Volume XL Thursday Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND Second Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard} Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas · Number 3 20 March 1986

The House met at 3:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! Statements by Ministers MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister Resources and Lands. MR. SIMMS: of Forest Hr. Speaker, I have some positive news today to pass on to members of the House of Assembly. I want to advise them that I was inforMed this morning, by telephone, by the Federal Forestry Minister, Hr. Merithew, that we have now reached an agreement on a new forestry subsidiary proposal, to replace the old one which will expire at the end of this month. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

SIMMS: I am not at liberty to disclose the details yet, that will be done in a few times when Mr. Merithew will come down and along with myself and my colleague, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr. Ottenheimer), will sign the agreement and announce the details. I want to give the assurance to members of this House and, indeed, the public, therefore, that we are satisfied with the agreement and I am pleased to inform the public and the House of this particular development today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The bon. member for Stephenville. Ll04 March 20, 1986 Vol XL .. , MR. I<.

AYLWARD: I want to thank the minister for letting me know earlier that he was going to make a statement. I also want to thank him for bringing us some good news, as he said. It is great to see that we now have an agreement in place which is going to help benefit the forestry in this Province. It is long, long overdue. I can see now that the cups of tea in ottawa have paid off, and you have an agreement. I look forward to working with the minister to improve forestry in this Province, and I hope that there are some great benefits for this Province in this agreement.

I also want to mention that my colleague for Naskaupi (Mr. Kelland) is very interested in the chemical pulp plant supposedly going to be negotiated, or built in the near future in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, and I would like to know if, in the near future, there is going to be some information coming from this agreement on that, or related information coming from the minister? We welcome the news. We are waiting, also, for the forestry center to be announced for Corner Brook. We are looking forward to hearing that announcement in the near future. We welcome any good news.

I pat you on the back for this, but we will be watching very closely to see what happens. Thank you very much. Oral Questions MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. No. 3 R104

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Opposition. the Leader of the MR. BARRY: I have passed a copy of the injunction that was served on the Newfoundland Association of Public Employees over to the Premier and I would like to ask the Premier whether he was attempting to mislead the House ye_sterday when he raised the question of whether or not this injunction applied to members of the General Service. Would the Premier not agree that this injunction. in its plain terms, applies to all the members of NAPE? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, as a result of some happenings this morning the government takes the view that we wish not to comment on matters dealing with the dispute at this time in order to allow the exploratory talks that . began this morning to continue and that anything we would say may be construed in some manner. So we would rather, because of the delicacy of the situation, refrain from making any comments that in any way are related to the present dispute to give the full chance of these exploratory talks being successful so that we could see the return -to work of the employees. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: As of 1: 30 Mr. March was saying Ll05 March 20, 1986 Vol XL that there had been approaches made indirectly, that there were no talks underway, that he was prepared to return to the bargaining table without condition, but the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) is saying that there will be - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Is this a supplementary question? MR. BARRY: No, it is a new quesllon, Mr . Speaker. The President of Treasury Board is saying, Mr. Speaker, that there will be no negotiation until the employees return back to work. Now, which is it?

Are the Premier and government speaking to NAPE? Are negotiations underway? Is government at the bargaining table, as the Premier said it was yesterday, or was that another attempt to mislead this House? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I have said what we are going to say on this matter right now. Obviously we are into a very delicate period and I think that any comment I would make or the Minister of Justice (Ms Verge) or the President of Treasury Board, would not be opportune right now.

We are eager to see the employees who are now on a work stoppage go back to work, and we want to allow the discussions that have been going on this morning, and hopefully will be going on this afternoon, to have the best possible chance of success. So I think the least said from our point of view to indicate anything the better in the hope that this will be taken No. 3 R105

by the union as a sign that government is very serious to have this matter resolved. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of Opposition. MR. BARRY: the Will the Premier answer the question I asked him directly: Are discussions underway with NAPE or is the Premier trying to avoid the heat in the House of Assembly by pretending that they are back at the bargaining table when in fact the President of Treasury Board is saying they will no'!: return while the workers are out? Are you back or are you not? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECI<FORD: Mr.

Speaker, I am prepared to take whatever heat that the Leader of the Opposition wants to give, and that is no problem for me or for any member of this administration. The kind of heat that the Leader of the Opposition applies to this side of the House is so cold that we have to put our mitts on. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Windsor - Buchans. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. BARRY: Hr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: L106 March 20, 1986 Vol XL A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the bon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: I believe, Mr.

Speaker, that Your Honour recognized the member for Windsor - Buchans. KR. SPEAKER: As I understand it, the hon. member has yielded to the Leader of the Opposition. MR. FENWICK: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: on a point of order, the hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker, I was up at the same time as the member for Windsor - Buchans. If he is to yield to anyone he is obviously to yield to me since I was the next person to be recognized. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I recognize the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Thank you, Kr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, I would ask the Premier to indicate, in light of the injunction that I have just passed over to him, which he may only have seen for the first time, whether he is now prepared to admit that this injunction was used as a method of intimidation rather than an instrument to maintain order? And whether he would indicate whether he is now prepared to ensure that the - MR. MARSHALL: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. No. 3 Rl06

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! A point of order, the bon. President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition, who should know better than any other member in this House, has indicated that an injunction has been given for that particular purpose. And, Mr.

Speaker, what he is doing is he is impugning the integrity of the courts, he is calling into question an order of the Chief Justice of this Province, and he should be called upon to withdraw it. __ I mean, it is all right for the bon. gentleman to get on with political rhetoric and what have you, but certainly_ there have to be certain bounds. MR. BARRY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, in order to obtain that injunction the Chief Justice of Newfoundland had to receive certain facts from members opposite.

There had to be the statement made, Mr. Speaker, that the public order and safety would be harmed if the workers were not ordered back to work - the members of NAPE, Mr. Speaker, not MOS or· Health or any specific unit, the members of NAPE. We had the Premier stand up in this House yesterday and say of the General Service, members of NAPE, that he was not going to look to see whether the injunction applied to them, when the clear and plain reading of this is that it applies to all the members of NAPE. L107 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Mr.

Speaker, I am not questioning or impugning the Chief Justice of this Province or the laws of this Province, but they are being brought into disrepute by the evasive tactics of the Premier and members opposite and by the fact that they are treating one group of citizens one way under the laws of this Province and another group in another way. And the point is are _they now going to keep charges laid against 120 citizens of this Province when they are not going to have charges laid against hundreds others on the picket lines? MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the bon. the Ministjar of Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, very briefly, the point of order which my colleague raised was the allegation by the bon. the Leader of the Opposition that the injunctions were used for a political or some improper purpose. Now the fact is that an injunction is the order of a court, the injunction issues from the court.

That injunction issued from the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland, and in calling into question and in castigating and in satirizing and ridiculing the injunction, the bon. member is by necessity, not by implication, not by extension, not by the exercise of great powers of reasoning, but evidently and factually and automatically, calling into account the impartiality of the Supreme Court and it is clear in parliamentary law and parliamentary custom that no bon. member, on this side or on the other side, may call into question the impartiality of the court.

The court is not elected, the court is not political, the No. 3 R107

court is there as an impartial tribunal for the rule of law, and to call into question its partiality, its fairness is not permit ted to any member, whether in Opposition or government, whether it be the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) or the Premier. And that is the question which is now before the Chair. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. the member for Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, Waterford the gentleman from Kenmount states it very well, that the court has made an injunction.

The implementation of that injunction is what my friend from Mount Scio - Bell Island (Mr. Barry) was talking about. We submit, and he submits ---·--and I submit, that the · i.Jnplementation has not been equitable, that it has been implemented on certain days and not on other days. Now nobody in this House will submit that the court had anything to do with that

interpretation of the injunction. Somebody else interpreted the injunction and applied it accordingly, and we say with unfair discrimination. That is the point we are making. We are casting no aspersions on the court, but we are casting a lot of aspersions on whoever interpreted so conveniently that injunction after the fact. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order that was Ll08 March 20, 1986 Vol XL raised, it does not appear to the Chair that there is a point of order. So I would ask the bon. the Leader of the Opposition to ask his question. MR. BARRY: The question is, in light of the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that the Premier had decided that this injunction will now no longer be implemented with respect to the General Service members of NAPE who are covered under its clear terms, will the Premier now agree, and stand up like a man in this House and admit that he and the President of Treasury Board and members opposite were attempting to use this. injunction as an instrument of intimidation rather than as a method of maintaining order in this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, it seems to me quite obvious, and I am sure it is to other members of the House and those who are within earshot of the QUestion Period, that the Leader of the Opposition and the members opposite are insistent on keeping this dispute going. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: They hate to see any movement, any crack, any light at the end of the tunnel which may see the end to this dispute. For our part over here, Mr. Speaker, we are interested in seeing an end to it as quickly as is possible. For that reason, Mr.

