I opened this morning. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, heart PREMIER PECKFORD It is the first real attempt on behalf of this Province to assert itsel f in the marine technology business of North 1\mericaand of the World, and this will be one, to be followed by many others, that we will sponsor over the next few years to ensure that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians get their fair share of the marine technology jobs, the offshore jobs, the fishery jobs,and that we become in the forefront of high technology in the marine field. I am very grateful for the great work that the Department of Development and the Deportment of Fisheries have done. So, Mr.

Speaker, that, I think, stands us in good stead and is a shining light on what the qovernment is trying to do to enhance our opportunities in the future.

November 17, 1982 Tape 2369 PK - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: A couple of weeks ago 1 it came to the Minister of Development's (Mr. Windsor) attention and the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) attention, that we have this great exhibition underway and it is extremely vital and necessary for it to go ahead, but they came to me and came to Cabinet and said, 'This must go ahead,we believe, Mr. Premier; all the contracts have been let and all the work has been done and it is very beneficial anyway for the Province to be involved in it.

However, there may be some areas where we should try to cut back and try to demonstrate some leadership in restraint in this Province.' And I said, 'Yes, I think so.' And therefore as a result of that we have cut back the exhibition in every place we could all through it, Then we decided that the reception should go ahead, A lot of people from all over the Province are here- there are axhibitions from the town of Botwood, from Deer Lake and Pasadena and Corner Brook and Gander and Stephenville- there are a lot of areas of the Province which are taking up the initiative.

We have people here from New Brunswick, from Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, from all over the world besides Canada. So we decided that we would cancel the cocktail party - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: - we would have the reception1 but we would have no cocktails at the reception, to show leadership and restraint, a SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: I would submit to the hon. member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) that the only spirit that he can show was here in the House of Assembly today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 4964

November 17,1982 Tape 2369 PK - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Russe1l). The hon. member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I am glad I found out that the cocktail party was cancelled, and perhaps the Premier should have made it public to all those who received invitations. MR. NEARY: He cancelled it after I mentioned it this morning on the radio. MR. WARREN: That is right. Right ori MR. HODDER: Yes. MR. NEARY: After I mentioned it this morning on the radio. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I note - MR. TOBIN: He will not show up now there are no cocktails. MR. MORGAN: He will not come where there is no booze. MR.

WARREN: You will not be there either. MR. HODDER: I note in the Public Accounts report for the year 1981 that the government has spent $237,000.95 on official entertainment. Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Premier whether we will be cutting back on all official entertainment which the Province has been hosting in the coming year? MR. NEARY: You will have to wait for the Minister of Finance. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, besides the cocktails being cancelled,there was some food to be served this evening as well and that has been cut in half, and that will only be a tidbit,it will not be a meal or anything like that - that has all been cut out-to show how leadership in that regard. 4965

November 17, 1982 Tape 2369 PK - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, as it relates to other areas of government, of the Legislature, of the work of the Opposition, the work of the Department of Education, the work of the Department of Development, the work of the Department of Justice, the work of the Department of Fisheries, every single area of government has been under scrutiny by the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins) and Treasury Board over the last while and tomorrow the Minister of Finance will outline the kind of restraint measures that we wish to institute and how all of us together have to try to participate in that for the benefit of Newfoundland and Newfoundland in the future. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear

0 November 17, 1982 Tape 2370 NM - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. Tn view of the absence of the Minister of SocialServices (Mr. Hic]zev) - MR. NEARY: (Inaudible) he has covered up too long. MR. WARREN: - the Minister of Social Services, I have not seen him in the House the last three days, he maybe sick or something. You cannot blame him. PREMIER PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Order, please PREMIER PECKFORD: Is the hon. member for Torngat Mountains asking me a question? MR. WARREN: Yes.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Well,would he ask his leader to be quiet so I can hear him? MR. WARREN: You could ask him that. MR. NEARY: How childish can you get. You talk about arrogance. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier,in the absence of his Minister of Social Services whom i have not seen in the House for the last three or four days, I understand that the Social Services Department announced on October i some thirteen changes to be made in the social assistance programme. Are those thirteen changes presently in effect? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. 4967

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2370 NM-2 PREMIER PECEFORD: The Social Services Department, like all the other departments of government, have been under scrutiny. There was an experiment tried by the Minister of Social Services in certain areas of his department. By the way, the Minister of Social Services is not in his seat and the hon. member pointed that out, he did not go on to ask where he was, he just wanted to leave it - MR. WARREN: I asked the leader.

PREMIER PECKFORD: So of course the Minister of Social Services is not here because he wants to be absent, he is not doing his job as Minister of Social Services and all of that which could be implied bytheway the hon. member indicated the absence of the Minister of Social Services. The Minister of Social Services, for information purposes, Mr. Speaker, is the Chairman for Canada of all the Social Services Ministers and is away participating as Chairman for all the Ministers of Social Services in Canada riqht now. That is where the Minister of Social Services is. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear PREMIER PECKFORD: The proposals that were put forward by the Minister of Social Services on the 1st. of October have now been reviewed by the Social Services Department. The Minister of Social Services has met with all his regional administrators in all areas of the Province, debated them with social workers, with his regional administrators and now there are some refinements to those regulations which will be going into effect over the next few weeks in line with the statement of tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER (RUSSELL): The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary to the Premier. Could the Premier advise the hon. House now that if a widow has an eighteen year old son living under the same roof with her, is there "x" number of dollars deducted off the widow's cheque each month because this eighteen year 968

November 17, 1982 Tape 2370 NM - 3 MR. WARREN: old son or daughter is presently living in the same house? MR. NEARY: Thirty-five dollars. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, now the hon. member is falling into the same trap as some of his friends earlier fell into and that is the details of programmes in all the departments - after the statement tomorrow the hon. member will have the opportunity to ask questions of the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Hickey) , or in his absence myself, or any other minister who is familiar with it, and we will be able to answer them. Obviously 969

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2371 SD - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: the kind of detail involving that will become known after tomorrow's statement when the various ministers indicate,under questioning from the Opoosition, or voluntarily giving information as it relates to the administration of their departments,and how the statement is applied to that particular department. MR. NEARY: That will be the day, when they volunteer information. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. member for Eagle River. MR. HODDER: Is not the Premier going to answer my hon. friend's question? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! The Chair recognizes the hon. member for Eagle River. MR. HISCOCK: My question is to the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Young). Could the Minister of Public Works please inform this House does the government have a real estate value on Mount Scio House and what is that value? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: that on the Order Paper SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. HISCOCK: MR. SPEAKER: Eagle River. Mr. Speaker, Iwould prefer if he would It is not for immediate reDly. Oh, oh! Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary, the member for [1 MR.

HISCOCK: A question also to the Minister of Public Works and Services, Could the Minister of Public Works and Services inform this House if the Cabinet Ministers are now gettinq word processors in their offices and if they have them or if they are on order? MR. SPEAKER; The hon. Minister of Public Works and Services. 4970

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2371 SD - 2 MR. YOUNG: He will have to ask each individual Cabinet Minister because I have nothing to do with the office votes of the different departments. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a week or ten days ago I wrote the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer) and asked the minister if the budget, the provincial part of the budget for the Ocean Ranger Inquiry had been completed and if I could have a copy. The hon. gentleman wrote me back and told me that the budget was not yet finalized.

Would the hon. gentleman tell the House now if the budget for the Province's share of the Ocean Ranger Inquiry is finished and if so could we have a copy tabled in this House? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, certainly if the budget were completed I would certainly make a copy available to this House, obviously it is public funds and the House and public have full right to it1 but the situation now is the same as it was when I wrote the hon. Leader of the Opposition about a week ago.

Budgetary discussions are still going on because really one cannot separate the Province's share from the federal share because it is 50/50. So really the whole budget has to be finalized and then it is just divided by half, the cost to both governments. But it is still under formulation, under discussion, under negotiations and not finalized yet. But when it is finalized,certainly I will undertake to make it available. MR. NEARY: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, that seems to be very peculiar since the comj-nission is functioninri and has been functioning now for the last few months and been holding 4971

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2372 ah-1 MR.NEARY: public hearings in the last couple of weeks. Is the hon. gentleman telling the House that they are not aware of what the final budget will be for the Ocean Ranger Commission of Enquiry at this particular point in time? I managed to get some figures from Ottawa. Is the hon. gentleman telling the House that he does not know how much pay or salary the provincial appointees will be paid, how much the legal counsel that is being appointed by the Province will be paid? Is that what the hon. gentleman is telling us?

