VOL. 3 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. Wednesday, March 14, 1984 NO. 3

March 14, 1984 The House met at 3:00 p.m. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. Tape 74 EC - l MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON. MEMBERS: PREMIER PECKFORD: The han. the Premier. Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker, yesterday the han. the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) made a fairly serious personal attack upon one of the members of the ministry. I would like to read the following statement: To the hon. Brian Peckford, Premier, St. John's, Newfoundland.

"Dear Sir: With regard to the recent personal attack on the character of the han. ·James Morgan, your Minister of Fisheries, pertaining to his negotiations with me on the restructuring of the fishing industry, I would like to make the following quite clear. First of all, it is a silly and unfounded charge that Mr. ~organ, during negotiations, broke down and cried." SOME HON. MEMBERS: PREMIER PECKFORD: tion. Hear, hear! "It h.as absolutely no fo~da- "Secondly, the charge is in no way connected with my office or my department. Mr.

Morgan during these negotiations handled himself as a hard- nosed bargainer and negotiator for his Province - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: -•rand the fishing industry, and handled himself in such a manner in which you, Mr. Premier, should be proud of him as your Minister of Fisheri~s. ' 1I am convinced as a result of the negotiation process, that both Mr. Morgan and myself have 198

March 14 , 19_84 Tape 74 EC - 2 PREMIER PEC:KFORD : 11gained a mutual respect for each other and I look forward to working in co-operation - SOME RON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. SPEAI<ER (Russell): Order, please! PREMIER PEC:KFORD: -"for the benefit of the fishing industry of your Province. Best regards, Pierre De Bane, Minister of Fisheries and Oceans." SOME" RON.· 'MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR'. SPEAKER.: Order, please! Ol;'der, please! Before we continue, I would like to welcome to the galleries today, Mr. John Yoss, who is the President~Elect of the Canadian Parks and Recreation Association, who is accompanied by Mr.

Vic Janes, the New£oundland Director of the Canadian Parks and Recreation Association. SOME' RON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 199

March 14, 1984 ~ape !'lo. 75 MJ - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the ~1inister of Education. MS. VERGE: ~1r. Speaker , th.ts government attaches a high priority to school construction . Since 1971 - 72 government has funded most of the cost of over $300 million worth of construction of primary, elementary and high schools across Ne>..rfoundland and Labrador. We now have more and better schools to house a smaller number of students. By the wa y 1 1971- 72, a historic year for many reasons, was also the year school enrollment across our Pro vince peaked at 163,000.

Even since then enrollment has been declining steadily and now there are 10 per cent fewer students,even with Grade XII. Today I am happy to announce another government measure for funding school construction. Government \..rill directly assume all the debt for previous school construction of the Denominational Education Councils, some $92 million - SOrm HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MS. VERGE: - and, Mr. Speaker, thils ~Till leave the DECs debt free~ Government will refinance the debt at an interest rate well below that being charged no w to the DECs.

The new arrangement will result in savings tQ government in 1984 - 85 of about $1 million on current account. Mr. Speaker, for the benefit of the general public who may not be thoroughly familiar with our education system, the DECs are the agencies of the churches partici~ating in our deno.minational education system. The DECs discharge the churches'constitutional powers and responsibilities in education. In particular,they allocate or distribute government funds for school construction.

Government gives the DECS block grants,proportional to each DEC's share of the total provincial oopulation 1and then the ~Ecs have the sole say about how the money is spent. The DECs alone decide 200

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 75 MJ - 2 MS. VERGE: school construction priorities. In 1980 government cha nged the method of providing financing to the DECs. Interest rates had soared and the DECs were finding it difficult to absorb the unprecedented carrying charges on the $114 .million debt then on their book s. In 1980 government assisted with the consolidation and refinancing of that $114 million debt, providing affordable repayment terms to the DECs. From then until now,government saved about $8 million on our current account. 201

March 14, 1984 Tape 76 PK - 1 MS. VERGE: Since 1980 and up to the time of the repayment that will occur later this month,government will have paid to the DECs $82.9 million to meet principal and interest requirements on this debt. During the same period government provided a further '. $63.5 million to school boards, through the DECs,for new school construction for a total payment to the DECs during the four years of $146.4 million. Mr. Speaker, clearly,government has demonstrated our keen appreciation of the importance of education to the people of this Province by our budgetary measures. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : .The hon. member for Port au Port. MR.HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out that as I understand the minister's statement, what was an indirect debt to the Province is now a direct debt to the Province. And I would like to ask the minister whether or not - and I should point out as well that there is no new money here, it is a transfer of a debt - I would like to ask the minister whether this means that there will be no other school financing this year. We still have schools throughout the Province that are in deplorable condition.

Even though there are declining enrollments, . we still have schools that ~ - need many new facilities, particularly with the :expanded high . school programme ;. And because of the _.,,. new :expanded /high school programme 1 monies have not been placed -· in the primary and elementary schools. So there is a great need ---·--- for funding as well as school construction throu~hout the . ..-! ,. Province. The minister has perhaps lightened the burden somewhat for the DECs and the various cvromittees, but it is a transfer O·f an indirect debt to the Province, which the DECs held 1 and it 202

_L March 14, 1964 Tape 76 PK - 2 MR. HODDER: is now a direct debt of the Province. But I would also point out that this document states the amount of money for construction that has gone in in the past, -- -· • - -- - - - --· - - TO • - 0 - - • I would remind the minister that there is much money needed this year as school boards are crying for new construction.

Even with t:he declining enrollments 1 they . :are crying for new fa~ili-ties:- -­ Emphasis has been put on the expanded high school curriculum, but there is needed added interest to be placed on the elementary and primary grades in this Province which have been s~~feri~g _ -- - - . because government has not adequately funded the ~~pa~~~ high J~ school programme. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Are there any other Ministerial Statements? 203 I

March 14, 1984 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR. OTTENHEIMER: as well. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Tape No. 77 SD - 1 The han. Minister of Justice. Mr. Speaker, I have a statement Hear, hear! MR. OTTEMHEIMER: 'Mr. Morgan, during these negotiations'- I am sorry, it is the wrong Ministerial Statement. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. OTTENHEIMER: I wish to inform the han. members of two orders issued recently in two separate cases pursuant to the Newfoundland Human Rights Code. Each of the two cases arose from complaints to the Human Rights Commission involving allegations of discrimination :Cased on sex in emp1oyment.

In both cases settlement :Oy negotiation 1 as encouraged by the Newfoundland Human Rights Code,was unsuccessful and,following the recommendations of the Chairman of the Human Rights Commission, that is Mr. Schwartz, I referred each complaint to a Commission of Inquiry. So this deals with the reports of two Commissions of Inquiry. In due course,both commissions submitted their reports and recommendations,and copies of both reports will be tabled. The first case involves an allegation by Ms.

Sharon Curtis that Coastal Shipping Limited had discriminated against her because of her sex in refusing her employment in the engine room of M • .S. Ast ·ron. A hearing in this matter was held at Eli:.za:Oeth. Towers, in St. John's, on November 2, 1983, before a Commission of Inquiry consisting of Mrs. Beatrice Watts, the member of the Human Rights Commission, and Mr. Herbert Buckingham, a member of the commission. The Commiss ·ioners held that Ms. _ Curtis had been discriminated against because of her sex in being refused employment by Coastal Shipping Limited.

On January lOth.of this year,I signed an order requiring that corrective measures be taken by Coastal Shipping Limited 1and that order was to the following 204

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 77 SD - 2 MR. OTTENHEIMER: effect: Cll That on service of thisorder 1Coastal Shipping Limited make personal contact with Ms. Sharon Curtis and assure her that she will be offered the first available position on any ship of Coastal Shipping Limited for which she is qualified or for which no form of certification is necessary. Secondly, that should Ms. Curtis accept a position with Coastal Shipping Limited for which no form of certification is necessary and an engine room position for which she is qualified subsequently comes open, she be offered that position. Thirdly, that should Ms.

Curtis decline an offer of a position w1th Coastal Shipping Limited for which no form of certification is necessary that she be offered the first engine room position that come ·s open for which s·he is · qualified. And fourthly, that Coastal Shipping Limited confirm its intention to offer an offer of employment to Ms. Curtis by letter copied to the Executive Director of the New£oundland HUman Rights Commission.

And fifthly, that Coastal Shipping become familiar with the provisions of the Newfoundland Human Rights Code and within thirty days of receipt of said order write a letter to the Executive Director of the New£oundland Human R~ghts Commission stating that in future the company will provide equal opportunities for employment for both men and women and that advertisements of the company · will reflect such · positions. That deals with the first matter. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear. 205

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 78 NM - 1 MR. OTTENHEIMER: Now,the second case involved allegations by Ms. Mildred Goose and Ms . Regina Clarke that the Town Council of Tilton had discriminated against them because of their sex and in the case of Ms. Clarke, because of her marital status,in not properly considering them for employment in a programme sponsored by Canada Manpower. A commission of enquiry consisting of Mrs. Irene McGinn conducted a hearing in this case at the Spaniard's Bay Fire Hall February 14 of this year. The commission held that Ms. Goose had been discriminated against on the basis of sex and that Ms.

Clarke had been discriminated against on the basis of sex and marital status in not being properly considered for employment under the hiring practice adopted for this particular Canada Manpower project.

On Ma~ch 12, 1984,I signed an order requiring that corrective measures be taken by the Tilton Town Council to the effect that,firstly,the town council become familiar with the provisions of the Newfoundland Human Rights Code and within thirty days of the receipt of the order write a letter to the Executive Director of the Newfoundland Human Rights Commission stating that in future the council -will pr~~~de equal opportunity for employment for both men and women and that advertisements of the _council will reflect, that position.

Secondly, that a financial settlement in the amount of $50 be made by the Tilton Town Council to each of the complainants within thirty days of receipt of the order to cover costs of expenses incurred by those complainants. 206

?<larch 14, 198 4 Tape No. 78 NM - 2 Z.IR . OTTENBEIME~: Thirdly, that a letter of apology be sent within thirty days of receipt of this order to both the complainants from the Tilton Town Council clearly stating that whether the act \ofas committed with or without intent,discriminatory actions had taken place with respect to the hiring procedures on the community centre project against Regina Clarke and ~tildred Goose . The letter shall also state that in future council will provide equal opportunity of employment for both men and \V'omen and any public aevertisements \olill so indicate.

A copy of this letter shall be sent to the Executive Director of the Human Rights Commission, that is Mr . Fred Coates . Fourthly, that the Department of Municipal Affairs be advised that ~~e Tilton TmV'TI Council has allO\ofed the TmV'n Clerk to vote on a council mat ter at a council meetinq contrary to the provisions of the l\1unicipalities Act. 207

Marsh 14,1984 Tape No. 79 ah-1 MR. OTTENHEIMER : These were the matters in the order. I think the reports made in these cases are very significant in that they emphasize the clear right of all women in our society to be afforded equal consideration for employment opportunities without discrimination based on sex or marital status. They also demonstrate the importance of the Human Rights Commission in protecting the rights of our citizens guaranteed under the Newfoundland Human Rights Code.

And since only last week International Women's Day was observed,I think it is fitting that we as a House of Assembly pay particular attention to these two important cases. I wish to commend the Commissions of Enquiry for the excellent work they did,and I think it is incumbent upon all of us on both sides of the House 1 in various capacities,to assure that the principle of equality in emp:oyment and other opportunities with respect to sexes be observed.

And very frequently, I think, very frequently discrimination occurs perhaps not intentionally but through ignorance or through force of habit or through a lack of sensitivity,not necessarily intentionally.I imagine there are intentional aspects as well. I think it is incumbent upon all of us as ~embers of this legislature to be conscious of that principle which indeed is a principle of law,and to do what we can to make people aware of the necessity for observing that principle of equality. bon. members and the press .

SOME HON.MEMBERS: MR.NEARY : MR.SPEAKER (Russell ) Opposition . 208 I have copies here for Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The bon. Leader of the

March 14,1984 Tape No. 79 ah-2 VLR .NEARY: ~x . Speaker, I just have a few brief comments to make on the so-called ~linisteri a l Statement just issued by the Vunister of Justice (Mr . Ottenheimer) . I am not sure no\o~ if, Mr . Speaker, we are creating a precede~t here for all cases that come before the Human Rights Commission . Will the results be announced i.n the House through a Hinisterial Statement? MR . OTTENHEIMER : All will , as a matter of principle . M..'{ . NEARY : All will as a matter of principle. ~k .