Speaker, we continue to say to the Leader of the Opposition and anybody else who asks the question because, exploratory talks were held this No. 3 Rl08

morning, some maybe ongoing right now, we do not wish to make any comments relative to the dispute, to signal to the union membership and to the union leadership that we are very eager to have this dispute solved. Any comments on the court injunction, or comments upon statements that have been made by the union leadership, I do not think would be appropriate. We want to demonstrate, by our silence, that we are putting our best foot forward and, unlike the Leader of the Opposition, we want to see an end to this dispute as soon as possible. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Windsor - Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: Thank you, Kr. Speaker. My question is for the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor). The public of Newfoundland are stating concerns that if this strike continues welfare cheques may be held up, prisoners may not be able to be paroled because the staff are not there, drivers' licences will not be issued, and all kinds of government services to people suspended. So, would the minister tell us does he intend to stand by his threat to suspend people who are off on strike now, the members of KOS and the General Service?

Does he intend to continue and follow through with suspensions, even though he knows that very act will further curtail services - MR. WINDSOR: Ll09 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL • Essential services? MR. FLIGHT: Essential services, if he wants to use 'essential', yes, to people in this Province, even though that one month suspension is going to further curtail and eliminate services to people of this Province? Will he follow through on his threat to issue suspensions which would now have to be issued to over 5,000 people? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the President of Treasury Board. MR. WINDSOR: Mr.

Speaker, it is obvious that the bon. gentleman is in the same camp as his leader in that he too . will do anything possible to try to prolong this unfortunate dispute. The only thing that I will say to him, Mr. Speaker, is that various departments of government are doing what is necessary with management people to ensure that essential services to the public of this Province are provided. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the bon. the member for Windsor - Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, it does not matter what camp one is in.

One has eyes to see and ears to hear and one can see what is happening in this Province. I ask the minister this, by what rationale did he decide to suspend all the workers that would dare come out on strike, and now it is 5, 000, and in the same breath that he issued the suspension by what rationale did he say that you must stay No. 3 Rl09

off? He is claiming they are essential one day, Mr. Speaker, that the day they went on strike they were breaking the law because they were essential in the better interests of the people of Newfoundland, but in the same breath he threatens to suspend 5,000 workers. MR.. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. member is making a speech. MR.. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker. MR.. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. MR. WINDSOR: Mr.

Speaker, I have addressed that question on numerous occasions in the past few days but, as the Premier has already said, we on this side of the House do not intend to do anything today which might jeopardize any possibility of finding an end to this dispute. The hon. gentleman will have to read the newspapers from last week. MR. FLIGHT: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.. SPEAKER: A final supplementary the hon. the member for Windsor - Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: Mr.

Speaker, both the Premier and the minister have indicated the desire to get this strike settled, so would the minister tell this House of Assembly is he prepared to talk about, is he prepared to consider the lifting of that threat of suspensions in order to get the MOS and the General Service back to the bargaining LllO March 20, 1986 Vol XL table? Will he lift the suspensions? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board. MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, what the government may be prepared to do is something the government will decide at the appropr!ate time and place.

I can assure the hon. gentleman I am not going to negotiate with him. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I am afraid you are not going to get me complaining· about not arresting any more people on picket lines, at least not in the foreseeab.le future. Mr. Speaker, my question has been partially answered but I may continue on with it.

My question was to the Premier and essentially it was, since the MOS negotiating team was back at the bargaining table or was sitting at the bargaining table, would the government be willing to go back, but I understand from his comments, -which I very much welcome, that indeed some sort of talks are going on right now. I wish them all the best of luck because I think that is important. I would like to explore a secondary avenue. MR.. SPEAKER: Order, please! No. 3 RllO

The hon. the member is making a speech. MR. FENWICK: Yes, but I am just giving a

preamble to the question. MR. SPEAKER: Would the hon. member please ask his question? MR. FENWICK: My question is this: Since the President of the Treasury Board has indicated that the ILO decision or the ILO report and the ramifications of Bill 59 are negotiatible or are at least discussionable, and since in the government advertisement today it repeated parts .of the ILO committee report which also called for discussions - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. FENWICK: I am getting to it now. MR. SPEAKER: I have asked the hon. member to ask his question. He continues to make a speech.

So I would ask him now to ask his question or I will recognize another member. MR. FENWICK: My question, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier is: Is he willing to enter into the negotiations that the ILO has suggested in its committee report with NAPE and the other unions that are involved with the Public Service (Collective Bargaining) Act? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: First of all, Mr. Speaker, may I thank the member for Menihek. He Llll March 20, 1986 Vol XL was kind enough this morning to communicate to my office that he would be asking a number of questions in the House on this matter.

I want to thank him sincerely for that. It shows that the hon. member is trying to be very responsible in a very difficult situation. I did not have a phone call from the Leader of the Opposition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Obviously some of the matters that the member has indicated are matters that quite possibly are under discussion right now. I do not know. The Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) has said on a number of occasions, and we have continued to say through the former Minister of Labour and now Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs (Mr.

Ottenheimer), that we would continue the review of all labour legislation with the new consultative committee that we had in place, which continues to be in place, on an ongoing basis, all legislation relative to the Ministry of Labour's jurisdiction. But I would not want to say anything more than that at the present moment. Obviously there are some talks now that are proceeding, and proceeded through- the morning, and I imagine there are a number of topics that are being discussed and that could quite likely be one of them. MR. KELLAND: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Naskaupi. MR.

KELLAND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No. 3 Rlll ·.

Notwithstanding anything that has been said so far in Question Period, as a first positive step towards ending the current labour dispute will the Premier take action to cancel the thirty day suspensions as a gesture of good faith? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, all matters that are relevant to the dispute I cannot negotiate, as the President of Treasury Board just said to a previous question, with t}le bon. member opposite. There are discussions underway right now and we will see how t~ey get on.

To bring up one or other of the issues that the labour leaders or that the government might want to raise and to do it here in the House while discussions are ongoing, would be irresponsible and preempting what is now taking place. I am not going to make any comment on any of the issues that are concerned. There are delicate talks going ahead and we hope they are successful. Various issues are going to be brought up by the parties at the table and we will just see how that works out. MR. KELLAND: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. member for Naskaupi. MR. KELLAND: Mr.

Speaker, I appreciate the strategy the Premier is using. It may be construed by some as a method of getting off the hook in the House but I chose not to take that particular belief. It seems to me, when we talked about injunctions and so on, the Premier could not respond to similar L112 March 20, 1986 Vol XL questions, and the Premier could not respond to similar questions yesterday because it related to the injunction. MR. SPEAKER: This is a supplementary. Could the bon. member ask his question? MR.

KELLAND: Has the Premier given any indication to the represe~tatives of NAPE that he is considering cancelling the thirty day suspensions as a gesture of good faith? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: That is just another way of asking the same question. I am not going to comment upon issues that are presently outstanding between the two parties. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Labour (Hr.

Blanchard) and it concerns, of course, the present dispute and a statement that was made by the Minister of Labour last week in which he said if this strike were in the private sector rather than the public sector, then the general public would not be supporting the strikers. Now, Mr. Speaker, that leaves itself open to a number of

interpretations. I would like for the minister, the author of Bill 59, to stand in his place and explain what exactly he meant by that statement. What did he mean when he said that if the strike was in the private sector rather than the public sector, then the public would not be supporting the strikers? Exactly No. 3 R112

what did he mean by that? MR. SPEAKER: The han. Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Mr. Speaker, I would like for the han. the member for Fogo to present to me in writing that I said that. I deny having made any such statement as what the member just stated. But try as they will, Mr. Speaker, there is nobody on this side of the House today going to make any statements on the very delicate situation as it stands right now. Many days I sat here bored waiting for good questions to answer, but today there is a very delicate situation and I have nothing to say about it. MR. TULIC: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A supplementary, the bon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULIC: I say to the bon. minister that he does not know half the time whether he is punched or bored over there. SOME HOB. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. TULIC: Mr. Speaker, they are awful touchy about something over there today. What is going on?

As • the person responsible', and I use the minister's words, his exact words, his printed words in one of those full page ads that they take out from time to time on the other side, as 'the person responsible for harmonious labour relations• - those are his words , he is L113 March 20, 1986 Vol XL responsible for harmonious labour relations in the Province - does the Minister of Labour condone everything that this government has done in the present dispute to its employees? Does he condone some of it or does he condone none of it?

And if he does, would he please explain how he can justify his silence over their in his seat, and making the kind of statements that he has made? Does he condone everything, nothing, or some of it? Would he explain to us just what he does condone of what has gone on out there, the kind of provocation and harassment that has gone on? MR. BLANCHARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Mr. Speaker, I have been proud of my record in dealing with labour over the years. SOME HOB. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BLANCHARD: And I continue to be proud of my record, Mr.