Or does the Ocean Ranger Commission of Enquiry have a blank cheque as far as the Province is concerned? MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Justice. MR.OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, the Ocean Ranger Enquiry budget has to be approved by both the federal government and the provincial government. MR.NEARY: Ottawa has already approved theirs. MR.OTTENHEIMER: There has been no final approval of the budget by this Province. Now what the federal government has done I would not necessarily be privy to, but there has been no final approval of the budget for this fiscal year by the Province. That is all I can say there.

Obviously money has been expended, but there is no final budgetary figure for this fiscal year. I cannot give that figure because it is not known. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Question Period has expired. 972

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2372 ah-2 PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR.SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Culture Recreation and Youth. MR.SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, in accordance with

Section 15 of the Arts Council Act I want to table the annual report of the Newfoundland and Labrador Arts Council for the year ending March 31,1982. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear ORDERS OF THE DAY MR.SPEAKER: It being Private Member's Day, we shall proceed with Motion No. 7,which was moved by the hon. member for St. Mary's-The Capes (Mr.Hearn). I think that the hon. member for Port Au Port (Mr. Hodder) adjourned the debate last week. He spoke for seven minutes and he has thirteen minutes left. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, 4973

November 17, 1982 Tape 2373 EC - 1 MR. HODDER: the fishing industry in this Province is a very sick creature indeed. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear! MR. HODDER: Even the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), as late as this morning, on the public airwaves acknowledged the fact that we were in desperate trouble with three fish companies in financial straits 4 from which they may not recover. This resolution, Mr. Speaker, which we are debating today, is timely indeed, as it comes at a time when we are facing the worst crisis in the fishing industry since 1968. •Mr.

Speaker, why is it that this government, which is primarily responsible to the people of the Province, which is responsible to the fishermen of the Province and to the Newfoundland people as a whole, that this government has allowed the fishery to fall into such a state? If we look at the policy papers which have been put forward by the Department of Fisheries, their plans and 'cheir statements since 1970 when they first took power, one would find no consistent policy - MR. BAIRD: Joey would not (inaudible) remember? MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, if I might, I would like to be heard in silence.

This government has now been in power for ten years. I make no apology for anything that happened before,but I would say this, Mr. Speaker, that there has been no consistent policy. There was probably more of a consistent policy and philosophy before this government took power than there is at the present time. 4974

November 17, 1982 Tape 2373 EC - 2 MR. HODOER: One merely finds in the past ten years, and I have been here for some six of those, that the government has reacted from crisis to crisis on a day-to—day basis. Now, at the present time, the great hope is the Kirby Task Force. The minister has made no comment on the Kirby Task Force, except to tell us that he has information as to what it says. He said that here in the House when he spoke on Private Members Day, the last day when we were speaking. But, Mr. Speaker, I think I can predict what the minister's actions will be.

The minister will embrace the Kirby Task Force and its recommendations because he is hoping, and probably knows,that it will offer relef to the situation which we now experience. But, 4975

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2374 MJ - 1 MR. J. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, when the political pressure comes on the minister - because change always brings political pressure and change always brings discontent, and there will be discontented people in this Province once the findings of the Kirby Task Force are made public, and the recommendations and the decisions, which the federal government S will make. There will be discontent in this Province. There will be some people who will feel it is the right thing but there will be upheaval - at that time, Mr. Speaker, I predict that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. J.

Morgan) will then turn on every flaw and follow the winds of change, because the minister has demonstratedover the past three or four years that he always reacts to what is happening at the time, but has never had a consistent philosophy as to where he wants to go and what he wants to do with the fishery in this Province. Mr.

Speaker, it is my belief that this Province, Newfoundland and Labrador,must have a long term strategy, one that is not only formulated but debated at length and which has the support of the fishermen, of the Fishermen's Union, of the processors and all of the people who are involved with the fishery in this Province. We often talk about how important the industry is but we very often treat the fishery with contempt.

I believe that the fishery can and must be the salvation of the Province,and I think that the leaders of this Province, the government of this Province, must put the fishing industry as a number one priority. I do not believe the Premier when he says that the oil will cure our fishery, that we will take revenues from the oil and use them to improve the fishing industry in the Province. That approach is wrong. The fishery must stand on its own feet. It cannot be subsidized,

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2374 MJ - 2 MR. J. HODDER: it cannot be helped from outside sources. We must implement policies and controls which will work in the fishinq industry. We have the product, S we have people who are able and willing and who wish to harvest that product,and we have the markets, Mr. Speaker. We have all the ingedients for a successful industry. We have all the ability that Iceland, which is a country that has successfully lived and has one of the highest standards of living in this world and their primary industry is the fishery, and we have the same tools at our fingertios.

However, we must do something that we have not been doing; we must pay particular attention to the fishery. I see it in my own riding, which is a fishing area, where the Province has totally, absolutely neglected the fishery. We have neglected the markerts, which I think, Mr. Speaker - forgetting the superfluous as far as the neglect in the.fishery is concerned like trying to give the fishermen a good return on his dollar—we have S 4977

November 17, 1982 Tape 2375 PK - 1 MR. HODDER: not in this Province developd marketing and marketing strategy or tried to develop markets. MR. NEARY: Right on. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, let us look at the recent history of the fishery. In 1968 and 1969, and in 1974, 1975and at the present time,the prices dropped in the United States, and the markets dried up, and inventories each one of those times has happened at present,have built up. On both occasions in the past, Mr. Speaker, the response was to bail out the fishing compaflies. MR. NEARY: That is right. MR. HODDER: Surely, Mr.

Speaker, we have learned our lesson. MR. NEARY: Things have not changed in thirty-five years. MR. HODDER: I can remenber as a small boy, Mr. Speaker, listening to the news-or as a young man, I suppose, going to the University-listening to the news of how the government, and it was not this government at the time, was bailing out the fishing industry; but this government has bailed out the fishing industry. They did it in 1974 and 1975. MR. NEARY: Still is. MR. HODDER: But, Mr. Speaker, if we simply follow that course again we will be forced in the next five years into the sane situation.

Why is it that by the Minister of Fisheries' (Mr. Morgan) own admission last Wednesday when I accused him of having no marketing strategy and having no Marketing Department, when I brought up in an off-the-cuff speech about my efforts to have some smelt which were being caught on the West Coast marketed, and I tried to find the Marketing Department it was not in the book, I phoned 4978

November 17, 1982 Tape 2375 PK - 2 MR. HODDER: the deputy minister and he gave me a name, and they came back and said I should find a market myself and gave me a list of names. And, Mr. Speaker, the minister's response around five minutes to six on last Wednesday was that that must have been more than three years ago. Mr. Speaker, what we reap now is what we have sOWflor the past ten years we have been allowing things to go by, we have been drifting from crisis to crisis.

You know, Norway and Iceland together, both countries, Norway and Iceland together have only five exporters of fish products ,while in my district and in the surrounding areas we have National Sea, T. J. Hardy, Clearwater Sea Products, Bay St. George Fisheries, there is another one over in St. Georges, and we have Pike's Limited, which I am not sure about, but all of those companies are involved in marketing, in foreign marketing.

But yet in the successful countries they only have five companies in all of Norway and all of Iceland, both very successful countries on the world markets, with only five companies that are in the export business. Yet, Mr. Speaker, yoi can pick any 4 1497q

November 17, 1982 Tape 2376 EC - 1 MR. 1-IODDER: little jut of land or any bay in this Province and you will find six or seven processors. Mr. Speaker, all of the companies in my district, all six companies that are buying fish in the district of Port au Port, are buying fish from a total population of somewhere around 25,000 people and not one of them - except perhaps one of them may - has the expertise to do the marketing. I wonder, Mr.

Speaker, if this government has ever given any consideration to consolidated marketing such as we see today in Norway and Iceland,or have we thought of anything like the Saltfish Corporation, which has operated since it was formed and marketed salt fish products in this Province without any government assistance at all? I am not sure, Mr. Speaker, if the fish companies in this Province have demonstrated that they can market their product successfully, and I believe that perhaps we should do something along the lines of the Saltfish Corporation.