Speaker, I ~~ink it is a good principle and I commend the minister , by the way, for taking swift action in these t\-10 cases and in establishing tl::e Comm ission. It just goes to sho\o~, Mr . Speaker, how wise the Liberal administration ~.o;as in this Province when they brought in a Human Rights Code and set up a Human Rights Corr~issioner and made provision for a Human Rights Commission in this Province . How wise we were, Mr . Speaker, thirteen or fourteen years ago when we introduced in 209

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 80 MJ - 1 MR. NEARY: this House legislation that would provide an avenue, a mechanism whereby people would be able to fight for their rights through the human rights legislation in this Province. It was indeed an excellent concept, Mr. Speaker, and we are proud on this side of the House to see that the mechanism that we have provided is now working 1and, Mr. S~eaker, especially in the area of women's rights. As hon. members know 1 there has been quite a storm of controversy about \vhether or not females should work offshore on oil rigs and so forth and so on.

Women have now taken an interest in eml_)loyment opportunities that previously were considered to be the domain of the males. So we are likely to see many examples of where women are being discriminated against in the work force. So we think it is a good thing, I commend the minister for it,and I congratulate the commission for carrying out their >vork s~viftly and for producing good results. Hr. Speaker, we look fo~·ard in future to seeing that this great avenue of recourse, of giving people who have grievances and complaints recourse to seeing that justice is carried out. We are rather proud of that, Mr.

Speaker. It is a great Liberal concept and we commend the minister for bringing this report before the House today. MR. BARRY: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) Scio. MR. BARRY: ORAL QUESTIONS Mr. Speaker. The hon. the merober for Mount Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Premier. I would like to ask the Premier whether,in light of the special, personal relationship which has been ""r:>rmed between the federal !~inister of Fisheries (Mr. De Bane) and the Newfoundland Minister (Mr. i'1organ), 210

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 80 MJ - 2 MR. BARRY: the Premier has been successful in obtaining, through the Nel¥foundland Minister of Fisheries, (Mr. Horgan) with his influence on the federal Hinister (Mr. DeBane) 1 an agreement 211

March 14, 1984 Tape 81 PK - 1 MR. BARRY: on the Northern cod allocations which are presently unavailable to the fishermen of this Province? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Well, Mr.

Speaker, on this side of the House,the hon. member has left a party which has advocated that the Northern cod stocks should be reserved for the benefit of fishermen of this Province for a long time, he has left the party that advocates that,and gone with a party which has been wishy-washy over the issue,and he now supports a party in Ottawa which has not seen fit to this point in time to put in place an allocation plan which is consistent with the objectives of the Government of Newfoundland. We are continuing 1 and the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan) is continuing his efforts in that regard with the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (Mr. De Bane) in Ottawa, and I am continuing it as well,as minister responsible for Intergovernmental Affairs,in meetings that I have had with our federal representative in the Cabinet of Canada.

And we would request that the members of the Opposition also clearly support the longstanding position of the Minister of Fisheries in Newfoundland and of the Government of Newfoundland in ensuring that the Northern cod stock is used,first and foremost 1for the fishermen of this Province and then if there is any surplus to be used for other Canadians. To this point in time we do not have an agreement in place which would see all the Northern cod being used for the fishermen of this Province, but we will continue to try to get changes to that management plan to reflect the objectives of this ~overnment. MR.

BARRY: MR. SPEAKER: a supplementary. A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The hon.member for Mount Scio, 212

March 14, 1984 Tape 81 PK - 2 MR . BARRY : As the Premier knows,the party on this side of the House supports and encourages that the Northern cod be utilized for the benefit ,first and foremost,of the fishermen of Newfoundland and that has never been any different . Mr . Speaker, in light of the fact that despite this special personal relationship , a very close personal relationshit> between the Newfoundland Minister of Fisheries (Mr . Morgan) and the Federal Mini ster of Fisheries (Mr.

De &me), has the Premier made any inquirie s or done any investigation to determine whethe r that special relationship does not exist because the Newfoundland Minister of Fisheries has sold out the Newfoundland fishermen on that point: SO."!E HON . MEMBERS: Oh, oh! t-IR. SPD.:!:t:::. (~:..t.:;,;dl) : Tte hon . tha Premier . 213

~1arch 14, 19 8 4 Tape 82 EC - 1 SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! Order, please! PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, now I know the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) is smarting, I knm., he is hurting , that yesterday he made an allegation and a personal attack against the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) and he has lost badly. On his first day in the House he has lost badly and he is smarting, but he does not have to get child­ ish and boyish about it, Mr. Speaker. I mean, the schoolboy debater over there does not have to get upset. Take it on the chin and grow up, Mr.

Speaker, that is what the member for Mount Scio sho~ld do. Obviously, we will continue as we have done in the past. We have a restructuring agreement in place now which is significantly different from the unilateral proposal put on the table by the federal government. We bargained hard, we negotiated hard, the Minister of Fisheries and myself and other officials of the Government of Newfoundland. And we will continue to bargain hard as it relates to the fishery of this Province.

Every Newfoundlander and Labradorian knows that the Progressive Conservative Government, this administration and the party, have advocated a very strong position on the Northern cod. A few years ago 1 when we_jirst advocated that position, there was a lot of silence around Newfoundland, even among the fishermen and among the union and among the Opposition party here. They were very quiet and half sat on the fence about it.

We were being anti-Canadian, we were being se~aratists, we were being confrontationists because we were standing up for the inshore fishermen and trying to see that the fish that was caught from 1497 to 1976 continued to be caught by the fishermen of this Province. So 1 Mr. Soeaker, we are very proud that 1 even though the han. the member for Mount Scio 214

March 14, 1984 Tape 82 EC ~ 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: crossed the House, h.e now - supports the policy on Northern cod and has persuaded some of the members oppos -ite _ to do likewise. SOME HON. MEMBERS: l-:ffi • BARRY : MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Mount Scio. Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Eerober £or MR. BARRY: }ll.,r. Speaker, a .further supple- mentary. As the Premier knows, and as I hope all hon. members of this House know, to question the confidence of a minister of government, to question the confidence of a department of government, despite what the Newfoundland Minister of Fisheries (_Mr.

Morgan) might believe, i,s hardly a personal attack. To say that a ~inister is incompetent is the very essence, Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! The Question Period, of course, as I stated yesterday, is to give hon. members to my right the opportunity to ask as many questions as possible and thus to receive as many answers as possible, and certainly there should not be any long

preambles nor any debate. I feel that the han. the rrember for M:lmJ.t Scio Wr. Barry) nas now entered into the realm of debate and I would ask him to pose a direct question. 215

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 83 SD - 1 MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, your point is well taken. I would ask the Premier whether he has taken or is prepared to take any inquiries or investigations and report back to this House whether the reason for the lovey-dovey relationship between the Newfoundland minister (Mr. Morgan) and the federal minister (Mr. De Bane) arises because the federal minister knows that he has a good thing going for him and knows that he is going to get the best of any future deal as long as he is dealing with, Mr. Speaker, an incompetent lightweight such as he is now dealing with?

Will the Premier take investigation, make inquiries, into this point? Is he prepared to relinquish to the federal minister the question of the allocation of Northern cod in order to keep and preserve that special lovey-dovey relationship between the Newfoundland minister and the federal minister? Will he at least determine whether in future deals the best interests of the Province of Newfoundland will be sacrificed because the federal Minister of Fisheries knows that he has a good thing going and can totally dominate the Newfoundland minister at any time? PREMIER PECKFORD: MR.

SPEAKER (Russell): PREMIER PECKFORD: worthy of a detailed answer. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. HISCOCK: MR. SPEAKER: for Eagle River. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: MR. HISCOCK: Mr. Speaker. The han. the Premier. Mr. Speaker, that is not really Hear, hear! Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary, the hon. member Hear, hear! Order, please~ Oh, oh. Order, please! My question is to the Premier 216

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 83 SD ~ 2 MR. HISCOCK: concerning the Northern cod. I have just travelled extens·ively down the lower part of the district, the Eastern part, and the fishermen there are extremely concerned and upset and very anxious that the Northern Development Corporation is not in place. Most of the fishermen last year had a disastrous salmon fishery and inshore cod fishery. They have now got all the salmon that is ready and they do not know· if there is going to be a buyer this year. The private companies do not know if they are going to go in and take over their plants again this year.

There was a proposal made last October to the MP for that area, Mr. William Rompkey, to make an amendment to the reorganization of the fishery so that the Saltfish . Corporation could take over the responsibility of this corporation. This has been on the table and been referred to the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morganl since last October. If I am correct in my correspondence with Ottawa, when the Premier was in Ottawa for the conference on Natives rights and the Constitution ~ MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! Order, please!

Th .e han, member is attempting to make a speech and I would ask him to pose a question. SOME HON • MEMBERS : Oh, oh. 217

March 14,1984 Tape No. 84 ah-1 MR.HISCOCK: Mr. Speaker, I am not making a speech but it is a rather complicated issue. It is concerning all the fishermen and if they do not get buyers and they do not get allocations in that area - SOME HON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.HISCOCK: If the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.Morgan) would be more concerned about looking after the fishermen in Labrador than he is in interrupting the minister then something would be done down there. MR. SP EAKE R (Russe ll) : Order, please! I would request the hon • .. member to pose a direct question or the Chair shall have to recognize somebody else.

MR.HISCOCK: The direct question is to the Premier. Can the Premier table information in this House that the negotiations are going on and that there will be in place buyers and that the Northern Development Corporation will come under the arm of the Canadian Saltfish Corporation within the next month or two? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, in the

preamble to the hon. member's question he commented again upon the Northern cod stock. I ask to be corrected if I am wrong on this b~t we have a constitutional position which we are still advancing with the federal government whereby there should be concurrent jurisdiction in the fishery which would therefore give us more say over allocation of fish stocks and that has not been supported by the Liberal Opposition. So when the member for Mount Scio (Mr.Barry) and now the member for Eagle River (Mr. Hiscock) talk about us getting greater access to the Northern cod stocks,the best way that that can be 218

.L March 14,1984 Tape No. 84 ah-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: achieved is through concurrent jurisdiction in the fisheries. In other words,to give us more say and control over the fisheries. So if the Liberal Opposition are really serious on the Northern cod,could I expect to hear from them in the next couple of days that they support our constitutional position. Because then we will get the Northern coa the way that the Liberal Opposition say they want it. MR. CALLAN: You are wrong there. PREMIER PECKFORD: Secondly, I will listen very carefully in the next - SOME HON.MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.SPEAKER {Russell ): Order, please!

PREMIER PECKFORD: - day or two to hear whether there has been a policy change by the members of the Opposition and they now support concurrent jurisdiction in the fishery,which would give us greater access to the Northern Cod. I will listen very carefully for that, Mr. Speaker. No"T to deal directly with the question asked by the hon.member, I appreciate the concern that the hon.member has for his constituents , since most of the fishermen in his area will find themselves dealing in some way or manner with the fishery and with the Northern Fisheries Development Corporation.

Now,under the restructuring agreernent 1there was a provision which described how the two governments were going to deal with the problem of the St. Anthony plant and all the plants on the Labrador Coast. That provision states that there would be established 219

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 85 ]·~J - 1 PPBMIER PECKFORD: a Northern Fisheries Development Corporation which would include the St. Anthony plant and those plants. Now that is what the provision in the agreement said. Since that time, as the hon. member knovTs , a number of politicians,and other people in the fishing industry, have advocated that that Northern Fisheries Development Corporation should be an arm of the Saltfish Corporation 1 but the provision in the agreement says that there ~.,rill be established a Northern Fisheries Development Corporation.

It has yet to be decided ~>Jhether in fact it will be an a:J:rn of the Saltfish Corporation or whether it will be just umbrellaed into the Saltfish Corporation. Finally, thirdly, r11e have, as the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador; in the last three or four weeks,through our Executive Council, through Cabinet, passed a proposal, which has now been submit~ed to the federal government 1and that proposal deals with the establishment of a Northern Fisheries Development Corporation.

