April 12,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 18

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

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

public galleries twenty-nine Level 1 Culture students from St. Michael's High on

Bell Island, accompanied by their teachers Tom Moret, Ron Bennett and Tina

Dobbin. Also a second group of forty-two students from Dunne Memorial Academy,

St. Mary's, Grade 7 Social Studies classes (2), accompanied by their teachers

Marjorie Gibbons and Helen St. Croix.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, with your indulgence and the

permission of the other members of the House I would like to depart today from

the routine procedure for just a few minutes, if I might. Today is going to be a

bit of a different day, at least for one member of the House, and all of the

remainder of the days of the House may be different for all the rest of us as a

result, because one member of the House, namely the Member for Grand Falls, and

the Leader of the Opposition is sitting in the House, he says, for his last

time.

I suppose one of the things that can happen to all members

who announce their last days in the House is that things can change in the

future. They may get drafted or any such thing as that could occur, and they

find themselves back sitting in the seat again. But let us assume that what the

member has said is correct, and this is indeed his last day in the House.

It is an appropriate time, perhaps, for all of us to set

aside the real or apparent animosities that sometimes fly back and forth across

the House, and I say real or apparent because the nature of politics is such

that both sides of the House are in constant competition for public attention

and support, and that invites the kinds of animosities and sometimes even ill

will that we see in this House but there comes a time when it is appropriate to

set that aside entirely and try and be fair, reasonable and accurate in ones

comments.

I think after some sixteen years now I think, since 1979 when

the member was first elected, it is clear that he has contributed significantly

to public life in this Province in that sixteen years. I know that he

contributed significantly to public life in the Province before he was elected.

He played significant roles in the community, significant roles in organizations

in the Province in voluntarily contributing of his time through service

organizations and other means for the public good. I want to acknowledge that,

but most of us do that kind of thing but few of us have the opportunity or

sometimes are willing to make the kind of effort that is necessary to contribute

to public life. Today I want to acknowledge that while the Leader of the

Opposition and I have frequently found ourselves expressing views that are quite

opposite in their specifics nevertheless I am confident that the general

approach of both of us has been to make the kind of effort that we think will be

beneficial for the people of this Province, that, I am satisfied, both of us

have agreed to be our duty and we have, I have no doubt, tried to achieve that.

He offered himself for election the first time some sixteen

years ago and has served in a variety of capacities including in the Chair where

Your Honour is now sitting and I understand, I was not in the House at the time,

but I understand he served with a reasonable level of distinction and indeed his

picture hangs somewhere. He is hung somewhere in this building.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is behind the pillar.

PREMIER WELLS: Behind the pillar in this building. I

don't know whether that is an appropriate or inappropriate place but

nevertheless he did serve as Speaker, he served as minister and latterly, in the

last three years or so he has served as leader of his party.

Now I guess there are two or three of us, the hon. Member for

Naskaupi has also served as Leader of the Opposition. It is not an easy role to

fulfil. It is a challenging role. It is a role where you are constantly torn in

two directions. Your natural inclination to support that which you see is good,

yet your obligation to make sure that you carry out a full critical role of what

the government is doing, and I can speak from personal experience that that is

not always an easy role to carry out, I am prepared to concede that some of the

stronger words that the hon. member has voiced have, I've no doubt, been voiced

in carrying out the second part of that role. That is, making sure that he leads

the charge for his forces in the criticism of the government and putting forward

the best position possible for the party that he has the responsibility to lead.

Mr. Speaker, quite apart from the challenges of that, I don't

think there is anything that anybody does in public life that is more demanding

or more challenging than the burden one puts on one's own family by having to

meet the sometimes inordinate but certainly unending demands of carrying out

public office. I think that those demands, speaking from my own experience, are

greater when you are in a position where you have responsibility for leadership

of your party, whether you sit on this side of the House or on that side of the

House. Those demands are very substantial indeed.

It puts you in a position where you seldom have any personal

time for your family, and that is a difficult thing to do, particularly when you

do have a wife, children, even grandchildren, or at least a grandchild, I

understand, recently. That is another status that the hon. member and I have in

common. I can say to him as I've said to others, of all the things I've ever

done or ever been I've not enjoyed anything as much as I've enjoyed being a

grandfather. I expect he probably feels the same way about it. So I'm happy to

see that he is going to have more time now to be a grandfather. It is indeed a

major burden on one.

I shouldn't close these comments without admitting to the

House that the roles of my hon. friend and I have intertwined many years ago,

not as much through him directly as through his family. Many members will

realize that he was born in Howley, a small railroad community on the West Coast

of Newfoundland, or in the western part of Newfoundland. When I first ran to be

elected to this House in 1966 the first person who came and organized a

community activity for me was the hon. member's father, Max Simms, a great and

strong Liberal, a dedicated Liberal. Strongly behind his father in his effort

was his brother, Wes Simms, who was a very strong supporter, who comes from a

great Liberal family. I don't want to make excessively light of that; I

considered Max Simms to be not only a great friend, a client, as well, when I

practised law in Corner Brook, but to be a fine upstanding citizen who

contributed greatly to his fellow human being in a tremendous number of efforts

and an individual who showed great personal courage in his later years of life

when he lost both his legs due, I believe, to diabetes, that was the problem at

the time, and the hon. member's mother, who stood by and worked with his father

at the time. I just mention this to let hon. members and the people of the

Province know that relationships between individuals that are sometimes

portrayed in the House are not always the strongly held views that one

frequently sees expressed in this House.

Mr. Speaker, I feel confident that I speak on behalf, not

just of the Liberal members of the House or the Liberals of this Province, but I

speak on behalf of all of the people of the Province when I extend sincere

appreciation to the hon. Member for Grand Falls for his contribution in giving

fifteen years of his life to public service. I think he has made a substantial

contribution and I think it is entirely appropriate that I, as Premier, should

express that appreciation on behalf of the people of the Province and ask the

House to endorse it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor - Buchans.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, I, too, would ask your

indulgence to associate myself in the first instance with the comments of the

Premier. I believe it is incumbent on me to say a few words and I can tell you,

a lot of people in Central Newfoundland would expect me to say a few words on

this occasion.

I don't know if it is the right choice of words, but I am

sure the member would agree that we have had some sort of a special relationship

over the years, and it came as a result, I think, of the fact that we both ended

up representing two districts, in my case, Windsor - Buchans, and in his case,

Grand Falls, that from 1949 to 1975 was, I think, one district, the district of

Grand Falls - Windsor, comprising both mine and his district. In 1975, the House

will know, that as a result of redistribution, two districts were created, I

became the Member for Windsor - Buchans and in 1979, the hon. member became the

Member for Grand Falls.

It wasn't very long before we were seen in Central

Newfoundland as being very adversarial. And when one looks at the reality in

that district, number one, we were representing what in the first case was one

district, while, in the second case, the greater part of my district was really

part of the town the hon. member's district was, Grand Falls - Windsor, one town

basically. And, of course, the other thing that made us appear to be adversarial

was the fact that he was representing his district on the government side of the

House of Assembly, and I was representing mine on the Opposition side of the

House of Assembly, and - from my perspective anyway - when one looks at the

style of government that we had from 1975, starting with Mr. Moores, and then on

with Mr. Peckford, with regard to where you sat in the House, one could easily

see why one would be seen as adversarial. One would also understand how, in my

case, it was very easy to be critical, and I was indeed very critical. And the

problem I had - because we became great personal friends - the problem I had was

that every time I was critical of what was happening or was not happening in my

district, that criticism appeared to be directed to the Member for Grand Falls

who was, obviously, the minister. But, as I said, and as I got to know more and

more people, and travelled the Province, I found myself more and more being

associated with Mr. Simms, what Mr. Simms did or didn't do, or what I said or

didn't say about Mr. Simms, and in the right circles it appeared to be that my

only interest in the House of Assembly was things I could say, critical or

otherwise, of the hon. member. What those people didn't know, of course, was

that during all that time we developed what I would like to think was a good

personal relationship, and we became good friends.

I just want to tell the House a couple of things that would

indicate exactly what I am talking about. The hon. member generated more press,

particularly in Central Newfoundland, than any other member before or since. I

stand here and admit that I probably lost the battle in generating press. And he

was very ingenious. One particular time I was on my feet being critical of

something the hon. member had done or said, or had not done or had not said, and

he threatened me across the House that he would - `That's okay, Flight,' he

said, `the Advertiser will have this.' Not only did he not just quote me

and be critical with a line or two in the Advertiser , he took Hansard -

the whole Hansard - sent it out, and The Grand Falls Advertiser dutifully

printed it verbatim, my whole speech, and it took me about a year to live it

down.

Mr. Speaker, there is an old saying, `What goes around comes

around'. In 1989, I became a Cabinet Minister, and one of the first things I

did, one of my first duties, was to go to Grand Falls and have a press

conference. And I called a press conference to announce some great thing this

government was doing, and I think it was with regard to building, funding, and

establishing a sportsplex, a recreational sports centre, in Central

Newfoundland.

Anybody who knows anything would know that that sportsplex

was going to go in Windsor. There was no doubt where it was going to be located,

to the extent that I had any involvement in it. I had the press conference, and

I remember the hon. Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation was with me. I

believe he was the executive assistant at the time. One of the very astute

members of the press said, after the announcement was made and after I had read

the statement I was taking questions, and they realized this press conference

was being held in the member's district, in Grand Falls, they said: Mr.

Minister, it is very conspicuous here that the Member for Grand Falls is not

present. Was he not invited? I didn't know. I really didn't know why the Member

for Grand Falls wasn't present. I know I hadn't invited him. I mean, the only

people I invited were all the local Liberals. I wasn't aware who was or wasn't

invited.

I had the opportunity, and I understand that he had some

comments to make about it after, but it suddenly occurred to me, and I responded

by saying: However, I don't think it is any big deal. Because I don't remember

being invited to any of the minister's many press conferences in Grand Falls -

Windsor the last fourteen years. I understand the member heard that and pointed

out that I may have been invited.

In closing, and I'm being very sincere here, I want to say

the ex-minister, the Leader of the Opposition, my hon. colleague, the Member for

Grand Falls has had a great presence in public life in Newfoundland. He has had

a great presence in this House of Assembly. A very quick little story to tell

you just how great that presence was. I felt it first-hand again shortly after I

became the minister. I was accompanied this time by the hon. Member for

Lewisporte. I had gone to Gander to present some twenty-five-year certificates

and pins for employees of the Department of Forestry. One gentleman was

retiring, he was leaving public life. His staff and all his colleagues and his

peers had arranged a party for him in Comfort Cove. Since I was in Gander they

wondered if I would take the time to come down and be a guest at the party. We

agreed. Mr. Penney, the Member for Lewisporte, and I agreed we would do that. I

went down.

There were about probably sixty or seventy people present.