I also very much like the idea that the Newfoundland Fish, Food and Allied Workers, the Fishermen's Union have when they have on a number of occasions made proposals whereby we set up an agency which would buy from the fishermen and then distribute to the various buyers in the Province. Mr. Speaker, surely something of a logical nature must be done with the fishery. In addition, I feel, Mr. Speaker, that we have to limit the number of processors' licences which the provincial government have given out in this Province. I do not know, Mr. Speaker, why they do it, but every time 4S80

November 17, 1982 Tape 2376 BC - 2 MR. HODDER: a community decides that they want a processors1 licence and starts clamouring for it, they give it out, and thenwhen the plants cannot hire or the plants cannot process the fish, they say, 'Well, the federal government is in charge of the quotas and it is their fault.' But, Mr. Speaker, if the fish is out there then we can catch it; if it is not there, someone has to limit the fish. We just cannot go out and do what has been done in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and clean the fish out so that the stocks cannot regenerate themselves, or have not shown a tendency to regenerate themselves in the past four or five years. 4 4 981

November 17, 1982 Tape 2377 NM - 1 MR. HODDER: So, Mr. Speaker, when we put fish plants in areas ,and then when people start crying because they do not have processing jobs, or there are no jobs for them, and then blame it on the federal government because of the quotas, what we have done in the I first place is to set up a false economy, set up false hopes in people and a waste of money by putting the plants k there. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) should realize that there is only so much fish Out there.

And he must realize that over the years he is guilty, as he is the one who has given the licences to plants in every part of this Province. As I stated before, Mr. Speaker, when I was talking about the Bay St. George area of the Province, there are only 25,000 people in the area, and yet we find that no one who is connected with the fishery in that area of 25,000, not one person is making a good living, not one person is above the poverty line. There may be one person in the whole of Bay St.

George-who happens to be a scallop fisherman who has a licence -who may be above the poverty line as far as his earnings are concerned. In my district, National Sea has a plant in Piccadilly -and I use this only as an illustration - they hire people from the surrounding areas to process the fish, yet it is only a break even operation. They now have a situation where they hire only for stamps. And yet in that area we have the T.J.

Hardy operation who is buying fish in Fox Island River and shipping it out We have Pike's Limited there,who seem to be operating on DREE grants because whenever the DREE grant runs Out they seem to go down. Clearwater Fisheries are there. They are wonderful.

November 17, 1982 Tape 2377 NM - 2 MR. HODDER: Here we have a plant - you see, business only goes where it can make money, and if they cannot make money they leave. People are not in business in order to have a deficit. They are in business to make profits and I believe in that, Mr. Speaker. I do not know if gentlemen opposite believe in it, but when the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) allowed Clearwater Fisheries to go in on the Port au Port Peninsula and take away the most lucrative fishery that we have and ship it off to the Bedford Basin in Nova Scotia, then,Mr.

Speaker, I feel that a great blow was struck at the one industry that we had. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please MR. HODDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I must inform the hon. member that his time has elapsed. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, that is highly irregular since usually I get a note to let me know that. MR. STAGG: We will give you about one minute. MR. SPEAKER: You have already had several minutes extra now. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. HODDER: 4 MM. SPEAKER: not been granted. MR. EAIRD: MR. SPEAKER: hon. member has leave. By leave. By leave. By leave? No. Mr. Speaker - Order, please Leave has Carry on.

Order, please By leave, The The hon. member for Port au Port. 4983

November 17, 1982 Tape 2377 N4 - 3 MR. FIODDER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for Number West (Mr. Baird) , and the member for Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) among others. Mr. Speaker, we have a I number of small fishermen, people who have dreams and aspirations, around the Province, people who are struggling to keep their plants going, but Mr. Speaker, the falseness of the whole situation is that there is just not the population base, nor the resource base for the number of licences that have been given out. 498

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2378 ah-1 MR.HODDER: Perhaps, Mr.Speaker, when you see a situation where the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) allows a company like the Nova Scotian company, Clearwater Lobsters,to go in and take the most lucrative fishery away and to take it over to Nova Scotia, perhaps he must believe the Premier's statement, which he made during the 1980 fishery strike and lockout,that he would rather have 20,000 Newfoundlanders making $5,000 a year than 10,000 Newfoundlanders making $10,000, because that is precisely what is happening in many areas of this Province.

And when I fight for expansion and when I go and sit down at National Sea headquarters and I say,'I want this plant expanded. It is the only industry in this particular area of the Province. I would like to see it expanded.' And they look at me and they say,' Weliwe have not made a profit in the last five years. ' And I say, 'Well,why have you not made a profit? Have you not got a fishing operation?' 'No. We just cannot get our hands on all the fish and we cannot make a profit with the number of people who are supplying us.' We have had Clearwater Lobsters come in and take the most valuable species away.

We have a Minister of Fisheries who allows a DREE grant to go ahead in Fox Island River for T.J. Hardy t' put a water supply in so they can supply ice1 and then T.J. hardy neither processes nor supplies ice to the fishermen. No, Mr. Speaker, that is government planning. Mr. Speaker, we must insure that the - 14 98

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2378 ah-2 MR.MORGAN: I understand he needs leave of the House in a unanimous way to carry on debate. MR.SPEAKER (Aylward) That is correct. MR.CARTER: It was given unanimously. Take it away. MR.MORGAN: It is withdrawn, Mr.Speaker. MR.NEARY: No. No. No. MR.MORGAN: It is withdrawn, that is what I just said. MR.SPEAKER: Leave is withdrawn. The hon. Leader of the Opposition on a point of order? MR.NEARY: No. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. member for Burin- Placentia West. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR.TOBIN: Mr.Speaker, I would like to commend my colleague from St.Mary's-The Capes (Mr.

Ilearn) for introducing this resolution that is indeed important to all of Newfoundland and certainly to my district. I would like to say that I believe the hon. member for Port Au Port (Mr.Hodder) is certainly confused as it relates to the fishing industry and the fishing problems in Newfoundland. The deep-sea fishery in the Province, Mr.Speaker, the fishery in general, I guess, is in real trouble. e Several plants are now closed and fears are being expressed that others may follow suit in the near e future.

The problems surrounding this industry are as complex as they are numerous and there is no simple solution to them. However, in order to deal with them I believe the problems must be identified, and in doing this it is surprising to find out that 4986

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2378 ah-3 MR. TOBIN: plants are being closed and hundreds of people are being thrown out of the work force not because of the worldwide economic crisis, not through mismanagement on the part of the operators,and certainly not tirough any lack of effort on the part of the Provincial Department of Fisherics. The fact of the matter is, Mr.Speaker, I 987

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2379 MJ - 1 that the main cause of the problem is a shortage of marketable species of fish which can be landed economically. The district that I so proudly represent, Mr. Speaker, that qreat and historic fishinq district of Burin - Placentia West, is the heart of this Province's deep-sea fishery.

For hundreds of years Burin Peninsula fishermen voyaged to the Grand Banks to reap the rich harvest of the deep, and, together witt the women foll'L who toiled long and hard on shore to process the fish, laid the foundation of the prosperity which built and developed so many of the famous peninsula fishinq communities. It was those same people who pioneered the deep-sea fishery as we know it today. The fish plant, Mr. Speaker, at Burin began processing frozen filets for export in the early 1940.

This marked the beginning of a new and higher level prosperity and it saw the introduction of the deep-sea trawlers which eventually replaced the stately banking schooners. In those days it would have been impossible to envisage the day when there would be a shortage of fish on the Grand Banks. They were the most prolific fishing grounds in the world and could have met the total requirements for eternity. Mr. Speaker, in the postwar period,after Newfoundland's entery into Confederation with Canada, control of the deep-sea fishery was transferred 4 from St. John's to Ottawa.

Unfortunately, the significance of this industry was not recognized by the Canadian Government and the deep-sea fishery was totally neglected. It was not long until hordes of vessels -Russian, German, Polish, Japanese, Spanish, Portuguese, British and others-swarmed onto our traditional fihing grounds

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2379 MJ - 2 MR. G. TOBIN: and began to rape the fish stocks. It was not until 1961, when a Conservative Government in Ottawa, Mr. Speaker, the Conservative [I Government led by John Diefenbaker, ttat introduced the Canadian Shipbuilding Subsidy Programme that Newfoundland fish companies received any assistance. This programme made it possible for trawlers and plant operators to construct new vessels in order to compete with the foreign fleets. The programme was highly sucessful, 50 per cent of the capital cost of new trawlers was paid in the form of subsidies by Ottawa.

Shipyards which had been experiencing hard times began to flourish. The steel industry in Canada also flourished,as did the manufacturing of equipment necessary to equip these vessels. A very large portion of the subsidy was returned to the treasury through the income and other taxes generated by the employment and business which resulted from the pograme.

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2380 SD - 1 MR. TOBIN: In 1966, Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Liberal government under the leadership of Mr. Pearson began to phase out the subsidy-with disastrous results. Today there is a real need for the re-introduction of a ship building subsidy to replace aging and obsolete trawlers. And, Mr. Speaker, on that point I wonder where the hon. member who represents the district of Burin - St. George's, who represents the same riding that I represent when I speak of the Marystown Shipyard, where has he been?

