PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE QF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number45 5th Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT MONDAY, MAY 10, 1971 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

May 101 1971 . Tape no. 558 Page 2 Mr. Murphy. tremendous outlay or a tremendous project to undertake and I certainly support it as I did, I think, the year before last. I do not know about last year but I certainly support the prayer of the petition and I trust "that the Minister of Highways will see his way clear,with all the free money we have now, to do something for the people of Port Anson. On motion petition received. JION. E. JONES (MINISTER OF FINANCE): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition on behalf of the people of Musgrave Barbour, Doting Cove and Ragged Harbour.

The petition has been presented by the Musgrave Barbour Economic Development Committee,through their secretary Mr. Randolp Abbott. The petition is signed by 692 of a possible 1S0 voters in the area. The prayer of the petition is that the Newfoundland Government, the Government of the Province of Newfouudland,support the development of that part of Musgrave Harbour known as Flynn's Tickle as a harbour for the inshore fishermen. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to point out that my reason for presenting it here in this House is that there 1 a local Provincial inwlvment,, that a road is necessary to reach the particular area. For the last past sixteen years, I believe, the fishermen of Musgrave Barbour, Doting Cove and to a lesser degree Ragged Barbour, have been dependini; on the coaaunity stage at Doting Cove as a landing facility.

Unfortunately, during lut winter's storms considerable damage was done to the structure there and,in addition to the damage done, the wharf has been practically inundated with sand,so that at the present time only about one-third of the fishermen in the area are able to use the whar~ or stage at Doting Cove. It is very unlikely, Mr. Speaker, that the authorities will decide to replace this stage becaus• of its exposed location It is for this reason that they are asking that a nev development in.Musgrave Harbour itself be 3001

May 10, 1971 Tape no. 358 Page 3 Mr. Jones. undertaken. The fact that 692 voters out of a possible 750 shows that it has complete support of the three coDDunities. I heartly endorse the prayer of this petition, Mr. Speaker.and ask that it be laid on the table of the House and referred to the departments to which it relataa. MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to add out support to this. As I understand, we received many petitions from both sides of the House with reference to Federal projects. I am sure that the House would be unanimous in supporting the prayer presented by the hon. minister.

It will give it I think a bit more weight in the House of Commons. On motion petition received. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS. MR. J. CHALKER (MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS) Mr. Speaker, I have the answer for Question No. 536.on the Order Paper of April 28, asked by the hon. member for St. John's Centre and also the answer to Question No. 539,asked by the hon. member for Burin,on the Order Paper of May 3. This last question, Sir, deals with the extension to the Science and Engineering Building at the University, which the House knows was a negotiated contract.

I believe God was on our aide at that time becauae,even with the strike now that delayed the construction of that building for a over a month, we still, we will still have it open in time for this September. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, "An Act Further To Amend The British Newfoundland Exploration Limited (Petroleum And Natural Gae) Act, 19631 " read a first time, ordered read a second ·,I time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, "An Act Further To Amend The Agreement Confirmed By And Set Forth In The

Schedule To The Frobisher Limited (Confirmation Of Agreement) Act, 1955 And To Make Certain Provisions Relating To That Agreement," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On aotion that the House go into Com:1.ttee of the Whole on Supply, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. 3002

May 10, 1971 Tape no, 358 Page 4 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON SUPPLY, HON. F, W. ROWE (MINISTER OF EDUCATION): Mr.Chainun, I understand that we are on 612~14. Mr.

Chairman, I understand that there was some information requested on that particular item, I would be very glad to give that information as requested, As I understand it from the deputy minister - a breakdown of that $8 ··million, The latest figures from the denominational authorities indicated: (If any of my hon. friends care to jot down these figures, I can give them here) ther~ are four groups invol"\).ed here now;involving some six, seven churches, The Integrated group,which is the largest group, involves, of course, the Anglican Church and the United Church and the Salvation Army.

I think they make up something like fifty-nine per cent of the population. As the committee knows, these grants are made on a per capita basis to the various churches. lt must be aade on thRt basis,under the law of Newfoundland and under the law of Canada. The Integrated group w-4.ll receive $4.8 million of that $8 million, They vill receive $4,8 million of that, They have committed themselves to the banks to pay $1.l of that in respect of past credits, past loans, so that $3.5 million will be devoted to new buildings, new schools or additions to existing schools - $3.5 million.

Thece ia $1.3 million•.committed and $3.5 million for new buildings. (I am not going too fast am 1?) Thei•next largest group of the four would be the Roman Catholic group. I think the Roman Catholic population of Newfo1D1dland amounts to something as thirty-six per cent, thirty-six point something per cent. The figure!. , that is always used is the previous census, the nearest census, of course. That gives the Roman Catholic Church $2.8 million of the $8 million. They inform us that they will be ueing $1.5 million of that for existing commitments and $1.3 million will go into new buildings.

The Pentecostal Church, I think, they make up about four or five per cent of the population. Their share of that $8 will be $380,000 of which they have already committed the entire - I am sorry, of which they have comnitted half. They have agreed 3003

May 10, 1971 Tape DO, 558 Page 5 Mr. Rowe (F. W. ) to plly half of that other share .. to the banks, to their financial creditors, $190,000,and $190,000 will go for new buildings. The Seven Day Adventist-which is also entitled - ·they are entitled to $10,400. They represent a very small group. But nevertheless they are a group with the saae rights as any .of the larger ones. They tell us that they have committed $10,400 to the banks and that they will be paying that to the banks, I understand. That gives us a total Mr.

Chairman, of $3 million c011111itted or $3 million to be paid to the banks in respect of existing cOllllitments. and $4,990,000 which for all practical purposes, $5 million for new buildings, new extensions to present buildings, making a total of $7,990,400 which is approximately $8 aillion. That is the information as I understand it1 and I aa very happy to be able to give that information. MB.. EAILE: In connection with the hon. minister's anawer, Mr.

Chairman, the grants given to the different boards, which he has broken down for ue, I asked the question as to whether there had .been any commitment in writing for future payments given to other than one denomination? 7 understand that one denomination has been given more or leas a warranty, in writing to a trust company ,that' . they will get certain amounts. Bas that been done in the case of other denominations? 3004

May /c,l 1971 PK - 1 MR.ROWE: F.W. This c011D11itment incidentally,which over the years the Government has been very happy to give when requested, they first gave in respect of our regional central high school programme, when they gave it to them in writing, our assuarance that we would asking the House to vote $1 million a year. I have given this assurance to all the churches,through their denominational c011D11ittees, the first one to ask was,to my recollection, the Pentecostal, but the others~sked as well. I am very happy to write them formally to state to them.

In fact, I think, I have sent them a copy of the Order-in-Council which states that it is the intention of the Government to request the House to vote this amount over the next six years, and that information has been given in writing to all the churches,through their d~oa:inational education committees. MR. CROSBIE: In connection with this vote, Mr. Chairman, the amount of $8 million, as the minister says, $5 million is to be used for new buildings~ equipping of new schools or classrooms this year, $3 million is to repay money spent in the past to build new schools or equipment.

So would the minister agree then that the SlDD of $8 million is not for the building and equipping of new schools or classrooms this year? Five million is for that purpose. Could the minister tell the House, Mr. Chj,irman, the amount expended last year und~r this same vote for $7,440,300, would that be used also for the same purpose, partly to repay loans and partly for new buildings? The same would apply there, then would it not? MR. ROWE, F.W.

Perhaps, I should have mentioned there,in connection with commitments, the commitments might very well be in respect to schools actually under construction at this moment, in IIOllle cases schools that have not come into UN and which will be coaing into us.a in the next three months or six months or twelve months, as well, but commitments for which they had to get credit from the bank• They will be able of course ,to meet these commitments to the banks out of thetr Bhare of the$ 8 illion. MR. CROSBIE: Well, Mr.

Chairman, it is quite clear then that the statement in the Budget Speech,that ,the House was asked this year to authorize the spending of $8 million, almost doubled last year's vote,ia not correct, {1) because 3005

May D, 1971 Tape 559 (morning) PK - 2 MR. CROSBIE: last year's vote was $7,440,000 1 it was $4.150,000 in the estimates a year ago, but the Government,by Lieutenant -Governor's warrants,increased that to $7,440,000. So that when the Budget Sp~ech states that the House has been asked to vote double the amount this year, doubled last year's amount, that is not a correct statement. Actually, we are being ask to vote $560,000,we are being asked to vote 'lllOre this year than last yea~for this purpose.

Also, that the Budget Speech is quite wrong when it implies that all thia $8 million is for the equipping of new schools ar classrooms. Three million of it is to repay loans for new buildings or classrooms that have already been erected. So that the Budget Speech, in wording .the Budget Speech of ·page 20 in that way, a statement made in the Budget Speech was quite misleading. What the minister says today confirms that. Now, Mr.

Chairman, now that the minister is back, he missed some of the discussion last Friday, but the Minister 1 in February 1971,in his news­ letter, Department of Education Newsletter, said that he was initiating studies in consultation with a view to having the government take over, without , r prejudice to denominational right~ 1 full and total financial responsibility for the construction of all schools. Plus eliminating school assessments and discrimatory school taxes of all kinds whatsoever. Since February 1971, has the minister had this question studied? If so, by whom?

And the minister will recall that he said,earlier in this Session in the House,that this would take several years to complete these studies and iiscussions. Row,as the minister knows,the Government's policy in this matter was outlined by the Premier on Thursday evening,at 'which time the Premier said it was the Government's policy to take over all these costs of construction. Could the minister advise us on whether the studies,he said_ where going to · be done, whether they had been done or what happened i~ that connection?

Because the Government have now announced this is the policy, it is not going to take two years to study it or consult with people, this is the Government's Declaration of Policy. 3006

May 10, 1971 Tape 559 (morning) PK - 3 MR, CROSBIE: Mr, Chairman, would the minister have and could he table in the House some accurate figures on what the present debt position of the various denominational school boards are . in connection with past construction of schools? We were given fi~ures the other day,verbally by the Premier,as to what their total indebtnessed was, and the Premier suggested $20 million. Obviously, this must be known to the Department of Education, just what is the amount of debts of various school boards, the denominations, that would have to be taken over?

Could the minister tell us and table in the House the exact amount of money that is now collected by the various school tax authorities and by the various school boards as assessments? We have heard that these figures amount to $1 million each.

It is easy enough to say th~t, but can we have tabled in the House, for example, for last year,the year that ended March 31, 1971, what actually was collected by all the school boards of the Province, as assessments or in any other way moneys to go towards the operation of schools and a statement of what the school tax authorities actually collected last year for school purposes? Because, obviously, Mr. Chairman, this is a very important point, if the Government are going to take over the full construction cost of schools. We asked the hon. the Premier, we did not get a satisfactory answer Friday.

So these figures must be available in the Department of Education, and I would like to see the exact figures. It seems to me that $2 million - the suggestion that the various school boards and the denominations of this Province only collect $1 million now in the way of school assessments and in any other way towards the school they operate, :t'he suggestion that school tax authorities only collect $1 million seems low. The minister's department should have the exact figures there. So can the minister give us some more information on that? MR.

ROWE, F.W, Mr, Chairman, I am very glad to make a comment on points made by the hon. gentleman. He asked about the study, the initiation of studies in respect of the possiblility of taking over full responsibility of capital cost of schools in Newfoundland. We have had, I do not know, 3007

May 10, 1971 Tape 559 (morning) PK - 4 MR. ROWE, F.WT how to put this, we had several talks with our Denominational Policy Commission. Perhaps, I should not remind the committee, because under our legislation there are two main educational bodies in the Province, (1) the General Advisory Committe, which has the right to advise the Government on all matters of education policy; the other is the Denominational Policy Co11U11ission, which must be consulted, which must be, not may be, but must be consulted by law on all matters pertaining to the rights and privileges of the churches.

