April 20,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLII No. 26

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Dicks): Order, please!

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

galleries twenty participants from an Improving our Odds class at the

Bonavista campus of the Eastern Community College, accompanied by their

teachers, Mr. Neville Sampson and Ms. Denise Hicks.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the

opportunity today to convey to the members of the House and to the public, my

initial response to the unanimous report of a conciliation board reviewing

collective bargaining between the government and the Newfoundland and Labrador

Teachers' Association.

Mr. Speaker, the conciliation board made three

recommendations. Firstly, it recommended that a mediator be appointed to assist

both sides to begin collective bargaining. We agree with this recommendation. It

has always been my position that the government and the NLTA should conduct

collective bargaining on the issues before us.

Secondly, the board recommended that a joint NLTA government

pension committee addressing the unfunded liability of the teachers' pension

plan resume its work. A number of meetings of the committee were held prior to

the exchange of collective bargaining proposals between government and the NLTA

in February. Government has put forth a number of ideas on how to address the

unfunded liability of the pension plan, and we would welcome more joint work by

that committee.

Thirdly, the board recommended that government disclose to

the NLTA the details of the restructured educational system as they relate to

the collective agreement. In recommendation three the board specifically said

that details of the educational restructuring as it relates to the collective

agreement should be made available before the start of the collective

bargaining.

I have said before, Mr. Speaker, that educational reform

should not be held up by provisions of the collective agreement. I would not

want to see the interests of students in our schools compromised by the

interests of teachers as employees of government. However, while we would like

to keep collective bargaining and educational reform as separate issues, we

recognize that there are some aspects of educational reform which may affect

collective bargaining. Consequently, we agree that more discussions with the

NLTA on these matters may be appropriate.

I want to evaluate recommendation three and must obviously

consult with my Cabinet colleagues before officially communicating the response

to the board's report to the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations.

I would conclude by saying that I am encouraged by this

report. I hope it can help us find a way beyond the impasse.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Menihek.

MR. A. SNOW: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to first of all thank the minister for sending me a

copy of the Ministerial Statement prior to the opening of the House. I am

encouraged by the tone of the minister, and also, of course, of the conciliation

board report. I am also encouraged by government agreeing to bargain in good

faith, or at least suggesting that they may start the bargaining in good faith

process, Mr. Speaker, because 350 teachers have already left their positions and

created uncertainty in the education system, let alone the families of which

they are a part, and the uncertainty there, Mr. Speaker, they caused that to

happen because of their lack of faith in the system.

Mr. Speaker, the government should disclose immediately their

plans as it affects the restructuring of the education system, because it is

going to have drastic effects on the collective bargaining agreement that is in

place now, Mr. Speaker. They should disclose this specifically, because of how

it is going to affect the 2 per cent clause, the numbers of the administrative

positions and the school board positions that are going to be affected -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. A. SNOW: By leave, Mr. Speaker?

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

MR. A. SNOW: Mr. Speaker, the government should begin the

process of collective bargaining in good faith so that we can sort out this mess

that the minister has created over the last several months.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday I had the pleasure of meeting with a

hundred or so people involved in the Improving Our Odds group in the

Trinity - Bay de Verde area, in the Bellevue area, where, there were a number of

questions asked with respect to the fishery; and I welcome people here today

from the Bonavista area, I am sure they have lots of questions so we will try to

ask the questions and see what kind of responses we get.

Yesterday, I understand the Premier in Question Period said,

that the provincial government the Province, has been working daily over the

last month with the Federal Government on the new TAGS program that was

announced by Mr. Tobin yesterday. Clearly, that means the government has a lot

of information and most of the details, no doubt. Today, I want to ask the

Premier about the criteria that will be used to determine eligibility for the

new program.

Now, yesterday, Mr. Tobin, in response to the media, said

there were three criteria for fishermen, and that included at least seven years

substantial attachment to the groundfish industry, 75 per cent of earned income

from groundfish or a minimum of $20,000 a year in earnings from groundfish; but

the Province, Mr. Speaker, and the Federal Government already know how many

fishermen can meet those criteria because there already is a full and complete

data base on every one engaged in harvesting groundfish, so, will the Premier

tell the House today, how many fishermen therefore will be eliminated from the

program because they won't be able to meet those three criteria? Because I am

sure he has that information.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I have to confess that I

don't have the detailed information immediately in front of me; it's a complex

issue. The Minister of Employment and Labour Relations, the Minister of

Fisheries, in particular those two ministers, and officials from their

departments and IGA officials have been meeting on a constant basis pretty well

over the last month discussing these details and putting forward the Province's

views but in the end the Federal Government must, of course, make the final

decisions. I have to confess that I think we had a pretty good input into what

was being decided. So I'm not being critical of the Federal Government when I

say that but I recognize that they make the decisions.

Now, I don't have the detail immediately in front of me but

it strikes me, from what the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has said that the

numbers about being required to have a 75 per cent groundfish and a minimum of

$20,000 is totally incorrect. Those are not the numbers, as far as I understand

it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) 75 per cent of income from

groundfish.

PREMIER WELLS: Seventy-five percent of income from

groundfish - 75 per cent of earned income.

Now, Mr. Speaker, there are a variety of criteria and

qualifications applying to different people at different stages. There are those

who have an absolute right to be continued on the program immediately and the

only requirement there, I think, is to be involved in NCARP, if I recall

correctly. All those who are receiving it now will continue to receive

assistance pretty well until the end of December in this year - I think that is

correct but I would have to go and check it; then, for the next two years,

depending on the level of attachment in the past, people would continue to

receive it and after two years there would be an expected reduction.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the expectation is that the two governments

will together be able to provide and generate some alternative employment

opportunity in that next two years. So there will be people who will be falling

off the program but our hope is that they will be finding alternative employment

elsewhere. I can't absolutely guarantee that but two other components of

addressing this problem are, of course, the industry renewal board and that's

another aspect, but part of it is economic diversification as well. Now, that is

a critical part of what the Federal and Provincial Governments are doing. So,

Mr. Speaker, it is hoped that people who cease to qualify after two years

because they don't have an acceptable level of attachment will have alternative

employment opportunities, but I can't guarantee that. We will have to face that

problem if, as and when it arises.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I'm somewhat startled

that the Premier couldn't answer a relatively simple question without providing

a speech.

The question was: how many fishermen will be eliminated as a

result of not being able to meet the three criteria that Mr. Tobin announced

himself yesterday? These criteria, I can tell you, are accurate; it is what Mr.

Tobin announced yesterday. There is no question about it. If he can't answer the

question because he doesn't know the information, well then, that is fine, admit

it. But don't walk around it. Let's try to get some answers for these people.

Presumably the Premier has been in close contact. He went to

Ottawa I believe and met with Mr. Tobin and Mr. Axworthy. They were here. You

were in Corner Brook and all the rest of it, so you must know some answers.

Yesterday Mr. Tobin, however, having identified the criteria for fishermen, did

not identify the criteria for plant workers. That is an extremely critical and

important area. But again we assume the Premier is familiar and aware of the

criteria because of the close consultation he said he had yesterday over the

last month, or his government has had over the last month, with Mr. Tobin. In

fact, he and Mr. Tobin have bragged publicly about the close consultation

they've had.

I want to ask the Premier now: can the Premier tell the House

now what criteria will be used to qualify the plant workers for benefits under

TAGS? He did say what the criteria would be for fishermen. Maybe it was a slip

of the tongue, I don't know. Again, surely that is information he has. Can he

tell us also when he answers the question, if he knows the answer, how many

plant workers won't be able to meet that criteria?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Let me remind the House again of the

answer that I just gave. The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, Mr. Tobin, has

assured me that unless somebody really was getting it and was unqualified for

the NCARP now, everybody who has been receiving NCARP will continue to receive

it until the balance of this year. So nobody will be immediately disqualified,

nobody. Everybody will be receiving it, except anybody who obviously wasn't even

entitled to receive NCARP in the first place. To the extent that there may be

some like that then they would also be disqualified, but from this follow up

program. Everybody who was receiving NCARP will continue to receive it at least

for the balance of this year.

At the end of December of this year the numbers may be - and

my recollection is maybe 2,800 to 3,000 less.

MR. SULLIVAN: 2,800 to 4,000.

PREMIER WELLS: Well, the number that I'm working with is

2,800 to 3,000 is the number he gave me, not 2,800 to 4,000. Twenty-eight

hundred to 3,000 as at December would not qualify.

MR. SIMMS: Plant workers?

PREMIER WELLS: No. Well, that is all total recipients.

AN HON. MEMBER: Total.

PREMIER WELLS: That is the number as I understand it.

Between 2,800 to 3,000 would not qualify after December of this year because

they had such a limited attachment that the argument was they shouldn't have

been qualified in the first place in respect to some of them. This is the

argument that some people have been making.

I can only pass on the information that I have. I can't

fabricate and say it will be over 5,000. Twenty-eight hundred to 3,000 is the

number that I have been given, and I assume that is the correct number.

MR. SIMMS: In both categories.

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

Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, we will see what the precise numbers are. We are just

trying to get some answers for the people who have asked us to ask the

questions, and we are happy to do it.

Now let me go to a specific point. Since the government had

input, consultation, the questions we are asking we expected the government here

would know the answers to. The amount of cod that was needed to be processed at

a fish plant, in order for those plant workers to qualify for benefits, was

always 10 per cent under NCARP - the Premier would be familiar with that. Now we

have been hearing from a number of sources, and people have been asking us the

question, that this particular criteria might be changed upwards so that 10 per

cent no longer would be required, and it could be increased up to 15, 20, or 25

per cent, some people are guessing, but to clear the air on the question,

because it is a critical question, obviously if that was to increase it could

virtually eliminate an awful lot of people, knowing what happened in the past.

Can the Premier tell us, because again we expect he probably

knows: Is this criteria of 10 per cent going to be increased?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I don't have all of this

detailed information at my fingertips. I was at the meeting with the ministers

in Ottawa on March 10. Prior to March 10, provincial officials had virtually no

direct input. It was as a result of the meeting on March 10 with the Committee

of Ministers in Ottawa, that provincial input started. From that time on a team

of officials were involved, I think it is safe to say, almost on a daily basis

in consultations with officials in Ottawa. It is the officials who have all of

this detail, so I will take the leader's question as notice, and I will give him

that answer either later today, if I have it before I leave the House, or if not

I will deliver it tomorrow in the House.

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I accept the Premier's undertaking to try to get the answers

today, if he can do it, but again I have to say I'm somewhat surprised. I would

have expected, on such an important issue, the Premier to have been well briefed

on it. Even his ministers - I don't know if they can provide the Premier with

the answers. They should know - the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of

Employment and Labour Relations - but I will move on.

Again, I am going by what Mr. Tobin said yesterday at his

press conference, because we obviously weren't briefed on it. The caucus over

there was, and the Cabinet were, as we understand it. According to Mr. Tobin a

number of people will be dropped off the program as the Premier mentioned

earlier over the next four years and beginning after December. We know what is

going on up until December.