I understand that there is, on the desk of the federal minister responsible, a report for some time relating to the subsidies of trawlers and it has not been released. And I think Mr. Simmons should certainly stand up and make his colleagues realize that there is a place in Newfoundland,if the rest of Canada is not prepared to do it,and that we certainly are the fishing capital of the world and subsidies such as this should be brought in right away. Mr.

Speaker, just to emphasis that point further, today Canada is the only major fishing nation in the world which does not offer substantial financial assistance to its shipbuilding industry for the construction of modern low-cost trawlers. This can only be construed as neglect on the part of the Canadian Government,which appears to center its interest in Quebec and the industrial centres of Ontario.

When considering the plight of our fishery today,it is evident that the neglect was not confined to the shipbuilding sector, The greatest neglect was the failure of the federal government to take action 4 against the foreign nations which had depleted our fish stocks. It was not until 1977,after some fish species had become cornmerically extinct and other had come close to it / that the Canadian government eventually declared a 200-mile fishing limit. Had the federal government heeded the warnings 4990

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2380 SD - 2 2 MR. TOBIN: and acted upon the pleas by the Newfoundland fishing industry ten years earlier, many of today's problems would not even exist. When Ottawa did finally wake up to the fact that the East Coast fishery was in trouble, did it take the appropriate action to rebuild the industry in a sensible and businesslike manner? SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the answer is a clear cut no. Instead it chose the industry partly for a trade off tool with foreign countries and partly as a political tool to enhance the political fortunes of its own party members. MR.

STAGG: The hon. member took care of them. MR. TOBIN: What was that? MR. STAGG: The hon. member took care of them and their party fortunes. MR. TOBIN: I think we all took care of them, Most of them should be taken care of. Although, Mr. Speaker, I must say, I see two hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House who I know are concerned about the fisheries, more concerned than their leader. Having declared the 200-mile limit / the government immediately allocated substantial quantities of fish to foreign nations. This was a trade off to ensure markets for Western grain and Ontario and Quebec industrial products.

The traditional Gulf of St. Lawrence, Mr. Speaker, which the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) alluded to earlier, the fishing grounds for trawler fleets from the Southwest Coast of Newfoundland, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia,were placed out of bounds. The consequence of this action was a concentration of these vessels on the Grand Banks,where the quota became exhausted very quickly. Even before the advent of the worldwide recession two years ago , fishing companies were finding it difficult to make ends meet. With the rapid 4991

November 17, 1982 Tape 2381 EC - 1 MR. TOBIN: rise of interest rates, fuel and other costs, the situition has now become impossible. Plants, Mr. Speaker, at Rimea, Harbour Breton, Gaultois and my own home town of Trepassey have now been forced to close. Plants elsewhere are threatened with closure. Given the 83,000 tons of cod now allocated to foreign fleets by the Canadian Government - MR. STAGG: How much? MR. TOBIN: Cighty-chree thousand tons. MR. STAGG: Eighty-three thousand tons MR. TOBIN: Eighty-three thousand tons of cod is now allocated to foreign fleets by the Canadian Government. Mr.

Speaker, if thiswere not the case, several, if not all of these plants, would be open and operating today and people, Mr. Speaker, well over 1,000 Newfoundlanders would be employed instead of receiving U.I.C. or welfare payments. MR. STAGG: That is right. MR. TOBIN: That is right. Mr. Speaker, some will argue that fish plants are a provincial responsibility and that the provincial government is responsible for providing the necessary financial assistance to help them out of their difficulties. Mr.

Speaker, we all know what the provincial Department of Fisheries has done for the fish plants in Newfoundland over the past number of months and years, but the problems that these 4 companies are experiencing are caused through federal action and inaction. * VIR. STAGG. Right. MR. TOBIN: For Newfoundland, Mr. Speaker, to continue to pour money into an industry without first ensuring the federal government has revised its fishing 992

November 17, 1982 Tape 2381 EC - 2 MR. TOBIN: policies, would be like continuing to pump air into a tire without plugging the hole. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that the federal government has two major areas of responsi- bility which it must live up to immediately, and I mean immediately.

It must once and for all cancel permits for foreign fishing vessels' efforts in our waters, except where it can be proven conclusively that the catches are surplus to our own requirements, and it must also provide financial compensation to the fishing companies for the damage already caused by the federal government's short-sighted and unfair policies. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hear, hear MR. TOBIN: For those of us who have the mistaken impression, Mr. Speaker, that marketing efforts by the Newfoundland industry are at fault - and the member from Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) , Mr.

Speaker, just demonstrated again, he got up and he spoke all day, Mr. Speaker, and every time one of them stands up, 'marketing' is all you can hear, Mr. Speaker, the problem in the fishery is marketing Well, let us look at the facts. Let us look at the facts, Mr. Speaker. The quality of Newfoundland fish has risen to the point where it is considered by many U.S. buyers to be superior to that of our main competitors, Iceland and Norway. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! I 14993

November 17, 1982 Tape 2382 PK - 1 MR. TOBIN: There is absolutely no problem in selling high-grade Newfoundland fish on the American market. The problem is the availability of sufficient quantity to meet the market requirements. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Right on: MR. TOBIN: As far as the European market is concerned,there is little hope that we will ever sell any substantial quantity of fish to the EEC countries as long , Mr. Speaker, as the Canadian Government permits them to take fish from our waters.

The so-called trade of f which permits foreigners to take 83,000 tons of fish in exchange for access to EEC markets is in my opinion a very, very bad joke, a deep joke, a sick joke. In actual fact it provides for 4,000 tons - I think, Mr. Speaker, we should listen to this - it provides for 4,000 tons of import to EEC countries at a 4 per cent tariff and 6,000 tons at a 6 per cent tariff. Any further quantity is taken at the rate of 15 per cent. Now, Mr.

Speaker, when this is compared with the agreement between Iceland and the EEC, which permits duty-free imports of Icelandic fish, and Norway,which is charged at only a rate of 3 per cent, it can be seen how crazy our so-called agreement is. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear 4R. STAGG: hhat a joe Tell it like it i_s. MR. TOBIN: It has to be remembered too, Mr. Speaker - MR. STAGG: Never give it away. MR. TOBIN: -when we compare this, Mr. Speaker, it has to be remembered that Iceland permits no foreign fishing whatsoever within its jurisdiction, within its 200-mile limit. And here, Mr. Speaker, there is more

November 17, 1982 Tape 2382 P1< - 2 MR. TOBIN: more foreigners out there, I would suggest, than there are Canadian boats. In closing - MR. STAGG: They made the British back down. MR. TOBIN: What is that? MR. STAGG: They made the British back down. MR. TOBIN: Yes, they made the British back down, but what is the Canadian Government doing, Mr. Speaker? What is the Canadian Government doing? Here we are competing for markets with the Icelandic people in the EEC countries - MR. SIMMS: Ask your friend on the other side. He can answer it. MR. TOBIN: I am sure, Mr. Speaker, my friend on the other side does not know.

I just listened to the speech from the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) and he referred to the grave problem in the Newfoundland fishery, Mr. Speaker, being the marketing problem. Mr. Speaker, we all know what - MR.STAGG: The biggest problem with the Newfoundland fishery is Liberals in Ottawa. MR. HODDER: We need good quality products and good marketing. MR. BAIRD: But now we have no fish. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we have superior quality to that of Iceland. The greatest problem, Mr. Speaker, like my colleague for Stephenville (Mr.

Stagg) just said, to the fisheries in this Province is the Liberal Government in Ottawa, supported, aided and abetted, Mr. Speaker, by the five Liberal MPs from Newfoundland and to some extent, Mr. Speaker, probably to a larger extent, by the eight sitting Liberals in this House. 4995

November 17, 1982 Tape 2382 PK - 3 MR. NODDER: What about Mr. McGrath when he was Minister of Fisheries? What did he do? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, this government p will stand up and fight for Newfoundland, will stand up and defend Newfoundland's rights, Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: - regardless if it is a Conservative or a Liberal Government that is in Ottawa - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: - and that is not what the Liberals can say in this House. A 4996

November 17, 1982 Tape 2383 EC - 1 MR. TOBIN: That is not what they can say, Mr. Speaker. Who has heard of Mr. Simmons, Mr. Rompkey, Mr. Rooney, Mr. Baker? MR. STAGG: What was the other fellow's name? MR. SIMMS: Rumpkey. MR. STAGG: What was the other fellow's name? MR. SIMNS: Tobin. MR. STAGG: Tobin, yes. MR. TOBIN: I would not dare say it, Mr. Speaker! I would not dare say it! I left that for my colleague from Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) to say, because, Mr. Speaker, I hate affiliating disasters with the name of Tobin, Sir. However, Mr.