This Policy Commission meets fairly often, I suppose, certainly we meet every two or three months,at any rate, not so often as the General Advisory Commission, which meets once a month regularly, on schedule. The Committee might be interested to know that I have a meeting, (the minister is Chairman of the General Policy Commission, that Denominational Policy Commission is made up of the Minster and the Deputy Minister and the representatives of each of the recognized churches or church bodies) that Denominational Commission will be meeting, as it happens,on tomorrow morning.

This is purely coincidental, The meeting was planned a month ago or more, It meets tomorrow morning and one of the items on our agenda will be precisely this matter. The hon. gentleman said that I said, lt would take two or three years. I did not say that. I said it could take.~I do not know how long it would take. I am only going by my past experience with matters so complicated as ownership and title, and so on to schools. My feeling is - it was two or three years, for e}Sample, it required for the various St. John's Boards to unite.

The two United Church Boards were negotiating and bickering for two or three years before they came together. The same thing applies to the two Anglican Boards, as the member for Fortune Bay will recall 1 the same thing applied, oF course, to the Roman Catholic Boards. But here this is a matter thathas required pretty careful investigation and consideration. We do not know how long, but I would suspect it would take a year,these studies, at least a ·year •. This is an informed opinion, sharedJI might say,by others. It could very well take a couple of years, if the thing were 3008

May 10, 1971 MR, ROWE, F.W, eventally done. • Tape 559 (morning) PK - 5 At no time did the Premier say that this would be done. The Premier did not say last Thursday night that it would be done. He sai~. - the Government's Policy is to do this, if the churches are willing.

They have no policy at all, no intention in the world of going along to the and say; "here we are, going to take your school~-~-• Of- course not. churches The other question the hon, gentleman asked is about the income, the receipts, I have the figures here just given to me - last year the total, from assessments and from taxes,came fo almost exactly $2 million. The figures submitted to us by the church authorities, the audited statements in fact submitted to us.

Now the other question\ as I said the other night, it is well known. that,at the present time, roughly the Province is divided about half in • assesS111ent areas and school tax areas. Now this is not a decision.of the Government, this is a decision of the local authorities, So far, for example, St. John's, no board in St. John's has requested the Government to set up school tax authority in St. John's, unless they did it on Friday, when I was not here. And other areas have requested and in most cases these requests have been granted.

Before any request is granted 1 of course, the matter is allowed to lie dormant for several months in order to receive public opinion, public representation on the matter. Now about the debt;the last figure that I had that I saw,and I want to stress again the debs of the churches are their own priv~te concern. I will speak frankly it isnoneof my business and I say no business of any member of this House _ what ~xactly the Roman Catholic Church owes in respect to Brother Rice High School. I do not think it is anybody's business - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. ROWE, F.W. Pardon me?

What would then matter would be the gross amount, whether the church owes so much on Brother Rice and so much.on St. Michael's and so much on St. Catherine's.in Grand Falls ,and so much on Regina ·in Corner Brook. That, I think, is immaterial and certainly I do not think it 3009

May 10th. 1971 Tape 559 (morning) PK - 6 ~[R. ROWE, F.W. is even our business. Sut it would be our business, if we were going to take it over, when we do talk about taking it over, is how much are we getting involved in, how much are we involving and the credit of this Province for? The last figure - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. ROWE, F.W. Pardon me? MR. MURPHY: Where did the figure $20 millions come from? the Government MR. ROWE, F •. W. Thia is the last figure we got from them, the gross.

They have no hesitation, at least they have informed us from time to time, while __ they owe 'x"million d~llars,(when I say "they" I mean the particular church~ I am not sure the Pentecostal Church o·r the Roman Catholic Church would want me to state publicly here now, assuming I had the figure here, that the Roman Catholic Church owes"x"million dollara'in,respect of education. ~ut . r I do not see anything wrong with giving a gross figure here. It has already been g•iven. The gross figure is something just over, I have not got it recently, within recent months, the last figure was just over $20 million. AN HON.

MEMBER: All of them. MR. ROWE, F.W. Yes, all of them put together, the total indebtedness in respect to schools,and some of that indebtedness,as my hon. friend from Burin knows,goes back a number o~ years. Maybe, some of these debts have been rolled over the years. But, tne grosa is $20 million, which I would _ suggest, Mr. Chairman, is not such a tremendous amount of money,considering. r.or exampl,e;even this year we.'.are voting here, I hope we will vote $8 million, alone that is additional and that does not include any monies that might be pent under the DREE programme. MR.

MURPHY: It is a lot of money when we have not got it. MR. ROWE 1 F.W. Oh, yea', ~e•• it is a lot of money. ', It is a lot of money, but relatively I do not think it is a frightening amount. MR. RICKEY: Mr. Chairman, when we adjourned the debate on Firday, I was attempted to ask questions regarding this item. One was in connection with the involvement of the Federal Government, as it applies to P.ducation in the Province. The Government have indicated, the Government do not get involved in terms of determining policy, 3010

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 560 NC - 1 MR. HICKE"I: as far as education is concerned. I believe a better way of putting it would be,the Province is free to determine its own course with regards to education. Now Sir. in connection with the building of schools, I feel this is rather illportant and I think it should be clearedJonce and for all,because there is confusion in the minds of a great number of people in the Province.

CertainlyJwith the suggestion that the Government is now contemplating the take over of the schools through­ out the Province, ~t would lend even more support to the suggestion that there is a danger of the Federal Government becoming very much involved. Mr, Chainaan, I aa not making those statements. I am not ' •aying that this is the case. I 1111 asking the qqeat:1.on. I have asked it on three previous occasions. Just what ia the meaning of the term free-accesa •chool? The Prelder tells on the one hand that the Federal Government baa little or nothing to do with education in the Province.

The amount of money it is 1oing to cost, if the Government takes over those schoolsJ ia a large sum. Tbe first queation obviously must be. where does the money come from? Does the Federal Government get involved insofar as this amount is concerned and,if so1 what do they demand in return? Bow much will they dictate to us in terms of our running our schools? Because Mr.

Chairman, there is one fact ,insofar as school construction, in the . '"' building of schools and that is that we have already a school under conatructioo,which the Fecleral Government is very 11111ch involved in, (In that particular instance, Sir, the Federal Government, they do not ask us. they tell us what type of school that is and what type of school that vill be and who will attend that school. That school. Mr. Chairman. happens to be right in my district, and that school is termed a free-access school. 3-011

May 10, 1971 (Homing) Tape No. 560 NC - 2 HR.. HICKEY: Now, Mr. Chairman, as far as I am concemed,that is a fancy phrase - a free-access school. It is a public school. Why does the Federal Govemment, or the Province, for that matter, use this phrase! BON. PREMIER: Inaudible. HR. HICKEY: It is not from Ottawa. I realize that, Mr. Chairman, I realize that. I am just asking that the Minister clear the air .on this matter.

It is as much for the benefit of.the Government, in fact it is quite possibly more for the benefit of the Government, that this matter be clarified, Becauae if we are.not getting involved in the public school system to any degree then ve should say so. ~ I have said in this House before; it is not for me to say that it is a poor system. I am not saying that I am against it or for it. I am not taking any stand for or agaiut. ill.•I am saying is, and all I am asking is that the term be defined, that we clear the air on the whole issue and that we acknowledge that a free access-school is in fact a public school.

Now where this fancy phrase caM from or who dreamed it up, I do not know,but certainly it is a cause of coacem to a great number of people. I think the Minister would be well advisect. and the Government would be well advised to clear the air on this matter because,if they do not, the situation is going to develop whe.re1>y a great number of people are going to arrive at the conclusion that we are slowly but surely getting to the public school system.~ Certainly if we are going to do it. then we ahould come out in the open and say so.

We should not allow ourse~ves to aet i~volved in it under the heading of such things as free-access schools. The school that I refer to,Mr. Chairman, as I said,is located in-, district. My understanding is that children of all deaominations vill attend that school. Otherwise the Federal C:OVemment would not have 3012

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 560 NC - 3 MR. HICKEY: involved themselves in the cost of construction of that school. What lam asking is,primarily, will this be the case in future? If the Federal Government gets involved in paying part of the cost or all the cost of future construction of school, will they dictate that children of all denominations attend? Or are the churches relinquiahing their rights under the Terms of Union. MR. SMALLWOOD: They do not dictate that they attend, They dictate only that if they wish to attend they may. MR. HICKEY: Yes, it is •the sae. It is the same difference. MR.

SMALLWOOD: Free access, access, access, not orders. MR. HICKEY: Right, the school is a•ailable. It is free for all children, of all denominations. But the important question is, Sir ••• MR. SMALLWOOD: Because the Government of Canada never did adopt denominational education/as the Government did in Newfoundland a hundred years ago and ever since, but not in Ottawa. MR. HICKEY: Will the Federal Government demand thi~ _ ~hat future schools that are constructed be of this type~ if.' so,are the churches relinquishing their rights under the _Terms of ,JJnion or is it being pushed down their throat?

This is the question ._ which# in my view. is a very important one and I think it should be answered. MR. ROWE (F .W .) : Perhaps we can deal with that before we move on. There are two points I would make~ I would repeat the point made by the Minister of Community and Social Development the other night, that we have it in writing-£rom Ottawa that no matter what phraseology or terminology, what construction might be put on it, they cannot interfere with the laws of Newfoundland and have no intention of trying to do so. That is number one. MR. SMALLWOOD: Under term nineteen. MR.

ROWE: They have no intention anyway of trying to do so. We have 3013

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 560 NC - 4 MR. ROWE: that in writing. There is no problem there. I suggest that there is not any problem here. There is no problem here. My understanding is that the various church authorities are quite happy with the statement that we have in writing from the Government of Canada. I do not think there is any problem here at all. I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, two things on it,and I hope my hon. friend will not miscontrue what I am going to say now. I would suggest that this is not strickly in order,under this particular item.

This is $8 million of Newfoundland money we are asling this Bouse to vote. It has no more connection with DREE, or DREE policy, than it has with landing on the moon, no more. I WQ!dd suggest, and again I am not irying to evade this thing, when we have to debate later on, we have to debate DREE funds, ~ey are all right here in this book here, including the DREE funds for schoola. That bas to come up here! It seems to me that, apart from the fact that it has nothing to do with the $8 million, this is not the time to debate DUE policy.

The $8 million has no reference in the world to the DREE programme, not in the world, no policy at all. This $8 million will be spent by the churches on schools which they own one hundred per cent and will continue to ovn,unless the time should come when they would ask the Government of Newfoundland to take over the ownership.

I want the hon. gentleman to understand, I appreciate the points he is making here, these are things that people are bound to ••• I do not think that the DUE involvement in Newfoundland will inpinge on or will interfe12with, in the slightest iota, the guaranteed rights of the churches,as we have it in our legislation. We have it in writing from the Government of Canada that they have no intention, they recognize they cannot interfere, no matter 3014

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 560 NC - 5 MR, ROWE: ---- what

interpretation is put on. On the other hand, the Government of Canada has to be pretty wary as well, T:hey are treading new ground too. I think this is appreciated by everybody. I know it is appreciated by the heads of the churches. I can go this far and say this; that 1 know that the Reads of the Churches, by one Head,I am not thinking juat of any one man either, I mean generally the Ecclesiastical Heads in Newfoundland, feel that this DREE involvement is a tremendous breakthrough in education. The first time~ it is a tremendous breakthaough in that Ottawa is channelling help in here.

I do not think, certainly I have no reason to think. they have any apprehensions about this thing here. I think if the crunch came that they are quite capable of sticking up for their rights,as they have done in the past. Finally,again I repeat. that I do not think that this is. the time, under this item, to be debating DREE policy, anyway. MR. MARSHALL: There is one other matter that I would like to bring up.in view of what the hon. Minister said.