Speaker, and no insults that the han. the member for Fogo will hurl will daunt my feelings about that. He knows where . I stand on that. And. if he does not know, his leader, who was minister for five months over there, ought to try to explain to him that you do not talk in public about very delicate situations such as we have at the moment. SOME HOB. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TULIC: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. No. 3 R113

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, member for Fogo. MR. TULK: the hon. the Mr. Speaker, the great Deputy Minister of Labour who wrote Bill 49 happens now to be the Minister of Labour as well. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Bill 59. MR. TULK: Who wrote Bill 59, who wrote that infamous piece of legislation. He happens now to be the Minister of Labour, and I say to him that he cannot hide behind his past record. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. member is starting to make a speech. MR. TULK: No, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, I would ask the minister to quit hiding behind his past, because his past, I suspect, is not as good as he would have us believe, and to come out foursquare and stand behind labour in this Province rather than allowing the Premier of this Province to use the hobnail boots and the provocation and harrassment that has gone on with people in this Province. Come out, be a man, stand up and defend them. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Mr.

Speaker, just after the hon. gentleman' s leader crossed to the other side of this House, he attempted to make a speech when the Federation of Labour was having a function and they closed off the microphone. They did not Lll4 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL want to hear from that party. What are they trying to do, make some brownie points today trying to create more furor? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We welcome the news from the government today that they now recognize-- the matter is delicate.

It was delicate last week when they were seeking to provoke people, when they were harassing people, but we welcome the news that they have come lately to the realization that this is a delicate matter. Now one of the more delicate aspects of it, Mr. Speaker, is the question of Bill 59. The federal minister, Kr. McKnight, has indicated he has been in touch with the provincial government to get them to change this bill. Will the Premier confirm that he has had such contact from Mr. McKnight or if not he, the Premier, then some other minister in his administration? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, there are, unlike when the bon. member was a minister in the Federal Cabinet, ongoing communication between the Government of Canada and the Government of Newfoundland concerning issues which are of mutual concern to both governments, and they will continue. I am not only hopeful No. 3 Rll4

but I am fairly confident that they are going to continue because people like the han. member who just asked the question are not going to find themselves in positions of power in Ottawa for a long time. MR. SIMMONS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the han. the member for Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: As always I enjoyed the Premier• s answer. It had nothing to do with the question but that is beside the point. Now I put the question again. Has he ~eard from Mr.

McKnight specifically the recommendation. the representation that _ the Bill 59 provisions be changed to fall in line with the ILO requirements? Has he had that representation? If he has, what is he going to do about the representation made by Mr. McKnight in this matter? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we are having ongoing talks with all the departments in Ottawa, including the Ministry of Labour and other departments. and they will continue. MR. SIMMONS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. the han. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR.

SIMMONS: Does the Premier share the view of Mr. McKnight that this Bill 59 requires changing to bring it in line with the ILO concerns? LllS Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Kr. Speaker, I cannot comment on that at the present moment because to comment on it may jeopardize the delicate discussions that are ongoing right now. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the member for Windsor - Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: I have a question for the Minister of Labour.

I want to tell him that not only will we bring this transcript where he talked about the strike, we will bring verbatim the tape On which he said that if this were a strike in the public sector, the general public would not be supporting the strikers. He said it. It is on tape and we will bring it forward. I have to ask. in light of the answer the minister gave my han. colleague, how could he, as Minister of Labour, have stood quietly by for ten or twelve days and not said one word about this strike except that, which was an insult to the strikers and to the general public?

Would the minister tell us how. as Minister of Labour, with the better interests of the working man at heart. he could have watched as those workers got screwed into the ground by this administration that he is part of? How could he have done that? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Kr. Speaker. the bon. the member No. 3 Rl15

for Buchans and all other members on the opposite side have had ample opportunity to ask any questions of me. I have sat here since the House opened and they choose a day when they are afraid something is going· to take place, something positive. The parties are going to be brought to the table and we may get an agreement, and they will have nothing to talk about. They choose today to ask them. You have tomorrow and any other days to ask these nonsensical questions. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR.

BARRY: In light of the minister's extensive experience in the labour relations field, I would like him to get up and tell this House how many times has he seen the imposition of a thirty day suspension being an inducement to the early settlement of a strike? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Labour. MR. BLANCHARD: Mr. Speaker, I do not know how many times we have to tell the bon. member that we are not making comments on this side today, me or anybody else as I understand it, and I think the Premier articulated that very well in the first question, Mr. Speaker.

But I ducked no questions from the bon. the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) or anybody else on the other side, but today we want a process to have whatever chance it Lll6 March 20, 1986 Vol XL may have of success. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has elapsed. At this stage I would like to welcome a group of students from Enright Memorial High School from St. Joseph's with their teachers Mr. Green and Mr. Reardon. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, privilege. MR.

SPEAKER: 000 on a point of On a matter of privilege, the bon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I took considerable encouragement yesterday from the statement from the Chair that it was the Chair's intention to enforce vigorously the rules of this House. I noted in particular your actions in the last day or so in insisting on short questions and answers for which I commend the Chair, if that is in order. In the vein that you introduced here into this House yesterday when you made that statement, I would ask you to consider the following matter of privilege.

Beauchesne, on page 104, paragraph 319 (3) provides in part: ••a Member will not be permitted by the Speaker to indulge in any No. 3 R116

reflections on the House," etc. and then I skip to the next line. This is the

part I want to draw to the Speaker's attention: "or to impute to any Member or Members unworthy motives for their actions in a particular case.'' Mr. Speaker, repeatedly throughout this Question Period - and yesterdays and indeed throughout the last Session but I address myself now to this QUestion Period - repeatedly, and I give you two specific examples of ministers, in responding to questions, have attributed motives to members opposite. I submit that is unparliamentary and the two examples I give you are these, Sir. The Premier in responding to the Leader of the 9J>position (Mr.

Barry) said - I cannot quote him exactly - but part of what he said was, 'Unlike the Leader. of the Opposition, I want the strike settled. • SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, if they want a more direct example, the next example requires no extrapolation or deductions at all. The President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) said in responding to the member for Windsor - Buchans (Mr. Flight) that he, the member for Windsor - Buchans, •would like to prolong the strike.' Mr.

Speaker, that is in direct violation of the provision of paragraph of 319 (3) which prohibits members of this House from attributing unworthy motives to other members of this House and I say to you, Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Ll17 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, could I have some silence? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr.

Speaker, just as you, Sir, in your good wisdom has decided to see to it that questions and answers are brief, I would appeal to you on this matter to ensure that in future when members on any side of the House are attributing unworthy motives that immediately that member be interrupted by the Chair and asked to withdraw the allegation. Specifically, Mr. Speaker, I ask that you ask these two persons, the Premier and the President of Treasury Board, to withdraw their attribution of unworthy motives to the member for Windsor - Buchans (Mr. Flight) and the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) respectively. MR.

MARSHALL: To that point of privilege. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): To that point of privilege, the han. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: To that point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, first of all, the bon. gentleman wants to so constrict the rules in this House to such an extent that the han. the President of Treasury Board or any other person cannot express a matter of opinion or an obvious indication of what the han. gentleman is doing because the han. gentlemen there opposite, by and large, are so transparent that it does not even require an opinion to be expressed. On the other hand, Mr.

Speaker, with respect to raising a Mo. 3 Rll7

point of privilege, I refer Your Honour to page 25 of Beauchesne, the han. gentleman referred to the same edition, paragraph 82 which states: "A question of privilege must be brought to the attention of the House at the first possible opportunity." If the bon. gentleman has a point of privilege or a point of order at any particular time, the time to bring it up is exactly at the time that he perceives that there has been a breach of privilege itself. Otherwise, Mr.

Speaker, we can get into spending the whole time of this House on going over Hansards and going after what happened five minutes before, five days before, five . months before, five years before and talking about points of privilege that occurred in their own mind and historically. A point of privilege has to be brought up immediately, number one, and secondly, what the han. President of Treasury Board was saying was something was not a matter of imputing motives, as the han. gentleman says, it was a matter of opinion. It was not even that, Mr.

Speaker, it was axiomatic, it was something that was absolutely obvious. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of privilege, it does not appear to the Chair that there is a prime facie case for a number of reasons. I do not want to hide under the thing that it was not brought up immediately after it occurred. The comment that the bon. the President of Treasury Board made, as I recall it, was that an bon. member here was prolonging the strike. I will look into the comments of the han. the member for Fortune - Hermitage (Mr.