Speaker, in closing, let me say that I was very much encouraged by the fact that the Minister of Fisheries for this Province, my colleague, the hon. Mr. Morgan, who is one of the greatest friends, Mr. Speaker, that the fishermen of this Province have ever known - MR. STAGG: I would like for you to repeat that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: Do you want me to repeat that? Well, Mr.

Speaker, I have no difficulty whatsoever, S have no compunction whatsoever in saying that I believe that the Minister of Fisheries in Newfoundland today 0 is one of the greatest friends that the fishing industry, the fishing people and all the people of Newfoundland related to the fisheries have. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 4997

November 17, 1982 Tape 2383 EC - 2 MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, let me say that I was encouraged, to say the least, that my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) and his federal counterpart, Mr. DeBane, who, Mr. Speaker, has just been appointed, and all indications are that he could be a very good Minister of Fisheries. tie have suffered, Mr. Speaker, we have been dragged through a trouble period in the last few years with LeBlanc; it was a lost cause as far as the people of Newfoundland were concerned. But I believe, Mr. Speaker, that Mr.

DeBarie appears to be heading in a good, clean-cut direction as it relates to the fishing industry,afld I have great belief, Mr. Speaker, and great faith in the interest demonstrated by the hon. the member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush) in the Newfoundland fishery. I think he is a sincere individual. I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that the member for Terra Nova will rise and I am sure that he will have no difficulty whatsoever in expressing his interest in the Newfoundland fishery and supporting the resolution put forth by my colleague. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. TOBIN: However, Mr.

Speaker, I made reference to the flEeting of my colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, and Mr. DeBane, and I was delighted to know that they held such congenial meetings during the weekend. And I trust that all of the problems that I have addressed will be dealt with. It is my hope that the prosperity of the Burin Peninsula, which the residents have worked so hard to build with centuries of hard work, will be preserved. Mr. Speaker, if it is not, here is one individual who will want to know the reason why. Thank you very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear 4998

November 17, 1982 Tape 2384 NM - 1 4 MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) The hon. member for Terra Nova. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure that the hon. member for Grand Bank (William Matthews) will be so pleased when I have finished my speech as he seemed to be before I began. MR. STAGG: Grand Bank is the fellow there with the beard. MR. LUSH: From Placentia. MR. TOBIN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. member for Burin-Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: In case the hon. member for Terra Nova does not know the geography of Newfoundland, Mr.

Speaker, does not know the area that the members here represent, I would like to inform him that I represent the district of Burin-Placentia West and will be just as pleased with his speech when he is finished as when he starts, because he is not going to say anything anyway. MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order. The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: But, Mr. Speaker, it is rather amusing to listen to members opposite talking about that great fighting spirit for Newfoundland, their ability to stand up for Newfoundland and fight and fight.

Well, Sir, there is certainly every indication that they are great fighters, that they are great fighters with the federal government and showing Newfoundlanders that they stand up for Newfoundland, that they are willing to go through anything to stand up for 13 q 9

November 17, 1982 Tape 2384 NM - 2 MR. LUSH: Newfoundland, and if you do not support them,of course you are unpatriotic, that you are not a Newfoundlander. Well, Mr. Speaker, they are great fighters. But the problem with the fight is that they are fighting the wrong battles. They are continuously barking up the wrong trees and attacking the wrong issues. And one can look over the past three or four years and try to evaluate what all of this fighing has brought about. And it has brought about a big zilch in terms of developing the economy of this Province. And, Mr.

Speaker, it is a favourite tactic of this governrrent to fight battles, but they are fighting the wrong battles,of course,and it is all for a very political reason: these are diversionary tactics. It is to divert the attention of the people of this Province away from the real problems which we face, away from the performance of this government,because they do not want the people for one moment to think about the performance or the record of this government. So it is great to be able to deflect and divert the people's attention away from the real problems which face this Province, Mr.

Speaker, this is certainly a resolution,again,which attempts to do that, to divert the people's attention away from the real problems of the fishery. Because, Mr. Speaker, this resolution does not get at the substance of the problem which we face in the fisheries today, it does not get at the substance and the quality of the decisions that need to be made to improve our Newfoundland fisheries. This government, Mr. Speaker, always come out with simplistic solutions to problems. I was not aware until today that the only problem with the fisheries in Newfoundland is the Northern cod stocks. That is the only problem.

It seems as though if we were to get that problem solved then everything in the fishery would be just fine. Arid, Mr. Speaker, 5000

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2385 SD - 1 MR. LUSH: that is far from the truth,but, as I have said before, it is another one of their attempts to divert public attention away from the real issues of this Province. It is another attempt, Mr. Speaker, to undermine the federal government ,and not necessarily the federal government but the Federal Liberal Government. It is another one of their ongoing attacks, it is another of their ongoing efforts, Mr. Speaker, to undermine the Federal Liberal Government, to undermine the Prime Minister of this country.

How quick the Premier was to latch on to a statement that was practically erroneously reported by the press about the Liberal Convention last week. And the Premier was on the airways talking about how the Prime Minister challenged Newfoundland to have a referendum on separation and then comes in the next day with a resolution on the seal hunt. But I have not heard a resolution forthcoming since then to thank the Prime Minister for the great speech that he made in Europe, the great speech that he made in defence of the seal hunt, I have not heard members saying anything about that, Mr. Speaker. But, Mr.

Speaker, it is another one of the ongoing efforts to attack and undermine the federal government. And, Mr. Speaker, this government have become experts, they have become experts at using diversionary tactics, at blaming others, at blaming other governments for their lack of performance. Back ten years ago, Mr. Speaker, first when this administration came to power, for four or five years they could not do anything because they were blaming the previous Liberal government.

For four or five years they were at that on a continuous basis , day after day, blaming the previous government, the provincial Liberal government and that was why they could not do anythinq. Things were in such a financial mess they could not do anything. Then they started bringing in all of their studies, all of the royal commissions, making the people of the Province believe 5001

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2385 SD - 2 MR. LUSH: they were doing something, stalling for time, bringing in new structural changes, new studies, and royal commissions. Mr. Speaker, was it not amusing just last week when the Premier condemned the Prime Minister of Canada for setting up the study on the economy of Canada. 'It was not necessary', he said, 'another study'. And the government opposite have become experts at setting up studies and royal comrnissionsbut it is okay when they do it. The Prime Minister of Canada was described as being stupid and doing this for political purposes when he did it.

Every chance, Mr. Speaker, every opportunity that the hon. gentlemen opposite can get the chance, Mr. Speaker, is to try and put a knife into the backs of the federal government people, and this is just another attempts Mr. Speaker, nobody in Newfoundland doubts the importance of 5flfl? •1 LA

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2386 MJ - 1 MR. T. LUSH: the Northern cxd stocks to the fishermen of this Province nobody doubts that. But, Mr. Speaker, we would like to see the government going about it in a sensible manner of negotiating with the federal government and trying to come up with some system of managing the Norther cod stocks, some system of control control. MR. L. HEARN: What kind of control? MR. LUSH: That is what I would like to know. I have not heard hon. members talk about the system. I just have not gotten into the substance ,but I will get there. Mr.

Speaker, it is just another attempt to undermine the federal government. And the hon. member asked a good question because it is his side, it is the government that has brought in this motion,but to this date we have not heard one suggestion about the Northern cod as to the kind of stand they want the federal government to take. It says BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this government request the federal government to adopt a much more reasonable stand as it relates to the matter. ' What is the reasonable stand, Mr. Speaker? Is it a joint committee? Is it joint consultation? What is the reasonable stand, Mr.

Speaker? SOME HON._MEMBERS: Give it away! Give it away! MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, they are getting hot now because they know I am telling the truth. They know the real purpose for this resolution. They know the real purpose for this is to undermine Mr. Speaker, the federal government. To try and put a wedge between the Liberal party, the provincial irty and the federal party, that is the intention of it, Mr. Speaker. That is the intention of this resolution and, as I have said before, Mr. Speaker, it does not get to the substance of the problems experienced in the Newfoundland fishery. But, Mr. Speaker, 5003

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2386 MJ - 2 MR. T. LUSH: it again gives them the opportunity to duck out from their responsibilities. It is a cop-out, Mr. Speaker. It is another in their schemes of laying blames on the shoulders of others. As I have said,for the first four or five years it was to lay blame on the provincial Liberal Government. Now, in the last two or three years, they have a new whipping boy.