It has been reported to me, I pass it on for what it is worth, that many members of the Armed Services here, that school assessments for Armed Services personnel are usually paid by the Federal Government,for the parents of the pupils in other Provinces. But for some reason or other, the Federal Government is refusing, add I say I am just passing this on, is refusing Co pay the school assessments here in Newfoundland,because they have to deal with too many church eodies. This is the reason that is being given to me,and I am not putting it forth as the reason but it is t~e ostensible reason for it.

Now the personnel, the Service personnel in Newfoundland, then·\are about two hundred families, I understand, some of them have paid their assessments,some of them have not paid their assessments and refuse 3015

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 560 NC - 6 MR. MARSHALL: to pay them because they do not think it is fair. They think it is discriminatory that the Federal Government would pay for one Province and not the other.

I am just wondering if the Minister is aware of this and if so, I think that steps should be taken with the Federal Government because, of course, it is not for the Federal Government to dictate to this Province the type of educational system and arrangements that we will have. ~ _ROWE: We have had a couple of representations on this matter come in, in fact,to the Deputy Minister in two specific cases, the draft of servicemen coming and complaining to us about Federal Government policy and we told them we had nothing to do with Federal Government policy at all in this regard.

There was not very much we could do about it. However, if my hon. friend thinks that this matter · is serious enough, and,even if it involves only one,I think it is, I see no objection to our contacting the Federal authorities, indeed to writing them. I would be quite prepared to write to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and draw to his attention the complaints that we have received, the complaints of discrimination in this respect. It is only complaints, as far as we know._ ~e ·.have no evidence.

Just a man comes in and says; "they are not treating me as well as they are treating my buddy over in Germany or over in Saskatchewan," So we would be very happy indeed to take that up formally, 81\d I am sure the Deputy Minister will make a note of that and we will take it up formally with the Government of Canada. MR. MARSHALL: If I could just end that, I would certainly appreciate the Minister taking this up. I realize the Government is not responsible for Federal policy but the Federal Government has jurisdictioQ here in Newfoundland 1 aa we all know.,and pays and supports the educational system, either 3016

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 560 NC - 7 MR. MARS!!:ALL: directly or indirectly,through funds. Now with this, you know, this particular thinking, I do not think that the Government, I do not think any Newfoundlander will go along with it, if the reason is that they are not paying these assessments, purely and simply because in this Province they have to deal with too many achool boards.

If they will pay it in one province because there is a public school system and,not in another because we have a denominational system, if this is the thinking behind the Federal Government's action in this matter, I think the Government should take it up, and take it up very, yery strongly with Ottawa, that Ottawa is not to make these types of judgments with respect to our own particular affairs. So I would appreciate the Minister taking it up. MR. ROWE: Mr. Chairman, I would be very happy to follow that up.

I might say that if that is the excuse that the Federal people are using, that they would have to deal with individual boards or a multitude of boards, that does not hold water, because in that case there is no reason why they could not deal directly with us or, for that matter 1directly with, say,the four denominational authorities concerned. Surely there could not be .any objection to dealing with four bodies. But we would be very happy to be the go-between there. We will follow that up still further, Mr. Chairman. MR. EARLE: Mr. Chairman, 3017

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (morning) PK - 1 MR. EARLE: I want to turn for a moment to this matter of taking over the capital cost of school construction. I agree with the minister that it is a very complicated and an involved thing. Actually, I think the Government now admits that they are just beginning to examine it, and it may take a year, two years, three years or whatever it is.

I did recall that the idea of such a thing ,which was so vague was reviewed at the Development Conference, but, ' . be that as it may, there are still a few basic questions on this, which I think- have to be answered to the satisfaction of this House. For instance, while it has been stated that $2 million would more or less cover the amount that was collected by way of taxation and assessments, for years, 8f course, that may or may not be the amount, but over the next five years it will certainly increase a great deal more than $2 million.

The point which I would like to make is that the churches,themselves,. over the years have contributed very, very heavily to the construction of schools which they now occupy. Having put many millions of dollars into it which they have_collected from their parishioners through collections, bingos what have you, all sorts of things, they now own a very, very substantial plaritthroughout the country. physical assets, so there are millions and millions of dollars.

Has any consideration been given at all, at this stage, to the fact of what it may cost to take that over or will the churches just agree 1 for future commitments 1 to take over the cost of schools, ;Are they going to pass over the complete plan that they already have or do they expect to be compensated in some way by the Government for what they have put into these plans? In that connection, it is related to it; I think the minister at one time said that his department is now developing a good planning and construction division.

When he aaswers me, I wonder would he inform the House just how far that has gone, have they got actually in the department - MR. ROWE, F.W. Item 614. MR. EARLE: Item 614 - All right, I will leave that question until later on, under 614? But the first ~uestion is, what has been considered, if any at this stage, about the capital investments which the churches already have in these plans? Has there been any discussion at all on this aspect of it? aOlS

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (morning) PK - 2 MR. ROl~F., F.W. I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, we cannot make anything more out of this matter than what has already been said, which is that the Government have indicated its willingness, assuming that there can be mutal / agreement between the Government and the churches, on the terms, . so .:to speak, willingness, as a matter of policyJto take over the complete responsibility for the building of schools. Now the very points, the very question the hon. gentleman just raised, and very real questions. Of course a man with his background is bound to raise those questions.

This is what this is all about. These are the matters that would have to be discussed. These are the matters that would have to be negotiated, and they have not been touched on,of course they have not been touched. MR. EARLE: Why is the thing announced, if it has not been - MR. ROWE, F.W. Well, it was announced as a matter of policy and there was a qualification • '1'he qualification is,assuming the churches are willing, assuming this mutual agreement between the two bodies.

We have no intention in the world, there is nothing in these estimates about this policy, not one single cent in these estimates has any relation to that particular announcement, none whatever. We have nothing to hide about it. There is no reason to discuss it, lt has not been accepted. I do not think it is in order anyway for us to be discussing it. But, these questions, these very questions, I would suggest,would have to be dealt with, would have to be handled by a joint committee.

If there is willingness in this regard.on the part of the chuJches, the joint committee would be set up with pretty thorough powers to look into the matter and, of course, with plentj ~· of time and plentj'. ·/ of resources. MR. EARLE: Surely all that should have been done before anything - MR. ROWE, F.W. Well, that is a matter of opinion. MR.SMALLWOOD: Mr. Chairman, I would like to add a word to what has been said, and the word that I would add is; "the policy of the Government to assume all costs of building and equipping schools." That is our policy. We have adopted that policy.

Now carrying out the policy, putting it into effect, will depend on having the concurrence of the churches. The churches are the owners,of the schools. They have gone heavily into debt to build schools 3019

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (morning) PK - 3 MR. SMALLWOOD: and long before they went into debt they collected money. The money that the churches have found with which to build and equip schools is not merely the money that they borrowed, We all know, if we know anything we know that for many decades the churches have raised money that they did not borrow. They raised it. They raised it by means of collections. They raised it by means of picnics, garden parties, plays, social,. They raised it by means of sweepstakes and bingos. They raised it by many, many means,to build schools.

Then,in addition to that, they borrowed money. Now they own .those schools. I would make a guess, and it is only a guess~ if you were to take all those schools in Newfoundland today,80Q 1 900 school buildings equipped, that are owned by the churches~and put a valuation on them, which could be done; you would find that,even with all the tens of millions of dollars that the Newfoundland Government has passed over to the churches on the authority of this House in recent years, the churches still have put in more than half the money that has been put in the building and equipping of those schools.

And less than half of the money that has gone into them has come from the Government; over half. Now the more than m .half that the churches put in, they obtained 1 various ways, including borrowing. The borrowing that they have done, I would imagine would be the smallest part of their source. Now the churches own these schools, the buildings and the equipment · in them.

When it becomes a question of the Government assuming the full cost of building schools in future and equipping them and enlarging schools and equipping the enlargement, when that happens therehasto be settled the question of the existing schools and the title to them. Now it may be, I suggest only that it may be the case,that . the churches would be interested only in what went on inside the walls of those school buildings.

It is conceivable that they might not be a bit interested in the title to the land on which the building stood, the title to the buildings and the title to the equipment and paraphernalia inside the buildings. Their genuine interest would lie in what happened, the functioning of schools within those buildings~that it would be less in the property and more in the quality of the education inside of the 3020

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (morning) PK - 4 MR. SMALLWOOD: property. But, Mr. Chairman, that is for them to decide,is it not? And the Government have adopted a policy of assuming full responsibility for all future construction and enlargement of schools and equipping the schools. Full responsibility,that is our policy. We have adopted it. We are not carrying it out into this year's estimates, possibly not in next year's estimates, hut it is our policy. When will we carry it out? When we have the concurrence of the religious bodies. That is it. It is as simple as that. When will we have .that concurrence?

That is more than we know. There are practical questions to be settled by the churches themselves. The most we have had up to now is preliminary discussion with them, and we have had .. preliminary discussion. We have had that, but the discussion will have to become far more detailed and we will probably last a year or two, or maybe _even longer.

I would not imagine that it would last more than a year or two, Also let me say this, finally; that the Government's taking over full financial responsibility for the future constriction of schools or enlarging of existing schools and equpping,either . or both, does not necessarily involve the Government acquiring title to any schools even those that it would then build. Any more , than, for instance, the Government of Canada,in giving money for the construction of schools in this Province, which they are doing this year, would acquire title to those schools, those buildings, those properties.

It does not follow at all, not necessarily follow that the Government of Newfo\ll\dland,taking on full responsibility, financial responsibility for future construction and extention and equipping,would have to acquire title, either to the achools that have already been built previously or those to be built at the full cost of the Government. It does not follow ~ We are in Newfoundland for over a century operating under a denominational school system. We still are. An integrated school is just as much a denominational school as one that is not integrated with others.

We are under the denominational school system, If, as and when that s~stem disappears - if, as and when, which I do not expect to see in my lifetime, I do not 3021

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (morning) PK - 5 MR. SMALLWOOD: expect to see the churches in Newfoundland withdraw completely from activity in schools. I do not expect to see it. I expect,as long as I live and maybe my youngest children, as long as they live, I expect to see the churches in Newfoundland take and want to take and insist on taking a very active

part in education. That does not necessarily mean they will insist on owning school properties. But. it does mean, I think, that they will insist on having something to say, something important!to say on the quality and the kinds of education that goes on inside of the buildings. But, Sir, if . I have not made it clear, I do not know how to make it ,- . _, . any clearer, ~'hat policy is a policy that we have adopted. lt is the Government's policy. We adopted it. We announced it at the development conference~ I amplified it here on, I think~well it was one day this past week. It is our policy -1 MR. ROWE: F.W.

On Thursday night. MR. SMALLWOOD: On Thursday night. That is our policy, tut carrying it out will depend on the glad and willing and happy - glad, willing and happy concurrence of the churches. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, the hon. the Premier says that this is the Government's policy and it is quite a simple matter. Well, that is just not ao. You cannot have it both ways. The hon. the Premier says that the Government have adopted a policy, that it is going to take over a hundred percent of the cost of constructing and equipping schools. Yes, that is quite simple. That statement is quite a simple one.

There is nothing in the estimates this year to carry out that policy. Yes, we realize that. But that it may'be· in the estimates next year to carry out the policy But, ,., ~ ... . Mr. Chairman, the Government eannot have it both ways. This is not a simple matter. How can the Government announce a policy that it is going to take over a hundred percent of the cost of constructing and equipping schools and then not deal in the policy announcement with any of the problems that that is going to raise? T?en rhen anybody in this House raised a problem, what will happen to taxation? What taxes will you have to increase?

Will there be 3022

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (morning) PK - 6 MR. CROSBIE: a special educational tax? Will the churches continue to have title to the schools and so on? The Government replies/that matter is not dealt with yet. We have to negotiate with the church authorities. We have to delve into this, we have to delve into that.• Well, now that is not a proper announcement of policy. How can you announce a policy with an announcement that contains no solution for the problems which the policy announce:lcreates.

