May 10,

1999 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

PROCEEDINGS Vol. XLIV

No. 20

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

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

Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

At a time when we are facing nursing shortages across this

country and while we are working to increase the number of nurses in this

Province, I stand today to provide statistics released today by a number of

organizations together, the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the

Canadian Nurses Association and Statistics Canada.

Between 1993 and 1998, Newfoundland and Labrador experienced

the greatest increase in the number of registered nurses employed in nursing,

while Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba showed a decline.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, all provinces except

Newfoundland and Labrador saw a decrease in the number of registered nurses

employed in nursing per 100,000 population between the years 1993 and 1998. This

was particularly true for Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Alberta and British

Columbia.

The increase in registered nurses employed in nursing in

Newfoundland and Labrador over these five years lead the country, while six

provinces saw a decline in that number and throughout Canada there was a

decrease of 3.4 per cent. The number of nurses employed in nursing by 100,000

population from 1993 to 1998 showed an increase in this Province from 891.4 to

986.3.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: In all other provinces, Mr. Speaker,

there were decreases, and throughout Canada there was an average decrease from

816.3 to 748.4. We have now improved our ranking to number two in the country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, these statistics have been

gathered by the Canadian Institute for Health Information, the Canadian Nurses

Association and Statistics Canada. While we will continue to recruit and retain

nurses to the best of our ability, it is encouraging to see that these

statistics show we are leading our provinces in employing registered nurses.

In the last number of weeks we have announced the addition of

125 new nursing positions and the conversion of 200 casual nurses to permanent

status. More recently we have informed all of the boards in our Province that

they can convert more casual nursing positions to permanent status where

appropriate and we will adjust their budgets accordingly. The boards have

identified another 340 potential conversions. This means that the vast majority

of casual nurses who want a permanent position will have that opportunity.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: However, Mr. Speaker, there are casual

nurses who prefer to remain casual because of the flexibility in their personal

life and some who prefer the recently increased pay from 14 per cent to 20 per

cent on top of their salary. Boards also need a pool of casual nurses to have

the flexibility to provide a continuity of service. We remain hopeful that

boards will be able to negotiate a speedy process with the NLNU locals to allow

the permanent positions to be filled as quickly as possible.

Last week we allocated $4 million to the boards to provide

additional support services which will lessen the current workload of nurses and

allow them to concentrate more on nursing duties. These services include the

hiring of more porters, medical service aids, cleaning staff and licensed

practical nurses, and should alleviate some of the workload that nurses have

identified as work they should not have to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: We are aware of the changing demographic

in the nursing profession and we are working to address short-term and long-term

needs. The department has been actively engaged in a number of human resource

planning activities in the past year. Provincial meetings were held last week

with several boards to assess the impact of the Nurse Practitioners on servicing

rural areas of the Province. Feedback from the public and colleagues has been

very positive. Thirteen further Nurse Practitioners will be completing their

program in the fall and returning primarily to rural areas.

Discussions are actively being held with the Schools of

Nursing in the Province to increase enrolment, and a proposal has already been

submitted by the Schools and is currently being examined by the department.

Discussions have also occurred with the Centre for Health

information as well as Atlantic counterparts related to the information and the

database development needs to support human resource planning.

The department recognizes that both short-term and long-term

planning are needed. Recent short-term activities will link with long-term

directions which will be overseen by a Provincial Human Resource Planning

Committee. Extensive dialogue with several employers, professional groups and

education representatives have occurred in the proceeding months. We will

continue to work to recruit and retain nurses in this Province within our fiscal

capacity and by addressing workload and lifestyle issues.

I table as well today a news release and a copy of the

statistical information released today by the Canadian Institute for Health

Information as supplementary information for all members.

Mr. Speaker, health care across the country continues to face

challenges. This government recognizes health care as a priority, and is

committed to addressing these challenges within our fiscal capacity.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say we have the cheerleader back here, the Premier, the

cheerleader is back today. You can hear the thumping today. This government is

so desperate for good news. Do you know what is increasing in the per capita of

nurses? Out-migration of 40,000 people out of our Province! That has improved

the percentage, I say to the minister.

Under this government, when you have taken 40,000 out of this

Province, at the rate we are going we will be number one in per capita before

the year is out, I would say. We will be number one.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: The minister fails to realize that we have

an increasing older population. It is the young people who are moving out of

this Province. It is the older people who need more nursing care and more help.

I would say that distorts the ratio of per capita nurses in this Province. The

minister is looking at 1993 and 1998. What about 1999, where Ontario is hiring

10,000 nurses? Other provinces in this country today, and since 1998 I say to

the minister, are realizing the need for nurses.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SULLIVAN: Yes, and there is a lot being hired.

Newfoundland nurses are being hired all across this country and in the United

States. That is where they are getting hired. The minister will realize that.

She might try and paint a rosy picture on the past. It is 1999 and the future we

have to worry about, Minister, not statistics that are twisted to suit a

situation that do not reflect the accuracies of the situation in this Province

today.

I hear today that beds are closing in this Province almost

every week because there are no nurses. There is not enough to care for the very

acute care level of people in our institutions. People at home cannot get into a

hospital because there are no beds available and because there are no nurses

available for those beds. That is part of the problem.

Minister, you own department set up a centre for health

information to collect data to more efficiently manage and deliver services

here. A consultant was hired, and a request into your department of proposals is

waiting to get an answer, I say to the minister, to get information on our

Province, to deliver health care better. I say to the minister, you have not

responded to that yet.

The very agency set up here in this Province to look at the

efficiency of health care has not even gotten the attention from its own

minister to be able to provide it. She has to quote the CIHI, I think it is, the

Canadian Institute of Health Information. She has not had the system here in our

Province.

I tell you, Minister, you have distorted, you have skewed

these figures to suit a purpose, when the real needs here in this Province are

not being met.

I would like to comment on her 200 positions. One hundred and

eighteen of those positions were hired back in January. We have only had the

difference. There are disputes in the system as to what the number is.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. SULLIVAN: We do not have the full numbers, the

minister said. They were announced last fall. There were already put in place, I

say to the minister.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The minister is using very selective figures which distort

the facts. It is pretty obvious that if you are counting the number of nurses

per hundred thousand, the actual number per hundred thousand is going to go up

if your population is going down.

Three other provinces, by the minister's own figures -

Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia - increased the number of actual

nurses that they had, but their number of nurses per capita went down. That is

the use of the statistics this minister is putting before this House.

The government had an opportunity to solve the problems of

the nursing profession during the nurses' strike. What did they do? They made it

worse by pushing the nurses back on the job without solving the problems, taking

away their last offer that they put on the table, and destroying the morale of

the nurses in this Province and their willingness to cooperate with this

government to solve the health care problem. This minister is just trying to put

a good face on a very poor performance.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On Friday, May 7, federal, provincial and territorial

governments released a key discussion document that is the first step towards

developing a comprehensive, long-term strategy to improve the well- being of

Canadian children.

A document entitled A National Children's Agenda

Developing A Shared Vision was released along with a supplementary paper,

Measuring Child Well-being and Monitoring Progress . The National Children's

Agenda reflects the commitments by governments in the Social Union Framework

Agreement to ensure that Canadians participate in developing social priorities

and that governments share information on successful practices and programs in

their jurisdictions. These documents set out for the consideration of all

Canadians a common vision, values, goals and areas for action to engage all

parts of society in an efforts to better meet our children's needs.

The Vision document identifies four goals to ensure that

children are: healthy physically and emotionally; safe and secure; successful at

learning; and socially engaged and responsible.

The purpose of the National Children's Agenda will be to

ensure that all Canadian children have the best possible opportunity to realize

their full potential. The Agenda will support the critical and primary role that

parents, families and communities play in the lives of our children.

We have many successes in our own Province. Our recent Child,

Youth and Family Services Act and Child Care Act, as well as our National Child

Benefit Reinvestment Plan, including funding for Family Resource Centres and

Community Youth Networks, all put us as leaders in our approach and perspectives

on prevention and early intervention.

Other provincial jurisdictions such as the Model for

Coordination of Services to Children and Youth and the Provincial Strategy on

Violence again demonstrate our commitment to working across departments to

provide a coordinated approach to programs and services.

Our real success is in the creation of our new Department of

Health and Community Services as recommended by our front-line staff and

managers. This new department allows an integrated approach to service delivery.

Our Strategic Social Plan released just months ago is a model for other

provinces as they endeavour to prepare and release their plans. Our Strategic

Social Plan is, in fact, the only one in this country with a social audit

component.

Mr. Speaker, the Premier's Council on Social Development was

briefed on this Agenda last week.

While our Province has consulted widely and admittedly is

further ahead in the process through our Strategic Social Plan than other

provinces, citizens of our Province will still be able to provide their views

and input through a 1-800 number, a Web site and workbook.

We want to make sure that our investments are in the right

areas, so we must examine our existing resources in the context of emerging

research on children. We must also share our best practices and align resources

to make sure that we have a coordinated approach to children's issues.

The National Children's Agenda represents a new way of

governments working together and for the first time, I might add, governments of

all political stripes coming together to build agreements not just across

jurisdictions but across sectors.

I want to commend, in my Province, my colleagues from the

Departments of Human Resources and Employment, Justice, and Education, for their

contribution. Ultimately, this approach will mean better ways of improving the

well-being of children. The discussion papers also benefitted from input by the

five aboriginal organizations, and includes a perspective on children's issues

written in their own voice.

Because of our interest in bringing this issue forward to

ministers, three years ago we actually put it on the agenda of those ministers'

tables. In light of our progress on this initiative we will be hosting, in St.

John's, one of the five regional stakeholder round tables in mid-June. Further

details will be announced on the Atlantic round table in the near future.

I am confident that Friday's announcement was a start of a

process which will lead to a common set of goals and priorities which will

improve our children's futures.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS S. OSBORNE: Here all along I thought that this special

Committee on Children's Interest, Mr. Speaker, was the start of a process which

would lead to a common set of goals and priorities to improve our children's

futures.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS S. OSBORNE: I am talking about the recommendations

from this report. We talk about a 1-800 number in this. That report also talked

about a 1-800 number. This 1-800 number or web-site will be for people to

provide their views. This all party committee provided its views and suggested a

1-800 `warm line' for parents who are out there, who were having trouble with

abuse with their children and wanted a count to ten, if you wish, and asked for

a 1-800 line at the cost of probably $95,000 a year. That was not established.