It is the federal Liberal Government, 'That government that is out to undermine Newfoundland, that is out to grab everything they can from us, that wants to take our oil, that wants to take our fisheries, that wants to take our forestry.' Mr. Speaker, that is their impression. What they have done, Mr. Speaker, they have been a more divisive factor in Canada then any other present day government. Mr. Speaker, what they have done is to arouse the animosity and the hatred of Newfoundlanders. They have aroused, Mr. Speaker, the basic and the most banal instincts that we have. This is what they have done, Mr.

Sneaker , that they have $ 500L4

November 17, 1982 Tape 2387 PK - 1 MR. LUSH: not done a thing, Mr. Speaker, in terms of developing the economy of this country, of this Province. They have not done a thing. They have only been a divisive factor both in this Province and in Canada as a whole. That is what has been going on, Mr. Speaker, giving the impression that the Federal Liberal Government is up there to grab everything from Newfoundland, the trio, Mr. Speaker, of Mr. Trudeau, Mr. Lalonde, and Mr. Chretien. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh MR. LUSH: That has been the impetus, Mr.

Speaker, that has been the substance of every move by this government, that has been the impetus and that has been the substance of everything that they have done all political1 Mr. Speaker, nothing for the economic benefit of the people of this Province,fishermen or otherwise. MR. TOBIN: I think you are a Liberal. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the way to solve this problem is through negotiations. I know this government know nothing about negotiations. They demonstrated that, Mr. Speaker, with their own workers, the teachers of this Province.

They have demonstrated they know nothing about negotiations, All they know anything about, Mr. Speaker, is confrontation, conflict,denegration, that is all they know anything about. Fighters, Mr. Speaker, fighters, that is what they are, great fighters but they are doing a lot of shadowboxing, Mr. Speaker, a lot of shadowboxing and they are not getting anywhere. t Now, Mr.

Speaker, as I said this resolution does not get to the substance of the problems in the Newfoundland fisheries, it does not get to the substance and quality of decisions that need to be mad?, the public decisions that need to be made to improve the fisheries in this 5005

November 17, 1982 Tape 2387 PK - 2 MR. LuSh: Province. It is just another one of their schemes in the furtherance of their battle with Ottawa,This power struggle, Mr. Speaker, and this is all it is, and come at a very appropriate time, Mr. Speaker, in the last two or three years when this government has not been doing anything, and it is a great way it is a great method to divert the public attention away from the performance and the record of this government. And that is all it is for, Mr. Speakers They have some great motherhood issues and Mr.

Speaker, theyare continuously trying to back us over here into a corner of supporting the federal government. Just look through the resolutions, Mr. Speaker, I ask you just look through the resolutions, Every resolution introduced by every member opposite got that twist on it, Mr. Speaker, in an effort to put a wedge between hon. members here and our federal colleagues, that is what every resolution does. Just read them down through, Mr. Speaker. We urge the federal government, we request the federal government. The federal government, Mr. Speaker, who has not done one thing for this Province. MR.

STAGG: That is true. MR. LUSH: What did they do this year? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. LUSH: How many millions will they spend in the fisheries this year? a 50 U

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2388 ah-1 MR.LUSH: low many millions? $20 million maybe, $30 million maybe, $40 million maybe, $50 million maybe, $60 million maybe, $65 million. That is what they are going to spend this year, in the area of $65 million. That mean, mean government Ottawa, that government that is trying to grab everything away from this Province, they are going to spend $65 million in the fisheries this year, $65 million is what they are going to spend. And, Mr.

Speaker, every time there has been a crisis in the fisheries in this Province,the federal government have come through and bailed us out.They did it in 1968, they did it in 1974 and they are coming forward again in 1982. MR. TOBIN: And so they should because they are the ones who gave the fish away. MR.LUSH: And, Mr. Speaker,'They do not do anything for us.

They are only spending, in addition to the $65 million that they put into the fishery, they are only spending another approximately $70 million in job creation in this Province this year, approximately $140 million in the fishery and in job creation programmes. And ,Mr.Speaker, the list can go on. MR.STAGG: - What about the motion? MR.LUSH: The motion, Mr. Speaker, we will get to the motion. There is nobody on the other side discussed it yet,but I will discuss it for this side. There is nobody on the other side who discussed this motion, Mr.Speaker.

But, Mr.Speaker, if I were to present this motion I would have said,

Be it resolved that both levels of government, the provincial government and the 5007

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2388 ah-2 MR.LUSH: federal government,develop a more harmonious , a more conciliatory stand with respect to the Northern cod stock: That is the kind of motion I would have presented, Mr. Speaker, but not honourable gentlemen opposite because they want to make their political Brownie points. They want to build up the hatred a little more throughout this province,they want it to build up a little more hatred, they want it to 5008

November 17, 1982 Tape 2389 NM - 1 p MR. LUSH: build up a little more animosity, they want it to build up a little more hatred against the federal government. That is what they want it to do, Mr. Speaker. MR. STAGG: What do you want to do? MR. LUSH: They want it to try and further alienate the people of this Province from the people of Canada. That is what this resolution warted to do, Mr. Speaker. MR. TOBIN: That is not true. That is not true. AN HON. MEMBER: You are not going to have enough time. MR. RIDEOUT: One minute left. MR. LUSH: Mr.

Speaker, the problems of the fisheries in this Province can be solved and they can be solved by this provincial government. MR. STAGG: No, that is not true. MR. LUSH: They can be solved by this provincial government, working co-operatively, working harmoniously, Mr. Speaker, with the federal government. And I believe that this provincial government should have some say with respect to the Northern cod stock. I believe they should - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. LUSH: - but this motion does not say that. This is to condemn the federal government, that is all, Mr. Speaker.

But I believe there should be consultation between both levels of government affecting the Northern cod stocks in this Province, and I think our spokesman said that we would recommend a joint management committee, Mr. Speaker, with respect to development of the Northern cod. And that is what we believe, Mr. Speaker, in that respect. We believe that there 5009

November 17, 1982 Tape 2389 NM 2 MR. LUSH: should be some consultation. But consultation has to be both ways, Mr. Speaker, it has to be both ways. Consultation is not going out and saying, "Do you agree with my proposal?" That is not consultation. That is not negotiation, Mr. Speaker, "Do you aqree with my pr000sal?" MR. RIDEOtJT: It is certainly obvious you do not agree. MR. LUSH: So, Mr. Speaker, I do not agree with this resolution because its purpose is not to develop the fisheries in Newfoundland, its purpose is to enhance, Mr. Speaker, its purpose is to enhance the image of the PC Party in this Province.

That is what it is for. It is not to improve or develop the fisheries in this Province. If it were it would have been worded accordingly, Mr. Speaker. If so it would have been worded accordingly. If this resolution, Mr. Speaker, was looking for our support it would have been worded in a way where we could have supported it. MR. RIDEOtJT: You are not reading it. MR. LUSH: But, Mr. Speaker, it was worded intentionally, it was intentionally worded so that we would not support it, just as the Premier worded the resolution, Mr. Speaker, to be wired to the Prime Minister last week, just the same as that was worded.

Because if the Premier wanted us to support that motion he would have worded it appropriately. 50111

November 17, 1982 Tape 2390 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, my colleagues have outlined the problems in the fishery, the problems that are outlined by everybody that I know in the fishery, marketing and processing. Now, it is good news to know today that we have no problem with marketing. It is good news today to know that we have no problems at all with marketing, Mr. Speaker, that we can market all over the world.

I always thought that our marketing was too restricted to one market, to the U.S. market, and that we were not selling our fish in the quantity that we should to other European countries, to Japan and Africa, Mr. Speaker. But it is good to know that we have these market problems solved. But, Mr. Speaker, no one knowledgeable in the fisheries is saying that today. No one knowledgeable is saying that we have more than enough markets for our fish. Nobody is saying that. MR. MORGAN: Why are the plants closing? There is no fish for the plants How stupid are you MR. LUSH: There are too many plants, Mr.

Speaker, too many plants, too many fishermen. MR. MORGAN: Why did the plant close? No fish SOME lION. NE4BERS: Oh, oh MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I do not happen to subscribe to that. That again is another very political issue. If I were dishonest I could go out and say, Yes, I would rather see 20,000 fishermen making $5,000 a year than 10,000 fishermen making $10,000,1but I am not going to be that hypocritical, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to be that hypocritical. This is why I say this resolution does not address the problems in the fisheries today, Mr. Speaker.

It does not address the problems in the fisheries today, far from it. 5011

November 17, 1982 Tape 2390 EC - 2 MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, we have to look at the supply, we have to look at the quantity of fish that we have and gear that supply to the numbers of people who can prosecute the fishery; but this government believes in an open policy, everybody get out and prosecute it. That is their policy, Mr. Speaker. They have identified two problems in the fisheries today and they are great Motherhood issues, great vote getters but they do nothing to develop the fishery. Problem one is the Northern cod,.because this is a way,again1where they can batter, Mr.