It advances the vie~s as to how we, the Government of Newfoundland, think this Northern Fisheries Development Corporation should be set up. So negotiations are now ongoing between the Province and the federal government for the establishment of that Northern Fisheries Development Corporation. We have taken the initiative, as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador 1 in putting a definitive proposal on the table so we have something to negotiate from and to indicate to the federal government our thinking on it.

It is now March 14, and it is our hope that within the next six or eight weeks -it is difficult to say because it takes two to tango, but hopefully within the next two months- as the hon. rneP.'ber: :said, we will be in a position to put in place that Northern Fisheries 220

March 14, 1984 Tape NO. 85 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Development Corporation so i~ can operate in the coming fishing season in the hon.member's district. MR. SIMMS: Good answer. MR. HISCOCK: Mr. Speaker. 221

March 14, 1984 Tape No. '36 NM - l MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. member for Eagle River. MR. HISCOCK: I thank the Premier for taking time on the answer,but 1 as the Premier knows,the Province owns all the plants along Eastern Labrador and that last year these plants had to be closed because of the restructuring of the fishery- Williams Harbour and Black Tickle.

They are rather concerned now, So I am going on the assumption that what the Premier is saying is that he can assure the people in Eastern and Southern Labrador that there will be buyers in that area and,if there are not buyers in that area,that the Province itself will be responsible for buying salmon and look after operating these plants. MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD: how far we can go, The han. the Premier. Well,you know, I do not know I will have to check with the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Morgan) on that question, Perhaps the Minister of Fisheries will have something to say, I mean, we will use our best efforts and do everything we can, and hopefully the Northern Fisheries Development Corporation will be in place. I do not know if the Minister of Fisheries wants to add something more to that. MR. SPEAKER: MR. MORGAN: The hon. Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Speaker, to add to the information supplied to the han. gentleman who asked the question - MR. HODDER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR- SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! The han. member for Port au Port on a point of order. MR.

HODDER: The question was directed to the Premier but we have got to follow parliamentary procedure here. Can a Minister of the Crown 1if the question is asked of him, 222

March 14, 19.84 Tape No. 36 NM - 2 MR. HODDER : pass it over? I have never seen anything in the rules to allow them to do that. MR. NEARY: If we wanted to ask the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), we would ha ve asked him. MR. HODDER: Show me the rule that does that when he gets up there, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, once again I have to say how puerile can the members of the Opposition be. I would say the government is interested here in giving information.

I would feel that if they are not interested in receiving it,well 1 that is their concern. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To that point of order raised by the hon. member for Port "~.n Port, there have been occasions, certainly precedents in this House when an hon. minister has requested and asked another minister to answer and provide more information to a question that has been asked. I am prepared to recognize the hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, in supplying further information to a question which is of concern to the member who asked the question SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

MARSHALL: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR . SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. the President of the Council On a point of order. 223

March 14, 1984 Tape No . 86 NM - 3 MR . MARSHALL: Your Honour made a ruling a moment ago and I heard quite distinctly 1 and I am sure Your Honour ?~ ~ all members of the Bouse heard the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) say words to the effect that you can ask a question , anyone can get up. That is a good ruling. Now, Mr . Speaker, it is here in the book, I do not need to quote the book. MR . HODDER: Show it to us. Show it to us. MR . MARSHALL : I will sho w it to you. The hon. gentleman wants it to be shown to him . The situation is, page 38 of Beauchesne, "Hr.

Speaker as Presiding Offi ce r," paragraph 117, "The chief characteristics attached to the office of Speaker in the House of Conmons are authority and impartiality." "When he rises to preserve order and give a ruling he must always be heard in silence. No Member may rise when the Speaker is standing. Reflections upon the character or actions of the Speaker may be punished as breaches of privilege ." No w, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman wants more authority,he can look to Erskine May on page 441. 224

March 14, 1984 MR. NEARY: MR. MARSHALL: Tape 87 PK - 1 What is the point? Well,the point is this, Mr. Speaker, that Mr. Speaker happens to be,in this House,the representation of authority of the people of Newfoundland in this Assembly. If this Assmlbly is to 1.-X)rk in the way that it is suppose to work, if it is worthy of the respect and dignity which it should have in orer to conduct the people's business,the Speaker 1 of all people in this House,is to be respected. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MARSHALL: And when any member of this hon.

House makes allegations and statements like the hon. gentleman made,they call for an immediate and complete and unequivocal retraction. I call upon the hon. gentleman to make that retraction now to the Speaker. MR. HODDER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, made a ruling on which I have seen nothing - and I have read about it - whatever I have been able to get my hands on, I have never seen anything in the

section on questioning of ministers which allowed ministers to pass it along. And my comment was does this mean now that a question can be asked the Premier,he can pass it on to the Minister without Portfolio,who then passes it along to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer)? And all I am asking is for some justice for us in this House of Assembly. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the han. gentleman is not going to weasel out of it. The hon. gentleman has cast an aspersion on the authority not of the Speaker as a person,but 225

March 14, 1984 Tape 87 PK - 2 MR. MARSHALL: on the Chair of this House. And the hon. gentleman is required under parliamentary practice to withdrew these remarks, and apologize to the Chair for what he has done. Because if that type of thing is allowed to go on in this House, Mr. Speaker, it is going to disintergrate into chaos. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR. NEARY: Hear, hear! The han. Leader of the Opposition. Mr.

Speaker, yesterday we saw a typical example in this House of the arrogance of the gentlemen there opposite when they took the House on their backs yesterday and would not allow my colleague to make his speechr Now the hon. gentleman is trying to dictate to the Chair, trying to influence the Chair, trying to badger Your Honour in doing something Your Honour is quite capable of doing himself if he thought there wereany rules broken. Your Honour could take the initiative if he thought there was anybody cast aspersions on Your Honour or on the Chair. In actual fact,no aspersions have been cast on the Chair. Mr.

Speaker, let me remind the hon. gentleman that this is not a hockey game we are playing. In a hockey game 1you can get an assist for scoring a goa~ but in this House, if we ask· the Premier a question_ we could have asked the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan); we did not want to ask the Minister of Fisheries - rut ~ wanted to ask the Premier because he is the head of the administration 1and you just cannot pass it over and then have him 226

March 14, 1984 Tape 88 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: pass it on to somebody else like you do in a hockey game where somebody gets an assist on scoring a goal. That is not the way it works in this House, Mr. Speaker. And my hon. colleague merely asked the House Leader (Mr. Marshall) an innocent question. He did not cast any aspersions on Your Honour - AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, no! Never. MR. NEARY: My colleague was not on his feet speaking, did not deliberately get up and say,'Your Honour is wrong.' We know how to question the rulings of the Chair if '\'le so desire. We will do it under the rules of the House.

The hon. gentleman is making a mountain out of a molehill, Mr. Speaker, and all he is attempting to do is to use up the Question Period so that Ttle will not ask the administration penetrating and embarrassing questions. PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): To that point of order, the hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: This is absolutely ridiculous. I >vould like to hear ~~. HODDER: "lore questiQns, from the OTJoosition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD: Who started it yesterday? Oh, oh~ Order, please! Well, Mr.

Speaker, the situation is they are only splitting hairs. If we have a Speaker who is Chairman for this Assembly, I mean, it is ludicrous for the Opposition to try to advance the argument that suddenly now 1 because the Premier under questioning one day when he was asked a question about fisheries, answered it and then assumed or figured that the .Minister of Fisheries (1-:lr. Morgan) might have more detailed information to give to the hon. member - I was just trying to help the members of the Opposition. 227

March. 14, 1984 PREMIER PECKFORD; SOME RON. MEMBERS: PRIDUEE PECKFORD: SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell): PREMIER PECKFORD: Taoe 88 ;r am · sure - Oh, oh.l EC ~: 2 Let JOe finish. Let roe finish .• Oh, oh! Order, please~ The Speaker is in the Ch~i~ and I am sure the Speaker is not going to allow, because I passed it over to the Minister of Fisheries (J1r.

Norganl today to help give more information to a member of the Opposition, that in future that becomes a precedent so that we can start with the Minister of Finance and then the Spe~er will allow it to go to the Minister of Justice, allow it to go to the President of the Council, allow it to go to the Premier. The Speaker is in the Chair to ensure that fairness and equity happens on those kinds of things where there is mostly custom and not rules.

And no Speaker is going to allow this little incident to become of such precedent-making nature that tomorrow you are going to see a line right up on the front benches here from one minister to another in answer to a question. That is ludicrous and foolish! The members of the Opposition are wasting the time of the House when they could be asking penetrating questions. Do you . know why . they are wasting the time of the Eouse and having points of order? They do not have any questions because they have been embarrassed again today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The Chair has heard enough argument on this point. The question was asked of the Premier. The Premier felt that the han. the Minister of Fisheries might be able to supply other information and the Chair recognized the han. the Minister of Fisheries, 228

March 14, 1984 Tape 88 EC - 3 MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : a precedent which the O'lair ruled bad taken place several other times in this Legislature . There \vas then an allegation made that the hen . the member for Port au Port (~I. Hodder) had made some comments casting aspersions upon the Speaker or the Chair 1 and sufficient argtiment 1 I th·ink, has been heard . I shall reserve any judgement on that ooint . I \•ould certainly like to listen to the tapes and hear t·Jhat Hansard has to say about any remarks that have been made by any hen . member .

Certainly , ho\•ever, I "1ould like to say that whether or not a member has been recognized his ·comments certainly can violate the rules of this Bouse , I would caution all hon . members that they should reflect upon interruptions and comments that might be made in the heat of debate . MR. MORGAN: Mr . Speaker. 229

March 14, 1984 MR. SPEAKER (RU SSELL ) : MR. MJOOAN: Tape No. 89 SD - l The han. Minister of Fisheries. Further to the infonnation required by the gentleman who asked the question in a very sincere way, because the labrador Coast is indeed a very important part of our Province - MR. HODDER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: MR. MOOOAN: that part of the Province - MR. SPEAKER: point of order. MR. HODDER: Order, please! - and there is very important fishing in The han. rnanber for Port au Port on a Mr. Speaker, Beauchesne, page 131, says what there is to l:e said about answers to questions.

There is a lot to l:e said al:out questions but very little about answers, which leads me to relieve that, whoever wrote this book, it was done by a governing party. SCME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, it s.irnply says,

Section 358 (2) - SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER.: MR. HODDER: MR. SPEP..KER: Oh, oh! Order, please! Mr. Speaker, can I have sare quiet here? Order, please! MR. HODDER: It says, "An~s to questions should be brief as possible, should deal with the matter raised, and should not provoke debate". The rest is silent. Now, Mr. Speaker, precedent may dictate in this House, but I have l:een here since 1975 and I have not seen - except when leave has l:een given from the House - I have not seen that precedent take place, and that is why I rise on this point of order. I ~uld like Mr. Speaker to take that under advisarent because, Mr. Speaker, I think this is a taking away 230

M:trch 14, 1984 Tape No. 89 SD- 2 MR. HODDER: of the powers of the Opposition in Question Period, which is happening everyday anyhow. MR. MARSHALL: 'Ib the point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : 'Ib the point of order, the hon. President of the COuncil. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is questioning your nlling again now. I suggest he get a crash course on Beauchesne. We have a new one now - J:irrchesne ~ will call it. S01E HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. MARSHALL: But look!

It says: 'In putting a question a memter I!Ulst confine himself to the ~st limits.' It goes on to say it rray not 'deal with an action of a Minister for which he is not responsible to Parliarrent'.

Now the question was asked, so the hon. gentleren obviously wished to have J:he an~ because it was gent'aine and pertinent to his district, of the hon. the Premier, who is the Chief Minister in the government, and he responds and he says perhaps sane rrore details rray be known - by whcrn? - by the minister who is responsible to Parlianent. so, you know, it is a crack of nonsense - I am constrained fran saying what I really think it is. All the hon. Premier did was give it to the minister responsible. SO there is no possibility in this House of every minister 231

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 90 MJ - 1 MR. MARSHALL: in this House of ever y minister getting up and answering a question alonq this nature. Now what t.:ce han. gentleman is doinq here, first of all, is challenging Your Honour's ruling. When Your Honour says he is going to take it under ad v isement,~hen the gentleman gets up in this House and says that is not satisfactory that Your Honour take it unde~ advisement. That is in effect what he is doing.