In order to meet the target of having only 6,700 in Atlantic

Canada - which would work out to be about 5,500 by the way in this Province,

taking the 77 per cent that Mr. Tobin talked about - on the package by 1998,

clearly approximately 18,000 fishermen and plant workers will be dropped over

the next four years. So can I ask the Premier, can he tell us how that will be

done? For example, one of the questions. Will individual's benefits be approved

for fixed terms? In other words, will some people be told that within the next

few months their benefits will last for one year or two years or three years, or

whatever? Does he have an answer to that question?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that the hon.

members haven't given this approach much thought. Let me remind members again

that this is not simply a compensation approach. There are three prongs to this

MR. SIMMS: We know that. We are asking about the

benefits.

PREMIER WELLS: Well then, if you know it, take it into

account.

MR. SIMMS: We are asking about the benefits. Answer the

question!

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

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

PREMIER WELLS: It is a three-pronged approach.

Compensation to the extent that compensation is needed to meet the needs of

people who have, through no fault of their own, been displaced. A second aspect

of it is renewal of the fisheries for a continuing successful fishery in the

future, and one always hopes, although you can't guarantee it, that more people

will go back into the fishery too in the future. The third component of it is

economic diversification to offset the impact of probably large numbers of

people coming out of the fishery and not being able to earn an income in the

fishery in the future. There are three parts of it.

What I've said to the Prime Minister and to Mr. Tobin and

what I've written to them, and what the Cabinet gave them in an Order in Council

that was a specific response to the proposal in terms of expressing our approval

with the way it was going, it was subject to certain caveats. Including the

requirement that the proposal and its implementation be reviewed within two

years. If the projections have not been met, if those projections as are

expected have not been met, there will have to be adjustment to the program to

meet the circumstances that then exist.

It is not simply a target of taking this many thousand out of

the fishery no matter what. This is a comprehensive program that deals both with

providing compensation, providing for a renewal of the fishery and a continuing

efficient management of the fishery, and the third component being economic

diversification. If there is no economic diversification and no fishery renewal,

then two years from now we have a significantly different compensation problem

than they are projecting we will have. If they have a significantly different

compensation problem, that reality will have to be addressed at the time.

That is what the government has said to the Government of

Canada. That is the position on it. So for members of the Opposition to say:

What is going to happen, and is the commitment absolute for compensation for

four years? No. If a fisherman who now is entitled to that full compensation

goes out in six months from now and gets a good paying job, the compensation

ceases. So you are not going to provide compensation on top of income.

AN HON. MEMBER: Nobody said that.

PREMIER WELLS: Well, this is what I'm saying. The

question was, is it a firm commitment for compensation for that many years? No,

if there is employment opportunity provided to the individual and they can earn

income on that basis.

Mr. Speaker, it is a comprehensive program designed to

address all aspects of it and we are confident that it will.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SIMMS: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, this is the biggest pile of

malarkey I've ever heard.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: From the Premier of this Province, who could

care less about the 23,000 people in this Province who want to know the answers

to this question, he continues to dance around and not answer the

straightforward questions that are being asked. I'm surprised by the Premier's

attitude and I suspect he does know. He is keeping it to himself. Let me ask him

another question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SIMMS: You are abandoning the 23,000 fishermen and

plant workers, that is what you are doing!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SIMMS: Let me ask him another question that he should

be able to answer directly without skating around it. Annual federal

expenditures here in this Province for the TAGS program are going to be reduced

on an average of $60 to $70 million a year for each of the next five years. No

one can dispute that. That is what it works out to. In fact as we all know the

biggest and hugest cut may come at the end of December of this year. Let me ask

the Premier if his government has calculated by now how much total income coming

into the Province from the TAGS program will be reduced at the end of December,

and in the following years, and given the fact that we already have taken a cut

in this Province of $262 million from our economy because of the UI cuts, how

serious will these cuts be for the economy and for the people of this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Let me deal with the first comments of the

Leader of the Opposition, that I did not provide a straightforward answer to a

straightforward question. The reality is, Mr. Speaker, I provided the real

answer and they simply do not like it, and their position is very obvious. They

have the full answer and they do not like the answer because it does not meet

their political mold and they will not be able to distort it politically the way

they would like to, but they have the answer. Now, what they are going to get is

the full answer, and not simply the malarkey that they want to spread around,

and that is what they will get.

Mr. Speaker, the second thing is the amount that will be paid

out this year. I am told - I did not do the calculations myself, I therefore

cannot absolutely verify it - but I am told that the amount that will be paid in

the next year, in the first year of this program, will be more than was paid in

last year. That is what I am told.

MR. SULLIVAN: Are they the same people who (inaudible)

that Hydro should be privatized?

PREMIER WELLS: And they are absolutely right, and hon.

members opposite will come to regret greatly their position.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: They will come to regret greatly their

position on Hydro, as they have egg all over their face with the mess they have

tried to create for this Province without regard for the people of this

Province, and their future economic and financial interests. They will be up to

their necks in egg and they are not going to like it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I advise the House again that

I cannot confirm those calculations. I accepted it in good faith. The Minister

of Fisheries and Oceans told me that the amount paid out in the first year of

this replacement program will exceed the amount paid out last year. I did not do

the calculations but I have no reason to disbelieve him. He is an honest man. He

puts the position forward in a very straightforward and accurate way, so I have

no reason to disbelieve him.

I do not know off the top of my head what the amount will be

in the next year, but if 2800 to 3000 people come off as of December then in the

next fiscal year obviously it is going to be somewhat less. And if two years

later the economic diversification program has been successful and people have

obtained alternative employment opportunity elsewhere, and there has been a

significant recovery in other aspects, in maybe some of the groundfish aspects

of the fishery, and people have an opportunity to earn a living in the fishery,

then obviously less will be paid. My fondest hope, Mr. Speaker, is that they do

not pay the $1.9 billion, that economic and fishery circumstances are such that

we will get over this problem rather more quickly and people will not need that

level of assistance because they will have other opportunities.

AN HON. MEMBER: (inaudible)

PREMIER WELLS: That's it. And, Mr. Speaker, we were real

around we do not expect you to pay $1.9 million out to Atlantic fishermen

because that is what you put forward. If you can do it for $1 billion we expect

you to save the other $900 million for the taxpayers of Canada, but, if two

years from now projections are not as you see it, and the problem is worse, then

you may well have to put up more money than the $1.9 billion that you have now

projected. We have made very clear what our view of the matter is.

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

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I want to pursue a line of

questioning with the Premier that I pursued yesterday. I want to say to the

Premier that the real problem here, Premier, is that you are not fighting for

Newfoundlanders and Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: That's the problem with you and when the

real story is told about this fish aid package that you participated in, you

talk about egg on your face from Hydro, you'll be wearing the full frying pan, I

say to the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Now, it's clear from the Premier's

comments yesterday that there's still a major misunderstanding, still a real

problem between the Province and the federal government over the role of the

fishing industry renewal boards. I think after I asked the Premier that

yesterday, the Minister of Fisheries showed him the document, he went out to the

press: I think there's a very serious problem. Now the Premier said the renewal

boards will have a role in the future management of the fishery. Mr. Tobin said

yesterday, explicitly, no. Their only function will be to reduce over-capacity

in fish harvesting and fish processing to a minimum of 50 per cent. I want to

ask the Premier: was the Province taken in by Mr. Tobin? Were you taken in, Mr.

Premier? Did the Province agree to the TAGS program because you thought you

would get joint-management of our fishery? Is that the reason?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker, the Province's position

is very clear and I made it clear in the media yesterday. I also took the

precaution of writing Mr. Tobin yesterday and told Mr. Tobin in no uncertain

terms - referred him to our earlier conversations - now I don't know whether

what was in his statement was a misprint or whether it was something that was

changed since last we spoke.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WELLS: I know they don't like answers that don't

conform to what they want but, Mr. Speaker, I made it very clear to Mr. Tobin

that this Province will not participate in an industry renewal board that is not

a renewal board. We will not participate in a board that simply is presiding

over the down-sizing. We will not participate in a board -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: - we will not participate in a board that

does not provide for the genuine renewal and continued operation and development

of policies for the future operation of the fishery of this Province. We will

not, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Tobin knows it and so does everybody else in this

Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

Now that one really takes the cake because a misprint is bad

enough but for the Premier to get up here talking about reduction in the

processing capacity is something that you, as Premier and your government, has

100 per cent control of today.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: 100 per cent and you've been trying to

slough that off to someone else to make decisions on that you haven't had the

intestinal fortitude to make.

Now after two years fishermen and plant workers are still in

limbo because they don't know what plants will be closed permanently or how the

harvesting sector will be reduced, what types of boats and gear will be

permitted, if and when the fishery recovers, which we hope it will and soon.

That's the issue that's been referred to the industry renewal boards to be

decided. People can't plan their lives, Premier, until they know these answers.

Are you, as Premier, and your government prepared to keep them in limbo, to hold

them at ransom for another year, two years, three years, until you get the

concessions you want on the industry renewal boards or will you, as a

government, which you now have full control and jurisdiction over to make

decisions on the processing sector of the fishery?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, we're going to disclose the

full facts, including the fact that in 1970-71, when the former government,

former Conservative government took responsibility, there were sixty or seventy

fish plants in this Province and they pushed the number to 240. They pushed the

number to 240 by their policies.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WELLS: That's right, they pushed the number to

240. Now, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WELLS: - most of it, Mr. Speaker, in the 1980s,

and we all know who the Minister's of Fisheries were in the 1980s. They pushed

the number from about seventy to 230 or 240. Now, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

PREMIER WELLS: - the Province is going to know where the

real responsibility for the destruction of our fisheries lies. We, Mr. Speaker,

will continue to deal with the problems that arise in order to make sure that we

go forward with an efficient, effective fishery; and, Mr. Speaker, we will not

be pressured into seeing a downsizing of the fishing industry here and see

nothing happen in other provinces, only to see those other provinces claim

access to the fish stocks around this Province when they recover because they

have the capacity and this Province doesn't. We will not agree or participate,

in downsizing unless there is a means of having an effective provincial input

into the ongoing management of the fishing stocks when they recover.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A final supplementary, the hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: The Premier has me somewhat confused.

How can you get more than 100 per cent control of something that he now has over

processing, I ask the Premier? You have 100 per cent, you can make the

decisions, you can tell the people your plants are going to close or they are

going to remain open, get on with the rest of your lives, but you are not

prepared to do that.