How can the Government announce that this is policy, when there is a general election on in Newfoundland this year, and it is not going to give the people any of the solutions to ~h~ problems this is going to create? The Government says it may cause an increase in toes or it may not, or it may result in an education tax or it may not, or there may be an increase in its personal corporation tax or there may not, or the S.S..A tax or there may not. The one thing that the Government says,· the! will announce firmlY, is that there will not be a property tax. That is not announcing the policy.

That is just trying to take advantage of the electorate to make a glowing new announcement~•the Government will take over all construction coat of schools. We £re going to eliminate school tax. We are going to eliminate school assessment fees.• Then not give the details of the rest of the policy, which has to include an increase in taxation or an educational tax, which has to include problem~ of who is going to have title to the schools, ~111 they be free-access schools and all the rest of it? Now it is not just that simple, Mr.

Chairman, and the Government cannot expect the people of this Province to just buy that policy without any detail,from the Govermnent,as to how it is going to meet these problems. Now the Premier says,that this was the policy announced at the Development Conference. That was not the policy announced at the Development Conference.

Here is what was announced;' that the Minister of Education announced; "we are now coming to the coneluaion that, we should examine the possibility of having the Govemment ass\Dlle the full capital cost of building and equipping schools of all kinds everywhere in the Province." That is what was announced 3023

May 10, 1971 Tape 561 (moming) PK- 7 ~. CROSBIE: at the confetence. • .. .. . . H We are coming to the conclu&i®,Hnc;t jfVen that ,re ccnicl,med, we •~ now c-1ng t9 the conelusion tbat n should examine the 1>0•81.Mlity/'cn.9t ,tna;t we will, not that tll• GQve'tlllllQt will assume all capital cost, , 3024

May 10th, 1971 Tape 562(Morning) JM - 1 MR. CROSBIE: they will assume all capital costs of schools. ''We should examine the possibility of having the Government assume the full capital cost of building and equipping schools of all kinds everywhere in the Province.'" The Minister went on to say that there will be no final decision . possible on this matter for the next financial year and suggested that talks on the matter,with the Boards of Education~have not even started.

Now at the conference the Minister says, "No final decision is possible on this matter for the next financial year," and then four days ago or three .< days ago in the House the hon. the Premier gets up and announces the decision. The decision being that it is the Government's polic~ to take over all capital costs of schools if the churches agree, if the churches agree, if something is worked out with them. Well now if ·that is the policy.it should not be announced if the Government cannot announce the decision it is making in connection with the problems that this is going to raise.

Where the Minister said they are going to examine the possibilityJthe Government has now said; ''we are going to do it subject to the churches agreeing.• It is a far different thing than was announced at that conference at the end of January. It is a far different thing than what was announced in the Minister's news letter in February 1971. The Government cannot be permitted, Mr.

Chairman, just to say this is our policy and thenfwhen an~ of _the problems are pointed out1 such as the increase in revenue that will be heeded for the Government, such as title to the schools and all the rest of it, all this is subjecJ to negotiating with the denominations and the school boards and this will all be done after the election. After the election of 1971 we will deal with this and we may deal with it in the Budget of next year,if we are re-elected,or it may deal with it in the Budget of the year after next, if we are re-elected. How can the Governm_ent have the gall and the face to say that?

They announced a revolutionary new policy with which frankly I agree. I agree with the policy as the Premier has announced it but 3025

May 10th, 1971 Tape 562(Morning) JM - 2 MR. CROSBIE: I am anxious to know and the people of Newfoundland are anxious to know. Fine. Now how do you deal with these problems that we all know are there? How do the Government get the revenue? How are the Government going to deal with the title of schools and the rest of it? But instead of answering these sensible questions the Government can only sayt "Well, this is not worked out, this has to be investigated and the rest of it." Well you cannot have it both ways.

It is not the Govermnent either, it is not the Government's policy to do this yet,which is the true position. It ia not the Government's policy to do this yet because the .church authorities have not agreed, because they have ~ot worked out all the details, because they cannot say what taxes will be increased and the rest of it. Either it is not the policy or 1if it is the policy as the Premier says.then the u0vern­ ment should answer the questions we are raising. You just cannot have it both ways; announce this grand new policy and then net deal with any of the problems that it creates.

I certainly agree with the policy, the principle, but what I want to know is~ is there to be an education tax of $100.00 . per family per year? Is this to be financed by an increase in the sales tax which is a regressive tax,as the Premier admits? ls that to go from seven to eight or nine per-cent or daes it mean another ten per-cent on the personal income tax or a few cents a gallon on the gasoline? What does it mean? l'his is what we are entitled to ask so that we can know the whole thing because,on the answers to those questions would depend whether or not you accepted the whole policy. It is easy enough, Mr.

Chairman, to accept just the bald statement that the Government should be responsible for one hundred per-cent of the cost of schools. I do not think there is a member of the House who is going to disagree with that.But, if the Government says; uto do:that we must put up the SSA twe per-cent or one per-cent;then I might very well disagree with that or1 if it is a special educational taJC: of $100.00 -:,per family per year, or 3026

May 10th, 1971 Tape 562(Morning) JM - 3 MR. CROSBIE: $150.00 or $80.00,I might disagree with that or~if the title to all the buildings is to be vested in the churches and school boards anyway despite the fact this is one hundred per-cent public funds,! might very well disagree with that.

So on the answers to all those questions depends whether people are going to accept this policy or not and I fail to see how the Government - the Government should either say this is not our policy yet, this is what we would like to do but it is not our policy yet and it will not be until we have all the facts and figures and answers or,if it is going to announce as the Premie[ says,that this is the policy,then the Bremier should give us the answers we ask for and he should do it this year because there is a general election coming up that is going to determine who forms the Government for the next five.

This is such an important issue tha~ if there is an el~ction coming, th it is a matter that should be discussed in the election and 1if it is then agreed between the parties.fine, it is not an issue. If all the problems are set out and the answers, if they are agreed it is not an issue but,if there is some disagreement on all the details and how they are to be handled, then it becomes an issue and people vote on it. That is the way it should be approached, Mr. Chairman. Not just ~hat ve are going to take it over but how, what taxes increases or what new taxes if any and the rest of it.

That is what should be discussed now. MR. SMALLWOOD: Mr. Chairman, none so blind as those who will not see. MR. CROSBIE: They see too much. MR. SMALLWOOD: We are going to give the churches $8. million a year starting this year,for six years. We have informed them and.provided that the House will vote it,we will give them $8. million a year for the next six years 1 that is $48. million. Now we have it from the Minister of Community and Social Development ,.who is absent today, I think he is out on business some­ where else, that an amount running somewhere between $50. million and $1~0. 3027

May 10th, 1971 Tape 562(Morning) JM - 4 MR. SMALLWOOD: millions,over part of that eight year period, over a five year period,will come from DREE for school construction.

Now put it at the lowest figure, $50. million from DREE for the building of schools, $50. million at the lowest, it could be $100. million but take it at the lowest, $50. million and $48. million to be voted by thii H?use; that is $98. million in the next five, six years, $98. million, which means that there will be built 1with that much money,so many completely new school building~, thoroughly modern, thoroughly efficient 1 I mean from a building point of view, not from the point of view of what goes on inside.

Then it is highly doubtful, it is doubtful in the extreme, it is most unlikely that any additional increase rates of taxation wilL)Jave to be imposed and extremely unlikely, equally unlikely,that any additional new taxes would have to be imposed.

Now remember that new tax~s could be imposed,up to $2. millions a year for school construction,vithout it costing the Newfoundland people any more than it is costing them now,because the Newfoundland people now are contributing $2. millions a year already; Jl. million a year in school taxes 1 in the places where the taxes are levied,and $1. million a year in school assessments in the places where assessements are levied. That is $2. millions a year that some of the people are already forking out for school construction, $2. millions a year already, now.

I am told, I heard here this morning 1 from the Minister,that the school tax authorities JlhO impose the school tax cover about half the Province and the school boards that~collect school assessment cover about half the Province. So that between them they are collecting $2. million a year. But, Sir, the $2. million is not contributed by all the people. It is only contributed by some of the people in all of the Province.

In the school tax areas.I would imagine that pretty well everybody contributes but not so in the parts of the Province where there is no school tax and there is a school assessment because, where the school assessment is imposed, it is imposed only on the parents who 3028

May 10th, 1971 Tape 562(Moming) JM - 5 MR. SMALLWOOD: have children in school. It is not paid by the parents whose children are too young or whose children are left school. It is not imposed on parents who have no children and it is not imposed on unmarried persons. So that the burden of $1. million a year,collected now in school assessments,is a burden that is imposed on only a portion of the public but put it all together and it is $2. million. This House could impose additional,increase tax rates or entirely new taxes up to $2. million,without it costingany more than it is I already costing.

Actually I see no need, no need, with $50 - . $100. millions coming from Ottawa and this House voting $8. millions a year, I see no need either to increase the rates of taxes or to impose new taxes~ That is a bugaboo. That is an election year bugaboo. -That is all that is. MR. HICKMAN: Mr. Chairman, now all of this sounds so plausible and so,but it is purely theoretical. Number one 1 let us take the $2. million that is collected by way of school taxes and by way of assessments. '?he hon. Minister can correct m~ when I go wrong. All he has to do is interrupt and I will yield.

My understanding is that,under the existing Legislation,the $2. million that is now collected,by way of ~chool taxes and assessments,cannot be used for the construction or equipping of schools. MR. SMALLWOOD: That is practically what the arg1me11~ is about. It is n(,)t allowed to be used to run schools. MR. HICKMAN: To run them, that is right. It is the other way around. It is used for the purpose of equipping and construction of schools.

Now the real crunch that is coming to school boards and where they have to look hopefully through their School Tax Authority and regretably through their assessments, it is not just in the equipping of schools it is in the maintaining and running of schools. As I said here on Friday with the possible exception - HR. SMALLWOOD: The Govemment is already fully responsible for the operation 3029

May 10th, 1971 Tape 562(Morning) JM - 6 HR. SMALLWOOD: of schools. HR. HICKMAN: Well if, Mr. Chairman, the Government is fully responsible for the operating and management of schools then I say that the Government I has made a miserable failure in discharging its responsibility because there is not a school in this Province tbday that is being efficiently run or is giving a quality of education that the teachers or school boards in this Province would like to see or coming anywhere close to it, Mr. Chairman. But this is where the crunch is coming from.

This is where we are going to see $2. million, if we pass - $2 million, another tax that is not going to cost anyone. Are we going to stand still? Are we going to not only take our foot off the accelerator but do what we started to do and now put it firmly on the break? Is that what we are going to do? No, Mr.

Chairman, the simple fact is that, if we are going to come even close to allowing educators - look, they are the experts, Why is it" that in medicine or engineering or law or any other profession we defer to the profession, we take their advice, say; "you know what you are talking about," but when it comes to education,the one person we never listen to, the one profession ve do not listen to is the profession of the educato _r. Why not? They know more about it than we do.

They know more about it than anyone in the House of Assembly knows. t say that 1fully cognizant of the fact that we have former educators in this House,ftut education is such an ongoing thing.I am sure the Minister would be the first to agree with me that today the young teacher,who is coming out of university,is skilled the day he graduates,but five years later he cannot afford to go back. You know,he might as well go look for a job somewhere else if he is going to rroperly discharge his duty. No, Mr. Chairman, ve have not had - HR. SMALLWOOD: We are certainly departing a long way from construction.