Incidentally, it costs more than that to keep a youth at the Whitbourne

facility.

While I am speaking of the Whitbourne facility, I understand

there was a report done on that and the recommendations in that were not acted

upon.

We talk about keeping children healthy physically and

emotionally. Twenty-seven thousand children in this Province live in poverty.

The people who phone me do not have enough money to buy nutritional food for

their children. We talk about successful learning. We sure are. While there are

cutbacks in optimum programming and while the Minister of Education is living up

to the promise to see that the children will be educated and able to get on to

university, it is a bare-bones approach.

The statement says, "Socially engaged and responsible." I

have a mom and her seventeen-year-old boy who have $29 left a week. He cannot

become socially engaged. She does not have money to give him for him to take

part in programs in school. She is doing her best to keep him there. As far as I

am concerned, until we begin to act in this Province - by the way, the hon.

Pierre Pettigrew has made no promises to put any money into this. This is just

another study, more rhetoric. We are going to have a round table discussion.

While our people sit around the tables, many of our children are sitting at bare

tables.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is nice to have a bit of vision, but I recall back in 1989

when the hon. Ed Broadbent presented a resolution to the House of Commons - the

Premier was there, and since the resolution was unanimous I am sure he voted for

it - an all party agreement that the people of Canada would eliminate child

poverty by the year 2000. There are not many months to go. In fact, what has

happened since then is that child poverty has increased by at least 50 per cent.

Yet we are still talking about how are we going to deal with

this issue. There are solutions. It requires a challenge to the Government of

Canada by this government. It requires a concerted effort to eliminate child

poverty. We are alone amongst modern nations in that we have no national

nutritional program in our schools. We are yet to adopt a universal

comprehensive school lunch program which would ensure that schoolchildren have a

full stomach and are able to learn.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. HARRIS: We need to address the problems concretely

now, not just talk about them.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised with the mood

and the response in the House today to the very good statements by the Minister

of Health who has passed on the report of the Canadian Institute for Health

Information, the Canadian Nurses Association and Stats Canada, for example, on

nursing, and the more recent statement. I am surprised that members of the

Opposition opposite after their convention are not rushing out, wrapping

themselves in tin foil, and praying for lightning.

I am sure if we stood and told members opposite the sun was

shining outside they would all find a cloud no matter how far they had to go to

search for one.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, let me bring to the attention

of the House something which I believe even members opposite would take some joy

in.

I rise to inform my hon. colleagues about a significant

achievement in land claims negotiations with the Labrador Inuit announced this

morning.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER TOBIN: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not sunstruck. When

I was down in Florida with the Leader of the Opposition, the same week I was

there, and the Leader of the NDP, they did not look sunstruck either.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Although, Mr. Speaker, they were in a

fancier part of the beach than I was.

Just hours ago, chief negotiators representing the Government

Association initialled the Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement in Principle, an

agreement that represents what I believe is the best, most comprehensive land

claims settlement in Canada today.

The initialled agreement will now be presented to the

Labrador Inuit Association for ratification. That ratification process will

unfold this summer, with a ratification vote by mid-July. Following

ratification, land selection will be finalized and then the AIP will be

presented to the provincial and federal governments for ratification. When it is

ratified by three parties, negotiations on the Final Agreement will begin. That

final set of negotiations can be concluded within a year or a year-and-a-half.

I want to acknowledge this afternoon, on behalf of government

and I hope all members of the House, and the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, the excellent work carried out by the chief negotiators and their

teams on behalf of all three parties. I want to particular to pay tribute to

Toby Anderson on behalf of the LIA and his team, Jim McKenzie and his team on

behalf of the federal government, and Mr. Bob Warren and his team on behalf of

the provincial government. They have been at this now for three years and we

have now come to another important milestone in this negotiation. I want to pay

tribute as well to the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, these negotiations have been

difficult. They have sometimes been hot; indeed, they have given rise to

conflict on occasion. While the going has occasionally been very rough, what

characterized these negotiations is that the players around the table on behalf

of all three parties never gave up. They always stayed at the table.

I can tell all members of this House that the insight and the

commitment and the knowledge and the experience of the Member for Torngat

Mountains very often was the difference between a conflict that could have led

to a breakdown and the ability to carry on by reaching consensus that was fair

to all parties. I want to acknowledge the work of Wally Anderson in achieving

this milestone today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Agreement in Principle is

a significant step forward to our ultimate goal, a Final Agreement. I believe

that we are embarking on a new era of prosperity and cooperation between the

Province, the federal government and the Inuit people of Labrador.

This day has been a long day coming. The process began in

- and in 1980 the government of the day in this Province accepted an invitation

Here we are, 22 years later, after difficult negotiations,

with an initialled agreement in front of us. It has been challenging, it has

been complex, but I believe the end result was fair for all parties.

I want to take the opportunity of this occasion, while we are

reflecting upon the AIP signed this morning to say that this government, and I

believe the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, are committed as well to

reaching and achieving a land claim agreement with the Innu people of Labrador

as well, and a self-government agreement with the Innu people of Labrador.

While I am on my feet I want to acknowledge and thank the

Innu people of Labrador for their cooperation in allowing us to proceed with the

construction of the Trans-Labrador Highway between Red Bay and Cartwright this

year. The Innu Nation, through an agreement that we had reached on consultation

on the next phase of that road between Cartwright and Goose Bay, has agreed to

not challenge this road in the courts; and, indeed, the President of the Innu

Nation, David Nuke, is now playing a very helpful role in facilitating a

dialogue between the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and the Innu in

Quebec to allow this project to proceed.

Mr. Speaker, I want to conclude my remarks by saying that the

agreement signed today provides a land base for the Inuit people - 6,100 square

miles of Inuit land along Labrador's North Coast. It provides another 28,000

square miles of provincial land, called Labrador Inuit Settlement Area, which is

available for first use for traditional purposed by Inuit people. It provides a

land base. It provides the ability to draw royalties from mineral developments

on their own lands as a requirement for an impact benefit agreement for

(inaudible) major development. It provides for the provision of additional

commercial fishing licenses off the Coast of Labrador. It provides for first use

and first ability to take advantage of outfitting off the Coast and in Labrador

Inuit lands. It provides for self-government, to allow the Inuit people to take

control of their own destiny, to shape their own future, to take charge of

health, education, and the administration of justice. It provides for Inuit

governments, both a general government for all the people and community-based

Inuit governments.

It is a generous progressive land claims agreement and

self-government agreement which I believe is a model for Canada and breaks new

ground in Canada. It flows out of the will and the desire of the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador to recognize the rights of Aboriginal people and, more

importantly, the capacity of Aboriginal people to govern themselves if they are

given the tools to do so.

Again, I close where I began, by acknowledging the

contribution of the Member for Torngat Mountains in achieving today's milestone

in the LIA Land Claims Agreement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

On behalf of my colleagues on this side of the House, let me

say that we welcome this announcement today made by the Premier on behalf of the

government.

This announcement in its initial form, I guess, was made

several months ago - a year or year-and-a-half ago - but another step along the

way, a very important step along the way, of reaching final agreement is the

initialling of this Agreement in Principle which took place today. In that

context, we welcome that announcement.

We want to associate ourselves with complimenting those who

are parties to the negotiations. It is people of goodwill and people of good

faith that sometimes have to make - or have to be willing to make - the very

serious compromises that have to be made to allow these agreements to come

together. I am sure there were compromises that had to be made by all parties to

those negotiations, but good faith and goodwill allows that to take place.

This is very important for the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador; it is important for our Aboriginal people. It is important that a land

base, an economic base, and a self-government base, be put together so that the

Aboriginal people of this Province, as Canadians, as part of Canada, as part of

a great and compassionate and tolerant country, can provide for our Aboriginal

people the right to self-government, the right to economic advantage from the

lands that they have occupied long before we came to those shores.

Mr. Speaker, we wish the negotiators continued good luck. We,

like the government, hope that this long, arduous process can be completed soon

so that it can be to the benefit of all of the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, but most particularly to the benefit of our Aboriginal people.

In concluding, let me wish the government well, as well, in

their dealings with the Innu people. We also have to have the basis of an

agreement. I know it will be difficult, I know it will be tough, but the steps

have to be taken. I am delighted to hear that some steps are being taken. I know

it will be a long, hard road, but we wish the government well - and, again, all

the parties to the negotiations - and hope that it will come sooner rather than

later.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi

Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, would like to welcome the move today to initial an

Agreement in Principle that is to be recommended to the Inuit people of this

Province, and I want to say that it is a very, very difficult thing. I know it

must be a tremendous responsibility on the part of the negotiators for the Inuit

people, to come to the table and to make an agreement that will have the effect

of perhaps finally determining the rights of the Inuit people of Labrador. I

suppose it is easy for the government to say, no, no, no, and a lot harder, I

guess, for the Inuit people to say, yes, we are prepared to compromise on this

point, knowing that there may never be another opportunity. So, I want to

congratulate all those involved in the negotiations but particularly the

negotiations on behalf of the Inuit.

Mr. Speaker, I do note, however, that this is only one step

in the process. There must be ratification by the Inuit people, there must also

be ratification by both the Government of Newfoundland and the Government of

Canada, but there is a lot of hope today that this will lead to the

establishment of Nunatsiavut, our beautiful land in Inuktitut, just as in the

Eastern Arctic, Nunavut was established only in recent days. I do note that this

is the last Inuit group in Canada to reach this stage and it is important that

we recognize this as a very significant step.

Mr. Speaker, I may be out of time, so I will ask for leave to

say this. We have seen in the other end of the country, with the development of

perhaps the first modern treaty, with the Nisga'a people, a very contentious and

divisive debate taking place in that province; partly as a result, I should say,

of political opportunism. I hope, Mr. Speaker, with the support of all the

parties in this House today, and with the genuine desire, I believe, of all

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to recognize the legitimate rights of the

Aboriginal people, and the desire on all our parts to fairly settle those rights

and move forward together, we will not have that kind of divisiveness in this

Province, that we will be able to complete this agreement, and also with the

Innu and other Aboriginal groups who are looking for their rights to be

recognized.

I do hope that today's goodwill will continue on throughout

the debate, to the conclusion of this agreement and others with the Innu and the

Micmac people.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, indeed.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I just want to say that the people on the North Coast are

pretty excited. It is a gigantic step. I travelled to my riding this weekend and

talked to a lot of people, and there are a lot of questions that they have. I

guess when you look at a land claims agreement that is going to lay with the

future of these people, there are a lot of concerns. This is a deal, not like

one with a union or workers where you go back in three or four years and

renegotiate, but a deal that is going to be signed and is going to shape the

lives of the people for centuries to come.