Now, I want to remind the Premier as well, that since he

became Premier, there have been twenty-seven new retail processing licences

issued by the department.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: And of course we know what the problem

is - when the Premier made the reference about the increase in the number of

plants, the minister couldn't remember that he was minister; the minister

couldn't remember he was minister when all that happened, so I think that's part

of the problem. But anyway, both the Federal and Provincial Governments have

said, harvesting and processing capacity must be reduced to a minimum of 50 per

cent. When and if an arrangement is put in place to do that, I want to ask the

Premier: what will be the position of the Province on the geographic location of

plants? Because I have always maintained that there must be a regional

processing presence kept in every region of this Province. I want to ask the

Premier: Will you insist that there will be processing capacity kept in every

region of this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, that's one of the key issues

government has to take into account in any restructuring on the processing side.

Both governments have an interest in processing, that's true, but the Government

of this Province has a particular interest in where the processing is located

and making sure that there is access to plants by fishermen all over this

Province without having to truck fish an inordinate distance. So the location of

fish plants will be a significant aspect of future licensing. How it will be

achieved, nobody has yet decided. A variety of proposals have been forward; we

will want to speak to the fishing industry and we will want to speak to

fishermen and fishermen's representatives and unions, as to how this issue

should be addressed. No final decision has yet been made but it is one of the

major issues that the government has to address.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question, I guess, I will put to the Minister of Finance.

On Monday, the Minister of Finance said he would table a

breakdown of the $1.7 million spent last year in relation to the privatization

of Hydro and some other Crown corporations. Mr. Speaker, I thought we would have

the information by now, but unfortunately, the minister has not seen fit to

table it. I ask him: Does he have the information today and will he table it

today?

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I asked that the information be

put together, it probably has been put together; I will check shortly.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my understanding - the Minister of Tourism and Culture

- that summer jobs at provincial parks are not subject to the normal hiring

practices because of their temporary nature, and last year, two student

positions at La Manche Park were filled by people outside the district, one of

these being Eugene Hiscock, a former Liberal MHA for Eagle River.

AN HON. MEMBER: What!

MR. SULLIVAN: I ask the minister: With hundreds of

unemployed and capable students from my district pursuing post-secondary

education, will the minister assure this House that students from districts will

have priority when he meets the requirements for the upcoming year?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: Boy, you should (inaudible) jobs.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Industry, Trade and Technology.

MR. FUREY: Mr.-

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FUREY: I should refer the hon. member to his Leader

when he was minister in the Catamaran Park situation, perhaps.

Mr. Speaker, it is a fair question, but I can tell you that

in the past, all of these jobs were completely politicized; we are trying -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: That's the reality. The former minister just

told me that Mr. Hiscock, I believe, was a Master's degree student studying

French, but I will certainly look into it. We have been doing our best to apply

the basic rule of fairness and balance in everything we do.

MR. SPEAKER: The time for Oral Questions has elapsed.

Notices of Motion

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions

relating to the advancing or guaranteeing of certain loans made under the Loan

and Guarantee Act, 1957, Bill No. 13.

I give notice that I will, on tomorrow, move this House

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider certain resolutions

relating to the guaranteeing of certain loans under the Local Authority

Guarantee Act, 1957, Bill No. 14.

Petitions

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present a

petition on behalf of a number of residents of Newfoundland, whose prayer is

that the citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador seek to stop the proposed sale of

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

Mr. Speaker, this is a part of a continuing series of

petitions presented by people all across the Province opposing the sale of

Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. These particular petitioners are from places

such as Stephenville Crossing, Seal Cove, Ming's Bight, Baie Verte, Deadman's

Bay, and these individuals are, along with approximately 80 per cent - and

that's the figure that has been used - 80 per cent of the people of this

Province who oppose the sale of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Now, that's not

a made-up figure, it is based on scientific research that has been done on at

least two occasions so far, testing public opinion across this Province.

Now, the Premier seems to indicate today that he has some

other information to make known on this, and perhaps he will get up in response

to the petition and tell us what it is, but in my own district of St. John's

East I have asked my constituents what they feel on this issue. I have sent out

a brochure asking them to respond to a questionnaire giving their views on the

proposed privatization of Hydro, amongst other questions, and thus far 84 per

cent of the people who mailed back the questionnaire oppose the privatization of

Hydro, and support the position that I have taken in this House in opposition to

it. There were 2 per cent undecided, and 12 per cent who were supporting the

government position.

Now, this is a questionnaire that people have to put stamps

on to send back, so it's not something that - people who feel strongly about it

one way or the other can put a stamp on it and send it back in the mail, and the

response was even greater than the public opinion polls that have been done.

Now, the Member for Windsor - Buchans, the Minister of

Forestry and Agriculture, wants to know whether the people of St. John's East

understood both sides of the issue. Well, I would say they got a blast of

$80,000-worth of advertising from Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. They got a

blast of another $50,000 or $60,000, or 100,000 or 150,000, or however much the

government spent on these fancy ads in the paper. They got a full-page ad from

The Evening Telegram at least two or three times with the point of view

of the minister, or at least the point of view of the Premier on this issue, and

they had a little brochure from me, a little, tiny brochure, with one page

detailing certain views about Hydro, and opposed to that were the two or three

full-page ads, at great public expense, telling them how wonderful a deal this

was, so they had the information before them.

They also had, whatever arguments that have been made, the

benefit of a full public debate on CBC, a public debate on the cable television

program. The hon. the Minister of Justice was kind enough to debate the issue

one evening on Cable 9, and I think they were kind enough to replay it four or

five times afterwards so everybody had a chance to hear the government's views

and the opposition views on this matter.

I would say there are probably no more well-informed people

in this Province than there are in St. John's East on this issue, and perhaps on

many others, but certainly on this issue.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) send out a questionnaire.

MR. HARRIS: I don't know if the Member for St. John's

South sent out a questionnaire. I sent out a questionnaire to all of my

constituents and asked them for their views on it, and so far, the response has

been 84 per cent who have indicated that they are opposed to the privatization

of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, about 12 per cent are supporting the

government's position, and about 2 per cent have no opinion on the matter; they

wrote back saying they were undecided.

Mr. Speaker, that is a fairly good indication of where public

opinion is in this Province, whether the government is supported or not. The

real question that is now before the public of Newfoundland and Labrador is: Is

the Premier as good as his word? Will he do what is right - he is always talking

about doing what is the right thing to do - and indicate to this House that he

intends to abide by the wishes of the people and take back and withdraw the

legislation to privatize Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro, take back the power -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. HARRIS: With leave, Mr. Speaker?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HARRIS: - take back the power and give it back to the

people? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I know today is Private Members'

Day and we have a lot of petitions we want to present so I will be as brief as I

can. I want to support the petition as submitted by the Member for St. John's

East regarding the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

I think it is very clear to everyone that the vast majority

of the people of this Province oppose the privatization of Newfoundland and

Labrador Hydro. The Premier made reference today about having egg on our face

regarding Hydro. Mr. Speaker, I have been told of a letter that has been sent by

the government to all registered Liberals in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

PREMIER WELLS: No letter sent by the (inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: It was received - my information, I say to the

Premier, is that it was received in Marystown I believe it was the Wednesday or

Thursday before the ad in the paper for the 1-800 number. It was very

interesting what the letter said. It explained it all to them, and then on the

end was the part about the 1-800 number, Mr. Speaker. I don't know how many

registered Liberals there are in this Province. I don't know how many registered

Liberals got -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: I don't know how many registered Liberals in

this Province, Mr. Speaker, are going to respond and are going to call in to the

1-800 number expressing their support for the Premier and the government on the

privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

MR. EFFORD: What is wrong with that?

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I say to the Minister of Works,

Services and Transportation, that if you have to write the Liberals in your

district, or the government, whatever the case may be, and ask them to phone in

and say: I support, I would say there is something wrong with it.

MR. EFFORD: What is wrong with that?

MR. TOBIN: You don't see anything wrong with that? I

think there is something wrong with it. I think it stinks, I say to the Minister

of Works, Services and Transportation. Mr. Speaker, when you have to grasp at

straws, when you are that far down under the surface and you have to reach up

and haul at that final straw, if that is not a move of desperation I don't know

what it is. I can say that the majority of people in this Province are opposed

to the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro.

The Chamber of Commerce meeting the other night. People talk

about the largest Chamber of Commerce in the Province, Mr. Speaker, the largest,

bar none. It got an award a few weeks ago. What did they do when they heard the

Minister of Mines and Energy and the Member for St. John's East debate the

issue?

AN HON. MEMBER: No, no, no.

AN HON. MEMBER: Humber East.

MR. TOBIN: Humber East. Then they had a secret ballot

after they heard the Member for Humber East and the Minister of Mines and Energy

and two-thirds of the people there practically, voted against the privatization

of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Now, Mr. Speaker, did that chamber consist

of Tory districts, I ask members opposite? Port de Grave, Carbonear, Harbour

Grace, Trinity - Bay de Verde, Bellevue, that's where the Chamber of Commerce

was constituted from, from these districts, from all over that area and what did

they say? They said, no. Two-thirds of the members who took the vote, a secret

ballot, said no to the privatization of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. Mr.

Speaker, an interesting thing in this by the way, that it was the membership of

the Chamber of Commerce who made the decision and not the executive, like what

happened to the St. John's Board of Trade.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. W. MATTHEWS: That's what happened or like what

happened to the chamber in Corner Brook, when the next day they had a meeting

and all of the people came in and they said: what's going on here? That's what's

happening in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, I understand that we have other petitions to

present and time will be consumed within ten minutes on that petition so I'll

sit down but I'd say that to write the registered Liberals in this Province is a

desperation move on the part of government, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, some of the comments made by

the hon. member necessitate my response. To suggest that the government sent

stuff to registered Liberals is totally incorrect. The government did not but

the Liberal Party may well have sent it. Now the Liberal Party may have done

that -

AN HON. MEMBER: That was a misprint.

PREMIER WELLS: - but this, Mr. Speaker, is not a

misprint. This, Mr. Speaker, is PC Party propaganda mailed out of the government

offices, at government expense.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: Leaders News, Convention 1994 in Gander,

sign up and come to the PC Convention - no you're not entitled to that. The

Liberal Party doesn't use taxpayers' money to use at fund-raising, no indeed we

do not.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: Now, Mr. Speaker, if that wasn't bad

enough their fund-raising campaign is now carried on at taxpayers' expense. Here

it is, Mr. Speaker, a letter: Dear Tom, Just a note to remind you of the

luncheon club - their fund-raising luncheon club - meeting on Wednesday, April

20, 12:00 - 2:00 p.m., Holiday Inn. Feel free to bring a friend. I look forward

to seeing you.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

PREMIER WELLS: Yes, mailed out of the government offices

to Tory members, Tory Party supporters, yes!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, this is not the first time. I

was informed of this before. I was informed of this two years before, Mr.

Speaker, and I raised the question and stopped it at that time. The Opposition

were abusing the taxpayers' money by using it for their own political purposes

and stopped it at that time, Mr. Speaker, took steps to see that it was stopped

but, Mr. Speaker, I didn't make a public issue of it. I didn't want to resort to

petty politics over it. I just spoke to them about it, just advised them of it.