Now we are talking about item number (3) which is already passed. 3030

May lOt.h, 1971 Tape 562(Moming) JM - 7 MR. RICKMAN: Mr. Chairman, we are not departing a long way from item (14) at all because item (14) and the policy that has been annunicated here today and on Fxiday and on Thursday obviously has to increase the cost to Government. Now if we take the next step, and 1 believe this is wishful thinking on the part of Government,. that there w:1.11 be no increase in taxes as a result of this1 obviously something else has to give. No1r wat i$ going to give? The qual:lty of education has .given far too much in the last three or foUT years. So where is it going to give? 3031

Homing Session - MRW May 10, 1971 Tape no. 563 Page 1 MR. SMALLWOOD: What would the hon. gentleman say to the fact that last year we spent $20 million more on education than in the previous year and this year $35 million more without increasing taxes and without imposing new taxes. MR. HICKMAN: But substantially increasing the borrowing of the Province. MR. SMALLWOOD: We did not borrow for this. MR. HICKMAN: Oh! but you borrowed. Mr. Chairman this only evades the issue. You borrow for the total cost of operating the Province.

If the second highest cost or the highest cost happens to be education, obviously this is a very determining factor in the borrowing. MR. SMALLWOOD: That is pretty specious reasoning. MR. HICKMAN: It may be specioue reasoning but, if we are not borrowing it for education,then what are we borrowing it for? Health? Welfare? What are 1,ve borrowing it for'? Is. education excluded? Are you going to reason that right at the very bottom comes the $110 million or whatever it is for education and that the borrowing is for everything else on the top?

What I vas going to say was this: Since I have been in this House I have never heard, in my opinion, a complete, f&ir, nonpolitical debate on education. We talk ·· about education as if we are treading on egg shells. There is too strong an inclination to throw everything on the churches,without putting church and Government into the very slots where they belong, where the Education Act and the Schools Act attempted to put them. If you get up and do it, as I have done on two or three occasions, immediately someone comes screaming out of his seat on the other side: Oh!

You want to do away with denominational education." This is always the answer. That is a silly, foolish, half-witted answer for a very simple reason,that we could stand here and talk until the cows come home about the abolition of denominational education. Unless and 3032

May 10, 1971 Tape no. 563 Page 2 Mr.Hickman. until the Constitution of Canada is changed, it cannot be done. So you accept certain facts. Having accepted these facts, then you get into the real gut issue of education. Mr. Chairman, the real gut issue is this, that the final responsibility for education rests with the Government of this Province and not with the churches, Govemment are being derelict in their duty, if they do not discharge that responsibility. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order 1 please! MR. HICKMAN: Mr.

Chairman, Item 612-14, Erection and Equipping of Schools, how does that relate to OREE funds? lt relates in this way: The Dree funds, the ones that we know of, the ones that we ho~e will be forthcoming in the future 1 as cf now are restricted to certain areas of the Province. So that if the DREE funds are going to take care of certain areas, then obviously the school boards, in their projections, must place the emphasis on the other areas of the Province that will not take advantage of this. It Roes a step further. This is the relevancy of the conment that the hon. the member for St.

John's East (Extern) made; that school boards within DREE areas are finding that they are having difficulties in making their projections. Because there i~ another unit, a very important one! involved in all this and this unit, an important one, is the parent We tread on egg shells • We say we must not rock the boat and we must talk about the last one hundred years as = sacrosanct. But you find that parents and students are not quite as cowardly as we are. They are not that concerned about the past traditions.

What they are concerned about is the quality of education and the facilities that are made available to these children. Now how does this come in again to six, twelve, fourteen within a DREE area? Well let me give you two examples: One example is on the Burin Peninsula where two schools are being built out of DREE funds for the Integrated School Board, One school is being built out 3033

May 10, 1971 Tape no. 563 Page 3 Mr. Hickman of DREE funds for the Roman Catholic School Board. : When these announcements were made that peninsula,which is not only a geographic unit but which is starting,fortunately,to work together in education in practically everv field as one cohesive unit, there was great rejoicing. There was rejoicing wbP.n they saw the tender calls and referred to it as free access schools.

Because immediately Protestant parents in M~rystown were saying, "good our children are going to be able to go to a first-class Roman Catholic school in Marystown." Immediately Roman Catholic parents in Salt Pond, Salmonier, Point May and these places were saying the reverse, "good, we are going to have a fiTst-class integrated high school or elementary school system that we can take advantage of." Ibey are going to. Ibis is what the two boards based their projection on. Ihe same things are happening out here.

One of the reasons 1 why this new elementary school is to be built now was because it was based on the projections of .- the over~rowding in Vanier School. But now they find that they are not o~)ecting to this. Make no mistake about it. In fact the academic staff are delighted with it. But they find that their projections, which were based at that time simply on the Protestant demand for Vanier. may be completely out of whack because of the large number of applications they expect to receive froa Roman Catholic parents, to enter the new Protestant elementary school. out here on MacDonald Drive.

So it goes everywhere throughout t~e Province. I have yet to hear of a parent.,anywhere in the area where these schools are to be built,taking the slightest objection to the fact that these are free-access schools. In fact I suggest that parents and educators welcome this as a real giant step forward,even far more so than any dollars and cents which may come from Ottawa. So do not let us get cowardly and start to turn back the clock bY. trying to insist on superimposing on this the things today that are not relevant in 1971 and things whicn culll.d have aroused great emotions in 1960. It is quite wrong.

It is a cowardly attitude to adopt. What it is doing is that it 3034

May 10, 1971 MR. HICKMAN. Tape no. 563 . Page 4 is prejudicing, very seriously prejudicing the rights and the future of those who are in school today. These really are the ones that count. What difference does it make to any of us here now! We are through school. It makes no difference at all. We can get as emotional, we can get as tradition bound and as hidebound as we wish, but it is no skin off our nose. We will never be back there again. Mr.

Chairman, when the hob. the Minister oi Education was referring to borrowing by the school boards, he suggested that it is no concern of his or no concern (presumably, it is no concern of his or Government or this House) as to what the churches do with the monies that are voted out of this $8 million. MR. SMALLWOOD: He did not say any such thing. He did not say that. MR, HICKMAN: No, he said it is none of our business. HR. ROWE (F.W.): I would like to stand on a point of privilege, MR. HICKMAN: No, I promised to yield if there is anywhere I go wrong. Ma, ROWE (F.W.): I said nothing of the kind.

MR, HICKMAN: Well would you repeat what you did say? MR. ROWE (F.W.): And I implied nothing of the kind, MR, HICKMAN: Well will you repeat what you did say? MR, ROWE (F.W.): I repeat what I said, I would be very happy to do so. 1 said that the various churches owe the money. 1 said it is none of our business 1 I would suggest, Certainly, it seems to me that it would be highly improper for~ to be giving details, if indeed we had them, as to how nuch money the Roman Catholic Church owed on Brother Rice.or whether so much is owed on Brother Rice and so much on St.

Michaels, That is an intemal matter within the Roman Catholic Church. I said what does concern us,and would have to concern lie in the event that we adopted any new policy and even if we do not.is the amount, the gross indebtedness of the churches in respect of education, That is my point. I did not say that that was not our concern. HR. HICKMAN: While the minister is on his feet now, · .. I know or I think it was said here that somewhere between $3 million and $4 million of this $8 million vote this year will go in the payment of commitments for oustanding debts. Nov let us assume it is $3.5 million.

That leaves $4.5 million. 3035

May 10, 1971 Tape no. 563 Page 5. MR. ROWE(F.W.): It is $3 million of that money that will be paid to the banks. MR. HICKMAN: '11 right$ 3 million - that leaves $5 million f~eel MR. ROWE (F.W.): This is not necessarily, I should point out, money that they borrowed seven years ago. Some of that money might be in respect of a school which is under construction at this moment·. KR. HICKMAN: All right, I am not concerned about the time. MR. ROWE (F.W.): No. MR. HICKMAN: But there iR $5 million (before the minister sits) free to be used this year to build new schools.

Now what is the hon. minister's position with respect to that $5 million as to how it is spent? Is thAt any of his business? MR. ROWE (F.W.): To start of with that $5 million has to be divided ••• MR. HICKMAN: Right. MR. ROWE (F.W.): I have no control over this. That has to go to the churches in respect of populations on a pro-rata basis, on a population basis. That is number one • It has to be spent in the building of schools or the amortization of debts to schools. That is number two. That is my concern. They cannot uaei that money to build churches. They cannot use it to build anything else.

It has to be used to build schools. To that extent, we control it. It is paid out only in respect of the building_, of schools. We can approve the general plan. We have a planning division. We have th~ right to approve the general plans of the schools

(2) We hAve a right to approve the exact site of the school, not the locality of the school but the site of the school.

(3) We have no right at·all to say·-to the integrated churches, you must put a high school on New World island. You must scrap your plans to put a high school on Fogo Island. We cannot do that. My hon. friend knows that, of course, as I do • . Ml. HICKMAN: Firstly on the question of borrowing, when the hon. minister says that it is no concern of his as to how much money has been borrowed by the various school boards. HR. SMALLWOOD: He did not say that. 3036

May 10, 1971 Tape no. 563 . Page 6 MR. HICKMAN: Well what did he say then? MR. SMALLWOOD: The details of the individual borrowing and debts of the churches. It i~ their business not ours. MR. HICKMAN: We. are playing with words. The details of the individual borrowings of the various school boards and churches and the emphasi~ should be on the school boards, because the school boards are doinR a lot of this borrowing, not the churches. MR. SMALLWOOD: MR. HICKMAN: MR. SMALLWOOD: MR. HICKMAN: MR. SMALLWOOD: Boards are just agents of the churches. We are still back in the 19 •• They are. They are not. They are!

They are nothing else. MR. HICKMAN: Would the hon. minister confirm that that the school boards are agents of the churches. MR. ROWE (F.W.): In the final analysis ••• MR.. HICKMAN: In the final analysis - come on. MR. ROWE (F.W.): In the final analysis, the churches are responsible. The churches agree on school boards. Mr. Chairman, the Education Act is there. MR. S1JALLWOOD: Maybe the hon. member would like you to be different, but he is not different. MR. BICKMAN Look, Mr. Chairman, what is the point in arguing. MR. SMALLWOOD: The Education Act sets it all out. MR.

HICKMAN: If the Education Act sets out that the school boards are agents of the churches, then that Act was not properly introduced into this House two years ago. MR. SMALLWOOD: The hon. gentleman voted for it. MR.. HICKMAN: Right and that was one of the reasons I voted for it because it does not say that. MR SMALLWOOD: It does say it. MR. HICKMAN: Let us get back to this borrowing and the way the churches or the 3037

May 10, 1971 Mr. Hickman. Tape no. 563 Page 7 school boards; their individual debts as the hon. minister refers to - am I right in saying that the particulars of the individual debts he says are none of his business? Am I right now7 MR. ROWE (F.W.): The de tails •• _MR, HICKMAN: The details are particulars. Right. MR. ROWE (F.W.): Would my hon. _friend yield a moment? In case I did not, I was given the infonnation that all members had asked for some breakdown on this $8 million. I attempted to give a general analysis of the $8 million. I did indeed give that.

I was not sure whether hon. members expected me to state, to breakdown still further what the •arious churches owe? What the Roman ~atholic Church owe, i.e., either directly or through its boards? I suggested it is imnaterial because my hon. friends knows that the Roman Catholic Church is back of every Roman Catholic Board in Newfoundland. MR. HICKMAN: That is right. MR.

ROWE (F .W.): The point I was trying to .make was that if any hon. member expected me to give a breakdown of the indebtedness of the Roman Catholic Church, of the detailed indebtedness of that church in respect of education, even if I had the information, I would not give it. I did not think it would be proper to give it. That is my point. I said that it is none of my concern anyway. If the Roman Catholic -Church owes (I think I used to think it) $8 million for education, it is none of my concem whether $1 million of that is owed on St.