The people on the North Coast look forward to it. I have said

in this House on several occasions, that we always believed if we were given the

opportunity we could prove to the rest of the people in this Province and in

Canada that we can take control and we can do good.

All too often, I think, we have seen the negative side that

comes out from these communities, but there is a lot of good and there are a lot

of good people. There is a lot of hope and we look forward to this deal being

ratified, and to the day when there will be self-government and we will take our

place alongside of every proud Newfoundlander and Labradorian in this Province

and make a contribution as a whole.

Thank you.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions are directed to the Premier, and they are

exploratory in nature, I say to the Premier.

When the Lower Churchill development was announced some

eighteen months ago, we were given to believe, in this Province, that an

agreement would be concluded within twelve months.

My question for the Premier is simply: Could he provide the

people of the Province with an update on the status of negotiations with respect

to the development of the Churchill?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, yes I can. First of all I

should say that the framework agreement that was announced was announced last

March 9, which would be fourteen months ago versus eighteen months ago.

The discussions to this point and time are going very well.

Good progress is being made. The hon. Member for St. John's East will appreciate

that one of the important building blocks that government wanted to see put in

place, and in fact what we announced last March 9, was a determination to recall

a block of power: as you recall, 127 megawatts from Hydro Quebec. This is a

remaining block which has been there since the days of the first contract which

was never available to Newfoundland and Labrador. That has been successfully

recalled, and this year provided something under $30 million, roughly, to the

public accounts of this Province.

A second criterion that we established was to put in place a

new guaranteed winter availability contract, and with that a shareholders'

agreement, to deal with the problem of insufficient financing for CF(L)Co,

something we had talked about, and previous governments have talked about, going

back for some time now. I can tell the hon. member that we are very close to

closing the loop and achieving a new guaranteed winter availability contract.

Such a contract would provide, during the remaining life of the Upper Churchill

contract, in excess of $1 billion of new revenues to CF(L)Co which, of course,

is owned 65 per cent by the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Not only will

that new revenue make up the anticipated shortfall during the life of the

contract, it will provide additional revenues directly to the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, the third piece is to complete an agreement in

principle, a Memorandum of Understanding, with Hydro Quebec. The negotiations on

that piece were delayed because of an election in Quebec at the tail end of

1998, and of course a subsequent election in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador in the first part of 1999. Those negotiations have resumed. They have

been moving at a very good pace. I would anticipate, as I said a month or two

ago, that this summer we will reach an agreement on an MOU between Hydro Quebec

and Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro on the development of the Lower Churchill.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There were some reports recently, Premier, with respect to

the diversion of one or both of the Quebec rivers being in question. Given that

the project as proposed originally saw all components being interlinked and

related with one another, my question would be: What would the unavailability of

either or both of these diversions do to the economics of this project?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, that is a question we are

analyzing right now, and one of the reasons why a MOU has not been closed. Both

parties to an development of this size - you are talking somewhere in the range

of $10 billion to $12 billion - have an obligation to find out what structure or

what shape would be most efficient, most profitable, in this kind of

development.

I know the member opposite will recall that last March 9 when

we set out a proposal for development of the Lower Churchill, the proposal

included - it is important we remember this - a 1,000 megawatts of new power at

the Upper Churchill - that was to be achieved by partially diverting two rivers

and building a new power house with two more turbines - and 2,264 megawatts of

power at the Lower Churchill at Gull Island, for a total development of 3,274

megawatts.

We said at that time that Muskrat Falls, which is an 800

megawatt development, was not part of our plan because it was thought that the

cost of developing Muskrat Falls would be too high. In the intervening period of

time we have done two things.

One, we have gone back to look at Muskrat Falls. We have

given contracts to go back and see what the actual cost of developing Muskrat

Falls would be. It has been the position of every government, of every political

stripe by the way, that if it is possible to do Muskrat Fall as part of a Lower

Churchill development, it ought to be done now. Because if you do it later as a

stand alone project, because it is higher cost, it may never by done. So, we are

right now awaiting the final analysis on the cost of doing Muskrat Falls. I can

say without saying too much, I hope, that the early analysis - it isn't final -

is more encouraging than the numbers we had available to us last March.

Two, we have looked at the diversion. We want 1,000 megawatts

of new power at the Upper Churchill. There are two ways of getting it. One is to

divert water, and yes, I believe there has to be water diversion, but 88 per

cent of the water converted comes from one of the rivers and 12 per cent from

the second. The question which has been raised publicly is: Do we divert both

rivers at the cost associated with that diversion, plus put in power control

facilities at a cost of hundreds of millions, for 12 per cent of water? That, by

the way, is St. Jean versus Romaine. The question becomes: If it is more

efficient to divert one rather than two rivers - that is what the engineers tell

us, it is an engineering issue - is that a better approach? Secondly, given that

the turbines at the Upper Churchill are currently running at about 78 per cent

capacity -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. Premier to conclude his answer.

PREMIER TOBIN: I will conclude, Mr. Speaker.

That in spilling more water over those turbines you can

generate 1,000 megawatts of power cheaper than building two new turbines, is

that a better option?

Those are the two questions now being assessed and that will

be before both parties, I would think, in the days and weeks ahead.

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for St.

John's East.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My next question, in a sense, has been referred to in the

ministerial statement, but it is important and it is with respect to ongoing

negotiations and discussions with the Innu Nation. My question is similar to the

first, I guess. I would like an update, Premier, with respect to ongoing

discussions with the Innu vis--vis the development of the Lower Churchill, and

other developments in Labrador with both federal and provincial governments.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: I think the House will recall that for a

period of time earlier this year the state of play in the dialogue between the

Innu Nation and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador was a suspended state

of play. The Innu Nation itself announced unilaterally it was leaving the

negotiating table having to do with Lower Churchill development, and the

Province, Mr. Speaker, after a period of time, involving a number of issues,

including the southern Labrador highway, suspended talks at the land claim table

and at the self government table as well.

There was a period of seven or eight weeks of no dialogue.

Lines of communication were established after a period of time between myself

and the president of the Innu nation, David Nuke. We had a discussion in the

first instance about the Red Bay-Cartwright road. I sought assurances that the

Innu Nation would not interfere, or seek to interfere, with the construction

activity this summer. The Innu Nation, on the other hand, were seeking

assurances that they would have a role in selecting a route for the Cartwright

to Goose Bay portion of the road, whenever it is to be built, and have a role to

play in the environmental assessment process. They have one other question: they

are concerned that Mealy Mountain National Park be addressed in a timely

fashion.

On addressing all of those issues we were able to clear the

Cartwright to Red Bay road for construction this year with no opposition from

the Innu Nation. Two, we were able to establish the table on Lower Churchill

once again. Three, we were able to establish the table on land claim

negotiations once again.

There have already been a series of three meetings - one in

St. John's, one in Goose Bay and one in Montreal - involving all three parties.

For the moment the dialogue is strong, it is constructive, and it is positive.

Progress is being made and we do expect the Innu Nation this summer, as they did

last summer, to participate in our summer work program environmental assessment

in engineering work on the Lower Churchill river.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour

Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for

the Minister of Education.

I have asked the minister repeatedly: Is she convinced that

the teacher cuts will have a serious impact on program delivery in September

1999? Other interested groups - the school boards, the School Boards

Association, the school board council federation, the NLTA, school councils,

parents, students - have warned her, previously I might add, that these cuts

will cause damage to the programs in September 1999.

Minister, you have refused to listen. Are you not convinced

that the quality of programming in our schools in September 1999 will be less

than current quality if the cuts are not eliminated?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. FITZGERALD: (Inaudible) put up or shut up.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, first let me address that remark

from the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: It is not my remark. (Inaudible).

MS FOOTE: Well, the remark that you just made. At no

time, Mr. Speaker, have I ever said to put up or shut up. Unfortunately, the

Telegram chose to run that headline.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let me say as well that the

reporter who wrote the story wrote a fair story. It is too bad whoever is

writing the headlines of the Telegram did not do the same.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: To the question, Mr. Speaker. Let me again say,

as I have done repeatedly, that the quality of education in this Province will

not suffer as a result of decisions taken by this government. In fact, if you

want to look at what is happening in this Province with the decline in student

enrolments, we will see 70,000 fewer students since the early 1970s to what we

are seeing today. We have seen the number of students decline by 40 per cent

since the early 1970s and the number of teachers in that twenty-five year period

has declined by 6 per cent.

Mr. Speaker, with numbers like that and because of the

curriculum we are offering we are convinced that education will not suffer in

this Province based on the decisions taken by this government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again the minister still

maintains that she has allotted enough teachers. If that is true, who is to take

the blame for the downgrading of programming coming up? Is the minister blaming

the school boards? Is the minister blaming the administrators? Is the minister

blaming teachers? Who, Minister, is at fault if there are enough teachers and

the programming is not going to be there in September 1999? Who is to blame?

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

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, we are not into placing blame.

That is not what we are interested in in this government. That may be what the

Opposition likes to do, but we do not play those types of games. What we are

doing is working with the school boards who know exactly how they have allocated

the teaching resources that we have given them, who can tell us the impact it is

having. We are working very closely with the school boards, meeting with each of

the education directors for those boards. We do not need the Opposition telling

us about this example and that example. We are meeting with the people who make

the decisions, not the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS FOOTE: What we have, Mr. Speaker, is a lot of

misinformation out there, and I can tell you that the Opposition is certainly

helping to add to that misinformation.

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, the minister stood in her

place, she looked across at me, and she said: Give me examples. Minister, I have

given you the examples. Why are you not doing anything with them?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, that is the same member who will

stand up and tell us and tell others that the education the high school students

are getting today and next year will be impacted negatively by decisions we have

taken. Every student in high school in this Province will be eligible to enter a

post-secondary institution upon graduation with a quality education.

Let me give the hon. member an example. For instance, at

Bishop O'Neill in Brigus, which I am sure is very familiar with, there were

sixty-nine unique credit courses representing 106 credits available to students

out there over the three-year high school program. One hundred and six credits,

and they require thirty-six credits in order to enter a post-secondary

institution, in order to graduate with a good program. If that is not variety,

if that is not ensuring our students have a quality program, a varied program, I

do not know what is.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again I ask the minister, and

again from the statements that I have heard, and from what I've seen, there is

more to the education system than graduating in level III. I say to you,

Minister, that from what I have seen you consider the fine arts, which is music,

drama and art, as add-ons, as frills, that can be taught by any teacher.