Now I would say if the han. gentleman cannot abide by the established rules of this House, which are the established rules o£ British Parliamentary practise, the obvious proceedings would have to be taken against him. HR. HODDER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. HR. SPEAKER (Russell) au Port. The hon. the member for Port HR. HODDER: I do not know what the minister is reading from. He seemed to be making up the rules as he was speaking there. S0!-1E HON. HE~1BERS : HR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: MR. HODDER: Oh, oh! You do not own the House, you know. Order, please! Replies to Questions, 363. (1) .

"A llinister may decline to answer a question 1.-1i thout stating the reason for this refusal," -that is one thing a minister may do and very often ministers on that sige should take that course- "and insistence on an answer is out of order," we all realize that, Mr. Speaker - "with no debate being allowed." There is nothing, the rules are silent I say, Hr.

Speaker, and I hope this is not a reflection on the Chair - I hope it is not because I dC' not intend it to be - but I have .. - been here for some ten years and I have not seen this as bei!'g a precedent, so I had to raise it as a point of order because I feel that this would become a precedent after this particular time,which would mean that then ministers could take advantage 232

l.. March 14, 1984 Tape No . 90 MJ- 2 l'"!R. HODDER: of it . And I find this, Mr. Speaker, to be totally objectionabl~. I would not put anything beyond those ministers over there if they decided they wanted to play a fe,., games on a day •t~hen ~o~e had some questions that they might not \.;ant to hear. So, f1.r.

Speaker, \·Te do have rights and privileges in this House, \-lhich were given us through the Crown and by parliamentary law,which , through the centuries,has been added to and subtracted from, but for the time being we are "'orking by our mvn ::'tanding Orders and we work by Beauchesne and any precedents that have been set before. Now I kno\'1 of no preced ents in this House in the last ten years,and I sit here all the time -I am not gone and back , I am here and I try to do the best job I can . SQI.1E RON . MEMSERS : Ob, oh! MR .

HODDER: But I am here to try to make sure that,when we have a Question Period,' ,.,e have a fair chance at asting question s, which is not what "'e have been getting lately . MR. SPF.ii.KF.R (Russell) : PR.F:1-1IER PECKFORD: MR . SPEAKER: Order, please! 11r . Speaker . The hon . the Premier . 233

Ma.rch 14, 1984 Tape No. 91 ah- l PREMIER PECKFORD: This has really gone down to a new low. I mean, here is the member opposite trying to again challenge a ruling by the Chair. The ruling by the Chair has been rra.de. It has tried to be challenged while the hon. rranber was sitting dow. It makes no difference if he is sitting down or standing up; there are still certain privileges in this House and certain rules that have to be abided by whether you are standing up or sitting dow. But, okay, it has been ruled UfXJn.

Now the hon rrember is getting up under another PJint of order and, through the back door, challenging the Speaker's ruling. Now talk al:out rules of the House! I mean, we are setting new precedents 'alright! we are setting new precedents that, once the Chair rules on a given issue it is supposed to be finished and done with and we get on with our \\Ork, and not that a member get up again, in the guise of another PJint of order, and try to challenge the Speaker's ruling. That is the new precedent that is being set here.

We are having the rules of the House being flaunted by the hon. member because he does not understand the rules. MR. HODDER: Yes, he does understand the rules. Take the book hare tonight and read it. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! the Opposition. MR. NEARY: I recognize the hon. Leader of Mr. Speaker, regretfully ~gain I find myself in the position where I have to comment on some of the remarks that have been made by the Premier, who obviously does not understand the 234

March 14,1984 Tape No. 91 ah-2 MR .NEARY: rules, the ordinary simple rules of this Hoose, Mr.Speaker . My hon. colleague was not challenging Your Honour's ruling through the back door. My colleague was raising a different point of order on a different

section of Beauchesne where an hon.gentleman has to be brief, any hon. minister has to be brief in his answer, Mr . Speaker, and not provoke debate. That was the point that my colleague argued, so they have gone off on a completely different direction, Mr. Speaker. And again they are trying to bully and badger the Chair,as they have been trying to do last session and this session. The fact of the matter is that my colleague who asked the question does not tvant the Minister of Fisheries (~x. ~~rgan) to answer the question . He wants the Premier to answer . it. MR. SIMt-IS: just told him . 235 He ~·;ent to him because you

Harch 14, 1984 Tape 92 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: No, I did not tell him, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEt1BERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMHS: You told the Minister for Intergovernmental Affairs. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : Order, please! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, that is not so. The former Speaker of the House should be well aware that that kind of statement that he just made, I cannot say it is unparliamentary,but it is the type of statement that lowers the decorum of this House and the han. gentleman should have better sense. Mr. Speaker, I do.not want to see a repeat from the other side as to what happened yesterday, Mr.

Speaker, I like a stormy session, I like hard debate and I like banter back and forth,but what we saw yesterday, the shouting and the bawling and the roaring from the doorways and the corridors, Mr. Speaker. MR, TOBIN: And the lies. HR. NEARY: I hope that does not start again. SOME HON. iVIEiviBERS: ()h, ob! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope, and I know that Your Honour is going to be fair about this and take it under advisement, as Your Honour said he would. Because, Mr.

Speaker, we do not want to get the impression on this side that hon. gentlemen over there opposite are up trying to bully and badger the Chair. We hope that will never happen, Mr. Speaker, because that could really put the House in turmoil and I hope Your Honour does not allow that to happen. But that is what they are attempting to do. And I say, Mr. Speaker, that my hon. colleague was right in raising his point of order and I hope that Your Honour will rule that there was a valid point of order, 236

March 14, 1984 Tape 92 EC ~ 2 MR. NEARY: that questions should be brief, supplementary questions should be brief and answers from the Premier and ministers should be brief. PREMIER PECKFORD: order. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : the Premier. ~~. Speaker, to that point of To that point of order, the hon. PREMIER PECKFORD: I cannot allow the time to pass now. The hon. the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) can get up and say what his point of order was but he ranged all over the place and went back to the previous decision that was made.

Now, if the hon. the member for Port au Port is saying that his point of order is that the minister has to be brief in his ans"1ers , was that the point of order? MR. CALLAN: (Inaudible) first of all. SOME HON . MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh, oh! Order, please! Order, please! · Well, now, Mr. Speaker, we have the member for Port au Port saying that his point of order was not about the minister' s ans1•1er being brief, and we have the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) saying that the member for Port au Port's point of order is about the minister's answer being brief. MR. SIMMS: That is right.

PREMIER PECKFORD: The member for Port au Port just shook his head 'no'. He said his point of order had nothing to do with the minister's answer being brief and the Leader of the Opposition just got up in his place and said the point o~ order was about the minister's answer being brief. Now, neither one of them over there knows what the point of order is. SOME HON. ~.EMBERS: SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! Oh, oh! 237

March 24, 1984 Tape 92 EC - 3 MR . SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! Order, please! The Chair has heard some debate, argument, points of order raised and, as I mentioned earlier, will take the whole matter under advisement and reserve any judgement about askin g any members to withdraw any statements made if they indeed turn out to be unparliamentary . The time for Qu esti on Period has expired . 238

March 14, 1984 Tape 93 PK - 1 PRESENTING REPORTS OF STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES <JR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Subsection 2 of

Section 28 of The Financial Administration Act I wish to table the Lieutenant-Governor's warrants. I think there are twelve or thirteen in all. PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. SPEAKER: The hon.member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to present the following petition,signed by forty-three residents of the town of Makkovik. The prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker, is as follows: "We,who have signed below,would like to have Dr. Millicent Loder appointed as Chairman of the Grenfell Regional Health Services Board of Governors. Dr. Loder has been a member of this Board since its foundation.

She has worked as a nurse with the International Grenfell Association at St. Anthony, Mary's Harbour, Charlottetown, Black Tickle, North West River, Rigolet, and Nain, between the years of 1940 and 1980. Having lived most of her life in the Northern Newfoundland and Labrador,, she has a good knowledge and understanding of the health services and the general problems of the area." Mr. Speaker, in supporting this petition I wish to say that I have known Dr. Millicent Loder since 1965, when I first went into Labrador.

In fact, I knew her late husband, Sid Loder,who was a very hard working gentleman with the Department of Social Services years ago. And Mrs. Loder has spent many hard working years associated with the 239

Harch 14, 1984 Tape 93 PK - 2 MR. WARREN : International Grenfell Association in Northern Labrador and Newfoundland . Mr . Speaker, not casting any reflection at all on the present Chairman of the Board, I wish to state that the present Chairman of the Board has been there for a period of time, at the Mini ster of Health's (Mr . House) discretion . However, I hope that the Hinister of He alth would seriously consider,if and when he decides that the present Chairma:1 is no longer needed to be Chairman of that Board 1 he would seriously consider Dr .

Loder's qualifications and her knowledge and her interest and her concern for Labrador . Mr. Spea ke r, if and when the minister decides that tbls position could become vacant, I would strongly recommend on behalf of the people -i n- Makkovik;•.,ho ;igned this petition,that he would give every consideration to the appointment of Dr. Loder tothe worthwhile position of Chairman of the Board of the International Grenfell Services . · PREMIER PECKFORD : How many names do you have on the list? MR. WARREN: I said forty -three, I will just check them · again .. It is from Makkovik. 240

"' March 14, 1984 PREMIER PECKFORD: in Makkovik. MR. WARREN: Tape No. 94 NM- 1 There are 180 voters I have 43 names here. Are you questioning the petition? PREMIER PECKFORD: No. No. I am just saying that I did not know how many names were on it. MR. WARREN: when it goes through. PREMIER PECKFORD: You will see the petition No,but there are 180 voters in Makkovik and there are only 43 on that and I figured that it seemed like an awfully small number of names. MR. WARREN: Are you upset? If you are upset 1 tough luck. SQl.ffi HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (Russell} : Order, please! MR. WARREN: Mr.

Speaker, I support Dr. Loder, I support the people of Makkovik and I am sure the Premier does too. He has a chance now to get up and respond. Why does he not get up and respond and let the people of Labrador know what he stands for. I support this petition, Mr. Speaker, andask that it be placed on the table. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! This being Private Members' Day, Standing Order 53(4} says that ordinary routine business must end by four o'clock and private members' resolutions must start at four o'clock.

I suppose if we have leave of the House we could carry on and finish up this particular petition if members want to speak to it. AN HON. MEMBER: day. 241 No, go on with private members'

March 14, 1984 MR. SPEAK ER (Russell) : SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: Tape No. 94 We do not have leave. Oh, oh! Order, please! Before we NM - 2 get into private members' resolutions 1 I reserved a ruling yesterday on a couple of points of privilege that were raised. I would like to refer to the first one that was raised by the han. member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) when he said that the han. Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) threatened the hen. member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry). I have looked at the transcript from Hansard and I have read very carefully

section 71 in Beauchesne, page 23, and the first sentence o£ that

section reads, "Direct threats which attempt to influence Members' actions in the House are undoubtedly breaches of privilege." Having looked at the transcript,I certainly do not see comments made by the han. Minister of Fisheries which would influence the actions of the han. member for Mount Scio. There was nothing there that indicated physical violence or threats on his life or anything of that nature. Also,I would like to say that matters of privilege should really be raised and when they are raised they should be accompanied by a motion to bring forward some action.

There was certainly not any motion made on raising this point of privilege, so there was not a prima facie case established. Secondly, the hon. member for Mount Scio,near the end of yesterday's sitting,raised a point of privilege pertaining to the hon. Minister of Fisheries about a certain meeting which allegedly did or did not take place. And again I refer to Beauchesne, page 12,

Section 19, which says, "A dispute arising between two Members, as to allegations of facts, does not fulfill the conditions of parliamentary privilege." 242

March 14, 1984 Tape No . 94 NM - 3 MR . SPEAKER (Russell) : Having read the transcript, the quotation here by the hon. Minister of Fisheries (Mr . Morgan} where he says, "Now suddenly that came out of a meeting that took place down 'in a Newfoundland Hotel. '" Later on the hon . member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry ), rising on his point of privlege ,said, "First of all I did not have a meeting with Mr. Harris 'in the Newfoundland Hotel.'" So there is obviously a difference of opinion as to where a.nd when and if a meeting took place and certainly a question of a difference o£ opinion between two hon. members.