Catherine's School in Grand Falls and $2 million on the Holy Heart of Mary and another $500,000 Regina High School in Corner Brook - none of my business. This is the point I was trying to make. I stressed it because I felt that it would be improper for me to give any more details than I have already given in respect of the churches indebtedness. MR. HICKMAN: Right. I am not disagreeing with any of that. Everytime I try to make my point I get interrupted.

What I am suggesting to the minister is this - I am not suggesting that he disclose to the House how much money is owed by the Consolidated School Board of Conception Bay North or the · 3038

May 10, 1971 Tape 564 (morning) PK - 1 MR. HICKMAN: Consolidated School Board of Burin or the Roman Catholic School Board of Burin. What I am saying is this, that over the past ten ·to fifteen years when school boards have been placed in a position where they have to, you know, they must because of a thousand reasons, build a new school.

The minister, even though the grants are paid out to the churches on an undiscrimatory bases, the Minister of Education is fully aware of the amount of money that has been borrowed by that particular school board for that particular school More than that,the banks,on practically every occasion, will ask for a letter from the minister and from the Denominational Education Authority confirming that out of the grants for the next •x•' number of years .the school board for Conception Bay North will receive'x'number of dollars which in turn will be paid to the bank.

There is where I would say that regardless of the legal responsibility ' the Minister of Education has a very strong moral and financial responsibility to see to it that schools that · have been built and monies borrowed 1 on the strength of these grants,that these loans are met and these commitments are made to the various banks. That is being done. There is nothing wrong with it. This is why I say that Government does know and Government should know and Government must know the details of the borrowings of the various school boards in this Province. MR ROWE: ~e have a right to approve the bonds.

MR HICKMAN: Right. Not only that they have the right to approve but you realize, in so approving , - you must realize this - because I have been one of the ones to come in, on my knees, to get the approval for a school board - nothing to do with the churches at all but for the school board: "Will you approve the construction of St Andrew's School or will you give us a letter saying how much we will get each year on the strength of. •• " That is as good, really, as a government guarantee. On the strength of that letter you then go to the bank and say: "Here is our letter.

Lend us half a million dollars because, out of the grants that are going to come to the Denominational Education Authorities, there is going to be~50,000 go to you on account of St Andrews School. I know that. You know; why keep emphasizing this great distinction that does not really exist? Of course government have to know. 3039

May 10, 1971 Tape 564 (morninr,) Pk - 2 MR. ROWE, F.W. I just want to make that clear, that is pretty danr,erous there, Mr. Chainnan. If my hon. friend would yield to me, I am sure he would not want to convey a false impression. At no time did the Government of Newfoundland ever say to the board operating or about to build St. Andrew's School, we guarantee that you will get'x'number of dollars a year in order to build that school. All we guaranteed was what we would make available to the United Church of Canada in Newfoundland to build schools. MR. HICKMAN: It is more than that~ a bit more than that. MR.

ROHE, F.W. In tum the United Church of Canada through its educational council gave an understanding or a guarantee to that particular board, as to what they would make available. MR, RICl'.MAN: These letters 1 as the hon. minister know,has to be couched in such a way that the banks, even though they cannot legally, they cannot legally come tomorrow morning to the hon. minister and say, "look that new school that was opened in Fortune last year, we want our $50,000 because you have guaranteed it.~ They know they cannot do that. You know, I am not suggesting that they can.

But at the same time, the letters of intent that are exchanged between Government,Denominational Education Authorities, and eventually wind up in the hands of the Bank of Nova Scotia, even though they have not got the -.. strict legal

interpretation and the legal guarantee had precisely the same effect, because without it, without it you would never get your money from the bank. There is nothing wrong with it, ln fact it is good, If we had more of it, then the school boards could meet their projection and build their school and meet their needs. ~his is correct. The hon. minister knows it is correct, I am not saying - the trouble is, if you say something over here, you are suppose to be saying it in a critical sense. I am only trying to get the facts straight. The same thing applies to the pwnership of schools.

I did not realize until I came into this House that, the churches own all the schools. Certain churches own the schools, they do it as a matter of policy. But, I can tell this committee that the school in Grand Bank,which was operated by the United Church School Board,was not owned by the United 3040 I

May 10, 1971 Tape 564 (morning) Pk - 3 MR. RICKMAN: Church. It was owned by the United Church School Board for Grand Bank. I can say with absolute certainty that the schools in St. John's were owned by the United Church Schools, because first when we integrated the Board, we found that a couple of schools were still owned by the United Church, and we said we want them, and we want them right away and there was some hesistancy, we said, if you do not give them to us, well then you better run the schools, you know.

This is what is happening now with the integrated boards a fair amount of legal work that has to go on to get it all completed. But, eventually the ownership clear, unincumbered ownership in these schools and title will vest in the school boards. Other churches a~ a matter of policy retain the ownership,which is their right. But, these general statements that the churches own the schools, is just not correct.

Hy understanding of the Act is that the only control there is, when once a church voluntarily conveys to a school board a particular school building or certain assets.or altematively,if the board previous to integration owned it and then it goes in the integrated board, the only control at all is that the Denominational Education Committee had to approve the borrowing. They do not give any security. They do not give any guarantee. They have no title to mortgage. ~ut this is more,(and it is not a bad oneJ to keep valveson.

Jou could have a school board sometime who would want to go out and borrow itself completely out of existence. But, you do, boards today,of their own initiative,are going out borrowing money from banks, giving mortgages on property, building teacher~ residences and the only consultation ~tall " there is 1 to the D.E.c., by the Secretary," there is a thing on the bottom, "I approve.signed It has nothing at all to do with title. Nothing at all to do with title. There is nothing wrong with the school boards having title to their schools.

There is nothing wrong,tif'.':. the denomination wants to keep it. the thing if'! it has better borrowing power by having all the assets under one body rather than dissipated among various boards. Go to ft! · Now, Mr. Chairman, you know, of all the discussion we had here the last couple of days,to me the most disappointing thing that I have heard is the suggestion, free-access, as we have seen in the tender calls 1 may not mean free 3041

May 10, 1971 Tape 564 (morning) PK - 4 MR. HICKMAN: access. If it does not mean what it says, then, in my opinion, that is definitely a retrograde step and one which will not be accepted by the parents of this Province. It just will not be accepted. It should not be accepted. It would be most regretable if any steps were taken to try and manoeuvre or manipulate or embarrass the Government of Canada into changing the terms that have already been laid down. The hon. the member for St. John's West has gone over and practically everyone else has a dozen times the announcement - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR.

HICKMAN: part of the item,-you know, you think we were talking about whether w7 are going to have $30,000 to give the egg growing producers in Newfoundland this year, instead of attempting, as I regard this committe and as I regard the debate.attempting to clarify policies that are not that clear right now in Newfoundland insofar as education is concerned. Surely this is what this committee is all about.

But the tragedy in making announcements of intention is that so many people read into it, even though you can repeat it, the hon. minister has on several occasions, time and time again;-my announcement does not mean that we are going to do it. There are obstacles to overcome.'' MR. CROSBIE: It has been reversed now. MR. HICKMAN: Ah, well there has been a change in the policy, but even now there is still a cavet there that says that, we have to do a lot of negotiations.

But you can repeat this every day for the next 365 days, but it will not have the desire4-it cannot but help to embarrass the school boards throughout the Province. Because what are you going to do, if you are in an area where you are about to impose a school tax authorityf We know what happened in the past. For instance, we know that just prior to the Speech from the Throne in 1966, about a month prior to that, after two or three years of conditioning, public meetings, public debate, the Town of Fortune was declared a school tax area.

My recollection is that ,,,the Deputy Minister can correct me\ my recollection is the proclamation was·· signed. It became Law. Certainly everything had been complied with and all the announcements had been made. 3042

May 10, 1971 Tape S64 (morning) PK - 5 MR. HICKMAN: Then came the Speech from the Throne, and then came the Minister's Budget Speech, the then Minister of Finance, which changed it. They had not yet, in Fortune, gotten back to the position where they can bring in a school tax. Because what did people do? They did the natural thing, the same as those who were paying assessments did, and as they are doing again " now.

They said; we know about all these riders, we know about all these qualifications, but it has been announced and eventually it is going to come to pass, so why should we be foolish enough today;to have the school tax authority put in such a town, when ,ff we would hang her down for another couple of years the Government are bound to take over the full cost: This is the serious effect that announcements that are made prematurely have.

It is bad enough to make premature announcements on health or economic development or anything else, but a premature announcement made with respect to education can have ' the most undesirable effect of postponing certain capital construction or the implementation of certain programmes in towns and communities,that must be implemented this year and that would have been implemented this year and they will not now. And you do not recapture that. There is no way of recapturing the last two or three years. Y~u can repeat it time and time and time again that we are only looking into this.

NPlease continue to pay your taxes.• Ask any school board about the drop off in assessments already. Now, Mr. Chairman, ~hen again,in dealing with this policy, y9u know, you cannot do this without treating the requirements and the imposition it will have on the tax dollar generally of the whole educational system. I think you have to accept that,if we are going to accelerate at all, and if we are ~ot going to go back, then the increase in cos~ in education are going to be very substantial.

I would just like to conclude the•e few remarks by once again referring, because it is so relevant to all of these estimates,the findings of APEC, as of November 1970. Now let me quote this once again, "taxation levels in the Atlantic - Region are .. already relatively high, and,as has been pointed out 3043

May 10, 1971 Tape 564 (morning) PK - 6 MR. RICKMAN: previously,have a generally regressive structure. It is felt that any increase in taxation will yield only a marginal increase in revenue. Not only that, but if low income indi~iduals in the region are faced with additional taxes, they will be forced to endure further hardship, as a result of a decrease in their already limited after-tax income." Now, obviously, one of the regressive taxes in this Province is S.S.A. tax. Probably the second most regressive is the gasoline tax.

The other taxes, the income tax, the corporation tax, according to this report and it stands to reason anyway that it only results in a marginal increase in revenue. So this is where the whole question of where the money is going to come from, it is so relevant.

Then it goes on to say"the Federal Government," (this is November 1970)"the Federal Government's present attitude is that the Provinces must further e:kploit the revenue sources available to them." That is not $50 million for DREE money for schools in the next five years. · Where do we find?"- - as it then concludes "however, in the case of the Atlantic Provinces these sources are already inadequate." °WhPre d9 we find the sources in Newfoundland?

S.S.A, is regressive; income tax and corporation tax, marginal benefit; gasoline tax is regressive; liquor tax, regressive, you know, when it is increased beyond - where is it going to come from? What other taxes a~e open? None out of the gross provincial product because the gross provincial product is not rising fast enough · to take care of the escalation in the cost. So where does it come from? The mind of a hen? We sould tell Mr. Marchand that.because he calls this his Bible. His Bible! We remember. We saw him on television clutching it to his generous heart. He believes it. Anyone who 3044

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 565 NC - 1 MR. HICKMAN: who has any sense of responsibility for the future of this Province has to believe it, But apparently this is not the day to believe it. MR. _ _!ARLE: Mr. Chairman, a couple of very brief remarks. It seems that this policy, which has been annunciated by Government without any real idea of what it is going to cos~ is typical of the way we have gone about things in the past. We announce policies without the faintest idea really, except a pious hope that the taxes already collected and the assessments might cover it.

There is no basis for that conclusion at all. But even more serious than that, I wonder if anybody realizes what an announcement of this type, this policy, what a can of worms this has opened upi Because the Government, in my opinion, in announcing that, might just as well have added another sentence to it and say, ''we automatically hereby, in spite of the terms of Union, declare that denominational education in this Province is finished, for this reason, Mr. Chairman, that this 1110ney to pay the .. - -- full operation costs of schools and the full capital costs of schools, cous from all of the people.

Now,whether we like it or whether we do not; there are people in the Province who have not got any particular affiliation with a church at,all. Regretfully that is so. There are peoDle right throughout the Province who have no affiliation with any church and a lot of people who do not care very much. Unfortunately all of this revenue.which is going to be spent on both operating and capital to cover the one hundred per cent costs of schools.come from all of the people.