Simmons) but, on L118 March 20, 1986 Vol XL the face of it, it certainly did not seem to be a point of privilege. Presenting Reports by Standing and Special Committees DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the report of the Pooled Pension Fund, Province of Newfoundland,­ for the year ending December 31, 1984, the annual report of the Atlantic Lottery Corporation Incorporated 1984 - 1985, and the 1985 annual report of the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation. Notices of Motion DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Ways and Means to consider the Raising of Supply to be Granted to Her Majesty and I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on Supply to consider certain Resolutions for the Granting of Supply to Her Majesty. Petitions No. 3 Rl18

MR. KITCHELL: Kr. Speaker. KR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for LaPoile. KR. KITCHELL: Thank you, Kr. Speaker. I would like to present a petition today to the bon. House on behalf of 548 residents of the district of LaPoile concerning the Southwest Coast Winter fishery. This petition has been signed, as I said, by 548 residents of the district of LaPoile. I would like to read the petition.

"Because of the importance of this fishery to this area, we feel that licences should be restricted to only plants which are operational at this time of the year, and that licences should not be issued to people who only pump fish. What has happened this year is that too many middlemen, pumpers and non-operational plants were involved in the winter fishery.

"It should also be noted that if licences are granted to operational plants that they are ready to process fish when the fishery opens and not come up with feeble excuses of why they cannot operate their plants and filter fish to plants all over Newfoundland and possibly the Gulf.

"We do not see any problem with fish going to the Northwest Coast because we wiil receive fish back from them in the Summer months but, we do not want to see large amounts going to the Northeast Coast without being processed in this area. ''The plants, government, government, and the the the Lll9 Karch 20, 1986 provincial federal Fishermen's Vol XL Union should sit down and come up with a complete new system to eliminate loopholes which now exist allowing too much fish to leave this area without being processed." Thank you. KR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Kenihek. MR. FENWICK: Mr.

Speaker, I want to thank the bon. member for LaPoile for introducing the petition. I had a copy of that self same petition, although I counted 5 76 names, but that is a trifling matter. I also have another one which is very similar to it, which also has another couple of hundred names. The Minister of Fisheries (Kr. Rideout) has it right now but will be willing to table it later on as part of the same submission since there are a few extra names on it, rather than introducing a separate petition.

The member for LaPoile brings up a very, very contentious issue in the Port aux Basques area, one I think that the Minister of Fisheries (Kr. Rideout), I am glad to hear, is going to speak too because it is a very, very important issue for them. For a number of reasons, the fishery this year was slightly shortened and the people who are working in the fish plants there are very much afraid that the large fishery they have this Winter will not last long enough to qualify them for unemployment insurance stamps. The arrangement that has been made, which I think is a very logical and reasonable one, is No. 3 Rll9

that the fish from the Southwest Coast is now trucked to the West Coast of the Province during the Winter fishery and processed in plants that are ice-bound now and normally would not have any fish to operate and that in the later Spring and Summer months, when the fish are on the West Coast of the Province, it is caught there and trucked back to the Southwest Coast to the Port aux Basques area so that it can be used there as well. This seems to be an excellent system, working well and one which provides fish in both areas.

Unfortunately, with the very high price of fish this year, there are a number of opera.tors from other parts of the Province who are there now buying fish in a way which the residents of the Port aux Basques area feel very unhappy about in a sense that when the Spring and Summer comes they feel there will be no opportunity to get fish back from these individual communities themselves. There are I think a number of ways in which the problem can be addressed. One way hopefully would be that more and more of the fish can be stockpiled there in the Winter months so that it can elongate the season.

I suggest something like a blast freezer facility in the area in one or two of the plants may be able to freeze some of the fish over a short period of time so it can be extended for a couple of weeks - maybe the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Rideout) would be able to talk more about that a little later on - or some sort of restriction on the places in which the fish can be shipped off to during this very short period of time. Ll20 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL So, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the petition. I am very pleased to see that the member for LaPoile (Mr. Mitchell) is also supporting it.

I think it is an excellent way in which to bring the problem up and I look forward to the comments from the Minister of Fisheries. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the petition presented by the member for LaPoile (Mr. Kitchell) and I am just a little bit surprised that it took these few brief comments in the course of the petition for the member to bring this matter to the concern of the House and I wonder why - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

A point of order, the hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: I believe the practice in the Standing Orders on petitions is that a petition is presented on one side, can be supported by a member on the - MR. BARRY: Come on! MR. FLIGHT: Nobody stood. MR. MARSHALL: - and there is already somebody on the other side who has supported liTo. 3 Rl20

the petition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. There was nobody standing, nobody stood up. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): To that point of order, actually the Chair was incorrect there in recognizing the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. In our Standing Orders, one person presents a petition and it is supported by a member on one side and then by a member on the other side. I was incorrect in recognizing the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. Does the bon. the Leader of the Opposition have le~ve? SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. No. MR. BARRY: Is this correct?

The Government House Leader does not want to see support for the residents of LaPoile. Let it be noted. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. MARSHALL: There is plenty of support for the residents of LaPoile on this side of the House as evidenced by the Minister of Fisheries who got up and wanted to respond. MR. SIMMONS: To a point of order, Kr ·. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! order, the bon. Fortune Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: To the a point member of for Mr. Speaker, I have to express some concern for the ruling that was just made. I understand, Mr.

L121 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Speaker, and if you reflect you will realize that the expression 'on all sides of the House' is often used and it refers to the fact that while ' in terms of carpenter's terms there are only two sides to this House, in terms of political groupings, there are three sides to this House. I submit the provision in the Standing Order relating to a 'side' of the House relates to a particular political grouping and nobody from this particular grouping, the official opposition, has spoken on this petition.

I submit that that is the spirit in which the provision is made so we do not have a number of people from the official opposition responding to the same petition or a number of people from the government caucus responding. At the moment, Mr. Speaker, we have had nobody from the official opposition respond to the petition. We cannot be expected, since the gentleman for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick) does not sit with this caucus, to make arrangements with him any more than we can with the government caucus as to who speaks from a particular side. We in this caucus constitute one side of the House.

The gentleman who sits as an independent from Menihek sits as another side of the House and the members and the government caucus sit as a third side of the House I submit to you, ,. Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The bon. the President of Council. KR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, I refer Standing Order 92 (1). Ho. 3 you to The bon. R121

gentleman may see many sides to many situations but there are only two sides to this House. There is the government side and the opposition side. One of the problems we have had in this House, if I may say, is the mean spiritedness of the official opposition in not recognizing the member for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick) on various things which I will be dealing with shortly on committee. I refer you to Standing Order 92 (1). "In addition to the member presenting a petition," and I believe it was the member for LaPoile (Mr.

Mitchell) presenting the petition, "only two other members, one each from both sides of the House, may speak to a peti t_ion and in so doing they shall not speak more than five minutes each." I do not know what the member for Fortune - Hermitage's (Mr. Simmons) perspective is but it seems to me, from where Your Honour is sitting, this is one side of the House and that is another side of the House. You can see off to the side, Mr. Speaker, and if the Speaker would like to sit down here you could sit and probably see two sides of the House. It seems to me that that is evident. There are two sides of the House.

The bon. member for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick) was represented and he spoke eloquently to the petition. The Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Rideout) I know wants to speak to the petition and the Standing Orders preclude anybody else from speaking to ft. < MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I was going to refer bon. members to our Standing Order. It is perfectly clear that in 92 (1) "in addition to the member presenting a petition only two other members, one each from both si~es of the L122 March 20, 1986 Vol XL House may speak to a petition. " I must say there is no point of order. The bon. Minister of Fisheries. MR.

RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have an opportunity to say a few words in support of the prayer of this petition so ably presented by my colleague for LaPoile (Mr. Mitchell) and supported as well, quite eloquently, by the gentleman for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick). Mr. Speaker, the prayer, as outlined in this petition, is one that my colleague and I, the member for LaPoile, have spent, I suppose, numerous hours over the last several months trying to address in a meaningful way. I know his concerns and the concerns that he expresses so well for the people that he represents on the Southwest Coast of this Province.

The problem that has been inherited in what is commonly referred as the Sou'west Coast fishery is not unique, nor is it new, but it has been one that has been escalating over the last three or four years. The big problem perhaps up until the last year or so was the great hue and cry, and rightly so, that vast amounts of this fish was not even processed in Newfoundland and Labrador, that it was going across the Gulf and processed in other parts of Atlantic Canada. That was brought home very clearly by events that took place last year and the year before and perhaps were about to take place again this year.

What we tried to do this year was try to reach an understanding between the buyers and the sellers of the fish, between the fishermen, represented by their union 1 and by the processors who 1 for the first No. 3 R122

time, tried to organize their own act and form themselves into a West Coast Producers Association, I believe they call themselves. Under the global umbrella of an agreement reached between those two groups, it was agreed that the first plants to have first access, the right of first refusal, to that fish would be plants located on the Southwest and West Coasts of the Province. Mr. Speaker, we attempted to lend the support of government, the support that we have under the Fish Inspection Act, to that agreement to make it possible for that agreement to work for two reasons.