After the meal there were formalities and I was asked to make a speech. A member

of the staff got up to introduce me. After five minutes of a very flowery, very

great speech, saying how grateful they were that I would take the time to be

there with them - it was a very flattering five minutes - the gentleman doing

the introduction said: Now, ladies and gentleman, I'm so delighted to introduce

to you the Minister of Forestry, Len Simms. I said: When does this man get off

my back?

Mr. Speaker, I use that little story to lead into my last

thoughts and to confirm what in my mind is, and what everybody knows, that the

hon. member has had great presence in this House of Assembly, in the public life

of this Province, and certainly in his own constituency. He has made a great

contribution to public life, he has made a great contribution to this House of

Assembly. He has made a great contribution to Central Newfoundland, and

specifically to his constituents and to the people of Grand Falls, and I say to

the people of Grand Falls - Windsor, I appreciate very much the opportunity of

having worked with and gotten to know to the extent I have the hon. Leader of

the Opposition, and I wish him well in whatever endeavours he undertakes.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As Leader of the New

Democratic Party I want to join in the tribute being paid to the Leader of the

Opposition for his contribution to this House of parliament and to the public

life of Newfoundland and Labrador over the last sixteen years. As the Premier

mentioned, prior to that as a community activist in Central Newfoundland and

wherever he lived, making a contribution to his community before entering the

House of Assembly.

My first experience I guess with Len Simms was during his, I

believe, second election. I was a young lawyer at the time and was asked to

assist in unseating him very shortly after an election which was won by some

forty votes back in the early 'eighties. We didn't succeed. Of course Len Simms

has gone on to be, and has been from 1979, a political institution in Central

Newfoundland, as the Member for Windsor- Buchans has attributed to. In the House

of Assembly I have seen Len Simms as a vigorous combatant in parliamentary

debate with a sense of humour as well, and showed great courage in challenging

the government agenda on so many difficult issues in the last number of years.

Len Simms is a gentleman and I have a very good relationship with him since he

has been leader, and as leader.

I see quite a number of young people in the galleries, school

children, and I think it is perhaps fitting to say at this time, when I was

seeking to go into politics back in 1987, and first ran for the federal House of

Commons, a senior well-known gentleman who was a former member of this House

referred to that effort of going into politics as a noble calling, and I asked

him what he meant by that because I thought it maybe a cynical comment. He said,

it is a very noble calling to be participating in the decisions that affect your

people, the people of your Province. I have always remembered that because

despite the cynicism that you hear from members of the public, and sometimes

from the media, and sometimes promoted by people who do not really believe in

the democratic institutions and the democracy that we have, politics is a noble

calling.

Sometimes there are bad examples of people in public life who

bring down the name of politics and that calling by certain activities. I want

to say to all of those present here, and in the galleries, that Len Simms is one

of those who has added to the calling of politics by his example and by his

efforts in public life. He has been nothing but a gentleman in my books and in

my relationship with him.

I must say on a lighter note that I was kind of surprised

when I heard that he was retiring. I did not really think he was old enough to

be retiring until shortly after that, when I saw on NTV where they did some sort

of recap of some event that occurred a number of years ago, when Len Simms as

the Minister of Tourism, or Provincial Affairs, was passing out some athlete of

the year awards and I saw on the television cameras a very young man with a

bushy hairdo, some sort of Afro perm it looked like. He looked like a young

fellow in his twenties, so then I realized, perhaps he is older than he looks.

Then I heard he also had become a grandfather and that also sort of put him in a

certain category, so maybe he is about to retire.

He asked me the other day if perhaps I would be announcing my

retirement as well. I guess I will announce my retirement. My wife and I just

had a little baby girl in November so I am going to announce, when I become a

grandfather, my retirement, too. So, there you have it, my announcement.

I do want to pay tribute to, and thank and show the

appreciation of me and my party for the contribution that Len Simms has made to

the House. He has always been very kind to me. He even encouraged me to run for

his job. I think it is fair to say that while we compete in the House on issues,

on policies, and sometimes on personalties, there is also a mutual respect for

members of this House who participate in vigourous debate, who play the

parliamentary and public scene with honour and with integrity. I think all

parties show their respect for that and for individuals who carry out that role.

I want to join with the Premier, the Member for Windsor -

Buchans and others who will have something to say in showing our appreciation

for Len Simm's contribution to this House and to this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I want to join with the Premier, the

Member for Windsor - Buchans, and the Member for St. John's East in paying a few

words of tribute to our leader and our friend, Len Simms, on behalf of the

caucus in particular.

AN HON. MEMBER: A funeral, boy.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It sounds like a funeral.

Len suggested that I should get up and move adjournment. He

is a little taken aback by all of this. He said, `If they soon don't stop, Bill,

it will be 5:00 o'clock and the House will be closed.'

I just want to say that the Premier has referred to the

responsibilities and the profile that Len has had in public life and politics in

the Province. He served as Speaker, and if my information is correct, I think he

has held six portfolios as a minister in the PC Government under Brian Peckford.

MR. SIMMS: And Tom Rideout, briefly.

MR. L. MATTHEWS: And Tom Rideout, briefly. Yes, we

remember how brief that was, I say to the Leader. But he has had quite a profile

in public life in the Province, he has done quite well - in everything he has

done, not just in politics, but when you look at his achievements with the

Kinsmen Club of Canada, the first Newfoundlander to become national President,

quite a distinguished career as well. And in other activities that he has

undertaken he has done well.

So I want to say to you, Len, on behalf of the caucus, a very

sincere thank you for your efforts on behalf of the party, particularly as our

Leader. As the Premier has said, it is not very easy sometimes being a Leader of

the Opposition. We know how difficult it is sometimes to keep the caucus

together and even the Premier, as Premier, knows how difficult it is to keep

caucus together sometimes, but Len has done a masterful job with that. When you

are in Opposition, things are not always rosy. There are all kinds of reasons

why you are not higher in public opinion and usually, it all comes back to the

lap of the Leader. But Len has carried it off very well, he has kept us together

- and he has done that by being a hard worker, by the way. He has communicated

regularly with the caucus. It has been a very regular occurrence, really, to get

a Sunday afternoon phone call from Len Simms and every time I have gotten it I

knew he was on his way to or from Grand Falls or some other part of the

Province. My wife would say, `Len hasn't called you today, Bill, it is kind of

strange.' But he always would call, and he has done that with all members of the

caucus as he has traveled the Province, wherever he might be; he communicated

very well. I think that was one of the secrets as to why he was so successful in

leading the caucus and keeping it together as he did. So I want to say

thank-you, Len, for all your efforts.

He didn't inherit a very rosy situation when he became Leader

of the PC Party and I probably know that better than most people in this caucus

or perhaps better than any of them. It wasn't a great time to become Leader of

the party, financially, morale-wise and otherwise. It was a very difficult

challenge and I am not sure that Len knew when he became Leader of the party,

really what he was taking over, because I remember day after day talking to him

about this, that and something else and he used to scratch his head and shake

his head and say, `Well, Matthews, what have I done? What am I into?' But

between the jigs and the reels, he worked at it and he dealt with the party

debt, he dealt with organization and even though we didn't win the last general

election, he did remarkably well with very limited financial resources, and

being so far behind in public opinion, when the Premier called the general

election, he did very well. He put on a great campaign and when it was over it

was paid for and he has eliminated the trade debt of the party. So he has done

well on all angles of party work, he has done very, very well for us, and we

thank him for that.

Listening to the Member for Windsor - Buchans, I was reminded

of a few things about Len. I mentioned his phone calls - I don't know if you

know it or not, but Len really loves getting press. I don't know if anyone has

known this or not but when he sits here after Question Period he watches the

door and he waits for the yellow note and slip to come in from the press. Any

time he is here until 3:30 or 4:00 o'clock, he is wondering if he is going to

get a scrum, that's what they said. There have been days when I have said to

him, `You go on up to the office, now, Len, and if the note comes I will call

you.' He said, `You sure?' I said, `Yes, go on now.'

MR. TOBIN: At times we would send one to fool him up?

MR. L. MATTHEWS: No, we never sent one to fool him up,

but I remember one time, when I think he was Minister of Forestry and I was down

in my own area of the Province, it was a bad forest fire season, a very dry

summer and talk about a fellow manipulating the press, `Now, here is this report

by Forestry Minister Len Simms reporting above the forest fire around Grand

Falls, Newfoundland.' He was up in some plane looking down over the smoke and

the flames and giving reports on the forest fire. I often said to myself, I

wonder what he is costing the taxpayers of the Province today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Now, he knows that is true. That's why

he is turning red, you see.

But he loves the public relations. As a matter of fact, he

loves it so much that if one of us happens to get a note from the press and he

doesn't, he goes home and watches television to really see if they carry you. A

couple of days ago, of course, the press called me out on the overfishing, when

they questioned the Premier, and I went out. And afterwards, sometimes you feel

that you did well, and sometimes you don't feel so good about it. I said: `I did

really well. I felt good about the scrum today.' Of course, I didn't bother to

watch television that night. So I come back the next day and he says, `You

really got covered on television last night, Matthews.' I said, `Did I?' He

said, `I watched both stations and did I ever laugh; they didn't carry you

once.' Because they didn't interview him, you see, he didn't want me on. Having

said that, Mr. Speaker, it's all in fun.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) radio.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes, one of the boys said he got carried

by VOWR. But it's all in fun, and I have to be careful because he told one of my

good friends today at lunch that the next time they have a roast for me he is

coming down, because this time he can really let loose, since he will not be

leader and won't be in politics.

But it's only in fun, and I want to say to you, Len, that you

have been a very good friend of mine.

MR. SIMMS: You would never say it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I deeply appreciate the faith you put in

me, making me your House Leader, and I deeply appreciate the little bonus that

comes with it; I want to tell you that.

You have been a good friend, and I want to say, on behalf of

the caucus, once more, thank-you for what you have done for us and for the

party. We really appreciate it, and we want to wish you all the best in whatever

you decide to do in the future. We know you have a company started, and the

Premier said that he believes you, that you might be finished, but having said

all of that we know that you may be back, you may be in business, you may find a

job somewhere else, but whatever it is, on behalf of the caucus, we want to wish

you all the best in all your future endeavours, both you and your family.

I want to say to the Member for St. John's East, when you

talk about being here until you become a grandfather, sometimes that happens

faster than you think.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Not to delay too much longer, but I do want to take an

opportunity, because I, perhaps, have known Len Simms longer than anyone here in

the House. What perhaps most members don't know is that Len and I worked

together in 1964 in Corner Brook on a highway construction project when I was a

young engineering student, and Len was my assistant, which I thought was

appropriate. We spent a summer working on the highway, and there are very many

interesting stories I could tell about that, as there are many stories I could

tell about our time in the House of Assembly, in caucus, and in Cabinet,

particularly travelling overseas, in England, with the Sir Humphrey Gilbert

proposal, and in Kentucky dealing with the Bowater takeover in Corner Brook when

Len was Minister of Forestry. Many stories I could tell, but most of them are

not appropriate for Hansard, so I will skip those.