Therefore, 1 think, that the people themselves, as they begin to realize, as this thing will develop, will say this is an absolut~ - public school system because it is being paid for by public funds. Therefore, there would be a large 3045

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 565 NC - 2 MR. HICKMAN: outcry, I am sure, a frightening outcry from a certain segment of the public 1 that this is opening up public schools completely, being paid for by public funds and therefore there is no need of carrying on with the system which we now have. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, before it carries, I think we have got five minutes, I just want to reiterate, 7 Mr.

Chairman, that here we have a situation where the Premier says the Government has adopted this policy;,.,the taking over of the costs of schools and the Minister when he last spoke to the House a few minutes ago, got up and said,"if we adopt a new policy." Now you cannot have it both ways. The Government has either adopted the policy_,which the Premier says, or it has not. The.Minister ,, cannot get up and pretend, "if we adopt this new policy, the policy •••• MR. SMALLWOOD: He cannot do it without resigning from the Cabinet. I announce the policy, any Minister who does no~ aceept it,resigns. MR. CROSBIE: Right.

Good-by Mr. Minister of Education, if you do not accept that policy. It is not ,if we got a new policy;- the policy has been adopted~ MR. ROWE: We both said the same thing. MR. CROSBIE: No, no, not at all. All right now the Minister then clearly agrees with the Premier. Jou have adopted the policy, now what is needed is the details and the solutions to the problems that have been mentioned in the Bouse so far. MR.. SMALLWOOD: We will think of them when the policy is brought in. MR. CROSBIE: The policy has been announced. Look, in 1966-67, in the Speech from the Throne, Mr.

Chairman, the Government adopted a bold new policy. It was announced,by the Lieutenant-COvernmr, that school taxes and school fees are being abolished, That was the announcment. That was four years ago. Four years ago that was announced.,- • 1n the Budget,that the Minister of Finance .(and he is now Minister of 3046

May 10, 1971 (Ml'Jrning) Tape No. 565 NC - 3 MR. CROSBIE: Education)brought down four months later, the Government had to announce that school fees and school ••• MR. ROWE: I know I am wasting my breath, at least I feel I am wasting my breath, Mr. Chairman, but I would submit to you Sir, that eighty per cent of the discussion on this particular item there is obviously one intention in mind, that is to hang,Iber down to get to 1:00 o'clock on this item and no doubt.this afternoon, two or three hours on the next item and so on. Mr.

Chairman, these gentlemen on the other side are bringing into this discussion items which they know, as well as I know and your Honour must lmow,are Out of Order. It is not on this particular Vote, I would suggest, it is not under this particular Vote, asking for $8 million for this year capital grant, it is not under this particular Vote that a policy that might be implemented in two or three years time should be discussed. It is not also, I would suggest, the time for the DREE discussions to come into the picC~re and a dozen other things that have been brought in here this morning under this particular Vote.

II we are going to do that, what is going to happen when we get down to on vocational education? Another general discussion as we had at the beginning of the Vote, ll.t the beginning of each departmental Vote, when the Minister's item is called? It is then open, as I understand it and as it has been done here for twenty years, it is open to every member of the House to make a general statement on education. This was done here ad infinitum and ad nauseam. This was done here for three days. The best part of three days was. killed on this. The -first time it has ever happened here.

Now it is done again here and it is going to be done, no doubt. I say now, Mr. Chairman, that these gentlemen on the other side are stalling and killing time here. You know that as well as I do. MR. CROSBIE: Is this a Point of Order, or ia it a speech? It is a political speech. 3047

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 565 NC - 4 MR. CHAIRMAN: I think that what the Minister said is well taken actually. lllembers have drifted considerably from the item which we have been asked to pass While I think that every speaker has 1 on occasions. been relevant to the item. practically every speaker on other occasions has not been. I think that members by this time. after five years. know the rules as well as the Chair does and that we are now discussing the erection and equipping of schools, which is a capital expenditure and members should res~rain themselves to speaking on that item. MR. CROSBIE~ Mr.

Chairma_n, four years ago it was announced that school taxes and fees were -·done away with. That had to be reversed. It has been discussed all morning. We were discussing how to meet the costs of constructing and erecting schools. There have been four years passed since then. Mr. Chairman, for that problem to be dealt with by the Government. The Government had to reverse themselves because they had to leave the churches to meet a percentage of the cost of erecting and equipping schools.

So the policy announced in 1966-67 was not carried out and for the last four years the churches have been left to impose school assessments and school taxes for that purpose. Now the Government is trying to suggest that this is finally, four years after the promise, going to be carried out, that there be no school taxes and no school assessments for these purposes,without explaining whatsoever .pow the problem 1that kept the Government from doing that for the last four years,is going to be dealt with this year.

The Government announced that it is going to do it and_ will not give us any information as to how it is going to do ~t. ?hat is what we are discussing here in connection with that Vote. The hon. the Premier suggested that there is no need for tax increase, with a $98 million deficit shown in the Estimates this year, 3048

May 10, 1971 (Morning) Tape No. 565 NC - 5 MR. CROSBIE: with an $82 million deficit last year, with $400 million'..isl deficit• over the laat five years, the bon. the Premier suggests that the Government can take over more costs and not increase revenue, with the Vote for Education Ut> $25 million. Never mind the question ••• MR. SMALLWOOD: Be will go on again after lunch. MR. CROSBIE: I have not finished my remarks, Mr. Chair1D81l. Now it ia either one o'clock or not. I will go on if it is not • . MR. SPEAKElt: It now being one o'clock I now leave the eh.air until three o'clock. 30_(9

PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 46 5th Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT MONDAY, MAY 10, 1971 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

Hay 10, 1971, Tape 566, Page 3 -- apb particular year. MR. ROHE: !!ay I add 1-1r. Chairman, ( I should have said. if my hon. friend permits) that this money will not be paid out to any - in respect of any church until the other DREE money has actually been expended. It is not something we will be advancing. The other money would have been expended before the thing is - balance is restored. I hope I am making that clear. ?fR. CROSBIE: In this connection the money that is spent by DREE for schools in Newfoundland appears in the estimates for Community and Social Development.

For example, let us say that it is $20 million this year that is going to come from the Federal Government for schools • . , That would be voted in the Department of Community and Social Development. MR. ROWE: Yes. mt. CROSBIE: One of those block votes in that department. So, that money comes first to the Newfoundland Governrn.ent1which has to vote it. It is this House of Assembly which has to vote it but it is a contribution from the Govermnent of Canada.

Could the minister tell us, or does he want us to wait until we get to Community and Social Developmen~. where those monies are going to be spent this yearf You know, what schools for example? MR. ROWE: Well, actually I could tell you what churches will be spending it this year. I think it would mostly go this year to the Pentecostal Church.

We will not know possibly until later in the year whether or not, (and I use these words, I hope nobody will take it too seriously) how much any one church has been short-changed so to speak, we will not know before the end of the year, but we do know in respect of last year that it was the Pentecostal Church which did not receive any. As it happened, purely a coincidence, purely unitentional, the Pentecostal Church was not affected by the DREE areas last year. There was no DREE area where the Pentecostal - where DREE undertook to put in a Pentecostal school. 3052

May 10, 1971, Tape 566, Page 4 -- apb Another year it ~icht very well be the Roman Catholic denor.iination or some area where a preponderance of schools would go in, like the integrated, and that would leave the Roman Catholic Church coming short. That is all right. That might be rectified the following year. ~ut there is a question of keeping the balance somewhere along the line so that we will not be accused of breaking the Constitution.

As it happens, t~e Pentecostal Church has some very serious needs at this present tirr,e in respect I believe of, I am speaking from memory now, Stephenville and New World Island. At any rate, the point is that this restores the balance,that will restore the balance as far as we can esti.Mate for the first two years of the DREE programme. Next year, or :,· two yearsafter that,we will-whatever the format is that is decided on, or is acceptable to the churches for restoring that balance. Over long­ term, it will probably even out very well anyway. Motion -15 carried. Motion, clauses 614-01 through 615-02, carried.

MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, -03, this is instruction,examination costs. The estimates show a decrease of $90 thousand this year as compared to last year. Are there going to be less examinations? l-lR. ROWE: Yes, yes indeed.

My hon. friend apparently has just forgotten for the moment that this is the first year that we will have eliminated the grades IX and X public examinations. ~Jhile there has been an increase in grade X, I think the actual number - somebody from one of the news media was asking me today and I will be giving him that information- -the actual number writing the grade XI examinations next month will be 10,00~ which is the highest number by far in our history. By eliminating the grades IX and X examinations our total cost here will be do~"ll by something of the order of $90 thousand. MR.

HICK}!AN: While the hon. minister is on his feet; this will be the first year that some of the grade XI's will not be writing their examinations too, is that not right? Provincial? Some of the schools have 3053

Hay 10, 1971, Tape 566, rage 5 -- apb Afternoon. now been accredited with the university. NR. ROWE: I think here, and the deputy has just refreshed my memory on this matter too, I have known it, everybody did, last year the university announced that they were prepared to take in some students on the basis of reco~mendations from the schools themselves, or from the principals of the schools. In most cases our information is that, even where such schools have been acceptable,they will still be ~"Titing the external matriculation examinations.

I doubt very much if there will be any schools, there could be, but I doubt that there will be any, certainly not very many schools that will not be writing the grade XI examinations. ,,. ~m. HICKMAN: There will not be any schools, but there will be a percentage of students in the schools. MR.

ROWEr Theoretically there could be some1 you know, that are top- notch, but most of them - you see, after all,most of these students are interested in scholarships and matriculation scholarship_s., ve have a fair n\DDber of these available and these very students we are talking about, the top-notch ones that the principals wouls be prepared to recommend, these are the ones most likely to qualify for scholarships anyway. There is an increase in the actual number writing grade XI, Of course, that is to be taken for granted. AN HON. MEMBER: Nine and ten will not br writing public examinations? MR.

ROWE: In most cases, probably in every case, their own schools would have to have their own internal examinations. MR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the minister might like to inform the committee of what his plans are for introducing the method of grade XI examinations in the schools. In other words, accrediting the schools. I think the minister indicated,last year or the year before, I am not sure which, when the move was made to grade IX and X. Subs~quently it was hoped that it would go on to grade XI, and that the school would do the examining.

Has there been any further move toward that? 3054 1,(. 1 - -- ...

.IIL May 10~ 1971, Tape 566, Page 6 -- apb Afternoon. MR. ROWE: Yes, the hon. gentleman is correct, At the time we announced the IX and X we also indicated that we planned to modify the grade XI examinations. In this regard we feel, I feel and I am sure every hon. member in this Ilouse prc:>bably feels the same way, and certainly people in education generally feel it, the life or death, the academic life or death of a student 1 should not depend on a one-shot examin~tion. So many times it happens that a sixteen year old girl -has to write her exam on Monday morning.

On Tuesday mond,ng ahe has another exam, Wednesday another exam. If for any reasi>-n at all that girl is indisposed, and on an average a nwnber of gir:1.s are, and the same thing applies,probably to a lesser extent,with boys, but if for any reason a girl is indisposed any particular morn:l.ng she could very well fail her examination, not 3055

~fay 10, 1971 Tatff! 567 (afternoon) PK - 1 MR. ROWE, F .-1'1'. write a~pass paper and the result is she has lost her year or at least she is unable to get in University, So what.we are trying to devise is a number of criteria of which the final examination would only be one, "That final examination might be worth fifty percent, but her school record thi:oughout the year would be worth something, and other criteria as well. For example, the teachers~In an ordinary high school today there are five or six teachers. There may be seven or eight teachers involved with each student doing grade XI.