Now, Mr. Speaker, here they are back at it again, using the

taxpayers' money for their own party propaganda. It's time, Mr. Speaker, they

were called to account for their political misbehaviour. To stand in this House

and criticize because the Liberal Party, at it's own expense, sent out letters

informing it's members, at the Liberal Party expense, Mr. Speaker. Not this,

`Convention '94,' sent out on government letterheads with eighty-eight cents

postage on it, Mr. Speaker. How many were sent out? How much did it cost the

taxpayers to advise the Tory members and send out applications to attend their

convention? It's the Leaders News, you're not the Leader of the Province you're

the Leader of the Tory Party.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: Was it sent to the people? Here is the

opening statement: Easter Greetings to Progressive Conservatives throughout

Newfoundland and Labrador. What has that got to do with taxpayers? Now, Mr.

Speaker, those self-righteous hypocrites with that false indignation standing up

making these allegations - it is about time the people of this Province knew

just what was going on. Mr. Speaker, I will get the rest of the information out,

too, and demonstrate just what has been happening as they have been spreading

this false propaganda about Hydro throughout the Province at public expense, and

then they have the gall to stand up in the House and be critical of the Liberal

Party because at its own expense it communicated to its members. Mr. Speaker,

such hypocrisy is not deserving of any kind of attention, except the highest

possible condemnation possible, and that is what I invite the people of this

Province to confer on the members opposite.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

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

I want to present a petition on behalf of residents of Grand

Bank from various towns in the district, but mostly from the town of Grand Bank.

What a display, if you have ever seen a cornered weasel, a wounded rat, you have

seen it here today. If ever we have seen an individual trying to crawl up out of

the hole he dug for himself, in a hole not only with the people of the Province

but in a big hole with his own caucus, I say to the Premier. If ever there was

an action of desperation for the Premier of this Province to stand in his place

today and wave around literature of the Leader's News, and a letter inviting

people to a luncheon club, I say to the Premier, you call someone else a

hypocrite? We can get the letters. The Member for Burin - Placentia West made

reference to the letter, I say to the Premier, that he knows came into his

district and knows who received it. He did not come in here and table it like

you did.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. W. MATTHEWS: So, you did not table it? You should be

made to table it, by the way. The Speaker should order you to table it. You

cannot come in here waving around letters and other stuff and not table it. You

table it. You are the one who talks about decorum in here and everything else.

You table what you just read from I say to the Premier.

Mr. Speaker, you talk about a man who is desperate because he

has lost an issue. I say to the Premier and to members opposite what an

unbelievable display of behaviour for the Premier of this Province who came into

this Chamber five years ago and was going to improve the decorum of the House.

What a farce! What a hypocrite, I say to the Premier of this Province. When you

cannot defend what you are trying to push down the throats of Newfoundlanders

and Labradorians that is the way you behave. I say to the Premier that in the

last five years I have been in this Chamber when the Premier is on the ropes he

attacks people personally, he attacks individuals. He turns into character

assassination, I say to the Premier, and that is what he has done again today.

When you cannot defend the indefensible, when you have lost the battle, that is

what you resort to time after time, after time.

PREMIER WELLS: (inaudible) that will be back to haunt

you.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: To be very honest, I feel sorry for the

Premier. He has lost so badly in the last three or four months that he is now

hanging on to the knot at the end of the rope and his fingernails are breaking

off, I say to him. He has lost so badly on this Hydro issue, and he is now being

exposed as to what he has agreed to with the Federal Government on the fish aid

package, he is about to slip off the knot, and if the people behind him were

honest, and spoke in the House like they do in caucus, we would know the true

story, I say to the Premier. But we are going to keep up the fight against the

privatization of Hydro. Eighty per cent of the people are against the

privatization of Hydro, and again, it's time for the Premier to stand in his

place and tell the House and tell the people of the Province that he is

withdrawing the legislation, and if he doesn't want to do that then let it die

on the Order Paper, I say. Let it die there.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

It now being 3:00 p.m., we will call Motion 4, Private

Members' Day.

Private Members' Day

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DUMARESQUE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is certainly a privilege for me today to stand here and

propose this resolution to the hon. House, but before I get into the substance

of the motion, I would like to ask unanimous consent of the House to make a

friendly amendment to the last stanza of that resolution, since a number of

members on this side feel, and also after talking to members opposite, they have

concurred, because we are asking for a full-fledged seal fishery, some people

might interpret it that we could be talking about a return to the white-coat

hunt.

I was going to certainly make that clear in the speech, but

simply for the record, and to make sure that there is absolutely no dispute

about where we are coming from, I would like to propose, if I have unanimous

consent of the House - and I already discussed this with the hon. House Leader

and the leader of the other party in the House - I would like to propose that

the resolution be amended by placing the word `adult' after `full-fledged' in

the last section, and the phrase `based on the full utilization of the seal' at

the end of that particular section, so that it would now read:

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly endorse a

full-fledged adult seal fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador, based on the full

utilization of the seal.

I would like to propose that, Mr. Speaker, and have you rule

on it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Does the hon. the Member for Eagle River have the consent of

the House to amend the motion as indicated?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member has leave to amend his

motion accordingly.

Motion carried.

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

MR. DUMARESQUE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, today we are going to discuss what I believe is

a very important issue - obviously, the resolution as it stands, and I would

like to read it into the record:

WHEREAS the economy of rural Newfoundland and Labrador has

been devastated by the collapse of the Northern Cod stock; and

WHEREAS the seal population has reached more than 5 million,

and created a clear imbalance in the ecosystem; and

WHEREAS the market is now available for the utilization of

the whole animal;

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly endorse a

full-fledged adult seal fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador based on the full

utilization of the seal.

Mr. Speaker, coming on the heels of the announcement

yesterday by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, it is now certainly more

incumbent than ever for us to be dealing with the seal fishery, and over the

next few minutes - and I am sure other members from both sides will touch on it

- I want to give an overview of why this is such an important issue, and

particularly talk about the ecological imbalance that presently exists in the

oceans adjacent to our communities. I want to talk about it in respect to the

present fisheries crisis that we have, and what it means, and how we must

address it.

Obviously, we also should address the market developments

that have taken place in the past six months or so in particular, to really give

a good understanding of why this resolution, I think, is important and must be,

I hope, endorsed by all members of this hon. House.

Mr. Speaker, presently there are over 5 million harp seals in

the waters adjacent to Newfoundland and Labrador, but it also must be clearly

pointed out that there are millions of other seals - I would say in the area of

3 million to 5 million more seals. Those are the grey seal and the hooded seal

and the jar-seal, and the other seals that go to the inland waters. We know that

the harp seal population, which is the only one that is surveyed by the DFO

scientists in this area -

AN HON. MEMBER: Partially surveyed.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Partially surveyed in what some people

certainly have been led to conclude after some of the numbers that they have

reached in the past number of years. We know just recently that they've ended

another count on the harp seal. It must be clearly pointed out - and also I'm

reminded by the Member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir, that the seals on the South

Coast of Newfoundland are not included in the count that is undertaken. There is

a tremendous population in that area that is not included in the count.

Mr. Speaker, we now have situation where clearly we have with

every confidence 8 million to 10 million seals in the Atlantic Ocean adjacent

primarily to Newfoundland and Labrador. These are made up of the various species

that I mentioned.

Now, Mr. Speaker, it has been a long-standing issue, I guess,

as to what the seals eat. There have been various groups and organizations, but

particularly the IFAW, that have always contended that the seals do not eat

fish, but now we do have the scientific evidence, the scientific evidence is

there, that shows that the seals, in fact, do eat any number of species of fish.

And now, the IFAW have had to accept that fact because the biological

information coming from the seals now confirms that they certainly do eat fish.

Particularly with the codfish, the seals take the underbelly;

they come up and take the underbelly of the cod, because what they are really

going after is the liver in the seals. Sometimes if you took a look at the

inside of the seal you wouldn't find all the bones and everything associated

with the codfish, because they take the soft underbelly and they get at the

liver. Obviously, fish without a liver or without an underbelly don't get very

far in the oceans of our shores and there is no doubt that the death of that

fish is immediate. So, Mr. Speaker, it is very clear now.

If you take 8 million to 10 million seals eating just one

pound of fish a day - and obviously the seals that we see are very healthy,

those that I've been hearing about, along the Coast of Labrador, and others can

confirm. The Minister of Works, Services and Transportation probably can confirm

it better than anybody else in this House because he still holds his seal

licence and he still takes the seal. But, Mr. Speaker, if those seals ate, say,

8 million pounds of fish a day, for say, 300 days a year, that is 24 million

pounds of fish, something like 1200 tons of fish being taken just by that

population alone.

Just to give you some comparison of that. The latest

scientific evidence that tells us about the state of the Northern cod says that

there is now a biomass of Northern cod of less than 20,000 metric tons - less

than 20,000 metric tons of spawning biomass for the total Northern cod fishery.

It is absolutely inconceivable for us to continue to allow the seal population

out there as it stands to go after what is the last remaining fish in our great

Northern cod stock.

Mr. Speaker, it should also be pointed out that the seal

doesn't restrict its diet to codfish. I am little bit amused when I hear people

in the media talking about what is happening to our salmon. I'm a bit amused,

because over the last number of years we've had moratoriums in New Brunswick,

Nova Scotia, and on the Eastern Seaboard of the United States. The last I heard,

the scientists were in St. Andrew's, New Brunswick, saying: There must be - we

can't figure it out - but there has to be some kind of virus out there now.

They've ruled out all the other things and they now conclude that it must be

some kind of virus that is getting at our salmon.

Mr. Speaker, how obvious do they want it? How clear? The

virus is the seal. There is absolutely no doubt about that. You go to any of our

rivers in Newfoundland and Labrador - the Gander River, I am sure the Minister

of Finance has seen them, where the seals have gone up as far as he has gone in

the Gander River, right up to the lake, Mr. Speaker; and other rivers around,

other members have given an accounting for it.

I had another letter just yesterday, from a senior citizen

down in Cartwright, Labrador, who spent all of his time working on the rivers,

the North River, the Eagle River, Paradise River, Black Bear River and all of

those, Mr. Speaker, and he is telling me that for the last number of years, he

has travelled through those rivers, he has seen seal after seal after seal

taking the young salmon and also going after the adults especially as they are

spawning; so if they are up there taking them, it makes no wonder they can't

come back to the ocean, and make no wonder they are not returning in the numbers

that they are expected to with the rivers.

So I would say to the people who are so preoccupied and

dedicated to preserving the Atlantic Salmon, it is about time that you added

your support to getting the seal population under control. It is about time that

you admitted to all of the world, that the salmon population is being hindered

in no uncertain fashion by that species, Mr. Speaker, and it has to be stopped.

Mr. Speaker, obviously, in addition to the terrible imbalance

in the ecosystem, there is now upon us a fisheries crisis as we never ever

thought it would be, and clearly, it never has been in the past to this degree.