One, in order to keep · unprocessed fish from going out of the Province so that the workers in Newfoundland and Labrador would have the opportunity to process the fish and, secondly, so that the people living in the area contiguous to the resource would have the first opportunity, the right of first refusal, at processing the fish. That was the arrangement that we all tried to strive towards. To some degree, Mr. Speaker, I think progress was made. It has not been perfect. There are still wrinkles to be worked out. There are still people out there who have tried to beat the system.

We cannot try to balkanize Newfoundland and say - MR. FLIGHT: Are you supporting the petition? MR. RIDEOUT: Yes I am support the petition. If you will listen, you will find out. The petition does not ask us to balkanize Newfoundland, to say that people from the East Coast cannot go to the West Coast to buy Ll23 March 20, 1986 Vol XL fish or to say that people from the West Coast cannot come to the East. That is not what the petition says. The petition is saying that there are people out there buying fish who have no processing capacity, who ought to be out of the buying of fish. Mr.

Speaker, that is something that we are presenting looking at in conjunction with the union, in conjunction with the processors, in conjunction with my colleague and the numerous representations he has made because the buyers' licenses expire at the end of March and we will not be renewing buyers • licenses next year under conditions similar to those under which they were renewed last year. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I have a petition here from the residents of Isle aux Morts which says, ..

As people of Isle aux Morts, Newfoundland, a community on the Southwest Coast, we depend upon the Southwest Coast fishery for the survival of our community. .. We would like to serve notice that we will ,. not tolerate the presence of any . off loading systems coming into our area who have no intention of processing in our Southwest Coast area. We strictly stress and are determined to eliminate such offloading systems. We are seeking support from our governing party and members of the Opposition parties. No. 3 Rl23

"Offloading systems which have no intention of processing in the area create a disasterous affect on our livelihood and is devastating to the economy of the area. If you fail to co-operate and see that our demands are reached then the people of Isle aux Morts and the surrounding area may have to move in and govern themselves." Mr. Speaker, I assume that what they are saying here is that they have not seen the necessary representation from their member on this issue. As a matter of fact, this is the first time I have heard their member, the member for Lapoile (Mr.

Kitchell), raise this as a problem for any part of his district. I am very much surprised to see that he is being so quiet on this issue if it has been such a serious problem for so long. I would like the Minister of Fisheries to stand in his place and respond to the people of Isle aux Morts and indicate where he stands on this particular petition. We have people here who see their livelihood being taken away and they are very concerned that fish is b~ing taken out of their community. ~ey do not have the opportunity to see jobs stay in their community.

The Minister of Fisheries is very quick to jump up and prevent me from speaking on the other petition. I welcome him to stand up and support this petition, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, when it comes to anything related to the fisheries in this Province, the Leader of the Opposition was asleep again, L124 ,March 20 , 1986 Vol XL as usual.

If he had listened to what my colleague for LaPoile had to say and had been less intent on trying to muzzle the hon. the member for Kenihek, he would have learned that the hon. gentleman for Menihek presented the very same petition in response to the gentleman for LaPoile. I gave a response to both petitions at once, Mr. Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition is asleep as usual. MR. BARRY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. RIDEOUT: There he goes, Mr. Speaker, he cannot stand the heat. MR. SPEAKER: Order. please! the hon. the Opposition. MR. BARRY: A point of order, Leader of the The Minister of Fisheries (Mr.

Rideout) has been in this House long enough to know, Kr. Speaker. that a member does not present a petition in response to another petition. or is the Minister of Fisheries attempting to establish new rules in this House, new Standing orders in this House? MR. TUL.K: No, he is just as stunned about that as he is as Minister of Fisheries. MR. BARRY: This is a separate petition from the people of Isle au Morts, Kr. Speaker, specifically. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, to the point of order. MR. SPEAKER: Order. please! order, the hon. Fisheries. ! No. 3 To the point of the Minister of R124

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order. Again, if the Leader of the Opposition had listened, he would have heard me say that the member for Menihek said, 'I have a petition from the people of Isle au Morts that is so similar to the petition that was just presented by the gentleman for LaPoile that I will just include my remarks in the overall context. The fact of the matter is, Mr. Speaker - MR. BARRY: Deal with the issue. the issue. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. RIDEOUT: Deal with I will deal with the issue. The issue, Mr. Speaker, is very simple.

The Leader of the Opposition must be in a dream world. The fact of the matter is, there have been difficulties for the last number of years in trying to bring some degree of sanity and control and quality to the Southwest Coast fishery. The bon. the gentleman for LaPoile, Mr. Speaker, has spoken on numerous occasions about the problem related to the Winter fishery on the Southwest Coast of this Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: When? When? MR. RIDEOUT: hears No, the Opposition never anything, Mr. Speaker, because they are continuously asleep. That is what is wrong with the Opposition. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR .

RIDEOUT: Ll25 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL Where was the Opposition last year when the former Minister of Fisheries tried · to introduce a regulation to the buyer's licences to control fish going out of Newfoundland? I never heard them say anything about that. That worked to a degree, Mr. Speaker. That brought some degree of sanity to the operation. Where were they this year when the union and the processors and government tried to bring further sanity to the situation there by demanding bleeding and gutting at sea, and pricing and all of that? I never heard a word out of them, Mr. Speaker. They are there to criticize.

They have nothing to offer that is positive. And the gentleman for LaPoile has been doing yeoman service for the people of his constituency. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage, is he supporting the petition? MR. SIMMONS: Yes, I am supporting the petition so ably presented by my colleague, the Leader of the Opposition. MR. TOBIN: A copy of a petition. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: My good friend - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! KR . SPEAKER: No. 3 R125

Order, please! MR. TOBIN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the bon. the member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, I submit to Your Honour that the petition which is now before the House, which was presented by the Leader of the Opposition, is a copy of a petition. The member for LaPoile got up and he said, • I present a petition on behalf of five hundred and some-odd residents of the district of LaPoile.• In that, Kr. Speaker, I sugge~t, there are petitions from all over his district that he had compiled into one to present. Mr.

Speaker, the petitions he presented were from Rose Blanche, Burnt Islands, and Isle au Morts. Mr. Speaker, I checked with the Clerk, and the Leader of the Opposition presented a copy of the petition. I submit, Kr. Speaker, that it is not in order and the member for Fortune-Hermitage (Mr. Simmons) should not be permitted to continue to speak. MR. SIMMONS: How about. Fisheries? the Minister of MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): To that point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: I would be very interested, Mr.

Speaker, in establishing what scientific methods were employed by the member for Burin-Placentia West (Mr. Tobin) to establish that this is a copy. I must say, Mr. L126 March 20, 1986 Vol~ Speaker, I have great difficulty, from time to time, in establishing whether it is something written in black ink or it is something that is copied. But we on this side, Mr. Speaker, believe in getting up in this House and expressing the concerns of Newfoundlanders, rather than nit-picking on technicalities to keep the views of the people of LaPoile from being heard. Mr.

Speaker, we understand why members opposite want to keep the views of the people of LaPoile hidden, and keep it quiet, because the member for LaPoile is not doing his job. But we will fight, Mr. Speaker, to see that the concerns of the people of LaPoile are raised in this House. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I assume that when a petition is read in the House it is an original and a genuine one and I have no reason to assume otherwise. I will have a look at the petition afterwards and if there is any irregularity, and I have no reason to think there is, I· will have further comment to make.

Now I would ask the bon. member for Fortune-Hermitage to continue. MR. SIMMONS: Kr. Speaker, the petition was not the one presented by the gentleman from - MR. YOUNG: (Inaudible). MR. SIMMONS: Can you just shut up for a minute? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Could he really, · Kr. Speake~? Is No. 3 R126

it physically possible for him to shut up for a minute? Just try it. MR. SPEAI<ER: Order, please! The bon. the member has asked for silence. There should be no need for him to ask for silence, he should be accorded that courtesy. MR. BAIRD: It is the way he asked for silence. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, first of all, the petition I rise to support was not a copy of the petition presented by the gentleman from LaPoile (Mr. Mithcell), it was another petition.