I just want to say, quite seriously, that it has been a

pleasure to serve with Len and to have known him for some thirty-one years. We

became friends then and, strangely enough, we are still friends after thirty-one

years. We have had some very interesting times together, and I would like to say

that Len has always brought a great measure of decorum to the House of Assembly

when he occupied the Chair that Your Honour now occupies, and as minister in the

Government, and as Opposition Leader, and as opponent in leadership battles. He

was always very honourable, and always a great fighter and a great contender, a

great Parliamentarian, a great constituency person, but has always done it with

a great sense of humour. And I think the greatest tribute one could ever pay to

a politician, would be to say that he dealt with some of the trials and

tribulations of politics in the House of Assembly with a sense of humour - very,

very, important, and Len has done it exceptionally well. Again, on behalf of all

the caucus and, I am sure, on behalf of all members, Len, I wish you well and I

want to note, Mr. Speaker, he has the good sense to now be a constituent of mine

in the great district of Mount Pearl. I wish him well in his retirement there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I must say I am a bit overwhelmed by it all; I did anticipate

that there might have been a few words said, a few kind words, but I quite

frankly didn't anticipate it would be as lengthy. It must be the largest and

longest tribute ever paid to anybody in the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: I am not sure if you got that.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Leader of the New Democratic Party,

who didn't quite confess as much as he should have; he neglected to indicate,

back in the early days, that is, before 1982 when he came out to try to unseat

me in Grand Falls that he really was a Conservative, he was a Tory. He didn't go

as far as to confess that and I don't anticipate that he will, if he is asked

publicly by the press, but worse than that, I think, back in his teenage days he

was probably a Liberal. But I thank him for his kind and generous comments.

To my friend, the Member for Windsor - Buchans, yes, I would

have to agree that he and I - at least there is a perception out in Central

Newfoundland that he and I are great adversaries when we really aren't. I don't

know if we have ever had a cross word or an angry word.

AN HON. MEMBER: In here.

MR. SIMMS: Oh, in the House you might exchange, in the

heat of debate, a few pleasantries or unpleasantries but we have never had an

angry word or anything I don't think, at least not since I have known him. But

what he mentioned - now, there tends to be some exaggeration in all of this. I

will deal with Matthews later on but he certainly exaggerated a lot of his stuff

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I didn't tell it all.

MR. SIMMS: - and so did the Member for Windsor - Buchans,

to a certain extent. When he talked about my sending some speech he made in the

House, out to the Advertiser and they printed it verbatim, that is

reasonably correct. I don't think they printed all of it, maybe just three parts

of it; but I can tell him this, that what he had to say in the House today will

be printed in the Advertiser !

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: But I do thank him - I know he is sincere in

his comments, and I say to him: The first chance I get to tell the people from

the Grand Falls Advertiser what you had to say, I will be sure to say

something kind and nice about you as well; I do appreciate it, I know you are

sincere; I appreciate it very much and I wish you well in your future.

To the Premier, I guess, anybody in the Province would be a

bit overwhelmed if he had the Premier of the Province stand and pay a tribute or

make some kind remarks about him, and certainly, I am no different from anybody

else in the Province; I do appreciate the words that he had to say. But I tell

the Premier this: What I appreciated more than anything else and was more proud

of, was the reference he made to my father. That to me, means more than anything

you could have said about me.

Mr. Speaker, I have a lot of friends in the House. I suppose

they are friends, but I think they are friends, on both sides. Not to be missed,

the Member for Exploits, who was the first Liberal candidate that I faced and

defeated in Grand Falls in 1979. I remember him well. I thank him for giving me

the opportunity that he did back then.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: He is an old friend. For those who don't know

it, when I hear people singing out Roger I turn around to my colleague. Because

I don't know him as Roger, I know him as `Popsy,' and that is what most of the

people out our way know him as.

There are others who I've known for a long time. The

Government House Leader - when he was Leader of the Opposition I was in the

Chair, for awhile at least. I remember having many conversations with him behind

the curtain, which I won't -

MR. TOBIN: He tried to get you to run (inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Yes, he did. I'm glad he is not saying

anything today in this regard because I'm sure he would remind everybody, me

included, about the time he talked to me in 1975, I think it was, about running

in 1975 for the Liberals.

MR. ROBERTS: You would have been four years earlier if

you (inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Yes, but I would have been out probably six

years later. In any event.... I suppose on that side of the House my best friend

is probably the Minister of Finance and Treasury Board, the Deputy Premier.

AN HON. MEMBER: Really?

MR. SIMMS: Yes. We are not close social friends but he is

one individual who I have grown to respect. I'm a little sorry he didn't have

anything kind to say about me here today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: I understand he has trouble remembering things

(inaudible).

Anyway, Mr. Speaker. I'm pleased there are young people in

the gallery today and young students from all over the Province. They won't

understand everything that has been said down here today, but when you hear

comments from the Member for Mount Pearl, the gentleman to my left, about how

long he has known me, I think it is fair to say that he is - I'm not sure, but I

believe you are the dean of the House now, are you not, or...?

MR. TOBIN: Successive.

MR. SIMMS: Who is - maybe -

AN HON. MEMBER: Continuously. Ed Roberts (inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Continuously, at least. So when he and I -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: What is that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Okay. We won't get into a big argument over

it. I didn't mean to start a big racket over this, but in any event he has been

around a long time. To hear his words, his generous comments, also means a lot

to me. I did know Neil long before politics and the House of Assembly. Yes, I

was his assistant. I was a young student. He was a graduate engineer or

something at that time.

MR. WINDSOR: I was thinner than you (inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: He was thinner than I was then, yes. But you

aren't now. I was going to say to the students and to the young people in the

gallery, you hear an awful lot about politics from time to time, and often the

comments aren't very generous about politics or politicians. Let me assure you

that politics is an honourable profession. It is something worthwhile to get

involved with, despite the negativity that is often associated with the

profession and with the job. There takes a certain type of individual who is

prepared to work with people and help people. There takes a certain type of

group of people I suppose, to make tough decisions and difficult decisions, and

I know they have been tough, I say to the Premier; I understand that.

So, when you hear people in a general way casting negative

remarks about politics and politicians, I just want to assure you that it

doesn't apply to everybody in politics, or all politicians, just as it doesn't

apply to everybody in any other profession. It is an honourable profession, one

that I am very proud to have served in, and I want to conclude by thanking you,

your predecessors in the Chair, certainly the people at the Table who have

always been very helpful to me in my sixteen years here in the House, to the

Pages, and those before them, and to the Sergeant-at-Arms who I had the

privilege of appointing, I guess, back in the day I was Speaker. I particularly

want to pay tribute to the press and media who have been very kind to me over

the years, reasonably generous, and always gave me a square shake, to the other

people associated with the House, the commissionaires, and all the rest of the

people, especially in the Library. I must not forget Norma Jean, or I will hear

about it.

Mr. Speaker, to my colleague, Bill Matthews, I leave the

final comment. He did exaggerate quite a bit. What he said about the press, that

is a little bit of an exaggeration. I felt I had a responsibility, as leader, to

wait around to see if the media wanted to ask about the issue of the day or

something, as leader of the party; that was all. There was never anything beyond

that. He makes it sound like it was some big deal; but, I must say, I was very

pleased to see that CBC and NTV didn't bother to carry him the other night. That

really made me feel good.

I thank him, and I have to say to members of the House that

if there is one individual, in my term as leader of the party, and Leader of the

Opposition, that I relied on more heavily than anybody, it was the Member for

Grand Bank, who did a terrific job for me as House leader and deserved the bonus

he has been getting for the last three or four years. I only hope - well, who

knows? We will see what happens. I had better not say anything about that.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank all members of the House.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: I am sure I speak for all members,

especially those who have not spoken, when I wish you a long, successful, happy

and financially prosperous retirement.

Before I continue, I would like to welcome to the Speaker's

gallery, a former member of this House, Mr. Garfield Warren, who represented

Torngat Mountains and was a Member of the Crown.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, first of all I am delighted to

see the Member for Torngat. You were here for my tribute, were you, Garfield?

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier a few questions about

a favourite topic of mine, the Trans City contracts. With respect to that

particular issue, I know that there is a matter that we have addressed, or tried

to address, in the House in the past on several occasions but we never really

received a satisfactory answer to the question. In fact, now, in reading through

the judge's ruling, Judge Orsborn of the Supreme Court also said that he could

not get a satisfactory explanation from the testimony throughout the trial, so I

would like to ask the Premier today, first of all, if he can now explain to the

House why the evaluation and award of the Trans City contract had to be so

closely monitored by a special committee of his Cabinet Ministers? What was the

reason for that? The judge said, and I have said, this question has never been

answered satisfactorily.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: My recollection of it, Mr. Speaker, is

that there were a number of things that we were doing that were different. We

weren't just simply calling a tender in the conventional sense of that, and

awarding the contract to the lowest bidder who met the basic specifications as

they were specifically designed.

This was a request for a proposal, although I frankly admit

that the way it went out there were some very confusing statements in it. Tender

was used instead of proposal occasionally, and then proposal would be used, so

it created a great deal of confusion; but there were two or three objectives

that I recall being considered at the time, first the suggestion that we could

get a better deal for the taxpayers of this Province by seeking a design, and

build and finance a complete package, because the argument was being made that

by going to tender you get over-design, or going to conventional design method,

and then calling for bids on the pre-design, you get excessive design and this

runs into much higher costs. So the strong recommendation was that we could get

a better deal for the taxpayers by doing it in that way.

Secondly, we could get it financed on a better basis at a

lower cost than we could otherwise do, and thirdly - I had sort of forgotten one

of the factors driving this at the time, was this was just at the onset of the

recession and we wanted to get government work under way quickly to help offset

the effects of the recession. And we felt this could best be addressed in this

way, by having it done by a committee of Cabinet, because it wasn't a

conventional approach.

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

Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, in a supplementary, and just

briefly in response to that, the judge didn't seem to accept that as a

satisfactory explanation, that's the point I am trying to make, because it

doesn't wash. There are all kinds of tenders that are let probably from time to

time that don't necessarily follow the normal routine. There are probably other

reasons for it.

In any event, a couple of weeks ago, the Premier may recall,

I asked him in the House if the police were investigating the Trans City

contracts, and I asked him as Minister of Justice. At that time, he said he

didn't know. Since then, I am told, and I believe there have been public

statements made by the RCMP commercial crimes unit saying they are in fact

reviewing the evidence in this case. So can the Premier, in his capacity as

Minister of Justice, now confirm whether or not there is a police investigation,

an RCMP investigation into the contracts, and could he outline to us the nature

and extent of this investigation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I expressed my view at the

time that the hon. member made that suggestion of what a terrible approach it

was, and it really portrayed politics at its lowest, and I am sorry that he

appears to have resorted to it today. In any event, when he did make that

statement, I wrote Colin Flynn, the Director of Public Prosecutions, and I

referred to the exact comments of the Leader of the Opposition and told him what

was said, and I sent a quotation from Hansard so that he would be fully

informed, and asked, `Would you be good enough, please, to speak with the

appropriate officers of the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary and the Royal

Canadian Mounted Police to ascertain if there is any basis for the suggestion

made by Mr. Simms, that there was interference in the investigation.' Here is

what came back the next day.