Again there was no motion made to point out any action to be .taken, and certainly no prima facie case has been etablished. 243

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 95 SD - 1 MR. SPEAKER: we shall proceed with Motion 1 for Fogo. It being Private Members ' Day to be moved by the han. member MR. TULK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to start off this debate on this private member's resolution by noting . first of all to the House that it has become a tradition thing, perhaps, for the Party on this side to put our first resolution down on the fisheries of the Province. MR. NEARY: Hear, hear. MR. TULK: I think it shows, Mr.

Speaker, the kind of feeling that we have about the fishery and the kind of importa~ce that we put on fisheries' matters in this Province. It shows, Mr. Speaker, that the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador believes, unlike some people on the other side 1 believes that the fishery is the most important industry that we have. We believe, Mr. Speaker, that it is the very basis of Newfoundland society, that it is the reason \ve came here, and it is the reason we are going to stay here. It is more important, Mr.

Speaker, than the offshore, it is more important than any other component of our economy,because without the fishery Newfoundland is nothing. Mr. Speaker, I do not mean in this debate, in the few minutes thab ;I have 1 to put down the other sectors of the economy. E)bviously not. They are very · important. Forestry is important in this Province, mining is important,so are the service industries in the Province as : well.

I think it needs to be said and I' think we should say it, that the fishery reaches · across · every segment and reaches into practically every home and into every person's house in this Province, it reaches across every segment of our society. Mr. Speaker, there is nobody, absolutely nobody in this House who will disagree with that statement. There is nobody in this House, I know, who will 244

..::.. March 14, 1984 Tape No. 95 so - 2 MR. HODDER: disagree with that statement. At least the people on the other side pay lip service to that kind of statement and that kind of feeling,that the fishery is the most important industry in Newfoundland. They pay lip service to it. Mr. Speaker, if you look at the actions 1 and I am afraid I am a believer that your actions speak louder than your words, if you look at the actions of the government of this Province, if you look at the actions of the Minister of Fisheries (~r.

Morgan), look at the actions of the Premier.and look at the actions of the government as a whole, then you will see, it is very easy to see, that really what the other side of this House is doing is paying lip service to the fishery. That is exactly what they are doing. For example, Mr. Speaker, and I suppose it is a good indicator of just what the priority of the government is on fisheries, look at how much_ they put in their budget, how much of their total budget is allocated to the fishery.

Last year,if you combine current and capital account in this Province, the total budget for Newfoundland was $1. 863 billion. Mr. Speaker, that is a fair chunk of cash, and you would hav~ expected that the biggest priority in that budget would have been in fisheries. But, Mr. Speaker, what did we see? The total amount spen:t in this' Province last year on fisheries - now remember the budget is ?1.863 billion- - what did we see in the fisheries budget? - $17,396,000, Less than 1 per cent of the provincial budget was· spent on fisheries by· the provincial government.

Yet,the Premier stands in his place day after day and ~reclaims the 245

March 14,1984 Tape No. 96 ah-1 MR .TULK : of the fishery, how important it is. While on the one hand he is talking about oil, still he is trying to paint a picture that the fishery is very important to him. He talks about the importance of the Northern Cod. We had a prime example , Mr. Speaker, of exactly what the Premier tries to do with motherhood issues again today when he attacked the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry).

He tried to attack the member for Mount Scio on the basis that this side of the House did not support the concept that Northern Cod belongs to our inshore fishermen and indeed belongs generally to the fishermen of Newfoundland. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is a red herring. This side has supported for years the idea that the Northern Cod stock belongs to Newfoundland regardless of the type of government that is in Ottawa or the type of government that is in Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker, the Premier is now off on another kick.

He gave us an indication today that he is going to try to get concurrent jurisdiction through constitutional change. Now, those are high sounding words. Those are high sounding words,yet the same Premier and the Minist~r of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), when they signed the restructuring agreement last year,gave away much of the jurisdiction that they had themselves in this Province. You cannot deny that, nobody can deny that.

Is it any wonder that the member for Mount Scio vmuld stand in this House yesterday, being the knowledgeable man that he is, and call the minister, not Jim Morgan, the minister, incompetent, weak? Is it any wonder? Absolutely none. It is time for this government and this Minister of Fisheries to put their money where their 246

March 14,1984 Tape No. 96 ah-2 MR.TULK: mouths are, Hr. Speaker. They have not done it. It is time for them to develop some policy for the fisheries in this Province and, Mr. Speaker, they have not done it. They have fudged every issue that there has been .They tried to find motherhood issues so that they could gain a few vote·s off some people by looking good 1 and ended up, Mr. Speaker, with the worst crisis in the Newfoundland fishery that we have seen , I would say, since the 1930s, in Ne.,.rfoundland.

We are faced with a situation this Summerof absolute chaos in the fishery unle~s somebody steps in and does something to stop what is happening. We are faced, perhaps,with fish plants closing in the Province, we are faced with perhaps hundreds of people off work, and our fishermen in particular are faced with the prospects of bankruptcy, absolute and total bankruptcy. There are two gentlemen today in the gallery from Musgrave Harbour and I would say that they can say to you - they have lived there all their lives, and they could say, Mr.

Speaker, and inform this House and inform the rest of us that last Fall in that community as well as other communities along our East Coast,they saw more for sale signs , those black and red for sale signs in the windows of fishing boats than they have ever seen in their lives before. Now , Mr. Speaker, that says something to us. It says that this industry is in trouble and it tells us that somebody, the Minister of Fisheries (Hr.Horgan), whoever he is, whatever body he happens to occupy is responsible for the mess that is here. Now, Mr.

Speaker, we believe on this side of the House 1~nd we have no hesitation in saying that, that the people of this Province - you can call it socialist or you can call it what you wish. I call 247

March 14,1984 Tape No. 96 ah-3 MR.TULI<: it good Liberal, good small '1. l and good big L - The people of this Province who produce the ra\v materials for our plants have the first priority of enjoying an adequate income and a good standard of living from that resource. That is our belie: and \.,re have no problems in stating that and stating it any\.,there . And that , Mr . Speaker, is the reason, that is the absolute reason why we have put this resolution on the Order Paper. It is our belief that our fishermen have to earn a good living from the fishery . It is also our belief that today that is not happening .

You sit down and ask yourself the simple , logical question, is it happening today that our inshore fishermen are making a living ? The answer is no . Now , Mr . Speaker, that is the reason that in that resolution the first

whereas indicates quite clearly that the real income , the amount of income that fishermen have today has decreased. 248

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 97 HJ - 1 MR. TULK: If members on the other side do not understand that,it means quite simply the amount of purchasing power, the ability of a fisherman to buy goods, the ability of a fisherman to have a decent standard of living has gone down. They will disrn1te that on the other side, but let me point out a few facts to the~, let me give them a few facts, let me give them a few indications of what has gone on 1 and I would like for the Minister of Fisheries Utr. Morgan) to take this down if he can dispute it, but he cannot.

In 197P one grade of codfish in this Province was purchased at 16.75 cents per pound plus a two cent subsidy by the federal government and .5 cent subsidy by the Province for a total of 19.25 cents per pound. Now,I can take him on down through the figures and tell him that in 1979 it was 18.5 cents because the federal subsidy had been dropped and the .5 cent per pound subsidy by the Province had been dropped. I can also tell him that in 1980 it was down to 19 cents, in 1981 it was 20 cents, in 1982 and 1983 it was unchanged. So, Mr.

Speaker, if you take off the federal subsidy and the provincial subsidy, what you see happening to the fishermen of this Province is that from 1978 to 1979, on cod alone, they had a loss of . 2.5 cents per pound. Now, Mr. Speaker, they had a loss of 2.5 cents per pound in subsidy and,if you total it all up, what it really means is that the price of fish in Newfoundland, the price of cod in Newfoundland has risen from 19.25 cents, in 1978,to 20 cents today,for an increase of .75 cents per pound. Novr, Mr.

Speaker, I suppose the minister ~rill say they had an increase but the truth is, as I said before, that the real incomehas gone down. The amount of money available after expenses, and the amount of money to maintain ones gear is less. For example, Mr. Speaker, let us take the example of the increase in the cost that fishermen have had 249

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 97 HJ - 2 MR. TULK: to suffer. The cost of nets and gear has tripled in the last five years. A fellow the other day, Earl ~mall - where is he fro~, Steve? - MR. NEARY: 1-Jhite Bay. MR. TULK: - from down in White Bay somewhere, gave me an example of where his insurance,in l982,ju~ped from $6,800 up to something like $9,900, an increase of 50 per cent. The cost of living has tripled, the cost of fuel since 1978 has gone from 85 cents per gallon to $1.85 per gallon, the price of licences have risen. The minister, I suppose, will sav, yes, that is federal.

He may find that little out, it is federal. But, Mr. Speaker, the truth is that while costs have increased the price of fish has stayed virtually the same. To add insult to injury,those people are asked to produce a quality product,to do certain things, to ice fish, to cut throats at sea and so on, to ice it down and to have it graded and to increase quality. Now, ~x. Speaker, there is nobody .in this House, there is nobody in Newfoundland who will say that we should not have a quality product, absolutely nobody.

The truth is that those people are being asked to do it, to cut down on the amount of time that they have available for fishing, to raise the number of times that ·they have to haul gear, to raise their expenses ¥Ti thout any compensation for doing so. Mr. Speaker, there has to be compensation for those fishermen. Mr. Speaker, given that situation, given the incompetence, as pointed::out yesterday by the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry), of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), is there any wonder, is there anybody in this House that would wonder - the member from Twillinoate (Mrs.

Reid) I am sure will not wonder - why Unity '84 is taking place? She will not wonder about that, she is too good a member to wonder about that. She knows exactly why that is happening. She knows that our fishermen today are fishing for less than they fished for in 1978 and she would not deny that. They are fishing for less. 250

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 97 MJ - 3 MR. TULK: Is there any wonder that we see that Fishemen's Uni0!1 then, out of desperation - I suggest to you that Unity '84 was 'Jo:t:n out of desperation - is it any wonder that we 251

March 14, 1984 Tape 98 PK - 1 MR. TULK: see that union through that political movement that they have put together called Unity '84,holding public meetings, attacking the government, and threatening to take over politics themselves because they say that the people in this House are not doing the job that they should? Mr. Speaker, I have to confess to you that I am surprised that we do not see fishermen in the streets in Newfoundland, I am surprised that we do not. DR. COLLINS: MR. TULK: DR. COLLINS: MR. TULK: They have too much sense. Pardon? They have .too much sense. They have too much sense?

No, they are a too civilized a people to do that. . ciut if you saw the frustration that we saw in that meeting we had with the Executive Board of the Union the other day- something that your government will not do,by the way, sit down with the Executive Board of that Union- if you saw the frustration that those people are going through,then you would yourself wonder how civilized are they that they are not in the streets already. MR. NEARY: They are an awfully quiet people. MR. TULK: Mr.

Speaker, I suppose the government can say, well, it happened and we were not warned about it.' Well,we have to ask ourselves the question , has the·governrnent been warned what was happening in the Newfoundland fishery? Did anyone try to persuade them to take action? Did anyone point out to them some of the things that they should do before this crisis that we are now in happened? Yes, Mr. Speaker, indeed they have. As a matter of fact, it has come from this side of the House. Mr.

Speaker, there are times when I believe,over the last two years,the caucus on this side of the House are prophets, I believe we are prophets because we have told the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), we told Dr. Kirby, we have told the friend and colleague of the Minister of Fisheries over there, the man who bails 252

March 14, 1984 Tape 98 PK - 2 MR. TULK: him out , Mr. De Bane we have told him on numerous occasions what is happening in the Newfoundland fishery. For example, Mr. Speaker, the last time that we told the government of this Province where the real issues were in the Newfoundland fishery and the problem with fishermen's income in this Province was in the debate on the restructuring agreement last Fall.

Just to refresh the minister's memory over there, just to try to get him so that he is thinking, so that he knows what to do 1 I want to say this to him, I want to repeat what I said then, and I will quote from Hansard. 'We have been bringing this issue to the House for years ,on this side of the House. We have pointed out that costs have increased and prices have decreased substantially. Fishermen's incomes in this Province are practically the same today in real terms, or perhaps even lower,than they were in 1977. And yet the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) in this Province has refused to act.' MR.