We now have the Northern cod stock decimated, we now have eleven species, eleven

groundfish species under total moratorium, from Cape Chidley in the north right

down to the George's Banks and other places in Atlantic Canada, a full, total

moratorium on these stocks. The salmon, as we have already pointed out, are also

in dire straits; there are other species outside of the Northern cod and the

Gulf cod that are under total moratorium. So we now know, and it is no secret to

anybody, that it is going to take some time before we have those species

returned and in all honesty, they probably never will return to their original

form even as they were five years ago. They probably will never return to that

stage.

Therefore, it is more incumbent upon us now than ever before,

to diversify within the fishery, to diversify to the point of looking at every

resource that we have available, to get those jobs that are going to keep that

community alive, that will give those fishermen some income and give our economy

the kind of stability that we are obviously not getting at the present time.

And, in the future, if we don't take advantage of this opportunity, it will be

even worse.

So, Mr. Speaker, it is very important that we look at the

seal fishery as a viable alternative for employment, as a viable alternative in

terms of getting economic benefit to our people on the Coast of Labrador and all

through the Northeast Coast of Newfoundland, the South Coast of Newfoundland

even in other parts of Atlantic Canada.

We now have some very, very positive developments in the

marketplace. My colleague, the Member for St. George's will talk quite lengthily

and clearly and very, very substantially about the developments in the seal

fishery. He is a very competent individual in this particular area when it comes

to the research and development that he has put into the oil and the by-products

of the seal. I am sure all hon. members should pay attention to what he is going

to tell you, because he does have a substantial amount of information and very,

very exciting developments that he has been involved with and which certainly

can have very positive effects on our rural economy, and our economy in general.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries, I am sure,

when he gets a chance to speak, will talk about the very substantial

developments in the marketplace in Asia. Obviously, it was our Premier who

headed up that undertaking this year to go to Asia, to hold discussions with

people in the Asian market. And it was largely because of the work done by the

Department of Fisheries over there and certainly promoted by our Premier when he

went on his trip to Asia in January, Mr. Speaker, that we now have a contract

that will see some 50,000 seals harvested.

I guess the real encouragement in all of this, the real

substantial benefit that we are now receiving, is in the fact that there has

been a market found and endorsed and appreciated for the full utilization of the

adult seal. There is absolutely nobody in this Province who would support, and

there are no reasons now for anybody to support or promote the return of the

white-coat seal hunt. That was wrong before and it is certainly not going to be

repeated. We have no intention of supporting any kind of a return to the

white-coat hunt. Hopefully, everybody out there can clearly appreciate that that

is exactly where we are coming from.

I am looking forward to the debate this afternoon on this

very important issue. I will return to some of the other issues in the seal

fishery, particularly some of the management issues that are now there in terms

of the management of the fishery as it relates to licensing, as it relates to

processing, and as it relates to being able to access that resource, at the

latter part of my presentation.

Mr. Speaker, I think this is a very exciting undertaking for

this Province to be embarking on. I think it has to be undertaken for all of the

right reasons and I would hope that all hon. members here today will be able to

support this resolution as it is now stated.

With that, I will now close off because I want to try to make

sure that other speakers get an adequate chance to have their say this

afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

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

to have a few words. I thank the hon. the Member for Eagle River for going on a

bit to allow me to get back from discussions with the Speaker.

I want to first of all say that I support the resolution put

forward by the Member for Eagle River. I want to acknowledge that he did call

this morning about his amendment, which I thought was wise. As a matter of fact,

this morning, once I read through the resolution, I had a flag raised, as well,

in my mind that perhaps we should deal with it the way the member has, so I

support what he has done there as well. It is not that - I wasn't going to

accuse the member of softening or weakening, like I did yesterday. In this case

it is a wise amendment and I commend the member for both the resolution and for

doing what he has done with the amendment.

I want to say to the Member for Eagle River that I was

supposed to be at a meeting at 3:30 p.m. with the IEC but I wanted to listen to

what the Member for St. George's was going to say. I want to say to the Member

for St. George's, out of courtesy, that if I should leave to go to the IEC

meeting, then I will certainly undertake to read Hansard.

AN HON. MEMBER: What was that again?

MR. W. MATTHEWS: I say to the Member for St. George's

that if I should be absent while he speaks - and obviously, from what the Member

for Eagle River said, he has some very good information that he will supply to

the House and some very interesting points to make. I want to assure him that I

will read Hansard tomorrow and digest what he had to say. I don't know if I will

digest what he has to say about some of the seal parts, or what should be done

with it, but I will certainly read what the member has to say in that regard,

and look forward to it with interest.

I think, as the Member for Eagle River has (inaudible), many

times we've had a very similar private member's resolution brought forward in

the House, and I guess on most occasions it has certainly been supported. Some

people have reservations for various reasons, depending upon the wording, but I

think there is one thing that we've always been unanimous about since I've been

here, and that is, the seal herd, the seal population has to be dealt with, if

we are going to overcome this very serious fisheries -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. W. MATTHEWS: - this very serious fisheries crisis. I

wish the press would stop sending me in notes like this because it interrupts my

train of thought. I'm coming out after you, so be careful what you say, I say to

the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

With all the other things that we are doing, particularly as

Atlantic Canadians, and Atlantic Canadian fishermen and fish plant workers, of

all the sacrifices that we are making. It should be clear to the world now just

how far we are prepared to go, and the harsh decisions that governments have had

to make, and are still making, to try and overcome this very serious fisheries

crisis, to rebuild and regenerate our fish stocks, that all of the contributing

factors to the decline in our fish resources must be dealt with, and that

certainly includes dealing with the member's resolution where he talks about the

devastation of the Northern Cod stock.

The seal population, he says, has reached more than 5

million. I guess there would be a debate on that, but certainly the seal

population is out of whack and that must be addressed. A clear imbalance in the

ecosystem - I strongly believe that. There are those who would disagree with us,

but I believe that.

The market is now available for the utilization of the full

seal, the whole animal. There is some progress being made in that regard, and I

understand there could have been some other opportunities, I believe, I say to

the Member for Eagle River, but I think they were missed, for some reason or

other this year, either for trying to access government funding, and the recent

trip to Asia, as I understood, held out some promise for it all, but then I

don't know if that's materialized or advanced the way that it should have. I

think there have been some wrinkles in that proposal. We might be able to take

advantage of those markets, or potential markets that seem to be there, from

what I am hearing. I don't know all the details, but maybe some other members

might allude to, or further develop that bit of a problem that is there, and

that we endorse a full-fledged adult seal fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador.

I certainly very strongly support that.

When you look at taking the fishermen out of the fishing

industry, that we have been doing for the last few years and are about to do now

in a very big way, when you look at the foreign fishing effort that is still

raging on the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks, members know that. We arrested a

couple of our own vessels. I give them credit for doing that. They should have

been arrested, and if there are more of them out there, arrest them as well, but

that foreign effort is still there in a big way - sixty to seventy vessels that

are still out there - and I believe they are still out there doing exactly what

the Christina Logos was doing.

It was very revolting to watch. I watched it on television,

and it would make you so upset, and think thoughts that you shouldn't really

think, when you see that vessel with the small fish that were in the hole, and

then to see the liners in the nets - and I believe what is outside there now

fishing are doing the same. They are doing the same, and if we don't stop that -

and I am sure the Member for Eagle River knows that full well, although I don't

hear him refer to it quite as often now since Mr. Tobin is federal Fisheries

Minister; you don't hear him talk about it quite as much - but if we don't get

rid of that problem

MR. SULLIVAN: George doesn't talk about it as much

either.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: No, Mr. George Baker doesn't talk about

it quite as much. Certainly, if Mr. George Baker talks about it now he doesn't

inflate the figures like he used to prior to October, when he used to have sixty

into 120 or 150 in a matter of thirty seconds, but unless we take care of that

foreign overfishing problem, we can take our own fishermen out of the industry,

close up our plants, take care of the seal problem - we could do that - but if

we don't get the foreigners off the Nose and Tail of the Banks, all of that, I

still think, will be in vain, because I am very worried and up to, I would say,

twelve to eighteen months ago I was optimistic that our fish resources would

regenerate, they would rebuild, but I have to be honest today; I am not so sure

any more. I am not so sure any more that they are going to regenerate and

rebuild. I am a very worried person today about the future of this Province, and

I am worried about the future of this Province because I am very worried about

the future of our fishery.

If we don't control all of the factors, if we don't take

action on all of the contributing factors, including the seal population, then I

think the chances of that resource regenerating, and Newfoundland and Labrador

being productive in the fishery again, is in great jeopardy. I just hope that we

will see the seal population dealt with in an orderly, organized, planned

fashion whereby the full seal is utilized. None of us can support just taking

parts of the seal, throwing the rest away, leaving it for whatever, I think we

all realize that. Society has made great progress in that regard.

Environmentally, when it comes to dealing with our food

resources we've made great advances. We've become far more cognizant. So I guess

what I'm saying is, we can't think about doing what we used to do. We have to be

progressive, innovative and utilize the full seal, which the Member for Eagle

River is talking about and which, as I said, I look forward to the Member for

St. George's expanding on somewhat, to tell us what real potential is there. I

know of some potential but I'd like to know just what full potential is there,

which I'm sure the member can inform us, educate us on and which I will take

great interest in.

Without saying too much more, Mr. Speaker, my concerns are

that we need to deal with all those factors that have brought us to the state

where we are today. The factors that have brought us to a point where we had the

federal minister yesterday come in, although he didn't give us too many details

on what's about to come down - anybody who's had any knowledge and followed the

fisheries crisis, the way that I have, and know anything about figures - a

number of people involved in the industry, a number of people being compensated.

Look at the total money package that's now being allocated

for the Atlantic region, you know what the end result of all of this will be.

It's going to mean that we're going to have between 17,000 and 18,000 people at

the end of the fourth year of this program who will not be receiving any

compensation benefits, that's what it means. I don't care who argues that point

or for whatever reason. That's the facts of it all. We're going to be left with

between 5,000 and 5,500 people in the fifth year of the program who are going to

be receiving some form of benefit from this program.

If you look at the figures, you analysis them, you look at

Atlantic Canada, you give us our 75 per cent or 77 per cent and it becomes

clearer as you do that. Now I know there will be those who will argue, for

whatever reason but that's what the end result is going to be, it's going to be

devastation. It's going to mean 17,000 - 18,000 individuals that are going -

hopefully, we all hope they will be retrained, we all hope they start their own

business or they find employment somewhere else but again we all know that

realistically there's going to be several thousand people who are not going to

find employment elsewhere. So what recourse is there for them? Where are they

going to end up? That's the big worry.

Hundreds of communities out and about our Province, rural

communities, I'm not so sure that they're going to be able to be kept glued

together. I look at my own area of the Province and I'm down there most of the

time when the House is closed. When the House sits, I'm out there every weekend.