On March 24 I received a response from Chief Leonard Power of

the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary. In response to my question, Chief Power

writes: `I can advise that the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary is not now, nor

have we been involved, in any investigation concerning this company or related

issues that arose during the recent civil suits in the Supreme Court. I can

further say, with certainty, that no member of the force has been dissuaded or

asked by any person in authority not to accept a complaint, or investigate any

complaint, that may arise in relation to that company.' On the same day, March

24, he says: `I also received a response from Inspector McCrae, officer in

charge of the commercial crime section: `I wish to assure you that no one,

either within or outside government, has approached me, or any of my

subordinates, requesting that we delay or stop any investigation into Trans City

Holdings Limited.' The director wrote to me: `I can also further assure you that

no request has ever been made of me, or any of our prosecutors, either directly

or indirectly, to delay or put on hold any review, or investigation, of Trans

City Holdings Limited."

Now, was the thrust of the Leader's question at the time.

They gave me the answer and I did not see much point in making a public issue of

it because it was, as I had noted at the time, of no substance, whatsoever.

Subsequently, I heard an interview with a police officer on the radio saying

that in the ordinary course of things when they see reports in a newspaper and

so on, they would review documents, and they were reviewing the judgement

rendered by the court in that case. I expect that is a completely normal and

appropriate thing for the police to be doing. I see nothing whatsoever untoward.

If they see a newspaper report suggesting that somebody may have done something

wrong, suggesting that somebody may have breached the law, even if they see an

allegation coming from the Opposition to that effect, and there are some

documents or judgement of a court, or some report or something, they will,

that's their normal course, police are supposed to be suspicious and do reviews.

I suspect, I don't know the exact numbers, but I remember in an earlier life

this coming to my attention when I was acting as a lawyer for a person who was

accused of a serious crime. The police say we investigate thousands of things

that never get beyond just a police inquiry. This is perfectly normal, the hon.

member shouldn't generate anything else beyond that out of it.

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I listened or tried to listen as

carefully as I could when he read the lengthy letter from the Constabulary. I

didn't ask him about that, I asked him about the RCMP crime

section and he then

referred to a response that he had and he read through it rather quickly, but I

think they were words to the effect, they confirmed they were never asked to

delaying or put on hold any police investigation. I think those were the words

he used, it was fairly quick so I couldn't get it all.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: I think that's what he said.

My question to the Premier is: Is there an investigation

ongoing? Does that imply then, that in fact they weren't asked to stop one or

delay or put on hold? Is there one going on? That was my question to him, and it

flowed from information that he referred to himself, the comments by, I think it

was a Staff Sergeant or somebody with the RCMP, who publicly, not only on radio

but in the newspaper as well, made reference to the fact that they were

reviewing the evidence in the Trans City issue. That would imply, I think - I am

not trying to make anything on it - I am assuming that that means they are

investigating it. If they are reviewing the evidence, then they are

investigating it, I presume. In any event, this is now two or three weeks ago. I

don't know what the date was on the letter to the Premier; perhaps he could tell

me when he stands -

PREMIER WELLS: March 24.

MR. SIMMS: - with respect to the RCMP. So that's three

weeks ago. So, does he know now, can he now confirm there is absolutely no

review of evidence, that there is no investigation going on with respect to

Trans City contracts? Is that what he is saying here today?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker. The police don't report

to me what they are investigating or what they are not investigating. The police

do their investigation, and one thing we have in this Province is a pretty good

system of justice. The police work fairly well, work fairly independently, and

the Director of Public Prosecutions works totally independently and people are

prosecuted, on the whole, not because they are involved in politics or they are

not prosecuted - nobody fails to prosecute them because they are involved in

politics; we have a pretty good system of justice in this Province.

Occasionally, when excessive political pressure is brought to bear, an

individual may be charged when he or she ought not to be charged. That happened

one time before and it was a pretty terrible circumstance. I have never

forgotten how that happened. It happened because Opposition members at the time

made that same kind of allegation and it's unfortunate when they do that kind of

thing.

Mr. Speaker, I don't know whether they are conducting an

investigation or not and I don't need to know. If they are, they will tell me,

but I do know - I do know, that they did, in fact, or at least I heard the

inspector from the RCMP interviewed, state categorically that they were, in

fact, looking at the judgement of the court. Whether they are going to conduct

an investigation as a result of it or not, is entirely up to them.

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

MR. SIMMS: But, Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, I

mean, that is precisely the question I asked the Premier several weeks ago and

again now, today. I didn't make any allegations. I asked him a question - one

was with respect to a delay in putting on hold and he has addressed that and

said no, and I have asked him if there is an investigation going on, an RCMP

investigation ongoing with respect to Trans City contracts, and I believe now,

he has just told us that he doesn't know if there is an investigation. If that's

the answer, well, that's fair ball. I simply asked the question in order to get

the answer; so, is that what the Premier is saying, he doesn't know if there is

an investigation on or not into the Trans City issue by the RCMP crimes

division? Is that what he is saying?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the RCMP may or may not be

doing an investigation. I do know that they did review the judgement. Now,

whether that constitutes an investigation - but I can tell hon. members that the

RCMP review numerous things that may or may not result in an investigation at

some time later as a result of that review. Every time they see something where

somebody alleges that somebody may have broken the law or may not have acted in

accordance with the law, the police, as is their duty, will do an investigation.

How ever they come about the information, even if it comes about as a result of

an allegation made by an opposition member in the House of Assembly, they may

well do an assessment. It may turn out to be a full blown investigation but I

can say to the hon. member, while I have been made aware, as the general public

has been made aware, that the police did in fact review the judgement and

documents in relation to this, I have no idea at this moment whether or not that

has resulted in an investigation.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well now we are getting somewhere, that is what I wanted to

know. Did you know? The answer is you do not know and you would not normally

know is what you are saying. You cannot even find out if there is an

investigation going on if you wanted -

PREMIER WELLS: Oh, I can find out if I wanted to. I could

call public prosecutions and ask them to find out (inaudible) but I don't

interfere with (inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: No, that is not interfering, I say to the

Premier, to ask if there is an investigation going on. How is that interfering?

That was the question I asked him two weeks ago. He did not ask then so will he

ask now, today or find out and let the public know and let the people know if

there is?

In any event, I will ask him one final supplementary

question, Mr. Speaker. The Premier has said in the past both inside and outside

the House that before the Supreme Court decision was brought down that he would

hold a judicial inquiry into this entire affair if there was one iota of

evidence of wrong doing or questionable practices? Now the court indeed found

evidence of questionable practices, of that there can be no doubt and more than

one iota. Now the government has appealed the decision. I want to ask the

Premier this: is he prepared to give a commitment now, in the House, that if

that appeal fails and the findings of the Supreme Court stand, will he then

order a complete independent judicial inquiry into this whole entire matter?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, if there is any evidence that

there is any wrong doing on anybody's part or any indication of wrong doing on

anybody's part, I will ask that a full inquiry be held but I am not going to

start witch hunts because politicians want to see witch hunts started.

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

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister

for Natural Resources.

Yesterday in the House the minister read out a ministerial

statement regarding the spray program for this year for the Province. In the

statement the minister said that it looks like and everything indicated, that

there would be a total of some 209,000 hectares of forest that would be

defoliated by the looper this year. Out of that, approximately 119,000 hectares

were in the moderate to severe category. Further on in his statement the

minister said that a program could range up to the spraying of 75,000 hectares.

Now I ask the minister, if there are 209,000 hectares infected and infested -

which as far as I am concerned is just as serious as the other 119,000 - if

there are 119,000 severely infected, why are we spraying just 75,000 hectares?

What about the rest of it, especially the other 50,000 that are severely

infested?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is true that the surveys have indicated about

209,000 hectares have infestation. Approximately half of the area has light

infestation. We don't spray light infestation. That is not threatening the life

of the tree in one year. The remainder, moderate to severe, and we have

evaluated the moderate to severe areas to determine what percentage of that we

need to cover. There are certain areas that get subtracted from that number. For

example, any area that is going to be harvested this year - if we are going to

cut the trees in 1995 we don't need to spray the trees because we only spray the

trees to try to save them for the future and a certain area of the moderate to

severe infestation will be cut in 1995.

There are also some parts of that moderate to severe area

that are not merchantable timber. They are in inaccessible areas and will never

become merchantable timber. They too are excluded because they will never be

harvested and there is no need to therefore protect them for future harvesting.

In the end, what it comes down to is that my staff, working with the people from

the two companies that are involved and working with the federal forestry

officials who have done the surveys, have determined that approximately 75,000

hectares are in the merchantable timber area, moderate to severe infestations,

and need to be protected to maintain these trees for the future.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Back I think between 1966 and 1972 there

was an infestation then affecting approximately 12 million cubic metres of

timber in the Province. After a very I suppose large spray program at that time

with fenitrothion the paper companies only salvaged 20 per cent of that

particular timber, which amounted to approximately 2.4 million cubic metres. As

far as I'm concerned, it is just as severe today. Having said that I ask the

minister: Could he tell the House what the officials in forestry and the two

major paper companies in the Province recommended to his department to spray

with?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, we are aware of the amount that

could be salvaged the last time. I believe I said it in my statement yesterday

that only 20 per cent was salvaged from some of these earlier infestations.

These were much larger infestations than we are now facing. We are at the

beginning of an infestation here and we are going to do the spray program this

year to attack the areas that are most vulnerable. We are certainly hoping for a

good weather window in the third week of June and the first half of July so that

we have a very effective spray program and can cover these areas at least twice.

We want to protect these trees at least twice.

In coming to our decision as to what we would use this year,

we evaluated the two options. I believe I did say that yesterday in response to

questions. We evaluated the two options and we discussed these two options with

the companies, as well as with the federal forestry people, but in the end,

considering all factors, we decided that it would be most appropriate to go this

year with BT.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The

minister also stated in his statement that this year they would be doing some

experimental trials involving a new growth regulator called Mimic and testing

two new BT products. Could the minister inform the House where this testing will

take place, and when?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Yes, Mr. Speaker. In the same time frame as

the regular spray program when the insects are in that vulnerable stage, the

appropriate stage of development, that is when the experimental series of sprays

will be done. We are using two BT products that we believe are going to be a bit

more effective than the present one in terms of its stickability in wet weather,

it will last a bit longer, and they should be a bit more effective, these two BT

products. We are going to do some sprays with that this year, and the Mimic, the

growth hormone, as well this year.

Mimic has already been approved by the federal government for

the spruce budworm but it has not yet been approved for the looper.

Unfortunately for us it is not approved for the looper and we don't have a

budworm problem, so we can't go having widespread sprays with it. This year we

are doing the experimental area with the looper.