Now, is the recent elimination of the fine arts curriculum

specialist in your department, as reported on CBC, a result of this belief? Will

schools with such programs get any support in the future from your department to

maintain fine arts programs?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: By the way, the per student teacher ratio in

Bishop O'Neill last year was fourteen students per teacher.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS FOOTE: Let me respond to the hon. member's question

with respect to the art specialist.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Education.

MS FOOTE: Mr. Speaker, let me assure the member opposite

that we will continue to focus on the fine arts, including art. What has

happened with that particular individual is that he is now in a managerial

position within the department, replacing an employee who has since retired. He

will continue to focus, among his other responsibilities, on art and other

avenues.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Harbour Main-Whitbourne.

MR. HEDDERSON: Mr. Speaker, again one final question for

the minister. The question is this, Minister, because I have been responsible

for the program at Bishop O'Neill Collegiate for the last number of years and I

am asking the minister: What about September of 1999? What are you going to tell

the students in 1999, with two units gone, with two teachers gone, and a drop in

the number of courses? What are you going to say to them in September of 1999?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MS FOOTE: I suggest the hon. member listen very closely.

We are going to ensure a quality education for those students at Bishop O'Neill.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Health and

Community Services. Minister, the shortage of nurses in the Province is now

starting to result in bed closures. There were fifteen beds closed at the Health

Sciences Centre just a little over a week ago. This shortage is going to end up

in another six beds closing in medicine this week.

The ICU and the Intensive Coronary Care Unit at the Grace has

now been reduced from eleven beds down to just five or six, according to the

CEO, Sister Elizabeth Davis, this morning. The Twillingate hospital -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SULLIVAN: They turned away three when you were away,

Premier, that is right.

The Twillingate hospital had to close six of its beds,

reducing the number - one-third of the beds - by one-third of what it had. One

nurse was caring for eighteen patients; one nurse to eighteen beds. One casual

nurse worked seventy-one hours in a week.

Minister, I ask you: What are you doing to stem the flow of

nurses from this Province?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am only happy to answer the question because I think it is

very important, based on the Ministerial Statement today, just exactly what we

have been doing. I think it is appropriate to say that I do take great offense

and I will be forwarding a letter to the Canadian Nurses' Association with

Hansard whereby a member of the Opposition, former Leader of the Opposition,

pointed out and accused our government of cooking up numbers to meet our own

needs when these are national statistics. I think it is disgraceful, quite

frankly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am only happy to answer the question, because over the last

number of weeks we have taken a number of initiatives including, most recently,

putting in $4 million to hire support staff, $7.5 million to hire extra nurses,

not to mention the new conversions.

I also have to say that I think it is important to put the

comments that you have heard in the media in context. The reason for the changes

in Twillingate -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am referring to the comments that the member raised when he

talked about issues with respect to changes in the status of various units.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to get to her answer.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think it is important to note that in various situations,

particularly with respect to Twillingate, those changes were made because of

unforeseen leave that was identified by the nurses. I think it is important that

those issues be addressed in providing patient quality, patient care. Those

issues were identified by the CEO.

With respect to the issues here in St. John's, we have been

actively trying to fill those positions. I would say again that I really do hope

that the nurses' union local will find it within their ability to speed up the

process so that we can put those positions in place as quickly as possible,

because some of them up to two years to fill. That is certainly too long to do

that.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There are six provinces in this country that showed an

increase in nurses, according to this information.

Minister, I spoke with a lady this morning, a person who is

caring for her eighty-year-old mother who has Alzheimer's. This lady cannot

walk, she has very serious bed sores, and she needs admission to a hospital,

Minister. A nurse has to visit her twice a day. The nurse said she needs to be

admitted, her family doctor said to take her to a hospital in an ambulance and a

specialist will look at her, but she cannot be admitted because there are

another six beds closing this week in the hospital. Minister, there is a crisis

I would say. What are you going to do to solve it and help people like this

eighty-year-old lady who needs medical attention and cannot get it?

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

Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have readily admitted, here on this side of the House,

that we have a number of challenges in our publicly -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have a number of challenges in our publicly-funded health

care system, but I am not going to jump on the fearmongering bandwagon and say

that our publicly-funded system is in crisis. I will not do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I will not play a

part in trying to

convince the public that our system is in crisis when our friends south of the

border have to decide if they are going to mortgage their homes to help pay for

the cost of their surgery.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Nobody has denied that we are one of

many provinces in this country that are having challenges and difficulties in

recruiting and retaining nurses, but we did not lay off 12,000 nurses in this

Province. We are not recruiting 12,000 nurses. The PC government in Ontario did

it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Furthermore, we are not looking for

thousands of nurses like the PC government in Alberta did when they laid off

thousands of nurses.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to conclude her answer.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Neither did we have anything to do with

what I heard the member saying: Cooking up numbers to meet our own needs.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister to take her seat.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: These are national statistics and we are

leading the country, representative of nurses to the population. You may not

like to hear it - the members opposite - but that, in fact, is true.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I could say this government is not hiring over 10,000 nurses

either, I say to the minister.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SULLIVAN: In a news conference on April 26, the

Premier of this Province said his Health Minister would be releasing, within

days, a plan to deal with the recruitment and retention of nurses in this

Province. I ask the minister: Where is the plan the Premier promised?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When I stood in the House on April 28, we offered an

invitation for all the parties to come and work to try to help resolve the

issue. We have been working ever since on a day-by-day basis with the health

care boards to identify ways to address this issue.

Yes, the 118 nursing positions that were identified to be

converted were done so since January, but there are another 153 other

conversions that are now in the process of being converted.

That information was shared with the branch of the Health

Sciences Centre and the Health Care Corporation last Wednesday. Do not make the

assumption, because we have not made it publicly, that we have not been working

on this issue, because we have. We take this issue very seriously.

In addition, the other part of the plan, if the member

listened earlier when I did my Ministerial Statement, we have identified another

$4 million to help address issues around workload for nurses, around support

staff, around hiring - administrative positions, around hiring LPNs and porters

and medical service aides. That is our strategy, to try and resolve the issue,

not to continue to fearmonger, not to continue to try to jeopardize our

publicly-funded health care system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: No, Mr. Speaker, we are trying to solve

the problems that we have to face and we are working very closely with the

boards to do it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Last Monday in this House, the minister said that there was a

contingency plan to send sick babies to the IWK hospital in Halifax. It is a

contingency plan they had in place a number of times throughout the last number

of years, if a need arises for a bed and a bed is not available. That is the

minister's quote.

I spoke with a person who is a head nurses in the system, and

a coordinator of a transport team. For the past twenty years they have worked in

neonatal care. They said there was never such a protocol for newborn baby

transport in place; it was put in place that weekend.

I want to ask the minister: Will she stand in this House now

and tell us if that statement she made was correct, and if the people in charge

are wrong and she is right?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I will stand here today and say the statement I made was

accurate. You cannot make an assumption that only sick babies are in St. John's.

We have sick babies in other parts of the Province. It is not uncommon -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, if I may have the

opportunity to answer the question, I would be only too happy to do so.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I ask hon. members to come to order immediately.

The hon. member has asked a question; I ask the hon. the

Minister of Health and Community Services to answer.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would be only too happy to answer the question. You cannot

make the assumption that sick babies are only out of St. John's. We have sick

babies in many other places in the Province.

It is important to note that there have been contingency

plans in place to fly sick babies out of the Province if the need should arise.

I had that conversation with the CEO of the Health Care Corporation. I know that

information is accurate and I stand by that information, with no disrespect to

either the director of that unit or any other staff involved.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Question Period has ended.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. DICKS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House

resolve itself into Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions

relating to the raising of loans by the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MR. SULLIVAN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Premier to withdraw

the statement he made. He made reference to size, calling me fat. I will admit

that, but it is not appropriate for him to cast aspersions on anyone, whether

someone is big, small, or someone has a disability of any nature. I ask him to

withdraw that word.

AN HON. MEMBER: Good idea, Loyola.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw calling the member

a big bluff. He is a little bluff.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will

on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Tobacco

Control Act.

MR. SPEAKER: Further Notices of Motion. Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given. Petitions. Orders of the Day.

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I move first reading - if I could

do it in order - of Motions 3, 4 and 5.

MR. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that hon. the

Minister of Finance have leave to introduce bills -

MR. TULK: Those motions just called (inaudible)

straightforward.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker?

MR. SPEAKER: Yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: No.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair has called Notices of Motion. We called Answers to

Questions for which Notice has been Given and we called Petitions twice.

MR. TULK: I was on Orders of the Day.

MR. SPEAKER: There was no response, so we called Orders

of the Day.

MR. SULLIVAN: I did not hear Petitions. I heard Notices

of Motion but I did not hear Petitions.

MR. SPEAKER: The Chair called it on two occasions.

MR. SULLIVAN: Does the Government House Leader wish to

give leave to present a petition?

MR. TULK: How many do you have?

MR. SULLIVAN: We have two in total.

MR. TULK: Sure, no sweat.

MR. SPEAKER: Petitions.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Today I rise to present a petition: To the hon. House of

Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland, in Parliament assembled, the petition

of the undersigned nurses of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador asks for

the House of Assembly to accept the following prayer:

WE the nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador have honestly and

openly conveyed our concerns about the failing health care system in this

Province. In good faith and under the collective bargaining process of this

Province we attempted to negotiate these issues with the Liberal government.

Premier Brian Tobin and the Liberal government showed their lack of respect for

nurses' concerns and made a mockery of this Province's collective bargaining

process by legislating nurses back to work without binding arbitration.

If the Liberal government honestly wishes to pursue

constructive dialogue with the nurses of this Province in an attempt to solve

the existing health care crisis, we wish to inform the House of Assembly that

this can only be made possible if: number one, the Liberal government admits

they made a mistake in not acknowledging the depth and scope of the crisis

facing health care in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; and, the hon.

House of Assembly repeals Bill 3 and the Liberal government resumes bargaining

in good faith with the nurses of Newfoundland and Labrador by using the

collective bargaining process that existed before Bill 3.