Speaker, and belt and beat the federal government; the other one is the licencirig system, so that again they can bash and beat and batter the federal government. Mr. Speaker, they do not talk about any of the areas under which they have jurisdiction. They do not talk about marketing, they do not talk about processing. Do not talk about processing, that is not a problem, Mr. Speaker. MR. TOBIN: I spoke on marketing, I spoke on processing, I spoke on harvesting. MR. LUSH: They do not talk, Mr.

Speaker, about trying to expand the responsibilities of the Canadian Saltfish Corporation to come in zith some sort of an idea for fresh and frozen fish in this matter, do not talk about that because marketing is not a problem. Well, Mr. Speaker, the fishermen of this Province are going to be delighted to know that marketing is not 5012

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2391 SD - 1 MR. LUSH: a problem. And many of the experts in the field of fishing today are going to be delighted to know that there is no marketing problem. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Order, please! I would like to inform the hon. member that his time has elapsed. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I just want to say in conclusion that with political will and with political courage this government can solve the problems which we experience in the fisheries today, that they can improve the fisheries, but as long, Mr.

Speaker, as they are only concerned about the next federal election, as long as they are only concerned, Mr. Speaker, with undermining the Liberal MP5 in Ottawa then they will never get anywhere. And the people of this Province will not believe them, they are losing their credibility day after day. People are beginning to see all of this brainwashing and all of this indoctrination, they are beginning to see it for what it is. But, Mr. Speaker, with political will and couraqe they can improve the fisheries in this Province. Thank you very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: hear, hear. MR.

SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. member for Fortune - hermitage. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, I wish to support the motion moved by my colleague from St. Mary's - The Capes • (Mr. Hearn). SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR._STEWART: And, Mr. Speaker, I might add for the member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush),who really spoke around the motion / therefore mostly for his beneitt I think I should read the motion. MR. DOYLE: That is right. That is right. 5 0 13

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2391 SD - 2 MR. STEWART: It reads:'WHEREAS the development of the inshore fishery is the only realistic way of solving rural Newfoundland's unemployment problems; and

WHEREAS Federal Government policy on the inshore fishery is detrimental to this effect, especially as it relates to the It harvesting of the Northern cod stock; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this Government request the Federal Government to adopt a much more reasonable stand as it relates to this matter.' I am sure that is pretty straight- forward, Mr. Speaker. MR. SI!4NS: That is not fed bashing, is it? MR. STEWART: Not really. Mr. Speaker, I represent a district that is totally dependent on the fishing industry and therefore it gives me great pleasure to support this motion.

The fishery has been the mainstay of the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador for centuries, managed properly it can be our economic base for generations to come. In the two decades, Mr. Speaker, after we joined Confederation, the fishery in Newfoundland underwent a tremendous decline. Offshore foreign fishing fleets using large factory trawlers almost wiped out our inshore fishery, a fishery on which, Mr. Speaker, hundreds of settlements in rural Newfoundland and Labrador depended. Under the Canadian Constitution the fishery comes under the jurisdiction of the federal government.

When Canada declared the 200-mile limit a few years ago it seemed that our fishery had been saved. Fish stocks started to increase in size and today the inshore fishery.- although I might add, Mr. Speaker, this is a very bad year - the fishery along the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador is growing more and more prosperous. However, ours is the only Province which has no say in its major industry, Even though the provincial Fisheries Department and the Fisheries 5014

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2391 SD - 3 MR. STEWART: Loan Board spend millions of dollars every years all the power over the fishery really rests with the federal government in Ottawa. MR. DOYLE: It is in the Constitution. MR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, even though we may not have much jurisdiction , this government has shown our concern and committment to the industry. For years the provincial Fisheries Loan Board has been the main source of financing for fishermen who need to purchase boats and gear.

The Province has maintained a Fisheries College and has conimitted itself to the construction of a world class Institute of Fisheries and Marine Technology. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. AN HON. MEMBER: Look at the empty benches they have over there. MR. STEWART: I know. Knowing all the good points I was going to bring out1 the Opposition all left, I agree MR. DOYLE: They knew you were coming. MR. STEWART: That is true. They knew I was coming on next. MR. TOBIN: They are not interested in the fisheries. MR. STEWART: True.

In January, 1982, the Province submitted to the federal government a request to undertake a comprehensive fisheries programme aimed at upgrading port infrastructure. This programme would concentrate on fishing facilities and infrastructure at a total cost of $144 million. MR. DOYLE: How much? MR. STEWART: One hundred and forty-four million. To date 5015

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2392 MJ - 1 MR. D. STEWART: the Province has recoived little or no reaction from the federal government as to its acceptability - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Shame, shame! It MR. STEWART: - Mr. Speaker, and it is unlikely that any reaction will be forthcoming until such a time a as the Kirby Task Force has completed its work. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to say a few words about the now-famous Kirby Task Force, which was appointed by the federal government to look into the problems of the whole fishing Lndustry in the Atlantic Provinces. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Oh, oh! 14R.L.SIMS: Mr.Speaker, tell them to be quiet. MR. STEWART: I might add, Mr. Speaker - MR. 'IMMS: Name them, Mr. Speaker! Name them! MR._STEWART. - this task force must have lost substantial credability Ghen it became involved in the bail out of the fish plant at St. Anthony, in the district, I think, of a federal Cabinet Minister. Is that right? MR. STEWART: That is right. MR. DOYLE: Who would that be? MR. SIMMS: Rumekey! MR. STEWART: Since then, Mr.

Speaker, this S same federal task force rejected applications for financia assistance from other financially troubled Newfoundland fish processing firms,including plants in my own district of Fortune - Hermitage. Not only that, what this federal government task force refused to get involved in with the 5016

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2392 MJ - 2 MR. D. STEWART: specific but major problems in the provincial fishing industry ,leaving the provincial government having to assist on its own over twenty-five Newfoundland fish processing firms by means of over $29 million in loan guarantees to enable these companies to reopen thrity-seven plants all around the Province in 1982. Mr. Speaker, contrary to what the member for Port au Port (Mr. J.

Hodder) said earlier in his comments, the provincial government has provided financial assistance, because as a provincial government we are firmly committed to the maintenance and development of our fishing industry for all the people of our Province. Now, Mr. Speaker, just to give an example of some companies which received financial assistance from government in 1981 and 1982, I would just like to outline a few of them: P.

Janes and Sons Limited, Hants Harbour - Jackson's Arm - number of plant employees 650, total amount of assistance $1,300,000; Greenspond Fish Processors Limited - Greenspond - 150 plant employees, $450,000; The Lake Group Limited - Bide Arm, Englee, Bonavista, Fortune, Grand Bank, Gaultois, Cook's Harbour, Baine Harbour, 2,500 employees, $5 million 5017

November 17,1982 Tape 2393 PK - 1 SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. STAGG: This government? MR. STEWART: This government. MR. DINN: What did the feds put in? MR. STEWART: They did not put anything in. William J. Burton Newfoundland Limited, Brig Bay, eighty employees, $150,000. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. STEWART: Newfoundland Food Processors Limited, Petty Harbour, 120 employees, $150,000. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. STEWART: Triton Seafood's Limited, Triton, 300 employees, $1,500,000. Ocean Harvester's Limited, Harbour Grace, again money guaranteed by this government, 800 employees, $2,500,000.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. STEWART: John Penney and Sons Limited, Ramea, on the South Coast, 390 employees, $3,300,000. Eric King Fisheries Limited, Burnt Islands, 130 employees, $150,000. MR.DOYLE: Had the federal government done their share we would not have to close down now. MR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the comment that the hon. membe just said, 'Had the federal government done their share we would not have to close down now.' MR. DOYLE: That is right. MR. STEWART: Tors Cove Fisheries, Tors Cove, . 300 employees, $50,000; Fishery Products Limited, Harbour Breton - MR.

DOYLE: In the hon. member's district. MR. STEWART: - in my district, a guarantee of over $100,000. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: 5fl 1 A.

November 17, 1982 Tape 2393 PK - 2 MR. STEWART: Cape Pine Fisheries, Witless Bay, Petty Harbour, 340 employees, $1,050,000. MR. ANDREWS: Yes, boy MR. STEWART: Atlantic Fisheries, Admiral's Beach, Dildo, 316 employees, $617,000. And the list goes on and on. But one more should be mentioned, Fisheries S Products Limited,two replacement trawlers; this government guaranteed $14 million for the replacement of two trawlers. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. TOBIN: When the federal government are sitting on a subsidy programme for trawlers, supported, aided and abated by the Liberal phonies here. MR. STEWART: True. Mr.