In terms of areas, they are in the western region. I haven't

seen the final blocks yet but they are certainly in the western region, I think,

for the most part, in central and western region, down around Grand Lake and in

that region. I will be pleased to get the details of that for the hon. member at

any time as soon as it is available.

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

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

absence of the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture I have a question for

the acting Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture. It is pertaining to the

TAGS review process. A few months ago there was considerable concern expressed

about the low number of appeals that were actually being accepted after the

reviews officer recommended acceptance. I think it was somewhere around 5 per

cent of appeals that were actually accepted after the appeal.

I know there was representation made from a number of corners

in the Province. I publicly voiced my concern about it. Members opposite - and I

believe the Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture and a delegation met

with the federal minister's on it, trying to do something about this concern

with the TAGS appeal process and, as a consequence, there was an independent

review panel set up, a third and final phase of review. I am wondering if the

acting Minister of Fisheries, Food and Agriculture, could inform the House what

the Province's understanding was of how that review panel would work, because I

hear there are some problems being encountered with it, that it is really just

another level set up that really does nothing different.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Natural Resources.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, I am the alternate Minister of

Fisheries, Food and Agriculture - first alternate - and I must say I am not

up-to-date on the details of that. The minister just had to leave today for

meetings outside the Province. I will be pleased to try to get that information

for you, and get it to you.

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

House Leader.

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

looked like the Premier was going to get up. I don't know if he is aware of the

situation or not, but the concern about the review process, there was

considerable concern about it throughout the Province, that 4 per cent or 5 per

cent of all appeals were actually being approved, or awarded benefits of

appellants.

The thing is now, as a result of the fuss and the kerfuffle,

they set up a third and final level known as the independent review process,

three independent persons, independent of the federal government, and I am

hearing now that some of the people who have appealed are getting letters saying

that the independent review panel will make its decision without having

in-person hearings or representations from the person who is doing the appeal.

I guess my question is, really, it seems to me it was only

set up to try to take a bit of political heat off the situation, because what is

the point if the person who is appealing their decision cannot appear before

them and give them additional information, or make representation, and verify

history attachment and dependence, then what is it all about? I am wondering if

the Province is aware of that. If they are not, will they check into it and make

the appropriate representation to the federal ministers concerned, namely

Axworthy and Tobin?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I can tell the House what has happened. We

have been aware of the problem for more than a month now, and about a month or

five or six weeks ago, perhaps, we structured a committee of members from all

parts of the Province - members of the government caucus - and asked them to go

to Ottawa and meet with the ministers and senior government officials involved

in it, to try to find a solution to this problem, and I believe it was probably

as a result of that meeting that this additional review process was put in

place. Then, the review process started to function and it became clear that it

still wasn't addressing a fundamental problem.

I asked my Parliamentary Assistant to go to Ottawa again and

meet with the ministers - and this time it was just my Parliamentary Assistant

who went - I asked him to go again and meet with the ministers, and meet with

the officials involved, and try and find a solution. He came back last week, I

guess it was, and reported to me on what occurred.

I have since spoken with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

in Ottawa about the matter, and as soon as the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans

gets the Spanish fleet off the Nose and Tail, hopefully, or gets them under

control out there at least, this matter will be addressed directly.

My Parliamentary Assistant, who is the Member for Eagle

River, will be in Ottawa probably next week, I think next Tuesday.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WELLS: Well, I asked him to go. We will be

meeting, I believe, with the Minister of Fisheries next Tuesday or Wednesday - I

have forgotten the date - to try and address the problem. So, yes, we are aware

of it; yes, it is being addressed.

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

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

the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations regarding the activities of the

Workers' Compensation Review Division. Can the minister confirm that the Chief

Review Commissioner is hearing all cases across the Province?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: No. About a week-and-a-half ago, when the

hon. member raised another issue, I had an opportunity to have some discussion

with the Chief Review Commissioner, and in our discussions he indicated to me

that other commissioners appointed last July are now also handling some of the

reviews. We didn't discuss numbers, I say to the member, but there are others

besides the Chief Review Commissioner.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Kilbride, a

supplementary.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, something has changed in the

last week and a half if that is the case. Something has changed drastically.

According to information sent by the Workers' Compensation Commission's chief

executive officer, Ms. Barbara Taichman, she was clearly under the impression

that the Chief Review Commissioner was hearing all cases. In fact my

understanding is that the minister was even surprised when he bumped into the

Chief Review Commissioner in Corner Brook because he was out there hearing

cases.

My understanding is this. That the Chief Review Commissioner

has been hearing all cases since December 1. I wasn't aware that that had

changed, but my information was that he was hearing all cases across the

Province, that he was travelling to Corner Brook, Grand Falls, Gander and

Labrador hearing cases while there were part-time commissioners in Corner Brook,

Grand Falls, Gander and Labrador. The question is: Why has that changed,

Minister, if it has? Can you confirm that he was hearing all cases? If it has

changed, why has it changed?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: Yes. First of all let me say to the hon.

member that neither I nor the hon. member are responsible for the impressions

that are left with the CEO of the Workers' Compensation Commission. I can't

speak for Ms. Taichman or why she felt that the Chief Review Commissioner was

doing all the cases. Let me say to the hon. member, I remember last year when my

colleague the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation and the hon. member

were debating this particular issue and the legislation associated with the

position.

The Chief Review Commissioner is autonomous really from the

department and has the right under the legislation to assign the cases. As the

backlog decreased from the old tribunal system down into the new system, it is

at the discretion of the Chief Review Commissioner to decide who hears the

cases. I say to the hon. member that the Chief Review Commissioner may have been

in other parts of the Island - again, that is his decision - to hear cases, and

that he may have in reality been in Labrador. Again, if you look at the

legislation, you will see that he has every right to do that.

The other side of the coin is that my understanding again in

conversation with the Chief Review Commissioner recently was that there are

other people, other commissioners, who are doing other cases and have been.

Whether or not in that specific time frame the review commissioner was the only

one hearing cases, the member could be correct. Again I say to the member, he

has the right to do that. It isn't up to me to take that right away from him

unless we change legislation.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Kilbride.

MR. E. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I would have liked to have

been a fly on the wall on the conversation that took place between the Minister

of Employment and Labour Relations and the Chief Review Commissioner recently.

As the minister is fully aware, at the meeting that took

place that we talked about a week and a half ago in his office on March 13 with

the CEO of the Workers' Compensation Commission, with the Injured Workers

Association, that was an issue that was raised. Correspondence sent back to the

Injured Workers Association thereafter indicated in writing that it was Ms.

Taichman's understanding that all reviews were being heard by the commissioner.

The minister is right, in that the Chief Review Commissioner

has the right to assign cases. But if the Chief Review Commissioner is going to

hear all cases across this Province and incur extra cost in doing so -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question. (Inaudible).

MR. E. BYRNE: Yes, I'm trying to lead up to it, Mr.

Speaker, if you would just give me a moment. Sorry. If he is going to hear all

cases across the Province and incur extra costs from it, why did the minister

let it go on? Has the minister put a stop to it? Can he say for certain now that

cases in all parts of the Province will be assigned to part-time review

commissioners in those areas of the Province?

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

Labour Relations.

MR. MURPHY: I sense, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member

has a force that drives him through questions. Whether he hears or doesn't hear,

or whether he is a fly on the wall or not, I have absolutely no idea.

What I said to the hon. member initially was, is that it is

my understanding that the review commissioner is now designating cases to other

commissioners. Okay? The hon. member knows the legislation and fully admitted

that the commissioner has the right to do that under the legislation. So I mean,

I really don't understand again, by innuendo and/or again by suggestion, what

the member is really trying to drive at. We have improved the system immensely,

we have saved the taxpayers thousands and thousands of dollars. In the old

tribunal system, I say to the member, we had in the Estimates some $447,000

cost, last we saved $100,000 and the projected for this year is down to $221,000

which is less than half of what was spent in the old tribunal days. So I don't

understand why the member is up grand-standing every day.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, a little light reading for

members of the House over the Easter break. These are the statutory orders that

have been passed by the government since March 11, 1994, beginning then and

ending on March 31, 1995. They are tabled by me in accordance with the

obligations of

Section 18 of the Statutes and Subordinate Legislation Act. I

would add, Mr. Speaker, this is only one set. I will forego tabling any other

sets. If anybody really wishes them, he or she could attend upon the Clerk of

the House who I am sure will be only too happy to provide them with copies of

the Gazettes. You may see now why we need regulatory reform in this Province.

PREMIER WELLS: We did that?

MR. ROBERTS: The Premier asks, `We did that?' In

collective ministerial sense, we did, is my answer.

Thank you, Sir.

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, last -

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: I am sorry?

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: I say to my friend, the Member for Burin -

Placentia West, if he would like two copies of that, I would be happy to ride

them with him but there will be a quiz when we get back after Easter.

Your Honour, last Friday in the debate on the Estimates of

the Lieutenant-Governor's establishment, the gentleman, the Member for Bonavista

South asked me if it were correct that His Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor did

not pay taxes. I told him, to the best of my understanding that statement was

not correct, but I undertook to speak to the officials concerned. I now have a

Minute from the Deputy Minister of Finance who says: I can confirm that you were

correct in your reply to the hon. member's question. The Lieutenant-Governor to

Newfoundland and Labrador receives no special tax exemptions and that appears to

be the case in other provinces as well.

The Governor General's salary, as I noted, is tax exempt but

that's a provision of the Constitution Act dating back to the original British

North America Act in 1867. I pass that information to the House for such use

that it may wish to make of it.

Petitions

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

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

I rise to present a petition on behalf of sixty-nine

individuals who petition this House on the issue of the use of fenitrothion.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Are they for it?

MR. HARRIS: These petitioners know where they stand, I

say, Mr. Speaker, as does this member. There seem to be a large number of people

in the House who don't know where they stand and many of them are sitting over

here on this side of the House, but these petitioners say:

WHEREAS fenitrothion is a toxic substance having a

detrimental effect on animals, fish, birds, insects and plant life; and

WHEREAS the use of this substance was discontinued by the

Government of Newfoundland in favour of Bt, Bacillus thoringienis for spraying

of our forests and is also banned in certain states and other provinces; and

WHEREAS consideration now is being given to the use of

fenitrothion to combat predicted infestation of hemlock looper in 1995;

WHEREFORE we, the undersigned, call upon the Government of

Newfoundland to continue the policy of not using fenitrothion in future spraying

programs.

Now, Mr. Speaker, this petition was prompted in the last

couple of days by the mere suggestion that the Province would consider using

fenitrothion in the forests, and I note that even though the minister made an

announcement yesterday in the House, he was very careful prior to making his

announcement some ten minutes before that, to basically say that the options

were still open, they were considering both options; they were keeping their

options open, he wasn't even going to make the announcement for a couple of days

he said, but then, when pressed, finally made the announcement yesterday

afternoon. So, Mr. Speaker, I don't think that this petition, even though the

announcement has been made for this summer, is a petition without a purpose,

because it does bring to mind and bring to public attention the issue

surrounding the very controversial insecticide, fenitrothion.