I drive through the communities, I know them very well. I know the state of the

infrastructure in those communities. I've watched how the infrastructure has

deteriorated over the last number of years - roads, water and sewer - in

communities that were very well managed and very well kept.

When I look at the impact of what Mr. Tobin announced

yesterday - and being as familiar with it as I am because of obvious reasons,

I've had to. I live out in rural Newfoundland and I've been fisheries critic and

on and on. So you have to keep abreast of it all but I honestly don't know how

hundreds of those communities are going to keep going. I don't know what's going

to keep them going. I don't know how the councils are going to be able to get

the taxes from those people to keep their infrastructure in place, to run the

towns, to offer the services. So it's a very worrisome situation. Members

opposite and members here are no different then I am, their communities are no

different then the communities that I represent. They've got the same problems;

social problems, education problems, employment problems, infrastructure

problems and when you analysis really what - it hasn't flowed out of yesterday

yet, it's going to take awhile for that. The real impact is not going to strike

until January of 1995 and then for each successive year it's going to get worst

that I honestly don't know.

But, having said that and not meaning to digress too much

from the resolution, that taking action as the member proposes in his resolution

- and with the provincial government playing a very important role and the

federal government playing its part - that certainly there's an opportunity here

- there's economic opportunities - at the same time we are benefitting

economically, we're taking care of that great major problem of helping our fish

resources regenerate, rejuvenate and rebuild. That is what is vitally important

as I see it.

I repeat again. Unless we take care of all the contributing

factors - our fishermen, we are dealing with that, in a very painful way, and

for the largest part our people have accepted it. The seals have to be dealt

with, and foreign overfishing has to be stopped. If we leave any of this out and

we don't deal with either one of these contributing factors - I'm worried enough

about the regeneration if we deal with all factors. If we leave any of those

factors not dealt with, we think we are going to have a serious problem in the

next four or five years as a fallout of the package announced yesterday, we will

have a far worse one if we don't do something.

I want to just finish off by saying that I support the

member's resolution categorically. I look forward to the Member for St. George's

and what he is going to say and the Member for Baie Verte - White Bay and the

Minister of Fisheries. I see the Minister of Finance wants to jump up and do

something. I don't know if that is more bad news on the Budget or if there has

been a provincial strike or - perhaps he is going to tell us all the seals have

gone south.

MR. SULLIVAN: No, it is a mini-budget he is coming down

with.

MR. W. MATTHEWS: It is a mini-budget. He is going to slam

a mini-budget on us now, that is what he is going to do. With that, I want to

conclude by saying I totally and fully support the resolution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Barrett): The hon. the Minister of Finance.

MR. BAKER: Point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance on a point

of order.

MR. BAKER: I would like to table something that I said

two days would be ready today. There was a slight mistake in what I had earlier

today and I had to send it back and get it corrected. I would now like to table

the privatization expenses. It was asked for by the Leader of the Opposition,

Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. minister have leave to table

the information?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave!

MR. SIMMS: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. SIMMS: Yes. I didn't hear if the minister said

publicly what the answer was, or just tabling it. The question was the $1.7

million. Was it - because I haven't seen it - in fact spent mostly for the

privatization of Hydro? That is the question that was asked. Maybe the minister

could tell us publicly as well as tabling the information. That would be

helpful.

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

MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker, I don't want to take up the time

of Private Members' Day to go over this in detail. I will give the hon.

gentleman a copy right now.

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

DR. HULAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues. First

of all I guess I will say that I am very pleased to have the opportunity to

enter into this debate today. I should hope to add to this debate a little

different slant. I want to discuss the vast marine resource we have out there in

our seal population completely from a different standpoint, and that being as a

source of nutritional and biomedical compounds.

Before I go into the text of my delivery I should also say

that the hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation had planned on

speaking in this debate today but he kindly gave recognition to the sacredness

of the private member's bill and offered me his position to make this delivery.

I am sure members on each side of this hon. Chamber would agree that the hon.

the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation would add valuable

information to this very important debate on the sealing industry.

The economic situation created by the lapse of the sealing

industry is well documented and you have heard some comments on that already

here in the House today. Although much has been written in recent months in the

popular press over the possible sale of seals to foreign countries for things

other than as a valuable source of food and leather, I want to present again, a

different story and a story I think that you will be interested in and most

Newfoundlanders will be as well.

AN HON. MEMBER: Shampoo.

DR. HULAN: Yes, shampoo. We eat a variety of foods to

meet our daily nutritional requirements and one of the requirements that we have

is a need for essential fatty acids, and I just want to back up a little bit

here and talk about essential fatty acids. Burr and Burr two scientists in 1944,

established the essentiality of fat in our diets and established a need for

certain essential fatty acids, and how did they do that? They did that with a

series of experiments with primarily the white albino rat, and you might say:

how do you know if fatty acid is essential or not?

Well, the two symptoms that you look for are: dermal lesions

on the skin and alopecia, alopecia being baldness.

AN HON. MEMBER: What's your problem?

DR. HULAN: Now hon. members, my condition of baldness is

genetic related, but since my hon. friend from Grand Bank said that he was going

to read a copy of Hansard tomorrow or this evening or whenever he receives it, I

want to say that I highly suspect his condition is an essential fatty acid

deficiency.

Going on further, I want to bring us now to 1967, when a

very, very important discovery was made by two Danish scientists Bang and

Dyreburg, who observed that the Greenland Eskimo, although he subsists almost

entirely on a fat diet, there is a very low incidence and virtually almost

non-existence of incidence of cardiovascular disease in the Greenland Eskimo.

Well this was very interesting since they consume a very high fat diet and their

cholesterol intake is roughly three-fold what our cholesterol intake is and yet

no incidence of cardiovascular disease; so many of our laboratories around the

world started examining the Eskimo diet to see what was unique about the Eskimo

diet, and what we found was that the Eskimo diet was uniquely high in a group of

fatty acids known as the omega-3 fatty acids. They are called the omega-3 fatty

acids just because of their particular configuration.

We also found that the omega-3 fatty acids of note were

primarily present in the fatty fishes that swim in the colder waters and I was

here musing to myself as I heard my hon. friend from Eagle River make reference

to the fact that seals will go for the underbelly of a codfish because they are

looking for the cod liver and he also made a very interesting observation here

today that seals are known very much to consume salmon and indeed herring. Well

it just so happens that the omega-3 fatty acids which I am referring to are

very, very high in salmon, in herring and it's only found in the codfish in the

cod liver, and as a result in the cod liver we have this product that you should

be taking if you are not, cod liver capsules.

The cod liver capsule is strictly an oil removed from the cod

liver and of course the cod liver contains all of the fat in the cod. The

viscera contains the fat, the liver contains the fat, the muscle tissue contains

.1 per cent fat, that's why it is a very healthy food to eat, but the point that

I am going to make is, it is very interesting that the seal will go after the

salmon and herring and cod liver, because they have a specific requirement and a

big demand for omega-3 fatty acids so that could answer the question as to why

they consume salmon and herring, very interesting indeed.

Well, I will tell you these omega-3 fatty acids are very much

of interest to scientists, myself included, many experiments, roughly 1,000

experiments have been done now on the effect of omega-3 fatty acids that we are

talking about in the Eskimo diet on cardiovascular disease. What we have found

and concluded very clearly is that if you increase the consumption of these

omega-3 fatty acids in your diet in eight out of ten experiments all of the

parameters associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease are

reduced, and those parameters that lead to a healthier cardiovascular system are

primarily increased.

Those parameters I am talking about are very low density

lipoproteins which are the bad cholesterol, high density lipoproteins are the

good cholesterol, and so on. Well, all of the parameters associated with an

increased risk are primarily reduced in seven or eight experiments out of ten,

but every once in awhile it is very interesting that you will have an experiment

that does not fit into the line, and I will tell you why. The missing link fatty

acid is not present in fish oils. It is not present to any degree in fish oil at

all.

About five years ago a colleague of mine at the Technical

University of Nova Scotia, and I, made the observation that Eskimos do not eat

fatty fish as a staple in their diet. They are opportunistic hunters and they

eat fatty fish when they can find fatty fish, and it is available, but the

staple of the Eskimo diet is seal. So we started looking at the seal in great

detail and we found that in seal blubber oil - this is not my shampoo, I can

assure you because if you rub this on your head it would really produce hair, I

am sure. This is blubber oil from seal, just pure blubber oil.

AN HON. MEMBER: Does it really produce hair?

DR. HULAN: No. It is pure blubber oil. The blubber of

seal contains the missing link fatty acid, docosapentaenoic, DPA for short. What

our experiments have shown to date, and what the Norwegian experimenters have

found, is that seal oil - we are getting very, very interesting results with

regard to the reduction, and, in fact, some German scientists are now saying

that the prevention of cardiovascular disease in man is through the consumption

of those omega-3 fatty acids, especially the one found in seal blubber.

I submit to this hon. House there is a tremendous and vast

industry off our shores whereby we can take seal blubber oil and concentrate it

into a concentrated fish oil capsule which will contain about 40 per cent of

those omega-3 fatty acids, a little capsule like this. This is a product called

cardi-omega-3, heart omega-3. We can concentrate the seal blubber oil into a

concentrated capsule for market on a world market.

Now, I wanted to do some extensive research on this at

Memorial University over three or four years ago and unfortunately our research

project did not get funded at the University either by the medical research

council, the national research council, or from provincial sources, and I am

told primarily because we are going to be dealing with a seal product, we must

not touch the sacred seal. Unfortunately the research was not done and the

reason we wanted to do the research was to be able to put the product on the

North American market and without the research we could not. However, the world

market is open. Southeast Asia will buy every concentrated blubber oil capsule

that we can produce. A bottle like this of sixty capsules sells for around $18

American dollars. I proposed in a proposal some years ago, and put economic

tests to that proposal, that we could produce several cottage type industries

around this Island to produce this product from seal blubber.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Even in Labrador?

DR. HULAN: Even in Labrador. The hon. Member for Eagle

River reminds me of Labrador. I missed the point as far as the omega-3 fatty

acids are concerned. One of the products found in seal blubber oil and to a

lesser degree in fish oil is one of these omega-3 fatty acids, although they

have in general not been considered as essential, one of them is very important

in brain development of the infant during the first three years of life. That is

why infant formulas that have been produced over the years can never mimic human

milk. Human milk and seal contain a very high level of docosahexaenoic acid, DHA

for short. It is very interesting that I have a colleague now in Ottawa who is

producing a formula that is almost mimicking human milk and he is doing this by

the introduction of seal oil and fish oil into the formula.

What this fatty acid does, it increases brain development. We

know that it also will increase, because of its presence in the life of the

infant, the attention span of that child when they get to be school age and also

the ability to learn and the rate at which they can learn. We know this is a

fact. Those fatty acids also have another important

part in our life. That is in

retina development of the eye. Without it most of us would be blind, and that is

why it is important to get it in our younger life.