That, to me, tells us that the problem has not been

addressed. The minister stood and said, we have a plan. Well, if the plan the

minister talks about - the Premier said she was going to release a plan within

days. That was less than two weeks ago, release a plan. We have not heard a

plan. We heard an announcement during the strike, when the minister stood in the

House and said: 200 casuals converted to permanent. Well, 118 had already been

done. Whether the number is 200 - or 175 is the number I am hearing - what they

put in the system are just 125 new permanent nurses, and they are going to be

doled out to the different health care corporations and community health boards

around the Province. The Health Care Corporation of St. John's, for example,

will get fifty, I understand, of these nurses, when they have such a critical

shortage. Can you imagine out in Twillingate, one nurse assigned to eighteen

beds, and a nurse on casual having to work seventy-one hours in a week? That is

equivalent to nine eight-hour shifts in one week. That, to me, is overwork. How

can we provide the care we need to the sick people in our Province when we are

subject to those conditions?

I am very much afraid - and time will tell - that what this

minister and this department have done with doctors, who are now starting to

vote with their feet and move out of this Province, is starting to happen with

nurses too. They wait until a crisis exists, and when you have a crisis existing

you can't solve it by ordinary means. You can't even solve it at times by

extraordinary means. We have allowed the nursing situation in this Province to

get to the point where I fear we are not going to be able to solve it by

ordinary means. We are going to start getting a domino effect now in this

Province.

I will use an example. A casual nurse working out in

Carbonear also works casual here in the City of St. John's. What happens when

the conversions occur here? There was a recent announcement here that the Health

Care Corporation is looking at 163 more casuals to permanent within their

Corporation. What happens to the nurses around St. John's who are working in

other areas and who take these permanent positions? The casuals are gone from

those other areas, they cannot staff their areas, and rural Newfoundland will

shut down more hospital beds, and we will relegate entire rural Newfoundland to

cottage hospital status or have an increased ambulance service. That alone is

another issue. They have gutted the operation of ambulance services in this

Province to such a point.

We have a very serious crisis on our hands in this Province.

What disturbs me more than anything else is the apathy shown by the minister and

by this government to deal with it, their lack of admission. She stands in the

House today and quotes this. No wonder six provinces increased nurses, no wonder

our per capita is improving, I say to the minister. Our population is going

down. Other provinces are going up in population. If we never hired a nurse,

Minister, our per capita would increase. We have lost almost 40,000 people since

you became a member here, a lot of them since you became Minister of Health. No

wonder! If we never hired again, we would get the best in the country in no time

at all, because the out-migration of people from this Province improves. That

does not tell the story.

They say there are statistics, there are lies, and damned

lies, I say. This is indicative of what they are doing with statistics, trying

to put the best spin on statistics -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave!

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: No leave.

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I stand today to present a petition. The petition reads:

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of Newfoundland

in Legislative Session Convened, the Petition of the undersigned residents of

Newfoundland.

WHEREAS Route 235 from Birchy Cove to Bonavista has not been

upgraded since it was paved approximately twenty-five years ago; and

WHEREAS this

section of Route 235 is in such a terrible

condition that vehicles are being damaged, including the school buses serving

schools in the area; and school children are finding their daily trips over the

road very difficult;

WHEREFORE your petitioners urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to upgrade and pave the 5 kilometres of Route 235 from

Birchy Cove to Bonavista.

Mr. Speaker, this is another petition being brought forward

by the residents in the Birchy Cove-Upper, Middle, Lower Amherst Cove area

asking that government look at bringing about some upgrading and paving of this

section of Route 235, one of the main highways leading into Bonavista.

This is the time of year when people who have been having

some difficulty in trying to get their roads maintained and upgraded, and

hopefully paved, are waiting to hear the provincial announcements of which roads

are going to be upgraded this year and which roads are going to have to wait for

the next year and beyond.

Normally the announcements are made and the government is

committed to do this road or that road with their capital budget. So far we have

not heard, or at least I have not heard, any announcements of what money is

going to be spent where, not only in my district but anywhere. I do not know if

government have changed their ways of making those announcements or not, but it

is certainly not something I have seen a list of, or heard any announcements of,

of how the $16 million of provincial funding is going to be spent in the

Province this year. Hopefully the news will be forthcoming soon.

Hopefully this

section of roadway that has been brought to

the attention of the acting minister on many occasions here in this House, and

to the minister as well, before he had to take a leave, was made fully aware of

what shape Route 235 from Birchy Cove to Bonavista was in.

The people are asking that this

section of roadway be

upgraded and paved. In reality if half of it was done, if they could get two or

two-and-a-half kilometres of this particular roadway upgraded, recapped, and

repaved it would make a vast difference in the five kilometres that those

schoolchildren, who are continually writing letters, I understand to the

minster, sending petitions to me, making everybody that they can aware of their

efforts in order to get this particular piece of roadway upgraded and paved,

would appreciate.

Certainly it is the worst

section of roadway in that

particular area. It is the busiest roadway in that particular area. They are

asking government if they would look favourably upon their request. The letters

are coming in, I would assume, every day to the minster's office. Faxes are

coming in. They are coming in from schoolchildren, seniors, from people who have

to travel to Bonavista and to other areas to go work. They are coming in from

delivery trucks, they are coming in from salesman, they are coming in from the

ordinary citizens of the whole peninsula. Because they sympathize with the

people who have to travel over this

section of roadway every day in order to get

to school, in order to do their shopping, in order to visit the hospital, in

order to visit doctors. Or a doctor, I should say, because we do not have many

left any more in the Town of Bonavista.

Those people have to travel over this

section of roadway on a

daily basis in order to access government services and in order to carry out

their duties of being able to look after their households and educate their

children.

It is a simple request. They are not asking for anything

major to be done. All they are asking for is that this

section of roadway be

made in a passable condition where they can travel with some degree of comfort

to their schools every day. That should not be too much to ask for, when you

take into consideration that they have allowed their own schools to close. They

do not mind travelling. There was no protest implemented to maintain their

schools, there was no protest saying: We want to keep our school, or we want to

keep this particular facility. They agreed to do the travel into Bonavista, into

Catalina, or Catalina over to Bonavista, and in other areas in that particular

section of the Bonavista Peninsula.

All they are asking now is a simple request. It is to say:

Please, Minister, if you would be kind enough to upgrade and pave at least part

of this

section of roadway in order that we may be able to travel it safely on a

daily basis. It is not too much to ask for.

I ask that the minister would include this

section of roadway

in his capital budget this year under the Works, Services and Transportation

budget to look after and pave five kilometres of road in one of the most

travelled roads on the Bonavista Peninsula, I say to the minister.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

Orders of the Day

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could now call

Motion 5, first reading.

MR. SPEAKER: Motion 5.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill,

"An Act To Amend The Health And Post-Secondary Education Tax Act," carried.

On motion, Bill 5 read a first time, ordered read a second

time on tomorrow.

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

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, Motion 1, the Budget Speech. I

believe the debate was adjourned by the Minister of Fisheries.

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

Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When I adjourned the debate on Thursday of last week I was

trying to bring up an analogy between the demands of the people of Newfoundland

and Labrador and the cost of applying it to the demands that the people are

asking.

I gave some thought to it on the weekend. I was thinking

about the election campaign, the election Blue Book put out by the Progressive

Conservative Government during the most recent election. One of the things that

I noted in that Blue Book was the cutting of taxes, the elimination. I think if

you added everything - the cost to the taxpayers of the Province, or the amount

of money that would have been cut out to all the programs, it would have been

approximately $800 million. Now, let's leave that $800 million for a couple of

minutes and just take a look at what we have heard from members opposite.

The education critic is saying we do not have enough

teachers, that the education system in Newfoundland and Labrador is in a crisis,

that we should put more money into the education system.

I just heard the Member for Bonavista South read a petition

asking for the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to put more money into

roads in his particular district.

I heard his colleague from Waterford Valley speak last week,

asking the government of Newfoundland and Labrador to pave the cabin roads.

I have listened to my colleague opposite talking about the

roads in his district. The Baie Verte Peninsula needs millions. In fact, if we

were to compare two districts, Bonavista South and the member's district

opposite, I doubt is there is one-quarter of the pavement in your district as is

in Bonavista South, but nevertheless the demands are there.

The Opposition House Leader every single day is in the House

of Assembly saying health care is in a crisis and we need to put more and more

money into the health care system. He has not put a figure on it, but the

Minister of Health has stood continuously and talked about the $40 million we

put in this year as a government to pay off the debt of the health care boards,

$7 million for more nurses, $5 million for increased health services, and on and

on the list goes. I do not have the total figure but it is in the multi-million

dollars and the Opposition says it is not enough.

Keep in mind what they had been saying in their Blue Book and

their presentation during the election. The cuts they were going to make would

cost approximately $800 million annually. Now they are coming in after the

election is over, as an Opposition party, putting demands on government to put

all these services in place that are going to cost hundreds of millions more.

Let's just put a hypothetical number on it. Let's suppose the

health care system, the education system, the roads, and everything you are

asking for is $400 million or $500 million. Where would the $800 million they

were going to cut - the demand for other services another $400 million to $500

million - where would the $1.4 billion, where would the money come from? Where

would the money come from to pay all of these demands that the Opposition party

is putting on the people or the government of the day?

Let's look at raising taxes. Let's put our taxes up high

enough that we could raise another $500 million. That is pretty heavy stuff

coming from the taxpayers of the Province who are already saying they are

overtaxed.

Okay, let's say we borrow the remainder. The remainder would

be $900 million. Let's add $900 million more to the debt of the people of this

Province every year. Who in their right mind would agree to that? So another

four years. Four times $900 million equals $3.6 billion at the end of this term

that we would have to borrow to pay for the demands that the Opposition party is

putting on this government to answer all the questions that are being demanded

by the individual groups across the Province.

Who is going to pay for that? Where is the money going to

come from? You keep borrowing and borrowing, and you keep paying off the debt

with borrowing money. At some point in time someone has to stop. It has to stop.

Someone has to pay the piper. Go into bankruptcy? That is a real possibility if

you borrow that kind of money.

When we took over government in 1989, that was the concern

everybody had in the Province. They said to the Premier of the day, the

government of the day, in 1989: You have to stop that borrowing. You have to

curb the debt of the Province. We have to try and start to pay down the debt.

What was the reason everybody gave? We do not want our

children or grandchildren paying off the mistakes of the governments of the

past. We want our children, our grandchildren, to have a bright future in this

Province.