I recall, Mr. Speaker, some years ago when the government was

considering using fenitrothion, it was a very controversial issue. There were

concerns raised by former biology teachers, by current biology teachers, by

members of this House, by scientists; there was a concern about the possibility

of effects on humans - Rhys syndrome was identified as a possible result from

fenitrothion spraying programs, there were other concerns.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. HARRIS: Well, that may have been discovered since

then, that aspirin was the cause of it. I see the former biology teacher nodding

his head back there but I recall that member raising the issue of Rhys syndrome

back then when that came up, so that was the concern, that was the controversy

at the time, Mr. Speaker, a lot of individuals were concerned about the use of

fenitrothion; in fact, as the minister mentioned yesterday in the House, the

concerns about the use of this insecticide prompted a further review by the

Federal Government as a result of the concerns raised by environment officials

in Atlantic Canada.

The results of that review will soon be published, Mr.

Speaker, and I would say, from my information, that review will disclose that

although fenitrothion will continue to be registered, it will be subject to very

serious restrictions, and its registration may not last more than another couple

of years. This insecticide is credited with doing damage to over seventy

different songbirds, causing life-threatening effects on about 40 per cent of

those. It is credited with causing damage to salmon and trout eggs and

hatchlings. There are serious environmental effects on other wildlife and other

forest uses through this toxic substance, fenitrothion.

Mr. Speaker, when Bt is there, is available, is equally

effective under most conditions, then there should be a long-term commitment to

the use of Bt, and avoidance of the use of fenitrothion, which is currently the

policy. It has been definitively banned for use in the Province of Ontario.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. HARRIS: I think this Province should declare itself

in the long-term interest, and the Official Opposition should be pressed to

state where they stand on the issue.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: I welcome the opportunity to respond to the

petition from the Member for St. John's East. I don't know where the petitioners

are from. Are they from St. John's, or other areas of the Province?

MR. HARRIS: Grand Falls, Port au Port, Corner Brook,

Mount Pearl, Lawn.

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, I would like to have a few

words about this particular petition.

The minister made a statement yesterday telling the people of

this Province that there was a very serious problem in the forestry industry in

this Province - a very serious problem. When you say there are 209,000 hectares

of forest in this Province that is threatened to be defoliated this year alone,

as far as I am concerned, that is a serious, serious problem.

Now, we don't have to be reminded, as members of the House,

and I don't have to be reminded as an individual from the West Coast of the

Province, what the forestry industry means to that particular area of the

Province. If it were Bt, or Mimic, or fenitrothion, or Raid, or Black Flag, or

White Garden, whatever, that would kill and do away with the hemlock looper or

the budworm, I would be the first to stand in the House and say, `Use that'.

I am a bit sceptical, I say to the minister, and I say it

with all due respect to the Member for St. John's East, that by using Bt this

year it will not do the job. I hope it will. I hope it is excellent. I hope it

will do the job that it is supposed to do.

Mr. Speaker, both Bt and fenitrothion - and the Member for

Gander, I remember, I have some speeches up there from the Member for Gander

with some wonderful quotes in them, I tell you that - fenitrothion and Bt are

both insecticides. One is a chemical insecticide, and the other is a biological

insecticide. Fenitrothion kills as soon as it touches the organism. We know,

when the minister says that the forests are defoliated, that it is not just on

the leaf of a fir tree, it is not just on the bough of a spruce tree. It is down

in the moss; it is on birch trees; it is on hardwood; it is on everything. The

eggs are down in the forests, and especially if it is in a wet or damp area, the

eggs will stay in the moss and survive all summer long, year after year.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, they will. If they are exposed to the

sunlight, and exposed to the light, then you can get at them, but with Bt it is

a biological insecticide, and it has to be ingested to be effective.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very serious problem. When I look back

between 1966 and 1972 to an infestation of 12 million cubic metres of wood,

salvaging only 20 per cent, that worries me. When I have companies like Abitibi

and workers from Abitibi-Price coming to me and asking me to see if I can get

Kruger to exchange some wood, see if I can get the Crown to exchange some wood

so that they can keep cutting on the West Coast of this Province - Abitibi-Price

is bringing in wood from the mainland every year now for the last three or four

years and our own workers are sitting back doing absolutely nothing.

The minister said today, the paper companies will harvest

this wood this year. Well, I say to the minister that the paper companies can't

harvest the wood this year. They can't harvest it, Mr. Speaker. We have

over-mature timber now in the Chain Lakes area. Kruger have over-mature stands

that they are not cutting and it is accessible. It is perfectly, easily

accessible and Abitibi-Price is out there crying to get wood to cut.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I say to the minister, when he approves the

companies annual allowable cut, make sure that this particular problem is

addressed. I say to the petitioners, Mr. Speaker - I don't know where they are

from -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I understand that members are minded to get out before 5:00

p.m.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. ROBERTS: Members are minded to get out of the House

before 5:00 p.m., and accordingly, I will not move the motion that we -

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: I say to my friend, the Member for Burin -

Placentia West, I am prepared to trust him to the same extent he is prepared to

trust me.

Your Honour, with that said, would you be good enough,

please, to call Order 3(

a) which is the Concurrence Debate on the report of the

Resource Committee on the Estimates.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to have a few minutes to speak in the

Concurrence Debate. As the Chairman of the Resource Committee, I didn't have an

opportunity during the Estimates meetings themselves to question any of the

ministers or to pursue any of the matters at hand, so I will just briefly touch

on some of these today. I certainly do not expect, neither do I have any designs

on using the full amount of time allocated to me.

I would like to recognize and thank the members of the

Committee: first of all, the Vice-Chairman, the Member for Humber Valley,

Members for Baie Verte - White Bay, Kilbride, Lewisporte, Harbour Main and

Torngat Mountains. The Committee worked well and we were able to deal with the

estimates for the departments which were assigned to us. These included,

Tourism, Culture and Recreation; Industry, Trade and Technology; Natural

Resources; and Fisheries, Food and Agriculture. As I said, we were able to deal

with these expeditiously and I am pleased to report, as I did previously, that

all the estimates for all departments passed without amendment.

Just briefly,under all four departments, if I may, Mr.

Speaker? First of all, Tourism, Culture and Recreation - I think we all

recognize, on both sides of the House, that tourism is certainly an area of

tremendous potential for the Province. In recent years there is an increasing

amount of interest, especially in the areas like Eco-Tourism, which is something

relatively new to our Province but certainly, judging from the nature of our

Province, an amount of unspoiled wilderness that we do have available to us, is

an area that shows tremendous potential. So tourism generally is still largely

under-exploited, and I think, down the road, we will be seeing more and more

developments in that area. During the Estimate Debates for the Department of

Tourism, Culture and Recreation, a large part of the evening was devoted to

questioning on the John Cabot 500th Anniversary celebrations, with the Member

for St. Mary's - The Capes, having a list of questions that I am sure he must

have spent two days previously compiling, and then, between himself and the

minister, spent the rest of the evening boring us all out of our trees. We were

waiting for them all to finish up so that we could get home.

MR. MANNING: (Inaudible).

MR. SMITH: Well, I say to the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes, if he can get his good friend, the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay, to

concur with that opinion, then I will go along with it as well, but I am sure

the member sitting next to you will have a different opinion.

In Industry, Trade and Technology there was a fair amount of

discussion with regard to the EDGE legislation, which I think all members of

this House recognize as being a progressive piece of legislation, and something

we all feel will go a long way towards promoting and encouraging economic

development in the Province. We all recognize, and it is a given, that if we are

to deal with many of the problems that face us as a Province, especially at this

point in our history, economic development is a matter that all of us must

become involved in and something that we must be talking and dealing with on a

daily basis.

Also, just a couple of points, under this department as well,

since this is the department that has for the past number of years dealt with

the development associations in this Province, and the funding for those

organizations have come through the Department of Industry, Trade and

Technology. We are at a period in our history where we are all aware that there

is a major reorganization that has begun centered around the nineteen, I think

they are now, economic zones in which all agencies involved in economic

development will be restructured within these zones.

There is some concern that has been expressed by the

development associations that as a part of this restructuring, they, as

development agencies, may indeed disappear. Well, Mr. Speaker, as I have stated

previously in this House, and have said to people and organizations who are

involved in economic development in rural Newfoundland, that I can never see

that happening. From my own experience over twenty years in working with

development associations, and having had the privilege to serve at the

provincial level for five years as President of the provincial body, I feel that

the record speaks for itself, and the contribution that these development

associations have made to the rural areas of the Province has been well

documented.

Keep in mind that the development associations had their

beginning at a time when the government of the day had made a definite and

deliberate decision to try to change the face of Newfoundland forever by

resettling the rural, remote areas of the Province and bringing them into the

so-called growth centres. And really, Mr. Speaker, it was in reaction to this

that the people in the rural areas stood up and said, no way, and as an

alternative these development associations were developed with a view to trying

to identify a future for the people who chose to continue to live in these

areas.

As I said previously, Mr. Speaker, I think they have

certainly met with a great deal of success. So, to the development associations

I say again today, that really they should not feel that their future is

threatened. At this stage in our history we need them now moreso than ever.

Because of the crisis we are facing in rural Newfoundland, it is the development

association who will ensure that the people living in rural areas will indeed

have a future.

Mr. Speaker, under the Estimates for Natural Resources, the

minister who is present in the House today, I am pleased to see, was very

excited about the developments in that particular department, as I think we all

are. The things we are hearing about the mineral find in Voisey Bay and the oil

exploration in my own district of Port au Port.

These are all matters which are cause for excitement for all

Newfoundlanders and they are a cause for hope as well. While we try, especially

in my own area of the Province, with regard to the oil exploration, not to raise

people's expectations unduly - because I think it would be very unfair and

unkind to hold out the promise of a major development, only to have it

shattered, down the road, when this was not realized. Having said that, the fact

that there is a significant amount of money being spent in that area of the

Province to pursue oil development is encouraging. We all hope - I'm sure

everyone in this hon. House hopes - that the project will prove to be fruitful

and will result in a major find of oil which will mark the beginning of a whole

new industry for this Province.

Because the thing to keep in mind, Mr. Speaker, is that while

the efforts are now centred on the tiny Port au Port Peninsula, indeed eyes are

focused on the whole of the West Coast of the Province. Because there are a

number of companies that hold leases all up and down the West Coast. And there

is no doubt that if and when a major find is announced in Port au Port, there

will be a flurry of activity in the whole of the West Coast, the like of which

we haven't seen in this Province for some time. The minister is certainly

justified in speaking on the activities within his department with a good deal

of enthusiasm.