And I can affirm, because I was present when at least three persons signed it, that there is at least three original signatures on it. I cannot tell about the original signatures, because I was not there when they were signed. But the point is this, Mr. Speaker, that in all this charade - MR. SIMMS: Talk about misleading the House. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, if you are going to enforce the rules of this place, you are going to have to get to old leather lungs there from Grand Falls. You really are! Because every time you stand on your feet in this House, you get no protection from the Chair. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! There is no need for the member for Fortune-Hermitage (Mr. Simmons) to make that comment. Ll27 March 20, 1986 Vol XL MR. SIMMONS: Yes, there is. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Name him, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I will name the bon. member if he continues on that tack. Hon. members on the left are not giving this member a chance. I have gotten up before and asked for silence, and now I will ask for it again. I may have to name somebody on this side. The bon. the Fortune-Hermitage. MR. RIDEOUT: member for A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A point of privilege, the hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. RIDEOUT: Hansard will clearly show that when the bon. member for Fortune-Hermitage was resuming his seat he made a comment that was certainly a direct dispersion on the integrity of the Chair and the Chair - MR. BARRY: Aspersion. It is a good thing it was not an aspirin. MR. RIDEOUT: I am making a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. I would submit to Your Honour that that cannot be allowed to stand unchallenged on the record of this House and that the bon. gentleman must be asked to withdraw, which he has not yet done. MR.

BARRY: Are you saying (inaudible)? No. 3 Rl27

MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I am making a point of privilege. The bon. gentleman cannot infringe on the privileges of any of us in this House, especially on you, Sir, as the Speaker of this House, and he must be asked to withdraw that comment. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I have heard enough on that point of privilege. I dealt with that matter just as it cropped up, and I will deal with it more severely in the future if it should crop up from any quarter. The bon. member has about a minute left to complete his comments on the petition. MR. SIMMONS: You see the circus I am trying to draw attention to.

After all that, I get a minute to speak on a matter of substance, of concern to the people of the Southwest Coast. I heard, Sir, your admonition and if you must at the right time name me, Sir, you will have to name me. In the meantime, Sir, let me give notice that I am going to name some people. If I cannot stand in this Chamber and exercise my democratic right without being harassed by a bunch of hooligans and without your protection - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The bon. member is completely out of order. MR. SIMMONS: Oh, the rules again! The good old rules!

Hide behind the rules all of you, you bunch of gangsters. Now, Kr. Speaker - L128 March 20, 1986 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I will ask the bon. member to withdraw that comment. MR. SIMMON'S: Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the comment and I would now like to say that the people of the Southwest Coast have not been very well served. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The bon. member's time has elapsed. MR. SIMMONS: Oh, the rules again. The good old rules again! MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, at the request - DR. COLLIN'S: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of Come by Chance - MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! Is this a petition? MR. BARRY: Of course it is a petition. DR. COLLINS: On a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of privilege, the bon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, as I recall, you requested the bon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage to withdraw a certain remark. I cannot remember No. 3 R128

hearing him make a withdrawal. The withdrawal, of course, has to be made in unequivocal terms. It was an interference with the privilege of this House and it should be a matter that the members of this House can hear, and the withdrawal should be made in such a manner that members of this House, whose privileges have been impaired, are satisfied with the withdrawal. MR. SPEAKER: I have heard enough on that. The bon. the member for Fortune Hermitage made a comment, I asked him to withdraw it, he withdrew it to my satisfaction and the matter is closed. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: We saw Speaker, occurs Finance project in that situation, Mr. the same thing that when the Minister of (Dr. Collins) is trying to the deficit. Mr. Speaker, I would like to present a petition at the request of the people of Come By Chance and at the request of the member for Bellevue (Kr. Callan) , which myself and the member for Bellevue were given in a recent meeting with the Come By Chance hospital area Health Services Action Committee. This petition, Mr.

Speaker, has 3,500 signatures, and I would say that it is one of the larger petitions that we have seen in this House. This petition reads as follows: "The Come By Chance hospital will be closed in less than a year and Ll29 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL the building closed up, except for the out~patient clinic, which will be operated on a nine to five basis. We, the undersigned, request that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador take advantage of this building and turn it into a chronic care center and nursing home for senior citizens." Mr.

Speaker, I would like to have that tabled and ask that it be referred to the department to which it relates, obviously the Department of Health, but also the Premier's office. Mr. Speaker, the petition just refers to the establishment of a chronic care center and senior citizens facility, but what the commit tee wants, as established from our discussions, is very clearly no reduction in the services now provided. That is their first request. But if , Kr.

Speaker, the Minister of .Health remains as hardhearted as he has been, and if the Premier refuses to intervene to help these people, then the minimum they ask for is the operation of ··a· · twenty-four hour clinic, twenty-tour hour doctor services in that clinic, and not just a nine to five situation, which is what I understand the minister is now contemplating. The reason they suggest a chronic care center is because the building will be there and, if you have a chronic care center, then you will need your medical staff, in any event, and the medical staff will be there on a twenty-four hour basis. Kr.

Speaker, there was a statistical study done by a Dr. Fowlow, who used to be at that hospital, who predicts that No. 3 R129

between six and ten deaths will occur, I think it is, within the next twelve month period, or annually, as a result of heart attack victims or other sudden emergencies, whether asthma attacks, Trans-Canada Highway accidents and so forth, if that hospital is closed out. There will be over six deaths, Mr. Speaker, every twelve month period if this hospital is removed and people have to rely on either Come By Chance or st. John's. Mr. Speaker, this is probably the real test of whether members opposite are serious when they talk about having concrete platforms construe ted near Adam • s Head.

Because if that construction goes ahead, it will be absolutely essential to have doctors close by, within a mile or two of that large-scale construction site . The Minister of Health may not have considered this in the original decision. We ask him to reconsider it. Also, when the refinery was in operation, Mr. Speaker, there were some, I think between ten and twenty, Workers' Compensation cases that went to that clinic every day that refinery was operating.

Bow, if the construction of concrete platforms is going ahead at Adam's Head, again you are going to have your Workers• Compensation incidents, so again there will be a need for a service there which will not be available under the very limited service that the minister is now contemplating. Mr. Speaker, the Action Committee has been communicating with the Minister of Health (Dr. Twomey) for a long time and they have been Ll30 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL ··, kind enough to copy me. copy the Premier and others. We ask in all seriousness, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Health look closely again.

We know he is not a man who is stubborn and just digs in once he has made a decision, we know there are new circumstances, particularly with respect to concrete platform construction, that might not have been considered in the original survey, and we ask the minister to look at all the circumstances and to give the people of Come By Chance and surrounding areas the service they have become used to and so desperately want.

One final point: As I mentioned in reply to the Speech from the Throne, people were resettled from Placentia Bay and located in Southern Harbour and other areas around the Come By Chance area, Arnold's Cove and so forth, and they decided where they would move to on the basis of where the hospitals were. Bow the rules of the game are being changed. That is not fair, Mr. Speaker, and we ask the minister to take that into consideration as well. We ask, Kr. Speaker, that full support be given to this petition by the Minister of Health. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAXER: The hon. the Minister of Health. DR.

TWOMEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In replying to any petition, one has to cover all the facts that appertains to that petition. It has been decided by the Department of Health that we will close the in-patient department of the Come By Chance hospital as soon as the No. 3 Rl30

hospital in Clarenville comes on stream. We have provided in the hospital in Clarenville to have consultants in internal medicine, in surgery, in anesthesia and in radiology, and hopefully to expand it in the future to have a modern hospital with all the modern facilities for a hospital of that size at this present time. It is going to be developed to the best of our ability, with the input of a very active board, and I hope an enthusiastic group of physicians. It has been determined by the Royal Commission on Health that we have an excess of acute beds in the Province of Newfoundland.

It has also been determined by the Department of Health that small hospitals do n9t play the important role that they played to the health of a community in the past. Communications have opened up the availability of the more advanced acute care hospital, of the more advanced means of diagnosis, of the diversity of specialists who deal with the complicated or the severe cases that now have to be referred to secondary or tertiary care centers. There is a movement alright in mileage; I believe it is about twenty miles. I am not going to argue on that particular point.

Clarenville is going to be the center of excellence for secondary care treatment of all the people in that large catchment area. At the moment, it has been decided that the clinic will be open from 9:00 to 5:00 and doctors will be on call thereafter. The clinic has all the facilities that Come By Chance hospital has at this moment to give care to acute cases that might be brought in. I do not think there is anything that can be done in the in-patient department of the hospital itself Ll31 March 20, 1986 Vol XL that cannot be done in the out-patient facilities that are presently in that hospital.

With regard to converting it to chronic care, chronic care has changed a lot during the last thirty or forty years. That hospital was built thirty to forty years ago. It is more difficult to treat chronic care patients of level two and level three nursing levels, or illness, in an old building that has not been designed either for acute care, in this present day, or chronic care as we now see it in institutions. There are many requests coming from all over the Island to put in new chronic care centers. I think there are thirty. The number of requests for licenced boarding homes has exceeded 300, I believe.