Ten years later, there is a whole new attitude out there. The

Opposition is now saying: Borrow more. Put the Province further and further in

debt. Add to the already billions of dollars of debt out there and keep

borrowing, because self-interest groups, or certain groups in the Province, are

not happy with what is going on.

Mr. Speaker, it is not possible. First of all, the people who

loan the money will say, no. The people of the Province will realize what is

going on here. Slow down; you cannot keep doing that. Clearly, the only answer

is that the government of the day has to play hard bull. It has to recognize

where the needs are and, within its limited budget, it has to provide the needs

of the people to the best of its ability.

Five hundred and sixty thousand people in this Province,

scattered over a land mass four times larger than the country of Japan where

they have a population of over 120 million people, but you have to deliver the

services all over that geography for that small population. If you have a small

population, you have a small tax base. You can only provide the services within

your means.

The Member for Bonavista South was asking for more roads.

Does anybody ever look at the kilometres of roads in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador for 560,000 people, and consider that the population

of Newfoundland and Labrador totally is equal to about the size of the City of

Winnipeg?

AN HON. MEMBER: Less than the City of Winnipeg.

MR. EFFORD: Less than the City of Winnipeg. Look at the

kilometres of roads in this Province, compared to the City of Winnipeg. Look at

the water and sewage infrastructure. It is scattered all over rural

Newfoundland, compared to a city where the population is congested in a small

area. You do not need to be a genius to figure out the cost of doing business in

this Province compared to a population congestion like the City of Winnipeg.

Look at the number of health care facilities in this

Province, the geography, the cost of transportation, the cost of communication,

and the cost of providing those services, compared to an area in Canada where

the total population is in an area four or five times smaller than the geography

of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, what we have to do is recognize, within our own

means, our own ability as a government, the same as you would run a business or

the same as you would run your own personal home. You cannot spend more than you

take in continuously; otherwise, at the end of the day, everything simply goes

bust. You cannot spend more money than you take in. If you do that, you have to

keep borrowing.

That is the reason I referenced the other day, when the

Smallwood government ended its twenty-three year reign, we had a debt of $800

million, not quite $1 billion. Seventeen years later, when the Progressive

Conservative Party ended its term in office, we made a debt of over $6 billion.

Instead of $800 million, less than $1 billion, we went up over $6 billion.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who was that under?

MR. EFFORD: That was under the Progressive Conservative

government for seventeen years of reign.

AN HON. MEMBER: Rideout's government.

MR. EFFORD: Partially the Rideout government.

What are we paying out in interest fees on average? Let us

talk about some of the money we could spend if we were not paying those enormous

interest fees. In excess of $500 million goes out in interest fees every single

year, paid for by the taxpayers of this Province - in excess of $500 million.

What are the demands of the Opposition House Leader? Put more money into health

care.

AN HON. MEMBER: More debt.

MR. EFFORD: Put more debt on the Province. Build more

roads; put more debt. Hire more teachers; put more debt. It cannot keep going.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: You crowd over there is some crowd to tell

anybody how to manage anything. You managed to put us $6 billion in the hole.

MR. EFFORD: What we have to do, Mr. Speaker, is spend

some time looking at our resource.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER (Oldford): Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: The Opposition House Leader will have plenty

of time on this Budget debate to get up and put his figures forward, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SULLIVAN: (Inaudible).

MR. TULK: Loyola, if you could ever see the big picture,

you might be leader - give you all the little details.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: He will not even make leader number two

anymore.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, what I want to do as Minister of

Fisheries and Aquaculture is try to utilize the resources that we have around us

to try to improve the economy of this Province because: the better the economy,

the more people are working, the more people pay taxes, the more taxes

government collects, and the more services they can provide to the needs of the

people of the Province.

When I look at this Province, and look at the resource in the

fishing industry, what we had around our Grand Banks, around our oceans, around

the Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador, and what we have today, we should be

ashamed to know how we have wasted that resource. The Grand Banks of

Newfoundland and Labrador are probably unequalled to anywhere else in the world,

the largest groundfish, the largest cod stocks - unequalled anywhere else in the

world.

In 1992, to the greed of ships - Canadian, foreign, national

and international - they almost came to a complete extinction but, nevertheless,

serious enough that the whole fishing industry had to be shut down. That was

1992. Seven years later, after an expected closure was supposed to be five

years, the stocks today offshore on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland are worse.

The biomass are worse today than they were pre-1992. Repeating the mistakes of

the past - mismanagement again.

When I hear the minister's own advisory committee, and when I

read the minister's own advisory committee's report last week, when the FRCC put

forth to David Anderson and said: There is absolutely no doubt in our minds that

the overpopulated seal herd is definitely impeding the recovery of cod stocks -

and then I hear the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans come out in the same

breath, the same day, and say he is not going to listen to his own advisory

committee because it is a knee-jerk reaction.

That says to me, there is something very serious going on. In

other words, there is an intimidation by the IFAW and the impact it is having on

the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for Canada in Ottawa is going to cause - as

a fisherman who was in Ottawa with us said when he made his presentation to the

Standing Committee on Fisheries: Probably it is already too late. That is what I

fear; probably it is already too late.

Look at what we had here last year - the export value in the

fishing industry - over $700 million with very little groundfish. Just imagine

if we had only protected our fish stocks. How much more would be provided at

export value on an annual basis if we had managed those fish stocks properly?

Estimation: $400 million to $500 million. In other words, we would be well over

$1 billion export value.

How many more people would be working in communities in rural

Newfoundland and Labrador? How many more communities would come alive again? We

had a debate, a round table discussion on the issue this morning. We talk about

seals; we have to protect the seals. We talk about the fish stocks and people

are concerned; but, as I said in the closing remarks this morning, I hear very

few people talk about people.

That is the lost issue in this whole subject; people are

forgotten about. Environmental conditions, the large biomass of seals, the under

biomass, the low biomass of fish stocks, but in the crunch of all of this are

communities around rural Newfoundland and Labrador and people living in those

communities with very little outlook to the future.

Now, what is the other negative that is going to come out of

all of this? What I am concerned about - let's go back pre-1992 when everybody

in the harvesting in the fishing industry wanted to make a living from the sea

and all of the attention was turned to cod. Small, medium and large, whatever

size ships, everybody wanted to earn a living from the sea and they all attacked

the one species.

What is different today? Everybody in a boat, regardless of

the size of the boat today, is demanding a living from the sea. What are they

going after? Shellfish. How long is that shellfish stock going to last if we

keep that type of pressure upon it, if everybody in the fishing industry of

Newfoundland and Labrador today are asking for a living and they are putting all

of that pressure on the stock?

Yes, the stocks are good today. Yes, the stocks are healthy.

Yes, science is giving a good report of the biomass, but what happens in the

year 2000, 2001 and 2005? I am not looking at how much money we can earn in this

Province today just from the fishing industry in 1999 or just from the fishing

industry in 2000. We should be managing our resource and we should be managing

our stocks for many years into the future - 2010, 2020. It is not just good

enough to ask a living today and not be concerned about the future.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

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

I am certainly glad to stand in my place today and say a few

words with respect to the Budget. I want to make a few comments on the speech

given by the Minister of Fisheries. He must be taking lessons in math from the

Premier of the Province, I say to you, Mr. Speaker. He must be taking lessons in

math from the Premier.

I will tell you why. He was up on his feet today saying:

During the election we were going to cut taxes by $800 million. We would have to

borrow the money. We were going to borrow this and we were borrow that. But, he

did not say that our figures - what we were saying - when looked at from an

economist at Memorial University, he was saying our figures were right and the

Premier and the government were wrong - way off by 100 per cent. Right away we

know that they are off by at least $400 million, in what they are saying about

our figures.

When we look at what is going on in the Province with respect

to this Budget - I have heard six budgets in this House of Assembly since I have

been here, the same thing over and over again. Talk is cheap, they say, very

cheap, but we have $400 million they are saying that we would have to borrow.

If you look at the situation in the Province - let's look at

the payroll tax, a tax on jobs. I was in private industry. I had my own

business, and I heard from many, many people. It burned me, it upset me, when I

heard them talking about - when they brought in the payroll level of tax, it

would be $300,000 when they first brought it out. If you had a payroll of

$300,000 you paid a tax on it. If you were going to create a job, you had to pay

a tax on creating a job.

One of the biggest problems we have in this Province today is

the shortage of jobs, and they wanted the companies of this Province to pay a

tax on jobs. Then they dropped it down to $100,000. If you had a payroll of

$100,000, you had three or four people employed, a small business - the way of

the future in Canada, by the way, from what I hear - where most of the jobs are

being created in Canada, small home enterprises and what have you, they want

people to pay taxes on it, on $100,000.

Can you believe this Administration when they get up and talk

about running government as a business? The Minister of Fisheries should

understand that government, to a certain degree, is a business, but Members of

the House of Assembly are elected to run the Province. It is not only a

business. You have health care to look at, which is a priority they say, in

their Administration. They say it; they certainly are not proving it. Education

should be a priority. They say it is a priority; they are not proving it. They

are not proving it at all.

I will say a few more words on that in a minute with respect

to the Minister of Education and some of the answers that she has been giving

over the past while.

Anyway, as I said, we have the payroll tax. It is costing us

jobs. I do not know how many jobs, because no one has done a study on that yet.

They are talking about cutting it back, gradually phasing it out. That is

something we suggested some time ago. The Administration now, the Liberal

government, are starting to hear what we have to say.

It is too bad the Minister of Health doesn't hear what the

Opposition House Leader has to say with respect to health. It is too bad she is

not hearing what the nurses have to say. It is too bad she is not hearing what

the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association are saying with this letter

that was sent to all Members of the House of Assembly.

The Member of Humber East was on his feet the other day and

spoke to this. I made a few notes. One of the notes I had here was that health

care has improved since the last Budget. Now, what he was saying was that he

would not expect health care to improve since the last Budget because it has

only been a couple of months.

The problem with health care in this Province has been

ongoing for years and years. We saw it last fall. We have seen it this winter.

We have seen it with the nurses on strike. I seen it the past four of five years

in this House of Assembly where what is happening this Province today with

nurses leaving hand over fist, with doctors leaving, nothing in place for

retention... They have talked about recruitment over the years, but nothing in

place for retention of the doctors in Newfoundland and Labrador. Doctors who

grew up here, people who grew up here, went to school, became doctors and stayed

here, now are leaving the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador - as the Premier

wants you to have now, Newfoundland and Labrador.