Speaker, the fish plants - MR. TOBIN: Go back to your plant in Trespassey. MR. STEWART: Mr. Speaker, the fish plants on the South Coast of this Province depend heavily on the deep-sea fishing efforts and the quotas alotted by the federal government,especially as they relate to quotas for the Gulf region. The small quota allotment for 1982 has seen a shutdown of the fish plant at Harbour Breton and surrounding communities.

And just to give an example of the hardships being experienced by the residents of Harbour Breton and surrounding coinxnunities,I would like to read a part of a letter sent to the new Federal Minister of Fisheries (Mr. De Bane) on October 7th. 1982, which really shows some of the concerns being expressed by residents in my district. And a part of it reads ' The envoked shutdown of its Harbour Breton operation by Fishery Products several months ago has brought the economy of this town to a virtual standstill and many residents face despair and court bankruptcy.

Construction and investment has come to a complete halt. Presently all facts point to a full production in January 1983. 'However, indications are that by 501

November 17, 1982 Tape 2394 NM - 1 'June of 1983 the plant will experience another low productivity level, similar to what the town is faced with today. This situation is totally unacceptable. Meetings with government and Fishery Products have been onctoine for quite some time, and the main thing learned from these meetings is that the problem is not financial, but rather lies with fish quota restrictions in our area. These quotas must be changed if we are to see full production at the Fishery Products Plant at Harbour Breton.

The present situation is aggravated by the lack of available species that we depend on which are now lost to other fleets in other areas. The lack of cod and redfish is a very important factor, particularly during the last six months of the year. Harbour Breton and surrounding communities have played a significant and stable role with the inshore fishery and it makes a great contribution to the plant's viability. However, the inshore fishery is not enough to maintain the plant's openinq for a twelve month operation.

The residents therefore request that you, the federal minister, initiate action to develop plans to provide the plant at Harbour Breton with a better resource share, review fleet requirements to catch the fish and to put the community on a more stable basis." MR. SIMMS: And what was his reply? MR. STEWART: This is from the LOL Lodge of Harbour Breton and to date I do not think they have even received a reply from the federal minister-which is standard. 11 MR. SIMMS: It should be brought to the minister's attention or something. MR. STEWART: It definitely should. 502fl

Noventher 17, 1982 Tape 2394 NM - 2 IF MR. STEWART: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, factors really beyond an" control made the past year critical for the fishing industry. Weakened market conditions, high interest rates, and really a failure of the inshore fishery in certain areas contributed to an unprecedented cost-price squeeze for most fishermen and processors. Although, Mr.

Speaker, being from the South Coast, where the large fish company draggers depend more on the Gulf region, Sydney Bight and qrand Banks for their supply of raw material, I realize, being from that area, that the survival of our inshore fishing industry depends largely on the availability of Northern cod. MR. ANDREWS: That is right. That is right. MR. STEWART: And really that means, Mr. Speaker, the survival of Newfoundland. MR. SIMMS: Right on. MR. TOBIN: The federal government has to get a policy of allocatinq quotas. MR. STEWART: Exactly. So, Mr.

Speaker, it is vital that Newfoundland gain control forever over the harvesting of the Northern cod stock because of the impact that this resource has on our economy. That point, Mr. Speaker, is also dealt with in great detail in the provincial government's resource management plan. The Northern cod stock is the sole basis of our cod fishery from Cape Chidley to Cape St. Mary's and contributes almost 60 per cent of the total inshore fishing effort. The Northern cod resource, for all practical purposes, has been fished exclusively from Newfoundland and Labrador, except Mr.

Speaker, in recent years when it was raped by foreign flag freezer-trawlers. MR. SIMMS: Shocking. MR. STEWART: The Northern cod must be reserved for the inshore and longliner fleets. 5021

November 17, 1982 Tape 2395 EC - 1 MR. STEWART: If these vessels cannot harvest all of the quota,then the surplus must be reserved for the offshore fleet who will land and process their catches in Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, the long and short of this is that while we may only have a lamb's share of the fishery jurisdiction, we certainly are shouldering the lion's share of responsibility. MR. ANDEWS: You can say that again: MR. STEWART: In concluding, I would just like to say that the fishery is more than just a business to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, it is and will always be our way of life.

Thank you. SOME HON. MEMBERS: I-lear, hear MR. FIISCOCK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): The hon. the member for Eagle River. MR. HISCOCK: Thank you kindly, Mr. Speaker. I do congratulate the speaker from Burin - Placentia West (Mr. Tobin) who just spoke. I do believe it was a good speech. IR. WALSH: His district is Fortune-Hermitage. MR. HISCOCK: Fortune-llermitagef I a1ologize. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh iR. HISCOCK: If I may, 11r. Speaker, I realize there is only one of this side and I 'aould not I mind having time to speak if members could be quiet for a little while.

As I was saying, with regard to the Fortune-Hermitage district, there has been a half decent speech but again, unfortunately, as the government have forty-four seats, it has been a little bit too political. 5022

November 17, 1982 Tape 2395 CC - 2 MR. HISCOCK: We are finding, Mr. Speaker, with regard to the debt of this nation of $20 billion and $70 million here in our own Province, that whatever way it is, with regard to the banks and with regard to El the private companies, unless we get rid of more rhetoric and have less political throwing the balls back and forth and blaming it on this one and blaming it on that one, we are not going to pull this country or this Province or these companies out of the mess that they are in.

And I, for one, as I said before, am not going to be going back and forth on this matter because it does concern the lifeblood of our province. But I will point out several things, that most of these companies are one com'any towns. And the letter from Harbour Breton, from the L.O.B.A. which said it is a one company town - so is St. Anthony, so is Labrador City, so is Grand Falls, so is Buchans, and unless the provincial government and the federal also, start looking for a greater base in diversifying the economy in some of our larger centres, we are going IF 5023

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2396 ah-1 MR.HISCOCK; to have these continual upheaval in bad times and we are going to see a great hardships as we have seen with regard to St. Lawrence, we have seen it with regard to Bell Island, we have seen it in other areas - Goose Bay. And if we continue to rely on just one primary resource, then the end result of course is we are going to be in a lot of trouble when we fall on hard times as we have. But with regard to the development of the inshore fishery it is the only realistic way.

I represent a fishing district and I believe very strongly that the fishing industry is the backbone but it is not the only answer. Tourism is also an answer. We have to get back more to agriculture, we have to get back more to other independent ways of life. We also have to get involved with more marketing of manufactured goods, we also have to look at other areas. And looking at all these resolutions when they were brought in,I was wondering if they were only brought in at the time because of the Royal Commission that was here by the government and also because of the Kirby Task Force.

When the house opened the last time it was a rather hot issue. If these were not put on the Order Paper more for political embarrassment than they were for in actual fact finding solutions, Now, of course, we find out that the solutions are not forthcoming and that the problem is more severe than it actually was at that time. The interest rates have gone down but the markets have not gone up. We still find out that we cannot compete with Iceland, we still find out that Americans prefer to eat hamburger, chicken 5024

November 17,1982 Tape No. 2396 ah-2 MR.HISCOCK: or other forms of non-fish diets because they are cheaper. We find also that Americans are now not concerned with eating one hundred pound cod blocks that are in storage for five or six months. They much prefer to have fresh fish that is flown out of Stephenville into California and other areas. So we are finding lifestyles are changing and if we Want to blame that on the federal government then we can. If we Want to blame that on the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan) here in Newfoundland we can but the reality is that this Province - if fishing is the backbone of our Province, we have to be very innovative , we have to find new ways and we have to be leaders in the world. We find now, Mr. Speaker, that down on Pier 17 we have a marine exhibition. MR.BAIRD: Pier 2. MR.HISCOCK: Pier 2. With regard to that, Mr. Speaker, I believe it is the first exhibition that we have ever had in our 400 year history. Is it no wonder that we are in the trouble that we are in?

Also in regard to our fishing,are we trying to find new markets or are we not?As happened with the fish strike, instead of trying to find solutions with it what did the provincial government do? Set up a Royal Commission and get rid of the hot potato and have an enquiry. Well maybe J If 5025

November 17, 1982 Tape No. 2397 lB-i MR. HISCOCK: the federal government has done the same thing by having the Kirby Royal CommLssion. Maybe that is the purpose of it. But whatever the purpose of the Royal Commission, or whatever the purpose of the Kirby Royal Commission, both of them were to study a severe, very sick industry which has gotten even worse. Now, Mr. Speaker, we are finding out that our mining industry is in trouble, our forest industry is in trouble, our manufacturing industry is in trouble.