We are doing our very best, and there are beds which have been opened in Central areas to cover large catchment areas of the population. As you look at the health care scheme in Canada, you will find that there is a decreasing utilization of the small hospitals. As in the report, as I am sure members of the Opposition found out recently as they went around our Province, they will find that many of the small hospitals in our Province have not got a waiting list at all.

They would also find, if they went in and examined the records, and were told about the records, that there are very few serious acute cases treated in these hospitals. They are usually referred to secondary care hospitals; they are usually referred so that they can be treated by people who have specialized qualifications in these particular fields, also specialized means of diagnosis that cannot and will never be No. 3 Rl31

available in the smaller hospitals any more, because with specialized investigations we also need specialist care. I cannot predict what will happen in the future, and I cannot look into the crystal ball of predicting any of the illnesses that has been mentioned by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) in his excellent presentation, but as events arise, the Department of Health is always prepared to review any problem and to review any change that is absolutely necessary as these areas develop. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, in supporting that petition presented by my colleague, the Leader of the Opposition, and, I assume, supported by the Minister of Health (Dr. Twomey), I want to mention several facts. Number one, the Minister of Health, who just took his seat, said the hospital was built thirty or forty years ago. Actually, it will be fifty years in May. Unlike the Markland Hospital, Kr. Speaker, the hospital at Come By Chance, the building that is there now, is not the same one that was put there fifty years ago. Much of that hospital at Come By Chance, Mr.

Speaker, is brand new. The Minister of Health will probably also know that the hospital at Come By Chance is always full. Today, last week, last month, next week, next month all of the beds L132 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL ' at the hospital at Come By Chance will be filled. That is one point, Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition said yesterday, and the Premier in responding to what was said - not yesterday, the day before yesterday. I read it in Hansard - talks about Come By Chance, he talks about the hospital, he talks about Clarenville being the area and that is true, Mr. Speaker.

Clarenville is the area where the shopping centers and so on are located, but why is it, number one, that the Premier on at least two occasions, during two elections, stood up in Arnold's Cove and Come By Chance and said the hospital would never close because it was needed, and it would never close as long as he was Premier? Why did the Premier do that? Why did he mislead the people? The second point, Mr. Speaker, is this: We talked about the construction of concrete platforms and the possibility of probably 1,500 people.

As I indicated in a resolution that was put ·--,. before this House of Assembly last' Fall, Mr. Speaker - earlier this year I believe it was - there is the possibility that the oil refinery at Come By Chance may be reactivated. As I understand it, talks are ongoing, or I hope they are, between this government and Dor Chemicals with the possibility of setting up a petrochemical plant in that area. So, Mr.

Speaker, even though the shopping centers and that sort of thing is in Clarenville, twenty-four hours a day, not from 9:00 to 5:00, people will be working on job sites where accidents happen and people get seriously hurt and Clarenville is too far away, Mr. No. 3 R132

Speaker. Why close the facility? I mean, what is the Minister of Health going to do? Is he going to do what they did with the Whitbourne clinic, open it up from 9: 00 to 5 : 00 and then after the first tragedy takes place, as happened at Whitbourne, then - MR. REID: What is wrong with what they did with Whitbourne? You put on the poor mouth then, did you not? What is wrong with what they have in Whitbourne now? MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, I do not have to accept interjections from the member for Trinity - Bay de Verde.

He knows full well that Stan Dawe and all of the other Tories out there who were kissing cousins with the Premier condemned the Premier, and I used that in the last election very effectively. Mr. Speaker, I can tell this bon. House, I can tell the Minister of Health, and he knows it because he has received the same correspondence from the concerned citizens out there that I have, that what they are looking for now is a twenty-four hour clinic. They are prepared to accept the fact that they may not get chronic care.

They are asking for it in their petition, and that is natural, but the people in Clarenville are asking for it, too, and they are not getting any more support from the Minister of Health than the people in Come By Chance are. It will be interesting to see what happens there over time. Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is that the people are asking for at least a twenty-four hour clinic, not a 9:00 to 5:00 clinic.

Obviously, since the facilities Ll33 ' March 20, 1986 Vol XL are there, a relatively new building is there, they would like to see the existing beds filled with chronically ill patients, and they are filled every day. AN HON. KEMBER: Are they filled now? MR. CALLAN: Kr. Speaker, I cannot answer questions across the House when I am trying to stand in support of this petition. Mr. Speaker, I support the petition and I hope that the minister has the generosity in his heart to grant the wishes of the people.

The Come By Chance hospital cannot be compared with the Markland Cottage Hospital, the geography is different, everything is different. Some of these factors were brought to light by the Leader of the Opposition when he stood and presented the petition. The day before yesterday, when the Premier was talking about Come By Chance and the hospital, he talked about Come By Chance being twenty miles from Clarenville. Well, Southern Harbour is not twenty miles. I mean, Come By Chance and Southern Harbour cannot be the same distance from Clarenville if one is ten miles out the road from the other.

The Premier, who was talking about the Leader of the Opposition not knowing his geography, talked about Norman's Cove, but No~'s Cove, of course, goes to Whi tbourne. Even Southern Harbour, which is in 'Bill Patterson's' district, the member for Placentia, and Little Harbour - MR. REID: People from Norman's Cove can go to Whitbourne. No. 3 Rl33

MR. CALLAN: The Premier made that geographic mistake, I am just talking about the fact that the Premier did not know what he was talking about. When he talked about Norman • s Cove, he obviously meant Arnold • s Cove or Hodge's Cove, not Norman's Cove. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The han. member's time has elapsed. MR. CALLAN: I support Speaker. MR. 'KELLAND: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: the petition, Mr. The han. the member for Naskaupi. MR. 'KELLAND: Thank you, Kr. Speaker.. I have been patient, as Your Honour has.

I have been awaiting the opportunity to rise and beg leave of the House to present this petition, all original signatures. Seven hundred students in the Happy Valley Goose Bay area of my district of Naskaupi signed this. The prayer of the petition reads as follows: ·~areas Them Days magazine is helping to preserve our culture; two, Them Days magazine is a non-profit publication; three, Them Days magazine relies upon government and public support, Them Days magazine relies, to a very great extent, on volunteer help.

We, the undersigned students of Happy Valley - Goose Bay, future leaders, concerned adults and voters, wish to express our strong desire that sustaining grants be made available and increased to Them Days magazine L134 March 20, 1986 Vol XL to allow for the systematic preservation of our heritage in written, pictorial, and auditory form." I would like to table that petition. I am pleased, if I may say so, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth (Mr. Matthews) remained; I advised him just a short time ago that the petition would be presented.

Over the period of time that Them Days magazine has been in existence, the last ten or eleven years, they have had a continuing problem, and that is one of funding. Of recent times and in past times, there has been a great deal of correspondence on the subject between myself and the Premier, the magazine, the various elected officials and so on.

I must thank the minister again for his prompt responses to the correspondence that I have originated to him on the subject, although I would have to say, at this stage of the game, I am not satisfied with the level of assistance, and I petition him, along with the 700 signatories, to give due consideration to that. If I can financial briefly situation explain that the Them Days magazine is in, they have an annual budget of approximately $100,000.

Something less than half of that, $40,000 to $45,000, they can raise through the sale of the magazine and through their wholesale/retail outlet, the sale of souveniers and things of this nature. Now that leaves more than half of their annual budget that they are required to raise .. They, themselves, feel that they are continuously existing almost from hand to mouth, in that there have been so sustaining grants forthcoming. The people who No. 3 R134

signed the petition, other people, the magazine, the Board of Directors of the magazine, feel that perhaps government has not attached the proper significance that Them Days magazine has to the preservation of the culture of Labrador. Labrador' s culture has been recognized as being unique within our Province, and I think the ministet" and others have said that they agree with that particular description.

However, in 1985, for example, assistance has been in the form of $10,000, but almost as a project grant, if I can use that word - in other words, $10,000 now because this is all we have that we can give you to help Y9U carry out the business of Them Days magazine for that year - but there has never been anything in the form of a sustaining grant. Now, in the annual budget figures I mentioned briefly there, I would think that something in the line of $25,000 to $30,000 in a sustaining grant would be what government, perhaps, should be aiming at.

You see, if the people connected with the magazine have to go out each year and try to raise $55,000 of new money, basically, new money each year, they are almost begging for support. In that $100, 000 we are talking of a staff of three people to produce four quarterly editions of Them Days magazine. It is a very fine publication, there is no question about that. It is recognized the world over. The editor is now to be inducted into the Order of Canada. They have won many awards.

It is used as part of the school curriculum and things of that nature, and they cannot understand why the political level cannot make a decision with that kind of L135 March 20, 1986 ' Vol XL accreditation behind them, and that kind of record. And the very fine archival work they have done, which is a very powerful resource when we are talking about the Labrador culture and Labrador information, generates no revenue, unlike the magazine. The magazine does generate some revenue, the archives do not, but they are a valuable resource for anybody.