So we have the Member for Humber East on his feet saying that

health care - it has been too short a period of time to really look at that. I

say -

AN HON. MEMBER: No, no, no, I was responding to his

questions.

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, you were saying, and that is what he

was questioning. Have we seen any improvement since the last Budget?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Maybe so. Maybe he meant the one for 1998.

Who knows? Go ask. In the meantime, I will say to you that there is nothing

being done in this Province with respect to health care and the improvement of

health care. I have known, I have seen it, I have been there, I say to the

member.

I also ask the Member for Humber East, if he is listening:

Does he completely disagree with everything that is in the letter? I mean, this

is a warning. We have the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association giving

us dire words with what is going to happen with health care in this Province.

What it is basically saying is: Yes, we can address emergencies, but the overall

health care of the Province is deteriorating. Longer waits -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am reading from the Newfoundland and

Labrador Medical Association, and I would imagine they would know a bit more

about it than you, I say to the Minister of Fisheries. You would not know

anyway, I say.

Also, he said - this is what the Member for Humber East said

when he was up speaking - and I have to congratulate the Member for Humber East

on his maiden speech last week. He has been here three or four years and I think

that was his maiden speech. He talked about a good feeling after the election,

when he talked about the nurses. The issues on the West Coast, he said, with

respect to nurses, were: working conditions, casualization, and the pay. Yet, on

the East Coast, he said, it was completely the reverse of that. He said the pay

was the big issue here on the East Coast.

That is what the Premier tried to create during the strike

and he believed it hook, line and sinker. The Premier hooked him in, no problem

at all. He believed that the nurses here on the East Coast were after 7 per cent

and that was it. Mr. Speaker, there is nothing further from the truth.

I remember only last week being in the Health Sciences Centre

on the elevator and a nurse stopped me and asked if I was the Member for Cape

St. Francis. I said, yes. She said: Someone has to get it through to these

people, the working conditions of the nurses in the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. She said: I was on for my full shift, went home, and was called to

come back in again, immediately afterwards.

Not only that, from what I understand - and I am sure the

Member for Ferryland can correct me if I am wrong on this one - now nurses in

the different hospitals here in the Intensive Care Units or special care are

being called now to go to the Janeway on occasions.

MR. SULLIVAN: Even neonatal, there are three who are

cross-trained to go from the Grace down to the Janeway (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: The Member for Ferryland confirms it. The

nurses that have been trained in neonatal are being cross-trained to go from

hospital to hospital, I say.

MR. SULLIVAN: They can go from one hospital to another

(inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: They can go from one hospital to the other.

What is happening here? What kind of work overload are we

putting on these nurses? What position are we putting them in?

Another thing that has arisen and has to be questioned - and

I am not questioning the nurses because they are going to do their best; they

have done it - if a person is working for twelve hours, goes home, and they are

called back in again right away, really, what are we setting up here? Are we

setting up a disaster waiting to happen, I say to you, Mr. Speaker?

The Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair was on her feet

last week, Mr. Speaker, speaking on the Budget. I was surprised, to be honest

with you, because obviously where a person sits in this House of Assembly

determines the way he or she thinks. When she was sitting on this side of the

House, there was nothing they could say on that side of the House that was right

or correct; but now that she is over there, well, the sun shines out of that

chair right there, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Which chair?

MR. J. BYRNE: The Premier's chair. The sun shines out of

that, according to the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair. She said: Well,

there is lots of money being put into health care in the Province. One-third of

our Budget is being spent on health care. Is one-third enough?

MR. SULLIVAN: No.

MR. J. BYRNE: No.

MR. SULLIVAN: One-third is not spent, because they

shifted Human Resources and Employment, different divisions (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: See! Typical.

MR. SULLIVAN: They shifted three divisions over to health

last year.

MR. J. BYRNE: The Member for Ferryland again, knowing the

Health Department very well, probably knows it better than the minister herself.

MR. SULLIVAN: Playing with figures again.

MR. J. BYRNE: Playing with figures. They don't spend

one-third of the Budget on it because some of that is gone now into HRD, Mr.

Speaker.

She also said that we put nurses in the system into a very

important category, a very important position. Now, I made a note here that they

were kind of patronizing comments. That is what they were. Again, listening to

the Premier of the Province saying that everything is fine within the health

care, and the Minister of Health getting on her feet day after day in this House

of Assembly answering questions from the Member for Ferryland, the critic for

the Department of Health, it is the same thing. I mean, I don't know if we are

living in the same Province, I have to say to you, Mr. Speaker.

She was also talking about the shortage of nurses, I do

believe. I have a note here. Now, we all know that there is a shortage of

nurses, but I can tell you one thing about this Administration, there is no

shortage of ministers or government departments. Seventeen now, Mr. Speaker, I

believe seventeen was the last count. That is up from fourteen with the previous

Premier, I believe. The previous Premier had fourteen. So, it is going to be

curious to see, towards the end of this mandate, how many ministers there are

going to be, because we all know that this is the last shot for this crowd. No

doubt about that, Mr. Speaker. So we will probably see it in the last two years

going up to twenty ministers, to take care of some of their buddies.

AN HON. MEMBER: Is that what happened (inaudible)?

MR. J. BYRNE: I wasn't here, I can't say. I can't say, I

have only been here six years. The former Premier, Peckford, is gone ten years.

I don't know what way the man thought, I don't know what he did, and I don't

really care. I am looking to the future, I say to the minister, and I am not

concerned, to be quite honest with you, with what happens in other provinces;

not at all. I am not concerned. The only thing I am concerned about in other

provinces is that their economies are booming. The economy of Ontario is booming

and there is a PC government there.

MR. SULLIVAN: Jack, (inaudible) Mike Harris for hiring

nurses. What does he want, Mike Harris to lay them off?

MR. J. BYRNE: There is a PC government in Ontario and the

economy is booming, I say to the Member for Twillingate, booming. Obviously, the

Member for Twillingate - is it Twillingate he is from?

MR. SULLIVAN: Twillingate & Fogo.

MR. J. BYRNE: Twillingate & Fogo. He must want Mike

Harris in Ontario to lay off the nurses. Every time there is a question, he is

singing out about Ontario and the nurses in Ontario and all the nurses that are

being hired. He must want them laid off. So, let's put it on the record that the

Member for Twillingate & Fogo wants Mike Harris to lay off nurses in Ontario.

That is where he is at, and that is his mentality, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: Take it easy on stuff like that, boy. It

cuts two ways you know.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. J. BYRNE: Okay. Well, it has something stirred up

here in the House of Assembly today, I will say that, Mr. Speaker.

Let's get back to other provinces, because whenever we are on

our feet here, Mr. Speaker, they have a tendency to go back ten, fifteen or

twenty years, to previous administrations, or go to other provinces, like

Ontario and Alberta, where the economy is booming. I can't even see them making

the comparison. They must be dim-witted to compare us to Ontario.

AN HON. MEMBER: Why is he talking about it every day?

MR. J. BYRNE: You guys are. You guys are bringing it up

every single day. All I can here is: Make Harris! Mike Harris! Mike Harris!

Hopefully you guys over there, and the Premier, can imitate him and get our

economy booming, Mr. Speaker. How can you criticize that?

The federal government is sending us down, thanks to Mike

Harris - the budget this year was how much extra?

AN HON. MEMBER: The common sense revolution.

MR. J. BYRNE: The common sense revolution. How much extra

do we get because of Mike Harris this year? He helped balance the budget.

AN HON. MEMBER: Millions.

MR. J. BYRNE: Millions. How much, six hundred and -

MR. SULLIVAN: One hundred and ninety-two million.

MR. J. BYRNE: One hundred and ninety-two million. Thank

you, Mike Harris. Thank you, the PC Government in Ontario. Thank you.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: It is. Did you notice?

I would say the Premier is on his knees every night thanking

Mike Harris.

MR. TULK: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I am sorry to say to you, to the Government

House Leader, that I did not attend this weekend. I had other concerns.

MR. TULK: I am going to tell you something. There were a

lot of people (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: They are all wondering where I was, I say

to the Government House Leader.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I do not understand this House

of Assembly. Whenever I am on my feet speaking, the crowd on the other side goes

right out of their mind; they are that upset in what I am saying. If the truth

hurts -

MR. TULK: (Inaudible) trees.

MR. J. BYRNE: Speaking of trees, I say to the Government

House Leader, did you read the

article in the paper over the weekend about this

book that has been written about Newfoundland? The future for Newfoundland is no

trees, no fish. I mean, we should be careful of what we are saying.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, is it? I stand corrected, I say, for

even bringing it up.

With respect to health, I remember during the election - what

did we have? - $40 million to cover the regional board deficit. That is good

thing, to spend the money, but we also had $40 million in the Premier's back

pocket three or four days before the election; three or four days before the

election, $40 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: I say to you there, there are a lot of

districts in this Province that could have given up a lot over the past number

of years, let me tell you that. Certain Liberal districts that certain ministers

in this House have no problem in saying if you are in a Tory district you will

get nothing; Liberals, every road, every driveway - he said in this House, on

record - paved.

Now, $40 million in his back pocket when he came back from

Ottawa. A week or two after the election - Oh, misunderstood. He did not know.

The transfer formula changed and now we are only getting $9 million. The people

believed it. That is one issue.

The Minister of Fisheries was on his feet talking about all

the money, the debt, the previous administration put this Province in. He

mentioned when the PCs took over back in 1972 or 1974, whenever it was, they

were $790 million in debt. He neglected to say that back in 1949 when the

Liberals took over there was a $40 million surplus. A $40 million surplus.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Anyway, I say about $40 million that was

supposedly to be spent on health care in this Province, out the window because

the Premier said that he didn't know anything about the change to the transfer

payments.

MR. SULLIVAN: He said $40 million in February and we got

$4.4 million when the Budget came down.

MR. J. BYRNE: He said $40 million in the election and we

got $4.4 million.

The Minister of Fisheries was on his feet talking about the

debt that the previous administration put this Province in. He did not say about

the $40 million in 1949. Think about that now. Then it went up to $790 million.

Think about that I say, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SHELLEY: They cancelled their convention, by the way.

MR. J. BYRNE: What convention? When was that?

MR. SHELLEY: They cancelled (inaudible) they were

supposed to have this spring. They cancelled it.