If you take a bottle of this product that is worth $18

American, translate that into what is on a seal, I can tell you the seal blubber

alone if we were to develop it to this stage would be worth on each adult seal

around $3,000. Three thousand dollars from one adult seal. Because each capsule

contains one gram of concentrated oil and each seal contains roughly somewhere

around forty pounds of blubber, I believe. If you calculate it back and

concentrate it down that is how we find our figure.

We also have a reference here today, the information with

regard to the carcass protein and the flipper protein of seal. We know that the

carcass protein has a tremendous use in animal meal products. One of the big

problems in the agricultural industry in North America over the years is that

they have not been able to afford to buy good quality fish meal to put in their

diets. Fish meal is the highest quality of protein to feed to any animal.

Following fish meal, and a close second, or about the same, is seal meal.

I will tell you why the American and Canadian industry have

not been able to afford to put fish meal in their diets. My hon. colleague for

Humber Valley probably knows this as well. It is because the pet food industry

will buy every bit of fish meal they can find at $600 or $800 a ton and put it

in the pet food diets.

Well, there is a tremendous opportunity not only in the

animal field for carcass protein but in the field of food science. We are now

developing technology to incorporate seal into various salamis and bologna and

things like that. It is getting to receive fairly good acceptance by tasters all

around the world, for that matter, where we have gone so far. So there is the

aspect of the seal protein.

We have the technology here right now to establish that

industry. We have the knowledge, the technology, and the scientific wherewithal

to produce the concentrated fish oil capsule. I'm so happy to be in this

Province realizing that we have the capability to take the seal and produce the

finished product, the finished product from the carcass protein in animal

feeding and human foodstuffs for a protein hungry world. That we have the

capability and the technology to produce leather products from the hide that you

will never see better leather than we can produce from seal.

AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh!

DR. HULAN: We have the technology to produce even better

than that, sir. The technology involves a completely environmentally friendly

process. We have the technology to produce cardiovascular supplements, as I have

just told you, and we also have the technology to remove from the organs of the

seal many other biomedical compounds that are not even available for use in

medicine today. They don't exist; they are not there for usage. We know they are

present in the seal, and in other marine species as well, and we have the

technology right here in this Province of Newfoundland, the scientific know-how,

to produce the finished product rather than send the finished product for other

people to capitalize on the value added issue, the value added product of our

resource.

Thank you very much, and I am pleased to support this very,

very important resolution.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Bay.

MR. SHELLEY: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I will say right at the outset that I am very impressed with

the Member for St. George's and some of the things he put forward here today. It

certainly was a different slant to what most of us would stand up and say. I

will speak in comment on yours before I will go on to some of the things I had

here, so that I won't lose the effect of it, I guess.

To be quite honest with you, over the years I have also

studied a little bit - not studied as close as you have, as a scientist - but

read about things. Maybe you can respond to me, or we can talk later, but wasn't

there something also in the compound of the seal that helped in the breakdown of

cholesterol?

The Member for St. George's, I was just referring to it. I

was going to maybe talk to you about it later, but referring to what you brought

up earlier, isn't there a compound in the seal that also helps in the breakdown

of cholesterol in the human body?

DR. HULAN: It is not so much to break it down. What it

does is increases the capability of the human body to rid excess cholesterol.

MR. SHELLEY: Okay. I read that somewhere before, not long

ago, and I just thought I should mention that to you.

It is very interesting that you bring up that slant, too,

because we talked about the whole utilization of the seal, which we will get

into in a little while, but this would probably be the last limb of the

utilization of the seal, where we talk about something that could be developed

right here in this Province, and also the point that you mentioned about us, the

secondary processing, the finished product coming out of Newfoundland, that can

be done right here.

I think you have hit on something that is very interesting,

that we can also add to our argument that the seal can be very well utilized and

it is something that is scientific, that can be proven by people in the

industry, that the seal, if it is utilized, can, like you said, provide

something to a protein hungry world that hasn't even been touched yet, and it is

an industry that can start right here on our own back doorstep. I commend you on

the report on that, and I hope to see you continue researching it and put it

forward as an argument for our seal industry.

You also mentioned - I will mention this before I go on to

some points I have ready there, is the leather products. Locally, of course in

my district I have had the opportunity of seeing some of those products because

there was a tannery in the Baie Verte - White Bay District. These chairs, I

think the minister is referring to, are a product of the leather. Like I say,

there was a tannery in Baie Verte and I was fortunate enough to go in there when

it was open. They had some problems and, of course, it closed down, as most hon.

members know, but I had an opportunity to go in there and see some of the

products, and I was amazed at the quality of the leather, the purses, the

wallets - everything that was made there. I know that is an industry that hasn't

been touched yet. That is untapped, as far as the seal industry goes, but the

whole point of all this, what the Member for St. George's says, and about the

tannery I just mentioned, is that can strengthen this Province's argument for

the use and the full utilization of the seal. This is where we can show the rest

of the world, because those are the people we have to convince if we are going

to make this industry succeed.

We have some very useful methods of using that seal so that

we can utilize everything that is in the seal, and not use the - I don't know

what the word is that I can use here that is parliamentary - the FFAW, when they

just focus in on one thing in the ads they use. The whole point behind this -

you mentioned today the protein in the seals; I just mentioned the full use of

the leather, and the crafts - you have seen some beautiful crafts around this

Province - magnificent coats, purses, and so on - that part - and now we go

into, of course, using the whole seal carcass. So I think that the more that we,

as Newfoundlanders, come up with uses for that seal, to show the world that yes,

we do use it all; we just don't go out like years ago, like the Member for Eagle

River mentioned earlier, and club a white coat on the head and take him in and

throw everything away.

That was an image that tarnished us and hurt us badly in the

world markets and it is something now that we are starting to rebuild, and I

think we will rebuild and gain back the confidence of people around the world to

look again at the full use of the seal so that we can utilize every single part

of the seal. I think it is an industry that can be tapped into here in this

Province, and we need all of those angles to come from: the protein, the

tannery, and the actual meat of the seal.

I will take a little bit different stand to making a few

comments today on this particular motion that was put forward. First of all, I

was very pleased to have the chance to stand today because of course in my

district there are many seal fishermen who over the years have utilized the seal

herd and have gone out on the ice floes. The first thing that comes to my mind

when I think about the seal industry is watching the old black-and-white films

of seeing the men jump off the boats on blocked ice and run out on the ice and

harvest the seal, and talk about the stories that the old skippers would tell

you or the grandfathers would tell you about how many times they risked their

lives. Of course, we know of the story - the books that were written on the seal

industry from years ago, and the great seal hunts. How many people risked their

lives and died hunting seals. It is a tradition here. The tradition of course

turned into a nightmare for us in a way when the infamous Greenpeace entered

this Province years ago and disrupted something that went on here for years and

years.

Our job as Newfoundlanders is to make sure that the world

realizes - because that is where our world markets are, the market for the seals

around this world - is that we have to help educate the rest of the world that

we do utilize the seal and we are not barbarians and that this industry is a

viable industry. Of course, when you talk about utilization of the seal the

second thing I would say to that right now in this particular time I think that

this right here today as we start this is that it has never been a more critical

time for us to put forward our arguments for a full-fledged - as the member said

in his resolution - utilization of the seal hunt. There has never been a more

crucial time and I think any hon. member would agree with me.

We are at a brink now where our scientists can tell us so

much about our fishing industry. The Member for Eagle River made a couple of

really good points. One was that there is 20,000 tons biomass possibly left, and

that one year of annual seal eating of fish could come up as far as 12,000

metric tons. That is an incredible amount. That just tells me that we may be on

the brink of totally wiping out the fish population of our ocean -

AN HON. MEMBER: It is not "may be," we are.

MR. SHELLEY: We are, that is right. I agree with the

minister. That we are on that brink and it is a crucial and critical time now

for everybody, at all levels of government, municipal, provincial and federal,

to start looking at a time that we can put forward our best efforts to make sure

that the seal industry is now utilized.

The Members for Eagle River and St. George's made reference

to the surveys that are done now on the seal industry. For example, the Member

for Eagle River I think it was mentioned about how the seals take the underbelly

of the fish. Here we have the same bunch doing surveys, scientists doing surveys

saying that: We don't see traces of the bone, of different parts of the fish, in

the seals. That is for obvious reasons. There is not going to be anything in the

digestive tract of a seal which shows that they already ate fish. Like the

member says, it just basically goes after the cod liver.

If these surveys and these scientists - and the Member for

St. George's being a scientist - I would say to him that these surveys are not

really showing the true story. If they are only showing in the digestive tract

of a seal the cod's liver - maybe that doesn't even show up. I don't know how

that digests in a seal. I'm not a scientist. I will say that we can't really

take note for that survey if it is only taking the underbelly of the fish. There

is no trace of bone; there is nothing in the digestive tract of the seal, so it

would really substantiate those surveys that are done. I think it was a good

point made by the Member for Eagle River that if it is just the underbelly of

the fish being taken then the surveys are not going to show up the other parts

of the fish that would be in the digestive tract. I think that is fair enough in

saying as I talk to our scientist from St. George's.

That is a very important point that should be noted. As these

surveys are continued that we ask them to take a survey where we really find out

how much these seals eat. That is from the scientists side, without being a

scientist, as most of us average Joes are when it comes to the seal industry and

the fishery. I think it was the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation

but I am not sure, you needn't quote me on this, but it was a few years back

that somebody said: `They are eating something and they are certainly not eating

turnips.'

MR. EFFORD: Kentucky Fried Chicken.

MR. SHELLEY: `Kentucky Fried Chicken', says the Minster

of Works, Services and Transportation. You know, it is only a simply statement,

but every now and then we have to step back and use a bit of logic and common

sense; I mean, these seals are out there in herds, thousands and thousands of

seals, they have to be eating something, and if we knew that one seal ate one

fish, then we know that another seal has to eat another fish, and so on, and so

on. If one seal eats a fish, it has to continue.

There is no doubt in my mind, without being a scientist, that

seals eat fish. Now anybody who argues with that is just not using common sense

let alone the scientific knowledge that they have.

The Member for Eagle River mentioned something that I had

noted also and would like to bring up again, and that is, there are three to

five million other seals besides the harp that haven't been utilized yet, that

we haven't even talked about. We talk about going into an industry that has

potential in this Province, we are looking at another three to five million

different types of seals besides the harp that we haven't even looked at, and

don't forget, a note was made before that this was only a partial survey of the

harp, anyway. It wasn't a full survey; it was just a partial survey. So there

are three to five million other types of seals that could be utilized off our

shores besides the harp, and those are not even mentioned. How many times did we

hear that from the surveys? So that's another important point.