The other matter which did come up for some discussion and

has been discussed here in the House again today - and the vice-chairman of our

Committee has already spoken to it, and I'm sure he will use his time in this

debate as well to reference it again - is with regard to the decision related to

the spray program, the debate over the agent that can be best used to meet the

need as it exists in this Province today. The only thing I can say to that is

while we all recognize that the forestry is an extremely valuable resource - and

I come from an area on the West Coast of the Province that appreciates that

moreso than a lot of people in this House. With the mill in Stephenville being

the backbone of the economy of Bay St. George, and the high-paying jobs there in

the mill itself, and also the number of people who work in the forest cutting

the wood, it is no doubt it is a major contributor. None of us want to take any

chances or to have a callous attitude with regard to the protection of this

resource.

Beyond that, I think there is a broader responsibility as

well that this government has been trying to address. We do have a lot of people

out there, a lot of the citizens of this Province, who rightly so have concerns

with their own health and that of their children and grandchildren, and indeed

future generations. Because it has been clearly documented - if we've learned

anything from history, it is that when you are spraying chemicals you have to do

so with a great deal of care and caution. Because we have found over the years -

I think in particular of the applications of DDT. It was only last evening I was

visiting a display down in one of the malls that they are doing in connection

with wildlife week. There was a story there about the peregrine falcon as being

an example of a species that was virtually wiped out. Really, it was only

through intervention that it was saved and was able to recover. These are the

kinds of things that we, as a government, acting responsibly, I think have to

weigh all of these things.

It is never an easy decision to make. It is a balancing act.

We certainly want to try to preserve our forests because they are so important

to our economy, but we also want to make sure that we preserve this wonderful

legacy, which is this Province of ours, that it can be here to be enjoyed by

future generations.

I am really pleased with my friend sitting next to me.

Because one of the things that I've noted over my years in things that I've read

and things that I've seen, and one of the things I find that really impresses me

about the aboriginal peoples of our country is the great respect they show for

the natural resources, the ability to be able to get along and to live in

balance with nature. I think it is too bad that over the years, and over the

generations, our European forefathers haven't adopted that same kind of

attitude. I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that we certainly would have avoided a

lot of the problems that we have seen in this Province, and indeed throughout

this country.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: With regard to Fisheries, Food and

Agriculture, if I could, Mr. Speaker, just briefly touch on a couple of things

with regard to this as it relates to my own district.

I have in this House presented a petition a short time ago

related to the Blue Beach Road, which is a fisheries access road. It is a road

going to the only harbour that exists in my district. I want to just go on

record as indicating that I'm hopeful that again this year, the Department of

Fisheries, Food and Agriculture and the minister will see fit to make some money

available to continue the further upgrading of that road.

As I said, it is the only access to a harbour, which again,

as I should point out - I keep putting in plugs for development associations

because they were the major catalyst behind getting this done. It is a harbour

that was developed now about twelve, thirteen years ago. They were able to

secure funding to get this done to open up a salt water pond to create an

excellent small boat shelter. In order to get there right now the road to it,

which is some nine kilometres long, at this time of the year is in a deplorable

condition.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I remember a few years ago

in travelling on the road, going down, about four kilometres down the road, here

was a big capstan sitting in the middle of the road. The only way you could get

across this

section of the road was the fellows would get into it and get bogged

down, and someone would get on the other end and hook the capstan on to their

pick-up trucks and pull it the rest of the way through.

I suggest that is a hard way to have to try to make a living.

When you are dealing with a business that is subsistence at best, and to have to

go out - and you need a truck in order to be able to pursue that enterprise, and

then to have to go and be confronted with a situation whereby in order to get to

your place of work you have to hook a capstan onto it to pull it through....

That was the last time I had seen a capstan in operation. I certainly hope that

on the Blue Beach Road we never see it again. We have during the past number of

years been able to upgrade it somewhat, and I'm hoping, as I indicated, this

upgrading is going to continue.

Also, with regard to my own area, I am pleased to just

highlight as well for this hon. House that we have active in my district one of

the first examples of an effort at aquaculture in this Province. For the last

eleven years or so we have been actively involved in raising in an aquaculture

environment, the giant scallop. One of the interesting things - and the hon. the

Member for Humber Valley mentioned in his remarks the other day, he had a chance

to sample the product out in Corner Brook. I'm sure he will attest to the fact

it is an excellent product. The interesting thing is that most people in this

Province are accustomed - when they think of scallop, they think of what we call

the meat, or what is really the abductor muscle. This is the only thing that

most people are used to.

This operation in Port au Port is promoting the total animal.

It is marketed in shell and it is served in shell, much as is the mussel, so

that if you buy the scallop, you buy the entire thing, and you eat the entire

thing just as you would with a mussel. It is absolutely delicious. It is an

example again of the type of thing that we have to be doing more of in rural

Newfoundland to guarantee a future for our people.

In relation to this department, I'm also pleased to mention

that we are getting very close now - it is a matter of days, I think - to

signing the necessary contracts to begin a whole new operation at what was once

the fish plant in my district that has been idle now for a number of years. We

have been working now for about eight months trying to set up a plastics

operation in co-operation with a major Canadian company. Now, that looks like it

is about to become a reality any day. This will create some thirty full-time

jobs for my district once it is announced, and beyond that, once we get the

thing working and we demonstrate that it is a success, then I think the

potential for expansion is virtually unlimited. I look forward to that with

great anticipation.

I think, also, it points out that we do have people in the

rural areas of our Province who are trying to look at the resources that are

there and trying to maximize the use of them. If there is a building there,

rather than looking at an empty and idle fish plant and seeing that as a scourge

or a curse, they are seeing it as a potential, what can be done with it. I think

what has to happen is we have to start changing our mind-set, try to identify

the opportunities, and then pursue these opportunities to try to bring about

development in the areas.

Under this department as well, one other matter that I would

like to touch on briefly is with regard to the community pastures. We were

advised during the hearings of this department that government is considering

some major changes with regard to funding to community pastures. If you recall,

there was an announcement made that a number of pastures last year would have

their funding rescinded or cancelled. The understanding at the time was that

some would be reinstated this year, but there was a bit of uncertainty.

We were advised during the Estimate meetings for this

department that the plan now is, beyond this year there will be no support

available to community pastures. Mr. Speaker, I would just like to indicate here

- and there was some concern expressed during the estimates meetings - that this

is something we need to look at carefully. In my area of the Province, in the

short time that I have been there... Agriculture, again, in rural Newfoundland,

is an area that has tremendous potential, and I think it is something that we

need to be pursuing. In my own district, at one time, there was more farming

going on years ago then there is right now, but the potential is there, the land

base is there. What we need to do is to try to sell our young people on the idea

that this can be a way of life. But I think the idea of closing out the pastures

at a time when we are trying to promote agriculture generally might not be a

wise move, so I am hoping it is something that between now and next year,

government will reconsider.

Mr. Speaker, with those few brief remarks I will conclude,

but before sitting down I would, if I may, like to take this opportunity as well

just to say a couple of words in tribute to the Leader of the Opposition who

today is concluding his tenure within this House. I was pleased at the remarks

that he made today. He referenced the fact that politicians, as such, and the

profession of politics, is not something that is held in high regard, and I

agree with you totally. One thing that has struck me in the short time that I

have been here - I came from a profession where over the years I was accorded a

fair degree of respect, and it really struck me, in the short time I have been

here, that if you are a politician you are some kind of a low-life. The media

are constantly after you. They downplay what you - really, we are portrayed as

being self-serving. Really, the only thing that we want to do is look after

ourselves, and I think that is regrettable. I think it is, as the hon. member

mentioned today, an honourable profession, but I also recognize and think that

maybe one of the reasons it has become what it is now recognized as, is that

each of us, in our own way, our own small way here within the House and outside,

contribute to that in the way that we, ourselves, behave.

I would like to say to the hon. the Leader of the Opposition,

certainly in the short time I have seen him in operation here in the House, I

think he has made a point to conduct himself with dignity at all times and, in

that way, I think, he has brought a level of recognition to the profession, and

for that I commend him and I thank him.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SMITH: I am taking a page from your book, I say to

the hon. member. He says, `You're not still talking'. He is getting some of it

back now that he gave to me the other night.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, with those few brief remarks I will

conclude, and I thank hon. members for their attention.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to make a few comments on the Estimates

Committees, especially the one today that the minister just tabled now on the

Resource Estimates that we finished off on Monday morning. We did most of them

last week, and finished them off on Monday morning with the Minister responsible

for Fisheries, Food and Agriculture.

Mr. Speaker, time doesn't permit me to comment fairly on

every heading on every department. It is very interesting. The resource sector

of the estimates of the departments of government are very, very interesting.

There is always something new, and there is no shortage of questions, that's for

sure.

In case the member has to leave, I would like to comment on

the last estimates, the one on Fisheries, Food and Agriculture. Now, the

minister responsible for that department now should know better than anybody

else in this House or this Province - I don't know about better because, as far

as I am concerned, a lot of things that he says, he thinks he knows, and that is

as far as it goes. He is doing things, or he has certainly condoned things, in

the past number of years, and now since he has become minister is starting to

put certain things in place that are going to be detrimental to the agricultural

industry in this Province - no question. And if I had the time to sit down and

debate with him, I could show him all kinds of cases where he is - for instance,

his task force on agriculture that he spent so much money and so much time on,

some of the recommendations he made in there. Previous to becoming a minister he

stood by and watched them being closed down. For instance, the swine station in

Pynn's Brook, he recommended that that not close down, that there would be

certain adjustments made. We had an export market there. We were the only place

in the world that had a disease-free animal that would be exported to other

countries. We have the dairy industry in Canada exporting holsteins and

ayrshires all over the world, Cuba right on down - Cuba and even down now in

Saudi Arabia, Mr. Speaker, exporting this particular dairy product that will be

of benefit to the nation and benefit to the Province as a whole.

The minister said the other day - I questioned him on why

there was no heading in the Estimates on pastures? He said it was covered up -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WOODFORD: - under another heading, a measly $100,000.

Last year he said he was going to close the pastures that were not viable in the

Province. They weren't viable so he was going to close them. I asked him a

question the other morning - there is nothing in the Budget on it, there is

nothing in a heading on it. I asked him would the price per animal unit be the

same this year? He said, `yes.' Then, I asked him another question pertaining to

pastures and he told me that this is the last year; they are going to close out

or privatize the pastures in the Province.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I will speak of the pasture that I know

best, that is, the one in Cormack. There are hundreds of animals units. The

Member for Port au Port just mentioned a very important point, out in Port au

Port, sheep and lambs were always a big factor out there, always was a growth

industry. Just about everybody kept so many. Even now, I think there is a very

large number of sheep and lambs on the Port au Port Peninsula right down through

the peninsula. But those pastures, the minister should not forget that those

pastures - in the beef industry, anybody who is raising two or three head of

beef, anybody who has twenty-five or thirty sheep, raise lambs and kill them for

themselves and sell them locally and so on, this was a great way for individuals

to get into the industry. Little by little, they get so many animals, they put

them up in the summertime, they pay x number of dollars per head and then they

probably graduate into - until they get their land ready.