MR. J. BYRNE: Oh, no! I just got word, Mr. Speaker, that

the government has cancelled their convention for this spring. That cannot be

right. The question has to be asked: Why? Because -

MR. SHELLEY: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No. It was because they could not get

people to go, that is one thing. We have too many people lining up, Mr. Speaker,

for the leadership. We have the Minister of Fisheries, the Minister of Finance

and the Minister of Energy lining up. That is why they don't have it because

they did not want to see this back-stabbing going on that the Liberals are so

known for. They did not want to have a convention this year. They are good at

it. They did not want that to happen this spring. They are trying to get another

year for the Premier, at least one more year out of it.

Anyway, on to health. One of the problems in the Province -

and the Auditor General brought this out with respect to the health care in the

Province - is that there is no accountability which we need to have in the

Province. The Auditor General has questioned on a number of occasions the

different boards across the Province. There is no accountability to say if the

money is being spent wisely, where it is being spent, how it is being spent and

if indeed it should be spent on certain things. No accountability.

I want to say a few words while I am on my feet, too, about

education. Because we saw the Member for Harbour Main-Whitbourne ask a few

questions the past week and today to the Minister of Education. What the

minister does not seem to understand, and I do not how to explain this, but he

seems to be zoning in on the quality of education in September. What the

minister seems to say is that the quality of education will improve. Those are

the answers we are getting, but the question I have to ask is this. Will the

students in September get the same courses offered to them as they are being

offered today, and last year and the year before? That is what needs to be

answered. Will they have the same programs available to them in September as

they have now currently, and as they had last year? The feedback I am getting is

that they will not.

It might very well be that they have a certain quality of

education that if they come out of grade XII they will be able to go on to

university, but will they have the same choices, will they have the same access

to certain programs that they have? I do not know.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: No, that is wrong. There are thirty-six

courses required to graduate. Yes, that is right, but if they have access right

now today to 130 courses, and that is going to be dropped back to a hundred

courses because of education reform, obviously the availability of education is

not improving. It is going backwards.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: What we are hearing is they are losing.

They are losing in music, arts and different programs, and what have you.

Obviously certain schools are not benefiting from education reform.

The other point that is made often is that the

student-teacher ratio is the best in the country. When you look at the

student-teacher ratio it includes non-teaching positions, it fails to count for

the rural spread of the Province, and it fails to factor in small necessarily

existent schools.

We do have a drop in the number of students in the Province;

surely the big impact is going to be on rural Newfoundland. If you have a

situation where the population in the urban areas is staying the same, the

student-teacher ratio may be better in urban Newfoundland, but rural

Newfoundland and the area is going to suffer. You have to look at the geography.

That is what I have said a few times back and forth in the House when the

minister was answering her questions. You have to look at the geography of the

Province when you are looking at the student-teacher ratio.

With respect to the employment itself and the economy, I

would say, Mr. Speaker, the government made a big to-do saying there were 6,100

new jobs in January. We all know that last year the Department of Municipal

Affairs had these special employment projects across the Province. They were

needed and they were good thing, I say to you, Mr. Speaker. I am glad that the

minister put them out. From what I can understand - and I have to give him

credit, the previous minister too, by the way, who is not here in the House any

more, and the present minister - they seemed to be evenly distributed throughout

all the districts in the Province. It seems to me pretty equally done. I give

credit for that, no problem there.

When the government said they created 6,100 new jobs, how

many of those 6,100 new jobs were a part of that special program, and the TAGS

program? So, that is really a false figure and something that people should not

really be hanging their hat on.

The social assistance clients is not good news either. The

Minister of Health was up today talking about the nurses in the Province and the

ratio of nurses to the population of the Province. The Member for Ferryland made

the point that this could be all well and good, but if you have 30,000 or 40,000

people leaving this Province, all that can do is make the figure look better

than what it was and is.

We know that there is a shortage of nurses in the Province.

There is no doubt about that. It has to be addressed. We saw the commitment, I

suppose, and the persistence of the nurses only a month-and-one-half ago, out

here in the lobby and on the steps of the Confederation Building when they had

their demonstrations, trying to get support against Bill 3. No one on this side

of the House supported it, by the way, not a soul, but everyone on that side of

the House supported it. I am sure if the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair

was on this side of the House like she was last year she would not have been

supporting it either. There is no doubt there.

We saw the nurses out here fighting for better health care in

the Province, contrary to what the Member for Humber East says, that they are

out there taking care of themselves. Not likely. If they were, what would be

wrong with that? Nothing at all. That is what collective bargaining is all

about. That was ignored by this Administration, and they tried to make a case, a

weak case I might add, that the 7 per cent the other groups signed for, that is

what the nurses had to sign for. Now that was a pig in a poke for sure.

We had a situation where other unions had signed an

agreement. They had the right to strike if they wanted to strike. They did not

so chose to do so. Then the government was trying to say everybody had to have

the 7 per cent, but not everybody got 7 per cent, did they? Not likely. The

judges are getting so much, the pilots are getting more again. I do not have the

figures here in front of me now.

It was not really true or accurate to make that statement,

that everybody had to sign for 7 per cent. Plus, I wonder if the first group who

signed for 7 per cent would have signed for 7 per cent if they thought they were

signing for everyone. That is what collective bargaining is all about. Every

group has different working conditions, they have different hours, they have

different responsibilities and what have you. That is what collective bargaining

is all about with these groups.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) they negotiated (inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Yes, they negotiated it, but the government

and the Premier were blinded by it. They did not want to hear anything about it.

The groups had the right to strike, the nurses had the right to strike, and they

went on strike.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: Candidate number one, yes.

Anyway, Mr. Speaker, the fiscal position in the Province is

not as well and good as the Premier would have you believe, let me tell you

that. In the Budget itself, there is a $4 million surplus. Listen to this. In

the fall there was a $55 million deficit predicted. Then the Minister of Finance

went up to an $85 million deficit. Then he went down to a $40 million deficit.

Then he went to a $30 million deficit in January. Three days before the election

everything is fine and we have a $4 million surplus. Now that is not including

the $30 million slush fund - that I like to refer to it as - that they can spend

wherever they want.

So in actual fact, if you believe the figures - and I do not

know why you would, because if they were predicted, one, two, three, four, five

times, why would you believe either one of them? - but if the last one was

correct they really have a $34 million surplus, not a $4 million surplus.

In the meantime, in the Department of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs - and I need someone to explain this to me, I can guarantee

you that - we had the government threaten to cut $6 million from municipal

operating grants. They said they were going to cut it by $3 million and now they

are increasing it -

MR. SPEAKER (Smith): Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: By leave, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave!

MR. SPEAKER: Leave denied.

MR. J. BYRNE: Mr. Speaker, I will sit down and I will be

up again. No doubt about that.

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

South.

MR. FRENCH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to take a few minutes today to talk about the

Budget, talk about some things from my own district, and talk about some things

that have just recently happened in this Province.

I will start off with the nurses' fiasco, I call it, and the

fact that nurses in this Province were legislated back to work. It seems to be

that on the night we passed this legislation we had sixty riot police hidden

away in the Department of Justice with a thirty-six inch television rented for

them, movies rented for them, all kinds of meals, dispensing machines brought in

and the whole business, all brought in, all tucked away nicely in the Department

of Justice. I do not know who, and I'm assuming it was the government of course,

brought them in here. I guess it was the government who paid whatever overtime

was required for that particular evening.

What was really interesting today is that I was at a function

that was put off by the RCMP. I had been hearing some rumblings all along that

the RCMP, on the same night, had a group of officers on standby ready to come

into this building, riot gear ready - they did not have the riot gear on, but

ready to come in here - from as far away as Clarenville. Anybody who was off on

that particular day was sent in to the headquarters in Pleasantville. Somewhere

between forty-three and fifty RCMP officers were ready down at RCMP headquarters

down in Pleasantville because nurses blew a whistle and tapped a stick on the

floor.

I found that very strange. What I really find even a little

bit stranger is that if the RCMP have to be paid, who pays them? Is that an

additional bill for this government, which legislated the nurses back to work? I

will say it has been very disappointing to watch what transpired during those

three or four days. As a matter of fact, to me it was an insult to the nurses of

this Province. What transpired with the police was the same thing. No longer

could we have a Constable in our own House sit in the Chair. Now, we got bumped

up to Lieutenant status. Why, I wonder? Why? Why was it necessary for some forty

to fifty RCMP officers to be tucked away in a building down in Pleasantville?

Why was that necessary? What in the name of goodness did they expect the nurses

who were here that night to really do? What did we expect to have happen in this

building on that particular night?

If you add up the sixty-odd that were here, and forty that

were down there, that was 100 police officers with full riot gear that we had

access to that night.

I had heard the rumblings about the RCMP and I said, no, that

cannot be true. So, today I made it a point. When the demonstrations were going

on, I visited various booths and said to the chap who was there showing me some

of the material they had: Which material here did you have laid out the night

they passed the legislation on the nurses? The guy laughed and said: Everything

from here down. I said: You are kidding me. He said: No, I am not. We had

officers brought in from as far away as Clarenville, just sitting around waiting

for a call.

We had 100 police officers in full riot gear ready to roll

that night. The RCMP were not in riot gear but the riot gear was very readily

available to them. I find it very strange and I find it very, very insulting.

I do not know how many government members had phone calls but

I know during this time frame I certainly had lots of them. I had lots of calls

from nurses. I had lots of calls from RNC officers. I still get them today.

Again, they will not forget. I think that is very evident. I think that, down

life's road, is going to be remembered, and remembered for a long, long time;

remembered for a long, long time.

The day the statement was made that maybe it is time we put

in a private member's resolution to have the RNC become a municipal police

force, my phone rang that day as well. It rang quite well. I listened to the

hon. Member for Conception Bay East that day on radio and I heard everything

that he had to say. On my way to work he was on CBC Radio. He was very

concerned. He said that if something went wrong at his house he would not get an

RNC officer to turn up. I would not expect an RNC officer to turn up at the hon.

gentleman's house. The hon. gentleman lives in a jurisdiction that is covered by

the RCMP. If the RNC are out in Conception Harbour, then I say they are way out

of their jurisdiction.

Again, I await to see the private member's motion that will

come before this House as it relates to members of the Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary who, by the way, I have a lot of respect for.

I had a phone call, after this whole nursing fiasco, with the

Chief of Police in this Province. As a matter of fact, I called in a complaint

as to the way one of his more senior officers acted to one of the Constables

that was stationed in this building. I told the Chief of Police that I do not

know how the member felt but I certainly felt embarrassed from listening to this

senior officer talk to a member of the force. I did not think it was qualified.

I did not think it was called for. In my opinion, it c