HISCOCK: left. MR. TULK: You have five minutes Five minutes. The time is gone already. The Minister of Fisheries'has refused to act. Instead , the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries,in the restructuring agreement,shoved in something called a social compact. They were going to establish a social compact,'The Premier is fond of glorious sounding words. He is fond of them. And of course the Minister of Fisheries,not knowing any better 1goes along with it anyway. Now that is great stuff. It sounds good. Mr. Speaker, where is the substance? Where is the substance of the social compact?

Where have we seen any negotiations going on with the Fishermen's Union? I will ask the minister a question, the question that I asked the executive 1 the other day 1 of the 253

Z.!aroh 14, 1984 Tape 98 PK - 3 MR. TULI<: Fishermen 's Union, and I could not believe the answer, and I expect the minister to supply an answer when he gets up~ Bas there been any meeting of publicly elected officials with the Fishermen 's Onion in this Province on that so -called social compac t? Which is really the 3ame wage restraint programme,in the Premier's mind,that he announced the other night. The same thing . Basically what he is telling the fishermen, like he told them down to Rotary the other day is that, 'You are not going to get any more. You have to make sacrifices'.

I believe it was yesterday the Premier in this "" lfouse 1 nade this staterrent - I made a note of it - made this statement: 25 4

March 14, 1984 Tape 99 EC - 1 MR. TULK: The fishermen of this Province, he said, have to share the burden of the restructuring and of the crises that we now have in the fishery. ~~ell, Mr. Speaker, how can you share any more of the burden if you are bankrupt? And there are hundreds of fishermen around this Province today who, if they were in any other business, would have had to declare bankruptcy for long ago. So how can you share any more of the burden?

I would like for the minister to tell me how he expects the fishermen of this Province to share any more of the burden than they are now sharing when they are unable to pay their loans, when in desperation this Fall there was what was billed as a 'boat owners conference' in this Province; and we had fishermen who have since said to me, said to me in an executive board meeting,again the other evening- 'You know, it was the worst thing that ever I did in my life,' this fellow said to me. 'I had to go in and stand up in front of tele~ision cameras, in front of the media of this Province, and announce that I was broke.' For a proud man of Newfoundland that is not an easy thing to do and yet, that same person today, that same fisherman, is being asked by this minister and this government to share the burden, to share the burden of putting the fishing industry back on its feet.

Mr. Speaker, make no mistake about one other point either, that the fishermen of this Province are not saying that the independents or the super company in this Province can afford to pay any more. They are not saying that. They know the kinds of conditions that are existing. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please! The hon. member's time has elapsed. SOME HON. MEHBERS: By leave. 255

March 14, 1984 MR. SPEA KER (A ylward ): SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: continue. MR. NEARY : MR. SPEAKER: Tape 99 EC - 2 Does the han. member have leave? Agreed. By leave. The han. member may You have half an hour. No, twenty minutes. Twenty minutes to open and twenty minutes to close. MR. TULK: As I said to the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan),and as I say to this government, is there any wonder why we have Unity '84? Can you expect our fishermen to bear any more of the burden?

I do not know where the Premier of this Province got the gall to walk into this House yesterday evening and say, 'Well, we have spent $100 million in the fishing industry,' And, Mr. Speaker, we know that half of that was converting debt into equ_ity, we know all that nonsense, and then to go on and say that the fishermen of this Province have to bear part of the burden. The burden for what? MR. NEARY: For their blundering. MR. TULK: For their blundering, yes.

I am going to say this -I have said it before in this House and I will say it again - for the blundering of both the federal government of 1977 and the provincial government of 1977 and since. Because what we did in this Province in 1977 is barely short of criminal,when we said to our fishermen, to our people - we drew this line on the map. We had an agreement, which was a good agreement. It was a good agreement. And i£ we had ~1ai ted for the stocks to build 1 then perhaps we could have increased the effort in the fishing industry. Hopefully, we can.

But what we said to our fishermen and to our people was simply this: 'Get in a boat' - the Premier has been at it for years - 'Get in a boat.' 256

March 14, 1984 Tape 99 EC 3 MR. NEARY: Walter Carter said it too. MR. TULK: Walter Carter: 'Get in a boat,' Romeo LeBlanc: 'Get in a boat' - 'You are all going to be rich in the fishing industry.' Well, now we see the riches. We went out there to catch fish but, as Romeo LeBlanc later said, it just was not there. And, on top of that, of course, we gave away species that we should never have given away and the minister is now, in his new love relationship with the federal Minister of Fisheries ('Mr. De Bane), starting to agree to trade fish for £ish, and he cannot deny it. It was only yesterday.

It ·was shameful, but yesterday morning 1: .after this House had gone on record .as saying quite clearly that we unani­ mously agree that we should not be trading fish for fish, it was disgraceful yesterday morning to see the provincial Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) agreeing with the federal minister that indeed he had struck a good deal in Japan,even though he gave away some fish. MR. HODDER: And to think that he has spend half of his life against that. MR. TULK: Well, sure he has . This whole House has been against it because· it is not good for Newfoundland. to the social compact. MR.

HODDER: as an hour is long. !II...R. TULK: Now, Mr. Speaker, let me come back That is their policy, as flexible As flexible as the hour that is there, that is their policy. Let me ask the l1inister o£ Fisheries: Last Fall, in September, there was this great press conference upstairs in which it was announced that there was going to be a social compact with the 257

March 14, 1984 Tape 99 EC - 4 MR. TULK: union that represents our provincial fishermen. I want to ask him, and I want him to answer the 258

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 100 SD - 1 MR. TULK: question: Has he met with that union to discuss that social compact or was that just another dash of rhetoric that blew out of the Premier's mouth? And I will give him an answer, Mr. Speaker~ The answer is that there has been one meeting with Cabot Martin and one meeting with a federal official. MR. NEARY: That is right. MR. TULK: There has been no publicly elected official in this Province who has met to discuss that idea of a social compact with the Fishermen's Union.

Now the minister is probably going to stand up as well and say, 'Well, we cannot do anything about the collective bargaining process in Newfoundland'. Well, Mr. Speaker, I have to tell the minister,in relation to that social compact I the Premier has been requested to hold a meeting; the letters are here where he has been requested to hold them. On collective bargaining, that is what our fishermen are now asking for. They want to go through a process of collective bargaining, I think that would sum up what was· said in that meeting the other evening.

They want to go through . a process of collective bargaining, MR. NEARY: ~ast Friday we had a meeting. MR. TULK: Last Friday afternoon we spent three hours. That is more than the provincial government spent with the Fishermen' s· Union - MR. NEARY: In ten years. MR. TULK: no, I will not be as bad as that I will say five, I have been here five, I know five - on wage problems. Mr. Speaker, the Premier of this Province is famous~ The Premier of this· Province is famous for talking about reasonable proposals. He stands up over there 1 'Our's is a reasonable proposal.' Now· I have to ask a question. As 259

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 100 SD - 2 MR. TULK: a member of this House and as a citizen of Newfou~dland I have to ask a question~ Is what the Fishermen's Union and the fishermen of this Province asking for today unreasonable? Do they say they do not want a restructured company in this Province? Do they say that they do not want the Newfoundland fishery to be commercially viable,as Mr. Kirby says? Do they say that? Do they say they want something for nothing? Absolutely notl As a matter of fact, Mr, Speaker, the Fishermen's Union in this Province today are operating quite the opposite.

They have to be the best union, the best set of people that ever sat down to a table to do collective bargaining. MR. NEARY: The most civilized. MR. TULK: They must be because, they not only are qorning to the fish companies and to government and saying, 'Look, we want an increase in the price of fish', not only are they doing that - and that is the normal way that unions · operate,. they come and they say they want more. But this union is not normal, no, because what do they do?

They say, 'Yes ·, we need more, ' but then they say to the government of the Province, 'Here is the way we think you can do it, here is the way we think that you can solve the problem and increase the amount of money coming into the independent processors, increase the amount of money coming into the super company and increase the amount of money corning to fish plant workers and increase the amount of money corning into the fishermen, the firs·t producers 1 • They are a unique group. The Minister of Fisheries (~r.

Morgan) would do well to stay out of this House, in the way h.e has been acting the last couple of days, he would do well to spend his time trying to get sorn~ sort of meetings with them and get some of the problems that our fishermen have straightened out. He would do well to do that. MR. MORGAN: hour. We gave you leave for half an 260

March 14, 1984 Tape No . 100 so - 3 MR. TULK: Alright. that is not bad. Whenever you want to withdraw it, you withdraw it 1 because I get the second shot at it. MR. MORGAN: Yes, you close debate. MR. TULK: And leave . You know ji cannot be bought anyway, but leave you t·IO Uld not buy me with,not at all. The Minister of Fisheries (Mr . Morgan) would do well to go down and sit down and talk to that Fishermen's Union and see if he cannot work out some of the problems that they are experiencing. Mr. Speaker, the solutions that the union are offering to the government, what do they basically say?

Is it anything that we cannot agree lvith as Liberals? Is it anything that the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador has not said for year s? Is there anything in it that does not fit 261

Narch 14, 1984 Tape No. 101 NN - 1 NR. TULK: with the submission that we made to the Kirby Task Force? Notan iota of difference in principle. The same things that we said to Nr. Kirby, and the same things that we said when we said Nr. Kirb y should be put on the shelf, and the same thing that we said - except the debate for social re~sons on the South Coast in this House last Fall-we are now saying to the Ninister of Fisheries (Nr. r-'lorgan) 1 and indeed that is what the union is saying to them. All they are saying is, "Consolidate your marketing.

Give in the same fashion that the Canadian Saltfish Corporation, recognize that you are dealing with a commodity and give that organization that you put together a line of credit such that they can hold fish and sell when market prices increase. In that way we believe you can up our income and stabilize our income." But no action, no movement. I am going to sum up by saying this 1 because I get another kick at the cat from twenty minutes to six on next Wednesday, all we get in this province is a Minister of Fisheries, who one day will row with the Federal Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

De Bane) if it suits his political purpose, tne next day they are dancing all over Asia and Europe and then the next day - MR. NEARY: MR. TULK: and the next - MR. MORGAN: MR. TULK: Up Your Minister Week . It is Up Your Minister Week, "I'll go waltzing 'round Asia with you." There you go. There you go . Mr. Speaker, I am going to close on that note,because that just represents what the Minister of Fisheries will put in the fisheries in this Province. Thank you . 262

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 101 NM - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Dr. McNicholas): The hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I am going to be in a very different mood from yesterday,because the mood I was in yesterday ,in dealing with the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) ,I will carry on tomorrow when I speak in that debate. So today I am going to speak in a completely different mood, because the hon. gentleman who just sat down,I am going to respond to him in the same manner in which he made his speech, a very sincere manner.

He is speaking on behalf of the fishermen, the fishing industry and the problems in the industry,and he made some good comments,and 1 therefore 1in that light I am going to respond accordingly. I think that when debate takes place in the House and the members of the Opposition speak in a certain tone,they can expect to be responded to in a tone accordingly. And I will deal with the member for Mount Scio tomorrow in my further addition to the 0ebate I co~menced yesterday. So I will not comment today on the member for Mount Scio's comments on the fisheries, that will wait until tomorrow.

Now the hon. gentleman who just sat down is leaving the impression that we as a government here suddenly changed our policies on the fishing industry. Yet no longer than two days ago they were saying we had no policies in the fishing industry. Now the fact is we have had a policy on the fishing industry firmly established, Mr. Speaker, made public, sent around the Province, sent across the country 1 in fact,to other provinces, fishing provinces; it was established in June of '82- and I have been minister now since 1980 1 I guess it was . '79- '80- developed in conjunction with the senior officials of a number 263

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 101 NM - 3 MR. MORGAN: of government departments, and the Cabinet and Planning and Priorities and the caucus and all concerned. That is a policy which clearly outlines what we see for the future of the fishing industry. And do not let it ever be said again by anybody in the Opposition, or the Fishermen's Union or anybody else, that the Peckford Administration has no policies on the fishing industry. We have firmly developed our policies. They are all in this document for anybody to read.