But, if those seven or eight teachers, for example, are convinced that this girl is University material, or a boy for that mattter, then their opinion should come into the picture somewhere, as well as whether or not she got seventy-two percent or forty-nine percent in a mathamatical examination on the 23rd. day of June. ?fR. HURPHY: In other words it is the general assessment over the year. MR. ROWE, F.W.

This is the general idea, to work up to that so that you will not have this - but it does happen, We know it happens. that some youngster loses a year or fails an examination. this is a heart-breaking experience for a student who has worked hard and expects to pass, and who was looking forward to going to University or to go into some other institution, maybe· going into nursing or something of that kind, only to be knocked out completely by virtue of the fact tiat on 23rd, day of June that girl wa~ indisposed and should have been in bed, MB.. COLLINS: Mr.

Chairman, it all goes back to the old problem where one group of people are doing the instructing, ~ometimes another group of people •,j,i writing the examination, still another group of people possibly correcting them. Certainly there is a lot to be said,for the teachers who are teaching the students, to be the ones to examine them in the school. Perhap~ the minister would lika to tell the committee what progress has been made, of if any thought has been given to introducing first year University proirammms in some of the larger high schools across Newfoundland?

Certainly there are a lot of arguments for this; (1) a lot of the young people 3056

May 10, 1971 Tape 567 (afternoon) PK - 2 MR. COLLINS: who are comin~ to Memorial are not ready to leave their homes.

(2) Costs are involved. There are a great number of schools across the Province who are qualified to the first year University programme. Certainly there is a lot to be said for it, Mr. Chairman, and I was of the opinion that the department was looking at this. Could the minister indicate if any progress has been made? MR. Cl1AIR.'-1AN: Order, please. I wonder if we can leave this until we get down to the heading under University. MR. COLLINS: I do not mind, as long as we can get an answer. On motion 03 carried. MR. MURPHY: 04 - Correspondence Courses.

Would the minister kindly explain what ' correspondence courses are available. MR. ROWE, F.lf·. Mr. Chairman, thanks to a number of factors.notable the increase in communications, the building of roads and our transportation programme, bus transportation, and also our bursary programme,which makes it possible for students, especially in the higher grades,now to leave small and isolated communities and go into schools, larger schools,to do their high school work, thanks to that, the need for correspondence work is far less in Newfoundland than it was a few years ago.

But, there are still a few cases where it is still obvious, I mean1you have a~lighthouse-keeper living on Baccaiie~ Island out there, and it is probably not feasible for a child in Grade III or Grade V or Grade VII to come in and go to school somewhere else, that sort of a situation and a few other situations• It is still going on 0 it is still available 1 that is the important thing, but it is not so conunon, not so prev4lent, It is not being used so much because the need is not there, as it was a few years ago. On motion 04 carried. MR.

MURPHY: 615-03-03 Films, Ne~ative Stock and Film Strips, there is a $15,000 increase this year. Is that education T.V. or just school films? MR,-ROWE,-F.W. The increase there is due to replace some of the old stock. this stuff wears ou~ and, of course, here ag,iin you have the incremental demand, you have "X" number of films in one year or film strips. Then next year there are 200 more classrooms than there were the previous year, and 3057

May 10, 1971 Tape 567 (afternoon) PK - 3 !AR. POWf:, F. W. everythinr, else increases in proportion. This amount here then is to look after ordinary incrernentals and also to replace a considerable amount of worn out stock, films and like matter. MR. MURPPY: 03 - Radio Education, ~!r. Chairman, could we just have a brief remark what this covers, radio education is this the school programmes which we hear in the mornings or is that further down? MR. ROWF. , F.W: I did not get it - MR. MURPHY:· Radio education, what programmes (10:15, one in the morning.) come under that? MR. ROWE, F.W.

Yes, we have a number of these radio programmes, ~eryone I am sure has heard them, even accidentally. That is what that is meant to cover. HR. MURPHY: On the station with the Premier. HR. ROWE, F.W. That one is not covered, I do not think,under that heading. MR. MURPHY: I do not think there is much education. On motion 03 carried. MR. MURPHY: 04 - Delivery costs. this is in the wrong department. MR. F.ARLE: 05 - Film Circuit Equipment Subsidy is down $7,000, and yet 02 is up. It would seem if one were up the other would necessarily be up thia year? MR. ROWE, F.W. Yes, What~is it down? MR.

EARLE: One is the film circuit equipment subsidy which is down, the other is the film, negative stock, which the minister tells us there is more required: Why is on~ down and the other up? Comparing 05 with 02, one is uo and the other is down. MR. ROWE, F.W. Yes, this one is a subsidy, this is a twenty-five percent subsidy that we gave, I think, two or three years ago,I believe, twenty-five percent subsidy acquisition for things like projectors in the schools.

Host of the schools that are interested in it took advantage of it during the past two or three years, so that, the actual number now needing it is less than it was,say, two or three years ago. ·3058

Hay 10, 1971 MR. MURPHY: Tape 567 (afternoon) PK - 4 How prevalent is this in schools, f!r. Chairman, may I ask, you know, precen tagetfi&e? There is an audio-visual centre down below, but I am just speaking about the audio-visual program in itself. Is it mainly in high schoolsl Do we have it in elementary schools now, education in fil~ showing? HR. ROWE: F.H. I would say that it is being utilized just as much now in the elementary schools as it was in the high schools. As a matter of fact, I was one of the one's I think to pioneer in this work in Newfoundland.

We made very sure at that time, I am referring back to 1942-43-44, that it was introduced and implemented in the elementary and primary grades. as much as in the high school grades. I do not think there is any discrimination shown at all. On motion 05 through 08 carried. NR. EARLE: 09-Educational Television, Hr.

Chairman, this must be a bit of a disappointment to the minister.The vote is exactly the same as last year, this educational television programme, I understand it is a growing thing, There was some training being done at the university in educational television, A few years ago, you will remember,there was quite a conference on this) the use of educational television was to be quite stepped up, but apparently it has not been. I wonder what has happened, why is it the same this year as last year? MR. ROWE, F.W. Mr. Chairman, I think, I got the gist of the hon. gentleman's question.

I was trying co do twe things, I should not really have been doing. 1'hat is/why is it that this vote is not increasing? MR. EARLE: Why is it not a growing programme? MR. ROWE, F.W. There is a programme on, My hon. friend knows that 1 I am sure, Vhy is it not more this year? I really do not know, _ except that we were not able to get any more money for it this year. But, it is something that is going on all the time and I would hope that it can be increased still more in the future. This is a pretty live issue with the Federal level too, my hon. friend probably knows.

I do nqt think any position has been taken in re~pect•of that, My own feeling is that any wide scale use of television ought to be, if not Federally inspired, at least Federally supported,very strongly. 3059

~Iay 10, 1971 Tape 567 (afternoon) PK - 5 On motion u~ through 11 carried. rm. CROSr.IE: Mr. Chairman, where is that Audio-Visual Centre, that is what I want to ask? The Audio-Visual Centre that is Atlantic Films or somethinp. is it not? }!R. CROSBIE: $35,000 for Audio-Visual Centre. MR. ROl-!E, F. T·!. Yes. It is down at Atlantic Filr.is. Tenders were called for, and Atlantic Films were awarded tenders for that. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, what do they do there, they are teaching teachers how to handle audio visual aids, is that it? MR. ROHE, F. W.

It is in fact a training centre; the use of audio visual aids of one kind and another. It is a highly specialized thing, No one ,,.. teacher can simply take hold and make use of it without some background training in a variety of ways. It is not merely the mechanical 1and that is important, the merely mechanical thing of handling projecters and film strips and things of that kind, there are also the techinques which are highly developed skill, I must confess I have not had a clance to go down since this centre started.and I am not to - AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. ROWE, F.W.

Yes, I know from people who have gone there and the reports I get from my people that it is doing an excellent job. Incidentally, I forgot to mention we also produced there 1 as well, in addition to being a training centre it is also being used to produce educational programmes, audio-visual educational programmes. ~!R. EARLE: Mr. Chairman, I believe some years ago, the Atlantic Films had a loan, and this payment to the Audio.Visual Centre was being credited against an old loan. Has that been paid up? Ras this been credited against the loan or is it a straiRht debt? MR. ROWE, F.H.

I believe a porportion of this - I cannot answer the question definitely, but I know it is being paid off. Whether it has been paid off completely, I do not think so. It was not here last year when this matter was under discussion. My understanding is that some of these payments 3060

May 10, 1971 Tape S67 (afternoon) PK - 6 MR. ROWE. F.W. are actually going towards that,in bits of paper transaction, so to speak. HR. CHAIR11AN: Shall 616-01 carry? HR. MURPHY: 616 - Special Education: Mr. Chairman, if I may - could the minister kindly explain,would this be deaf and dumb and things like that? MR. ROWE, F.~;. I would be ~lad to,because this is the second year.actually it has appeared in our estimates, and it represents a very important step forward.

It is the division that was set up last year with a view to looking after or trying to look after these needs of handicapped children of all categories in this Province. Special Education is a term used to designate them. I would remind the committee that handicapped children come in all forms, al.J types. We are prone to think of them. as being the so-called retarded child, a term which frankly I do not like, and which in itself can be very deceptive;because. what is a retarded child? This is a child who happens to be the poorest student in a class of forty?

Or is it a child who needs very special attention from a specialized teacher or is is a child who is incapable of ever doing anything more than some of the simplest functions? MR. MURPHY: A kind of slow learner. MR. ROWE, F.W. This is it, I mean there are so many categories, so many classes. Then again,a child, for example, was born with only one, l saw a child the other day who was born without hands. The child is normal in !all respects, other than that he was born without hands. Well, ·here is a special case.

This ie all through special educatioL here, of course, all that number, Anyone who has ever gone :1.nto the Janeway Hospital ,to the old Orthopaedic Centre.must have seen a number of boys and girls, whom we have, who ar~ physically handicapped and who. also require very special education. A child crippled by polio, and the child who will never walk as long as he lives, a child who is bedridden even, not only will not walk. but will be bedridden as lon~ as he lives, what do you do about that child? You do not just let the child stay there a vegetable. One time that did happen. It does not happen today.

I do not think it should happen in any civilized country or civilized community. 3061

May 10, 1971 Tape 567 (afternoon) PK - 7 MR. ROWE, F.W. Other types of handicapped children,requiring special attention are, the blind and the deaf and the dumb, or deaf mute. I do not like the term deaf and dmnb, the"deaf-mutes." I think the committee JR ~w~re of the fact,for a good many years now, certainly I would think this last twenty-five or thirty years,we have assumed complete responsibility for the education and trainin8 of all the blind children of Newfoundland. Starting back in 1949-50, we started to take on responsibility for all the deaf mute children of the Province.

Prior to that a couple of children have been sent away - KN. HON. MEl'IBER: Inaudible. ~m. ROHE, F.W. I say, yes, but it is all under special - MR. F.ARLE: I do not think so. MR. ROWE, F.W. Well, I see. But it will, this year it has been - I will have to deal with that later. This has been transferred, TraditionalJy we carried the vote for the deaf mutes and the blind in the Department of whatused to be the Department of Public Welfare 1 but the Government decided that all of this special education will come under the Department of Education and Youth, and so the transfer has been made in the estiamtes here.

There is an error here. I believe, my hon. colleague will, I think, be drawing our attention to this and probably making a motion on it later on in this debate. But that is what our dirision of special education comprises. The head of it,by the way,is Mr. Clifford Andrew~ -;, 3062

Afternoon Session - MRW May 10, 1971 Tape no. 568 Page 1 one of Newfoundland's best-known educators. He, apart from having been principal of one our our largest schools for some years and was twice, I think, President of the Newfoundland Teachers' Association, has also had special training himself, especially experience, in this field. We are gradually getting going on this thing. Among other things and probably the biggest at the present time, the biggest aspect of special education, is the education of the mentally retarded. Starting in Se