There are places in this Province where there is just forest.

Everybody figures and I think the minister figures that now if they give you

fifty acres of land, they are giving you a farm. They are giving you nothing.

They are giving you a piece of forest or a piece of land in this Province out of

which you have to cut a farm, out of which you have to cultivate a farm, out of

which you have to cultivate it to the point of spending thousands and thousands

of dollars per hectare or per acre to make that land viable.

The minister has also, this year, lowered the limestone grant

from thirty-two dollars a ton down to twenty-five. Well, I say to members

opposite and I would say to the minister if he were here today, that should be

put down to nine dollars or ten dollars per ton because that is all it cost the

government in the first place, Mr. Speaker. When the contract was let and the

tender was let some six or seven years ago, Havelock Lime, got it, crushed it

and now the government is charging three times and, in some cases, four times

the amount that it took to crush that material. And this is one of the basic

needs for any agricultural piece of land in this Province. Because of the high

acidity in the soil in this Province, because of the high acidity in the new

lands that we are just clearing, this is a very important factor. If you don't

have limestone in the soil, you might as well forget putting fertilizer on it. I

see people putting fertilizer on, Mr. Speaker, and they wonder why the crop

won't grow. The reason it doesn't grow is because of the high acidity in the

soil - that's why it won't grow.

We have places even in my area along the Humber River where

we have soil samples ranging under the Canada Soil Land Management Act anywhere

from one to seven, which is some of the best in Canada, yet, there are areas in

those fields that are going to take seven tons of lime per acre to make it

viable and to make it any good for growing any kind of a crop. Yet, we have the

new minister coming in and charging $25 to $32 a ton for lime, the very basic

need that anybody must have in order to grow a crop in this Province. So I say

to members opposite, get after the new `Bud' and make sure that some of those

things are brought before Cabinet and not just done away with by the minister

and the officials in his department.

Wildlife, Mr. Speaker, is another interesting section. The

minister said there were ten or twelve areas already assessed in the Province;

the counts were done, they looked fairly good, both moose and caribou areas of

the Province - I don't know what the areas are, the minister couldn't tell us at

the time, but they looked fairly good. And hopefully, there may be - if there is

not an increase in licenses, Mr. Speaker, well then, maybe there won't be a

decrease, but some of the areas they have already done look really good.

The Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, that's

right, we had the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation on - we just

referenced the Wildlife to him because now it is over in - but part of his

department has to do with the outfitters. And I was asking him about the

percentages last year for outfitters, that the 10 per cent rule - I call it the

10 per cent rule - and if it was still in effect that 10 per cent of all

wildlife in the Province, would be allocated for outfitters, and I don't think

there is going to be any reduction this year. When the minister speaks to this

particular subject, maybe he will be able to confirm that there will be no cuts

to the outfitters in the Province this year and any licenses not used by

outfitters, Mr. Speaker, should be taken back from them. Any licenses not

utilized by outfitters in this Province should be taken back and given to

someone who will utilize them.

I don't believe in any outfitter or any business person in

this Province sitting on licenses forever-and-a-day, just to have them for

resale value. As far as I am concerned, they should be taken away and given to

someone who is going to utilize them. It is a very important source of revenue

for the Province, all new money, all good money coming in from outside the

Province and, Mr. Speaker, I think last year was the first movement made with

regard to this particular problem. I think some of the licenses were reallocated

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) year before.

MR. WOODFORD: The year before, a couple of years ago, but

I know it was the last couple of years, yes, when the former minister was in

that particular department.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: Well, we talked about it, that's right. At

one of the estimates meetings we did talk about that allocation and as far as I

am concerned it was an excellent move. And if it can be identified there is

going to be an increase in certain herds - and there certainly will be in the

caribou herds in certain areas, I know that for a fact. So this will be a new

opportunity for outfitters to get new licenses in the future, therefore bringing

in extra revenues to the Province - no doubt about it, I can identify three or

four areas now where that can be done.

The member mentioned the Hunt Oil on the West Coast of the

Province, a very encouraging move and a very encouraging sign that it might lead

to something else. I hope so, because two of the other permits that were

allocated and given out on the West Coast of the Province is in the Deer Lake

area, two of the other permits now are held by a company in the Province just at

the back of Deer Lake and hopefully - well, under the new legislation now, the

new mining legislation, they have to exercise their options and do something

with it within five years which, as far as I am concerned, was another excellent

move. Before that, people would get permits, people would stake claims, and sit

on them in perpetuity, doing absolutely nothing with them.

Now, they have to spend money, and that brings me to the

Voisey Bay find, Mr. Speaker. The Voisey Bay find - under the new legislation

now, anybody who stakes a claim, goes in and pays $50.00 for a claim, I think

they have to spend at least $250 on each claim within the next year, so, if that

is the case, that means there are going to be millions and millions of dollars

spent this year in Voisey Bay alone. The 48,000 claim stakes so far translates

into a lot of dollars for this Province. And not only that, I was reading just

the other day that that find, at first, was three kilometres long, and now, with

some aerial and geophysical work, it is identified to be something like seven

kilometres long.

Mr. Speaker, that, to me, is a plus for the Province, a plus

for the mining industry, and possibly could be one of the biggest cobalt finds

in the world, let alone Canada. Hopefully, we can get into production fairly

soon in that particular area and provide jobs for each and every one of us. They

have to come to an agreement with the native people in that area and that should

be one of the first and foremost job requirements and initiatives. Whatever way

you want to put it, that should be one of the first things now to be done, to

sit down with the Native peoples in the area and come to some kind of land

agreement, an agreement on the rights in that area as it pertains to mining and

other possible finds in that area.

Tourism - we talked about the Marble Mountain facility in

Corner Brook. They are still skiing and they will be skiing this weekend, and

when I left on Monday, it appeared they could be skiing until the end of June,

by the look of the snow on Marble Mountain and in other areas of the West Coast

of the Province. It is a very worthwhile project, started by the former Tory

government, probably the former minister before the Leader of the Opposition.

That was one thing that this Administration had done, they identified something

good, they sort of hooked onto it, and I must say, it is creating a lot of jobs

and a lot of potential on the West Coast of the Province.

The taxi drivers in Deer Lake and Corner Brook, and the

rent-a-car companies in Corner Brook do not have a car in the wintertime. You

have to phone ahead and make sure you have your reservations made if you are

going to get a car in Deer Lake or anywhere on the West Coast of the Province in

the wintertime.

The golf course that was opened last year - I am sure our

Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, before this summer is over, will

try out that golf course in Deer Lake. He is an expert on golf and other things

pertaining to golf, and he will, I am sure, avail of the opportunity to have a

shot at the golf course in Deer Lake. Pardon the pun, Mr. Speaker. Some day when

he comes in, instead of going back on the flight at 5:00 or 6:00 o'clock he is

going to stay overnight and he will go up and have a few rounds of golf.

I must say, you would not believe what that did to the area

last year with regard to people coming and staying an extra night or an extra

couple of days. You wouldn't believe it - I mean, the whole retail and service

industry sector there. I am sure there are more eating establishments in Deer

Lake than - well, I can't say more than in the City of St. John's, but more

establishments than in any town comparable to its size in this Province or

anywhere else in Canada. I have never seen the like of it.

The Deer Lake Motel is there, the Irving Big Stop is there,

one of the biggest in Canada. You have a pizza place there now just opened, a

Tim Horton's just opened, Cozy Comfort just opened, you can go on and on, and

on, so they must be doing something right.

AN HON. MEMBER: They go on and on, and on.

MR. WOODFORD: No, no. They are stopping there. The new

piece of road in Corner Brook may have had an effect on it - I can't fault the

minister for that; I would probably have to pat him on the back. They are

stopping in Deer Lake. The transportation sector, the airport in Deer Lake -

thirty-four flights a day now going out of the airport in Gander. In the

mornings now -

AN HON. MEMBER: They were going to close it up a few

years ago.

MR. WOODFORD: Yes, they were going to close it up.

In the mornings now - we couldn't get off the ramp on Monday

morning. The reason was that there were four flights circling overhead waiting

for permission to land. What a wonderful announcement. What a wonderful thing,

when you walk into a terminal and that is what the announcements are all about,

four flights circling overhead, waiting to land, six on the runway; we have to

try to clear them out before other flights come in.

Now the Federal Government is talking about privatizing it.

First, they were going to give the Province the first option on airports;

second, they were going to go to municipalities. Municipalities can't touch them

under the Municipalities Act. There is no law, and there is no clause there to

protect them or allow them to do it. Thirdly, they were going to local

authorities. That is going to be a tricky subject, because a lot of people will

not put their necks on the line to run a business such as an airport. Last, they

will go to the private sector. The private sector will be last, but the problem

is, they don't want any profits from the airports, absolutely none, to go to an

individual. They want everything that comes into an airport rolled back into the

system, and that is where, I suppose, they are coming from on the first three

options.

I would be remiss if I didn't speak about forestry. When we

discussed the Kruger legislation last Fall in the House, about the $15 million

for Kruger - $7.5 million last year, and $7.5 million this upcoming year - that

is what the understanding was, $7.5 million each year for the x number of acres

of land that would revert to the Crown. I found out during the estimates - and I

must say, the minister and his staff were very forthright in their answers as

they pertained to every department - that they could give them the $15 million

last year. I don't mind that. It is done; what is the difference? It gave them a

little boost.

I also found out that the newsprint industry has enjoyed a 40

per cent increase in the last year. I also found out that there was something

like 57 million board feet of lumber produced in this Province last year. I have

to give credit to the former Minister of Forestry for part of that, because he

recognized the access roads in this Province that were needed to get in to some

of the timber that I would say Kruger weren't going to cut, and Abitibi weren't

going to cut, so he put it in the Chouse Brook one. He kept on doing it,

although it was in a Tory district, I say to the Member for Port de Grave, and

he did the Bridgers Pond one.

The Bridgers Pond one now, I say to the minister, there is an

individual in that area now putting in a new sawmill - I think you know who I am

talking about - between $500,000 and $700,000. He has 1.2 million board feet of

logs on the ground now, people cutting them all winter long and bringing them

in, and today he could saw 10 million board feet and sell it. The best prices we

had for lumber, especially 2 x 4 studs, was last year, and I would say it is

going to continue on this year for awhile, so that is going to increase to 60

million or 65 million board feet.

One word of caution, I think I mentioned this at the

estimates committee to the minister responsible for forestry, when they approve

the annual allowable cut this year for companies in the Province, is to pay

specific attention to some of the over-matured stands. The minister probably has

to change that a little bit because of the fact of the defoliation and the

infestation of the looper, but if that is the case, then I think we should make

a special effort.

I talked to the Member for Stephenville the other day, and

the minister as well - he knows exactly what I am talking about - about some of

the concerns of the cutters in that particular area who would like to have some

wood to cut for Abitibi-Price. If we have an over-matured stan