Now if the Opposition members do not want to take the time to read the document and understand what we are saying and why we are saying it 1that is entirely up to them. But the fact is we do have a firmly established policy and we are quite proud of our policy. Now to suddenly say 1 first of all 1 that we changed our policy on the Nothern cod, that is absolute rubbish. Our position on the constitution referred to today by the Premier is the same now as it was then. We could not get constitutional change during the debate on the constitution for the fis.l1inq industry.

We could not get concurrent jurisdiction, we to have a say over one part of the fishery and they the other 1 but also to work together in a joint way concurrently. We could not get that then, but we did get it. We did get it in the most significant agreement ever signed in this Province on fisheries. In fact,I would say it is the most significant federal/provincial agreement ever signed. Why? Because it involves so many thousands of Newfoundlanders, thousands of fishermen, thousands of plant workers.

And how often have I heard that agreement condemned~ It seems if we cannot get an agreement 1 as it is now on the offshore 1 we are condemned for that. And suddenly, if we get an agreement, a good one, we are condemned for that. 264

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 101 NM - 4 MR . MORGAN: If it is too good 1we get condemned for it by the Opposition. Because, Mr. Speaker, nobody can teLl me that that agreement is not good for Ne wfoundland . Let us listen to some facts about that agreement. Well,first of all, what are the results of the agreement? Well, Mr. Speaker, today in our Province we have every deep-sea plant open and operating. 265

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 102 ~!J - 1 MR. MORGAL~: We have today, for example 1 in our Province, <:Je have right now employed, 4,570 plant workers. Are they working for National Sea in Nova Scotia? No. Working for Nickersons? No. Fishery Products? No. The Lake Group? No. John Penny and Sons? No. They are working for a new deep-sea company as a result of the restructuring agreement. They ~rould not have their jobs today, Mr.

Speaker, if it was not for the agreement signed by the two levels of government and the Bank of Nova Scotia, our putting in $31 million and $75 million from Otta~·Ta. ~~d the Opposition is condemning us for doing that, for saving 4, 570 jobs. Now, Jl.1r. Speaker, ~Te have every plant OJ?en with the ~xceotion of one, Burgeo, and Burgee will reopen April 2, · in a couple or three weeks time. The other one not open yet is in the district of Fortune - Hermitage, the community of Gaultois, the plant in Gaultois, an isolated community on the South coast.

That plant is being upgraded and renovated, modernized if you want to call it that. That plant will reopen in the month of April. And we have a further 820 trawlermen working right now, working. They are not on welfare, they are not sittinq at home, they are working as a result of this new agreement that has been put in place. AN HON. HEHBER: Hm¥ many? MR. MORGAN: trawlermen. Eight hundred and t'<tTenty deep-sea Nm¥ further to that, 111hat else did the restructuring agreement say and what is it doing?

It is putting in place a mechanism whereby all+-""" ~~"1Jl and m_edium sized companies around the Province will be able to market their product. Through the new marketing organization of this new deep-sea company the independent small companies can go to the marketing arm and market their product and be given access to international markets, not just the USA, 266

Harch 14, 1984 Tape No. 102 HJ - 2 MR. MORG.l>.N : Europe and other parts of the world. We are going to have a study of the utilization of the resource. \!Je are going to have a Burin Peninsula Development Fund to help reaffirm the economy of that part of the Province. We are going to have a new Northern Fisheries Development Corporation to go into the Labrador Coast and the Great Northern Peninsula and firmly establish in that part of the Province the economy through the fishing industr~which is the main and only industry in the area. That is what the restructuring agreement is doing.

Now over and above that what is happening now in Newfoundland? I hear these comments day in and day out that the ~fishing industry is in total chaos, nothing is going on in the fishing industry, everything is in a chaotic state. Well, I just mentioned these employees,what else is happening today, in the middle of the Winter, in Netvfoundland? Well, Hr. Speaker, we have today 1,000 plant workers working in plants that were never open he fore in the Win tertiine. Now ltlhy is that?

Now 1 why is it' that suddenly in the middle of the Winter in Ne•.vfoundland ~.,e got 1, 000 more jobs than we ever had before in inshore plants that normally -vrould not reopen until the middle of ·May or the early part of June when the caplin scull comes ashore? We have them working as a result of a federal/ provincial agreement on the resource-short plant programme. Now someone says, 'Well, what is the big deal, Hr. M:organ and Mr. De Bane getting so cosy and co-operative? Well, if we are so cosy and co-operative 1what are the results of it? Let me mention a few; The resource-short plant programme is one.

If I had been fighting with De Bane like I was fighting with LeBlanc,for two years,we would not have the resourr.~-~~ort .?lant programme in place today. As a result of that co-operation, ~ve have got 1,000 more jobs this Winter. Ne would not have 267

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 102 t"_J - 1 ~.R . MORGA.l\1 : the 25 per cent subsidy on the boats for fishermen that has been brought back . LeBlanc cancelled it . Do you think that by fighting with Ottawa on behalf of the fishermen instead of co-operating with them we would have got that 25 per cent subsidy back? Ne woul d never have gotten it back . Do you think He would have got the subsidy for the sealers,that is now being paid to every sealer in the Province , if it \-Tas not for Mr . De Bane and myself working together?

Do you think we t·/Ould have got the neto~ ice making prograreme coming into place this S~"l!!!er? We are going to have new ice making factlitie s all along the coast of Ne\ o~found l and, they are going to spend close to $6 million this Summer, the feC.eral government . Do you think we \oTould have the upgrading of all the marine service centers? They are going to build neto~ ones along the coast, one starting this Summer in Green Bay ,in fact, co st shared . 268

March 14, 1984 Tape 103 PK - 1 MR. TULK: Green Bay. MR. MORGAN: These things would not be done if it was not for the federal government and myself working in co-operation. The ironic part of all this is that my colleague for St. John's East (Mr. Marshall) is getting condemned left and right by the Opposition because he cannot get along with his colleague or counterpart in Ottawa. He gets condemned for that.

And now suddenly I am getting along with my colleague in Ottawa- the Minister of Fisheries in Ottawa is on the opposite side of the fence from me politically-we are getting along, we are getting things done and we get condemned for that. So the Opposition just do not know where they are going and what they stand for. It is as simple as that. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. MORGAN: No~r, Mr. Speaker, I will speak to the resolution because it was presented, as I say, with sincerity. I sat and listened to the hon. gentleman. I had the courtesy to sit here , although I had other meetings pending downstairs.

I sat and listened to his speech. I did not have to, I did him that courtesy. Now, unfortunately, you see the way he treats things in the House, he gets up and makes a bit of a half decent speech, I sit and listen, the government ministers sit and listen, but when the time comes for him to hear what we are talking about in policies,and when we try to explain our policies to him, Mr. Speaker, ,he is gone from the House. That is the reason why they keep saying "'e have no policies. They do not want to hear our policies. MR. NEARY: MR. MORGAN: He is on urgent public business. Urgent business, Mr. Speaker?

The hon. gentleman has no more urgent business than I have,I am sure of that 1 with the problems ~e have today in the 269

March 14, 1984 Tape 103 PK - 2 MR. MORGAN: Province's most important industry , and theyare being worked on on a daily basis , almost on hourly basis, night and day. that I find it, I guess, Now, Mr. Speaker, I have to say coincidental , not any more than a coincidenc~ that what Mr . Cashin is doing in his Unity '84 campaign is asking the government to interfere in labour relations as it pertains to the fishing industry. Nobody can deny, no member of this House, on either side of the House can deny that there is a problem with certain sectors of the fishery as it pertains to the fishermen.

Now,not all fishermen are bankrupt. There are many fishermen who made much more than any minister of the Crown last yea~or any member of the House last year, many fishermen, but there are others who are below the poverty line. So there is a problem and that problem has to be addressed. But there is no po ,int in suddenly saying that the newdeep-searestructured company is going to solve the problems of the inshore fisherrnen,and nobody has ever said, the Premier included, that the newdeep-seacorn~an y is onl y going to work on the backs - the tenn used- of the inshore fishemen.

How ridiculous, ·thePremier coming from a fishing area of the Province, a rural area,myself growing up the son of a fisherman, to get on with the nonsense that we are going to have this new company work on the backs of the fishermen. But the fact is , Mr. Speaker, that less than 50 per cent of the fishermen in our Province will be selling their fish to this new deep-sea company. ~'l'hy? As I mentioned,it is a deep-sea company: it operates from: deep-sea trawlers going off shore harvesting thousands of metric tons of fishfor processing in these plants.

It only buys from a very small portion of the inshore fishermen. The Northeast Coast, is a good example, where there are inshore fishermen operating longliners. 270

March 14, 1984 Tape 103 PK - 3 MR. MORGAN: So to suddenly say, as the resolution is saying,that we have to interfere in the labour relations, does this mean, Mr . Speaker, that thi s government here through my colleague,the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn), is going to have to go out and tell E.P. Janes and Sons how much to pay for fish, and tell Ocean Harvesters, in Harbour Grace, how much to pay for fish,and tell Mr .

Boyd Way over in Beothuck Fisheries - some friends of mine are here, I think, in the galleries from Musgrave aarbour, out on the Northeast Coast, in the hon. member's district who jus t spoke - and tell him,Mr. Boyd Way in Wesleyville, how much to pay the people of Musgrave Harbour for fish? surely, in their own logic and reasoning is saying to Nobody, gove rnment you must go out and tell the companies how much they are going to pay the fishermen for their fish this year . Now,we are not going to 27 1

March 14,1984 Tape No. 104 ah-1 MR.MORGAN: do that and more than half the total fishermen in our Province sell to these independent,private sector companies. Some of them got assistance from us. People are always saying what are we doing for the fishing industry. well, everybody knows all the money we have put into those independent processing companies over the past two years, over $30 million in government guaranteed loans. But we did more than that as well and I will elaborate further on that later on.

But I want to say now nobody is going to deny on this side of the House - at least I am sure if he is in a clear mind he is not going to do it, he or she- that fishermen do deserve more return for their effort. But it is not for us to use the taxpayers' dollars. We just took $31 million from the taxpayers of Newfoundland, Mr.De Bane took $7S ·million from the taxpayers across Canada and put it into the fishing industry in Newfoundland. Now suddenly we are going to dictate the price of fish? No, Mr. Speaker!

Thereis a proper collective bargaining process in place and that collective bargaining process must be carried through. The union on behalf of the fishermen and the fish plant workers must sit down with these individual private sector companies, - number one, and work out a price and a wage agreement. And they must sit down with the new deep-sea restructured company and work it out with them.

Now I get the impression that what people are saying today in the Province of Newfoundland, including the Opposition now, is that because we are a shareholder, a minority shareholder of the large deep-sea company ~hat because we are a shareholder we are going to have to put more 272

March 14,1984 Tape No. 104 ah-2 MR.MORGAN: money up to pay better prices to the fishermen and more increases for the plant workers. But how could we do that? How could we justify putting up more money as shareholders through the deep-sea company, because we are shareholders in that company 1and get the new company to pay less than half the fishermen of our Province better prices and better returns and leave the other 60 per cent,who sell to these small independent companies 1still on low prices! No, Mr. Speaker, the argument from the Opposition is not making any sense, it is not logical.

And what I am saying is the same thing that Mr. DeBane is saying. We are on side on many issues. He is a man of principle and he showed that today quite clearly on an issue brought before the House yesterday, a man of principle. SOME HON.MEMBERS: MR.MORGAN: AN HON .MEMBER: MR.MORGAN: Hear, hear! Now, Mr. Speaker, he is- He should run for the leadership. Yes, if he ran for the Liberal leadership I might support him. I just might support Mr.De Bane if he ran for the Liberal leadership 1 although I am a Conservative . He is a man of principle. But I should not commit myself too far now, Mr.

Mulroney would not like that. MR. NEARY: How about Mr. Marshall? MR.MORGAN: Or my colleague in St.John's East (Mr. Marshall) would not like that. Now, Mr.Speaker, I am saying I am responding in a positive 1 sincere way because the questions posed were genuine and sincere. They are saying, 'Why can you not do more than what you are doing? What are we doing? Last year we put in 273

March 14,1984 Tape No. 104 ah-3 MR.MORGAN: $12.5 million. In companies? No, not the companies. The restructured company? No. Where did it go? Into the hands of the fishermen. It went into the hands of the fishermen, $12.5 million. How did it go in the hands of the fishermen? It went through loans through ourtoan Board, subsidized by the government of this Province, subsidized to the tune of 3 per cent less than the bank rate. If I go tomorrow morning to get a loan for a car 1 I do not get subsidized.To get a loan for a car to use back and forth to work I do not get subsidized.