It is obvious to me especially at this time again, at the

critical time in our fishery, even, as in the last few days we see it becoming

more critical every day. It is more important now than ever that this seal

industry is revived. We all agree that it has devastating effects on the

fishery; there has to be an imbalance on the ecosystem if they have the predator

eating another animal, in this case, the seal eating the fish. There has to be

an imbalance sooner or later in the ecosystem and there is going to be a

decrease in our fish stocks. And we have had all the other reasons - the foreign

overfishing, we certainly all agree with that, and there was another scientific

suggestion, I think, a little while ago about the cold waters and the effect on

the fishery, but if there is anybody with a little grain of common sense at all

anywhere, any scientist, he has to agree that control of the seal herds would

have a major impact on the rejuvenation of the fish stocks and if he doesn't,

then he is missing out.

Twelve thousand tons of fish annually, that was the last

quote I had on how much they guessed at least, and that was a conservative

number -

AN HON. MEMBER: What's that?

MR. SHELLEY: Twelve thousand tons of fish annually,

that's the last estimate I heard and I think the Member for Eagle River said the

same one, that seals consume annually.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: Seals, yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SHELLEY: No, no. What was the estimate you made

earlier - the Member for Eagle River - do you have it there?

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible) million tons.

MR. SHELLEY: Okay. We talked about it earlier.

MR. EFFORD: One seal eats an average of one ton a year.

MR. SHELLEY: One ton of fish a year.

MR. EFFORD: (Inaudible), multiply that by (inaudible)

million.

MR. SHELLEY: That's a fantastic statistic. But I would

ask the Member for Eagle River, if he has some numbers there, to convey them to

me and we have to make them public.

Now of course, there are two reasons, right, as we mentioned

earlier, not just for the sake of saving our fishery which I think, is at a

breaking point, it is at a critical point now that this is done, but also the

seal industry and the potential for jobs. Now, I would just like to mention to

the Member for Eagle River - and you can continue with this point later, but

Carino, was hoping, and I have a press statement here, for 40,000 seal pelts.

Now, they were looking for support from the Federal

Government to the tune of, I think, $106,000 to assist with processing. That

fell through just recently, and now Carino who was going to be processing seal

out of the plant in Fleur de Lys - that fell through. And talking about federal

and provincial support, I would ask the Member for Eagle River when he stands to

maybe touch on that point, that the seal industry needs the total support of the

Provincial and Federal Governments if we are going to move at all in the

direction of having a full-fledged seal industry in this Province.

I was really disappointed, and I must convey to the member

who put this motion forward, that the people in my district who were about to

get involved with the Carino group in processing seals in the district of Fleur

de Lys were very, very disappointed that this fell through. They were optimistic

up until last Wednesday, I think it said here in the press release, and it fell

through. I can't stress enough, that we need the support of the Provincial

Government and the Federal Government if this seal industry is ever going to get

off the ground in Newfoundland - full support, strong, strong support when they

go looking for their markets.

Now, on the comment about the markets - and I did this in the

House, I don't know, maybe just before the last break - but when we talked about

the markets the Premier went abroad to Asia looking for - and one of the reasons

he was over there was looking for markets for the seal industry, Mr. Speaker,

and I complimented the Premier on doing so. There were others who criticized him

for going to Asia - well, I can tell you that I compliment him on that because

that was very important to not just the seal industry. But I compliment him on

it. I think he should be doing more of it, going for markets, especially as it

relates to the seal industry. If we are going to find markets for them - if we

can capitalize on those markets - we all know, Mr. Speaker, that if we can go

out and find those markets, whatever happens over here on the ice floes, we will

have a market in Asia, China, Japan and those places, who are looking for that.

If we can nail down those markets then we will have a seal industry in this

Province, and I compliment the Premier on doing that. The Member for Eagle River

brought it up earlier that if those markets can be nailed down then we can move

on in this very important industry in this Province.

Now, the full utilization of the seal, as the Member for St.

George's mentioned, besides the whole carcass of the seal and also the leather

products that we use from the hide, the next step, which hasn't even been looked

at - and I say to the Member for St. George's, that it's very rare; as a matter

of fact, it is one of the few times I've heard anybody in this Province stand up

and talk about how far you went with utilizing the seal carcass. That's the

thing we have to get out there and tell the world, that we are looking at the

full utilization of the seal carcass.

I can tell you that in my district of Baie Verte - White Bay

they were looking forward to some productivity in the plant at Fleur de Lys this

year with the 40,000 pelts from Carino. They were very disappointed when the

Federal Government didn't come across with - I believe, it was the very small

sum of $106,000 they needed for processing of the seals in that district. I

wonder and I'll ask the Member for Eagle River when he stands again, to bring us

up to date and give us the status of how the Provincial Government - maybe the

Minister of Fisheries would let us know what kind of involvement the Provincial

Government had in those particular negotiations. How much support was given to

the Canadian Sealers Association when they put forward - because they did put it

forward, not Carino. The Canadian Sealers Association put that forward, and I'm

wondering how much support they had from the Provincial Government. Is there

anything else that you could have done to help make sure that that process went

ahead? From what I've read in two press releases I have here, the CSA do not

feel that they had the full support of the Provincial Government in looking for

that particular $106,000 for the Carino company. I would like to hear the

response from the Member for Eagle River when he stands, on that. Does he think

the support was there? Why did that $106,000 - which I think was a very small

amount, which would have seen 40,000 seal pelts being processed by the Carino

group.

I say, very frankly, I'm very disappointed in that. I really

thought that that could have come through. I didn't think it was a lot of money

to be looking for. I've had calls from sealers in my district who were really

disappointed. As a matter of fact, just up to a couple of days ago they were

very optimistic. They were led to believe, they told me, that they would get

that from the Federal Government but it seemed as if the Federal Government

delayed it and delayed it until finally it was too late and it fell through.

They were very disappointed.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you saying the Provincial Government

didn't support the Federal Government?

MR. SHELLEY: Well, I'm not saying they didn't support it.

I'm asking what kind of support they did give. I'll let the people opposite

decide and tell me if they think they gave all the support that they could have

given them, and if that $106,000 would have come through if the support was

strong enough from the provincial members here.

The last point I'll make is that on Sunday, April 10, The

Evening Telegram , of course, the front page, `The unlicensed seal catch left

to rot.' Now, it's very fitting that the particular fisherman, the seal

fisherman in this case, his name was John Cabot. I am sure some people read that

article. It is very fitting I found that John Cabot was the man who set this

headline and said: unlicensed seal catch left to rot. Fishermen cannot sell

pelts caught in nets. That is the most ridiculous, ludicrous, no commonsense - I

just cannot believe that. For years and years we see seals caught in the nets,

dead, but do not eat it, throw it away.

MR. EFFORD: (inaudible)

MR. SHELLEY: Exactly. The Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation makes a very good point, the same point that was made about the

salmon, throw away the salmon. When you sit down and make regulations I do not

know where they are made, sometimes behind a big desk, with people sitting down

around in suits in ivory towers. Why can they not use some commonsense and a bit

of logic? If there is a seal caught in your net and you are legitimately

fishing, have your license, have your net, and you are a legitimate fishermen,

for whatever species, and there so happens to be a seal, which there is an

abundance of, everybody declares there is an abundance of, caught in your net,

well why in God's name would they not take that in and utilize it, sell it, eat

it, whatever you can do with it, but I just cannot for the life of me understand

just throwing it away.

I would like for the Minister of Fisheries and anybody who

gets the chance with their counterparts in Ottawa to drive home that point every

chance they get because there is no one up there, I do not care where they are

in Ottawa, or what scientists who can tell you that makes sense. It simply does

not make sense and it is ludicrous to even imagine that this man - I am going to

give you the numbers on this - I am sure most people read it, but because he did

not own an eighty foot vessel. It says his nets have inadvertently hauled up

thirty-five to forty seals a day for a total of 900 to 1000 animals. That is

what this man threw away, 1000 seals in a week. It is an incredible thing.

I am sure that members opposite would support, lobby, and

help drive home that point that is a ludicrous regulation. It should be thrown

out, and if there is anybody who can make any commonsense or make any logic of

it in Ottawa then please have them come down here and report to the people who

haul these up in their nets. You cannot get enough food for food banks, you have

people starving to death all over the world and there are regulations in our

country that would allow the like of this to happen.

Mr. Speaker, the main points I have hit on are those. I ask

that the Member for Eagle River respond to the support by the provincial

government when they lobbied for the $106,000. I was very, very disappointed and

I think I convey that message on behalf of a lot of sealers in this Province,

especially in my district, who were looking forward for the Fleur de Lys plant

utilizing the 40,000 pelts that were asked for. I do support this. It is an

emotional issue to me and to people in my district. I hope this industry proves

that they have the markets around the world and that we can utilize and we can

be humane when we hunt those seals, and that it can be something that is viable

and something that could be very lucrative to the future of this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to be able to take

part in this debate and to offer my full support to the hon. gentleman's

resolution. I was interested in some of the comments made by the previous

speaker. I noted quite carefully, Mr. Speaker, that while he was very anxious to

point out some of the things we have not done, or at least what in his mind we

have not done, but he was not too anxious to come forward and give the Province

credit for some of the things we have done in developing the seal fishery. That

comes as quite a surprise because the hon. member's district has benefited more

than any other district in Newfoundland by virtue of the rebirth of the seal

fishery which is what we are experiencing this year.

Mr. Speaker, the district represented by the hon. gentleman

today has two plants operating processing seals in various aspects of the seal

processing. I think they are employing seventy-one people, not to mention the

fishermen who are conducting the harvest. Likewise, Mr. Speaker, in a short

time, days or a week or two, there will be twenty or thirty people employed in

the plant owned by Terra Nova Fisheries in Clarenville, so altogether this

year's seal harvest, which I referred to a moment ago as the rebirth of the seal

fishery, will be providing direct employment for close to 100 people. I cannot

be sure for what period but I would think maybe for a two month period, not to

mention the many hundreds of thousands of dollars, in fact, maybe as much as $2

million that will go into the pockets of fishermen mostly who will be conducting

the hunt.

Mr. Speaker, I view this as an accomplishment, something in

which I take some pride. We have not said too much about it, for obvious

reasons. I have avoided making any press comment about it, and saying as little

as I have to, because to do so would quite possibly attract some very

unnecessary and unfavourable comment from the animal rights people.

The deal that is currently being undertaken by Terra Nova

Fishery has an interesting history behind it in that I have had people in my

department now, some of my senior officials, working with that company and

others in the sealing industry, and those who want to get into the sealing

industry, for close to a year, helping to put together a package, and I am

grateful to them for the amount of work that they have done, and I am only sorry

that I can't publicly give them the praise that they are entitled to, for the

reasons I just gave; I don't want to have too much to say about the seal hunt.

Anyway, a lot of work went into it by people from my department, and a lot of

the credit, of course, for what is happening now must go to them.

I give credit as well to other people who are involved in the

seal fishery, Dr. Ho of Terra Nova Fisheries, the Sealers Co-op, the district of

the hon. gentleman who just spoke. Fogo Island Co-op, for example, are

desperately trying t