If a trucker gets a loan to buy a truck,he does not get subsidized. If a logger gets a loan to buy ~ew logging equipment 1he is not going to be subsidized. So, Mr. Speaker, we are subsidizing them, we are doing our utmost as a Province to help the fishermen. . Do not let it ever be said anywhere around this Province that this government 1and the Premier of this administration in this Province has not done everything possible to help the fishermen of our Province. We have done everything possible,and furthermore we are not going to give up doing more. Why?

Because without the fishing industry, with all respect to the urban centres like St. John's and Corner Brook and Grand Falls and Gander and maybe Bishop Falls and Botwood and some of them, but outside of these areas the fishing industry is the mainstay of our economy. In Labrador West there is not much of a fishery either. Without the fishing industry we are not going to have any kind of stable economy in rural Newfoundland. So that is the reason why we are so committed to doing something for the fishing industry every day of the week. And the 274

March 14 ,1984 Tape No . 104 ah -4 MR .MORGAN: han . gentlemen can try to leave the impression we are not doing anything, we are not concerned ,but we are, Mr. Speaker . We are concerned and we are working hand in hand , cheek to cheek, as John Crosbie would say to the ministers, cheek to cheek on issues . \•ie have disagreed on the Northern cod . We , have fought hard, we have fought gentlemanly 1 on the No rthern cod . 275

March ]4, ]984, Tape ]05, Page ] -- SD MR. MORGAN: I recall fighting and pounding desks in meetings with the federal minister and saying,'No, you are wrong, you are giving away our Northern cod'. But the Opposition did not take a stand. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. MORGAN: Oh, the Opposition was weak-kneed, they did not take a stand. We fought giving fish to Nova Scotia and New Br~nswick and Quebec and others. We fought the fish going overseas to the foreign countries . We fought it, but the Opposition was weak-kneed. But anyway, Mr. Speaker, it came down to the point that we as gentlemen agreed to disagree.

It was a policy issue. Their policy is wrong, we said; we say today it is wrong, but we agreed, as gentlemen, to disagree and we said, 'Okay, let us carry on and work on the other issues, let us work together on other issues, let us resolve ot~er problems'. And I am convinced that when the new management of the new company - MR. TULK: Ha! MR. MORGAN: Now, Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is of the opinion, and he is keeping his fingers crossed, that there is not going to be a new company put in place. MR. TULK: No, I am not. MR.

MORGAN: He is hoping now that there will be no new Board of Directors, no Chief Executive Officer, and suddenly we will have chaos and we will have all of these plants closed down and have major chaos in the fishing industry. Because there is not now, it is working well. And I have to applaud, Mr. Speaker, those people who are doing the interim management operations today of that new company. They are doing a comendable job getting all of those plants opened, and now working on getting TWillingate open; they are going to get Charleston open and Bonavista open, they are going to get St. Lawrence open - 276

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 105 SD - 2 MR. MORGAN: - St. Lawrence is going to re-open after being closed for three years - and they are going to get all these inshore plants opened. Mr. Speaker, when that new management team is in place and a new Chief Executive Officer then the red carpet is laid out for Mr. Cashin. I told him so in a meeting no longer than two weeks ago. Mr. De Bane and myself sat down with him and I said, 'Mr. Cashin, you know it'. MR. NEARY: Give us a date. MR. MORGAN: It was the same weekend of that mysterious meeting that Mr. Barry was involved in 1 in fact. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

MORGAN: And I will tell you more tomorrow on that one. I will tell you more tomorrow on that one. Now~ Mr. Speaker, I recall saying to Mr. Cashin, 1'Mr. Cashin, you know what I would like to see you do from here on in? r would like to see you, Mr. Cashin, sit in on the - MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! MR. MORGAN: By leave for half an hour, the Si:!Ille we we gave the gentleman from the Opposition. Fair is fair. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKEF'.: elapsed. MR. MORGAN: Opposition (Mr. Neary) MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON. MEHBERS: MR. MORGAN: We will give you half an hour.

The hon. minister's time has · ~he hon. the Leader of the is being fair on this one. By leave~ By leave. We are not being partisan, we are being pretty fair in debate. I only get partisan with those guys who are partisan on me.. In this case 1 the debate has · been pretty fair. MR. ·SIMMS: So far so good. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I said to Mr. Cashin, I said, 'Mr. Cashin, if you want a better deal for the fishermen, 277

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 105 SD - 3 MR. MORGAN: if you want a better deal for those plant workers , and you say you do,better wages and better prices for their fish in dealing with the new big company, well, Mr. Cashin, the carpet is laid out for you. Corne on in'. MR. TULK 'V'hen was that meeting? MR. MORGAN: The meeting of the weekend Mr. De Bane was here. The full executive of Mr. Cashin's union was around the table and they all witnessed what I told them. I said, 'Mr.

Cashin, there is nothing I would like to see more than you, you, if necessary, Sir'- I did not call him Sir. r·Je were , ~ were ·'Rick • and 'Jim.' And I said, 'Rick, nothing I wou ld like to see more'. ~1R . TULK: Where did all this hap pen? MR. MORGAN: You know, people leave the impression, as I recall two years aqo, that · Morgan could not get along with anybod y, because I was fighting with LeBlanc. Now I am getting along with my good friend in Ottawa, now I am getting along with Rick Cashin and others and they condemn me. MR. TULK: You cannot qet along with everybody. MR.

MORGAN: Not a certain person from Mount Scio, at least. Mr. Speaker, I said to him, )'he carpet is laid out for you by both governments, not just by !1r. Peckford 1 but by the Government of Canada.' To do what? To do what? 'We want you 1 or somebody on your behalf,to be on the Board of Directors of the new company. We have left a vacancy for the sole purpose 1 through the social compact so much criticized 1 for you to have a member on the Board of Directors to do what. So 1Mr.

Cashin 1your union can then have a say in the day-to-day management of the company, have a say in the day-to-day operations of the company, have a say in all policy issues, have a say in the running of the company. And,Mr. Cashin,' I said, 'then you could have a say on whether or not the fishermen and the plant workers get a fair deal from the 278

March l4, 1984 Tape No . 105 SD - 4 MR. MORGAN: new cornpany. 1 And what better way to do it, Mr . Speaker, what better way to do it? It was the Premier 's idea and it was taken up by Mr . Donald Johnston, who is now a canditlate for the great Liberal Part y leadership coming up in June. Mr . Johnston, he adopted the policy of, the Premier said , 'What an excellent idea having union involved in management . That is a great concept, 1 279

March 14, 1984 Tape 106 EC - 1 MR. MORGA N: he said, 'we fully support that .' And they did. MR. NEARY: Do you call him God or Mister? MR. MORGAN: I would venture to say, Mr. Speaker, that I have more friends in the Liberal Cabinet today than members of the Opposition, I will tell you that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. MORGAN: SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. MORGAN: MR. SPEAKER (Ay lward): MR. MORGAN: Hear, hear! Now, Mr. Speaker - Oh, oh! - I did not interrupt, Mr. Speaker. Order, please! Order, please! I did not interrupt the hon. gentleman when he spoke, so give me fair chance to finish in the next five minutes or so.

Be fair! Let us be fair! So, Mr. Speaker, the issue is quite clear. We have resolved a major part of the problems of the fishing industry, a major part with all these plants now open and working to the deep-sea side, that is now working. We have a problem over here which we have not resolved to date, and I do not want anybody to ever say that the Peckford administration is not recognizing that problem, because they are.

It was identified at two sources, the Inshore Royal Commission, commissioned by this government, by the Premier in particular; it was identified by the Kirby Task Force, but unfortunately, the Kirby Task Force,identifying it, did not address how to resolve it, and that is the problem with a certain category of fishermen in our Province who are not making sufficient returns to make their operations viable. In other words, they have money invested in longliners, they have money invested in fishing gear, they have money in­ vested in an operation and the y are trying to make a 280

March 14, 1984 Tape 106 EC ~ 2 MR. MORGAN: dollar. -How are they trying to make a dollar? The fisherma~ has only one licence with >vhich to go fishing on the Northeast Coast. They fish for groundfish and they go out using gillnets. They have no licence for crab, they have no licence for lobster, no licence for salmon, no licence for herring, no seine licence, no draggering licence, all they have is the basic gillnet licence. And with that kind of a licence they are not making a viable return. tbev are not- making money, in fact they are hurting.

And do not ever let anybody say that our Loan Board is going around taking boats from fishermen who are making an effort. By their own efforts in trying to make a liv£ng, they are failing because of bad conditions and poor catches. We are not doing that. We have not taken one boat, we have not repossessed any boats from any fishermen who are making every effort to keep their enterprise going. And,by the way, Mr. Speaker, talk about all the bankruptcies in the fishing industry - you would not know but every- thing was gone into chaos again! 'Who do you think is bankrupt?

All the fishermen!' In three years, a total of seven bankruptcies! How many fishermen do we have, ~tr. Speaker? We have 14,000 full-time and we have 11,000 part-time. Out of all these fishermen, only seven have gone to the point of declaring bankruptcy! Now, are we going around seizing longliners every day of the week and taking all these liners from fishermen? I hear the argument that the fishermen are losing their boats, that Peckford and Morgan are taking their boats, the bank is taking their boats, they cannot go fishing anymore.

In a total of three and one-half years, we have repossessed,out of a fleet of over 2,000 longliners, a total of sixty-one vessels. Now, out of the sixty-one 281

March 14, 1984 Tap e 106 EC - 3 MR. MORGAN: vessels, l'tr. Speaker - this is information that I think is important to the Opp osition - out of the sixty -one vessels that were repossessed through the legal proce ss, thirty of these vessels were abandoned by the fishermen and the fishermen said, ''J7e are quittin g the fishery, we are giving up. We have a job somewhere. ~'le are going away to the Mainland .

Talce the vessels, we are going to leave them .' So actually there were only thirty -one that went through the proc ess of the fisher men saying, 'I cannot afford to carry on , I cannot make my payments, I am giving everything up' - in three years, out of over 2,000 . So it is not all as bad as what it is made out to be. But in saying that, I am saying at the same time tha1: there is a problem . 282

March 14, 1984 Tape No. 107 HJ - 1 MR. MORGAN: There is a problem, Mr. Speaker, and a problem that Mr. De Bane and myself in travelling with Mr. McGrath, the former Minister of Fisheries for the Nation, the three of us travelled together with the Deputy Minister of Fisheries from Ottawa, Dr. Art May, a Newfoundlander as well, we travelled together for seven or eight days in the Far East looking for markets, and then we get criticized because we were doing it, we are travelling looking for markets.

If we do not go travelling looking for markets we get criticized, if we go looking for markets we get criticized, so you cannot win either way. But the fact is we know what we are doing is right, because without markets we are not going to have a fishing industry. It is no good in Ocean Harvesters having a plant full of fish or Boyd Way with a plant full of fish in Musgrave HarlJour or a Bonavista plant full of fish if we cannot sell it. MR. CALLAN: Arnold's Cove. HR. MORGAN: Arnold's Cove is working quite well, in the han. gentleman's district.

One of the best managed plants in the whole Province, the most productive plant in the whole Province. We will have to change that district next time, make it PC, I guess, because it is working so well out there. But, l~r. Speaker, we have to find markets. Now, Mr. Speaker, if we find markets, and if the market return is sufficient, if the market return is good, to get that what are they going to look for? Are they going to look for round codfish, split codfish or what are they going to look for? We are going to have to supply to the marketplace what the marketplace wants.

It is no good in us supplying massive supplies of fish, or producing it, if the market does not want that fish. It would all be held in inventory, not sold. We have to go out and find what the market is demanding in the fishing industry, what the market is looking for and then produce that fish for that market. We have to do that. But add to that, Mr. 283

March 14, 1984 Ta-pe No. 107 HJ - 2 MR. MORGAN: Speaker, the important point, which is such I cannot overemphasize it when I talk to fishermen down on the local wharves or on the stages or on the boats,and I cannot overemphasize it in talking to plant workers in the plants, it has got to be quality product. It has got to be top quality product because if we do not move in with the quality product when the market is asking for it,Norway will