They cannot understand why the political level cannot take their plight seriously enough, and this is not an aspersion on the minister or anyone else. I know he is trying. He indicated in the last piece of correspondence that recommendations or submissions have been made to government. I expect we will hear something on the 25th with reference to what level that will be.

But I would like to impress upon the minister and members of government that what we are talking about is something of a much greater amount than $10, 000 on a hi t-or-miss or project-type bases, that indeed what the magazine needs to survive is a sustaining grant of certainly not under $20,000, hopefully something in the range of perhaps $25,000 or $30,000 a year in a sustaining form. So I obviously speak in support of the petition, Mr.

Speaker, and hope and trust that I can see some support from both sides of the House to ensure that yes, indeed, there will be a sustaining grant for the very prestigious and very respected Them Days magazine in Labrador. MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The bon. the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth. MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I take 1\Jo. 3 Rl35

·J great pleasure in rising to respond to the petition so ably presented by the hon. the member for Naskaupi (Mr. Kelland). I would just like to say to him, as he well knows, and as do hon. members of the House, that during the Labrador games I had occasion to visit the headquarters of Them Days magazine and I was very, very impressed indeed with the operation and _!liith the amount of material and so on that they have there. It was indeed a pleasure to have a chance to talk with Mrs. Saunders at that particular time and to discuss her operation and the financial problems that they are encountering with .

Them Days. I would just like to say that it was only ~bou .t two months ago that I was really notified officially that Them Days were experiencing financial difficulties. I was somewhat surprised at that, because usually you know well in advance if someone has financial problems. With regard to the member's conunents on sustaining grants, of course it is very difficult for government to say that it is going to continue a grant to Them Days magazine for five, six or ten years.

It has to be dealt with in each fiscal year and, of course, last year, as the hon. member has referred to, government did provide $10, 000 to Them Days. I am hoping that some form of assistance will be provided this year in the budget. The exact amount, of course, I will not know until the budget comes down. From a department point of view and as the Minister responsible for CUlture in the Province, I have tried to lobby and acquire additional funding for Them Days because we fully realize the value of that publication to Labrador, particularly the coast of L136 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Labrador.

While I was there during the Games, of course, that came home to me fair square a number of times from people who expressed concern that Them Days just might fold. So I would just like to advise the hon. member that I am sincerely and seriously pursuing continuation of funding to Them Days. Until the budget comes down I really will not know what the end result will be, but I would just like to go on record in the House, Mr. Speaker, as officially supporting the petition put forward by the member for Naskaupi. MR. HISCOCK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The bon. the member for Eagle River. MR.

HISCOCK: Thank you, Kr. Speaker. I was a little bit surprised when the minister just said that he was not aware until a couple of months ago that Them Days magazine was in financial difficulty. I would say probably one of the reasons for this is that most of the officials in his department have too much contact with the sports element and there is nobody really KR. MATTHEWS: Be fair. MR. HISCOCK: No, no, I am being fair on this and I do not say this lightly, but there is nobody there, as such, who is really sort of in tune with the cultural aspect, and I would ask that the minister work on this.

This is only a conunent so the minister can brush it off very lightly, but the arts community No. 3 R136

does not. I would like to be able to offer some suggestions to the minister. As was pointed out by the member for Naskaupi, they do not receive any money whatsoever from the archives. Now, the provincial government has archives here in St. John's for the Province. Cannot the minister look at the possibility of having the archives of the Province designate a sub-office or a sub-branch down in Goose Bay, get some money from the provincial archives and channel it into the Labrador archives of the Province?

That is one thing the minister could possibly look at. - We see in this Province the Symphony Orchestra getting money, museums getting ~oney, Arts and CUlture centres getting money, art galleries getting money. MR. MATTHEWS: Are you against that? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. HISCOCK: No, no! Will the minister listen to me? All of these are getting money. I wish the Minister of Environment would sit down and let me finish on this important issue. Mr. Speaker, the issue is that we spend a lot of money on the Island part of our Province.

When you look- at a sustaining grant of $25,000, considering all the other grants we give to other parts of our Province, and when you consider that we do not give the Archives of Them Days magazine anything, it is quite possible the minister could go to one of the other branches in his department, or the Department of Education, and come up with some money and be able to do it that way. But I do think the sustaining grant should be . Ll37 March 20, 1986 Vol XL increased. The other thing is, as mentioned by the member for Naskaupi, Them Days magazine is being used in some schools.

I think they should be in all schools. Since too many of our text books are printed in the United States and not in Canada, we need to get more books into our classrooms. MR. HEARN: Not true. Not true. MR. HISCOCK: If the The Minister of Education (Mr. Hearn) would listen, the point I am making is that Them Days magazine should be in all our schools. He took the advice of the member for Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warren) and put an Inuit book into the school curriculum, I ask why can he not do it for the white people of our Province? With regard to A Reflection of Labrador, it is the same thing.

That is all I am saying. I am only looking for ways of getting money. The other thing. I have said it before and I wish the media would pay attention to this, I believe that the $7.5 million that comes into this Province from the Lottery Corporation should go into the Department of Recreation, CUlture and Youth and to help send people to the Labrador Games, to the Provincial Games, to the Olympics, and to fund museums, fund the symphony orchestra, and fund other groups. Instead, all these groups have to come cap in hand, or spend most of their energy going around trying to raise money each year.

But that $7.5 million goes into general revenue. I am not one who believes in buying tickets, but Ho. 3 '• Rl37

more people would probably buy those tickets from the point of view that the profits were not going to the provincial government. I think the minister should continue to stress this. As I said, I would like to compliment Them Days magazine for the work they have done, the volunteer work that they have done, and I ask the Minister of Education, the Minister of CUlture, Recreation and Youth, the Premier and any other department, to find ways of getting money to Them Days magazines. Obviously the main way is a sustaining grant, but I also think that something could be done through the Archives of our Province.

Maybe one of the people in the office of Them Days magazine could be designated as a permanent provincial employee, say the secretary, and have their salary paid out of the general revenue of the Province. What I am saying is, we have people working in the Arts and CUlture Centre being paid out of the public purse, as are people working in the Arts and CUlture Centres in Corner Brook and Grand Falls and other areas, why can we not do the same for Them Days magazine, which is for all of Labrador?

I think there are ways that the minister's department can bend rules - not break them - to be able to make up for the fact that Labrador is different. Because it is such a large geographical area with a small population, it is very expensive and very time consuming to go around collecting, and the minister needs to come up with innovative ideas. And I would say that if the minister had people within his department who were more attuned to the Labrador Ll38 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL culture, then they would have these ideas and we would not have to be expressing them.

In conclusion, I look forward to Them days magazine being included in the budget and I am sure the Minister of the Environment, Mr. Butt, commonly known as June in Goose Bay, will end up making sure that $25,000 will go to Them Days magazine. Orders of the Day MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1. DR. COLLINS: Kr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform the House that I have received a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor. KR. SPEAKER: Please rise for a message from His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor.

From Government House to the Honourable the Minister of Finance, dated Karch 20, 1986. "I, the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of Newfoundland, transmit estimates of sums required for the Public Service of the Province for the year ending the 31st. day of Karch 1987, by way of Interim Supply and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution Act of 186 7 I recommend these estimates to the House of Assembly. (sgd)---------------------- W. Anthony Paddon, No. 3 R138

Lieutenant-Governor." DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I move that message of His Honour Lieutenant-Governor together the bill be referred to Committee of Supply. the the with the On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of Supply to consider the message of His Honour the Lieutenant-Gov~rnor together with the bill, Mr. Speaker left the Chair. Committee of SUpply MR. CHAIRMAN (Baird): Order, please!

Resolution That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the granting to Her Majesty for defraying certain expenses of the Public Service for the financial year ending the 31st. day of March, 1987, the sum of seven --­ hundred and fifteen million three hundred and thirty thousand nine hundred dollars ($715, 330,900). MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall the resolution carry? DR. COLLINS: Mr. Chairman, if members opposite are insistent, I will sit down and let you carry the motion, if that is their wish. Ll39 March 20, 1986 Vol XL SOME HON. MEMBERS: No. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Chairman, as has been announced, the main supply bill, the budget, will be presented on Tuesday next. We do not anticipate that it will be immediately accepted, therefore there will be a period of time during which the current fiscal year will have ended and there will be no authorization from this House for the Comptroller General to permit funds to be taken out of the Consolidated Fund for the discharge of the functions of government, for the paying of bills, for the paying of salaries and so on and so forth, so we have to bring in an Interim Supply Bill.

We are intending to ask the House to accept an Interim Supply Bill for the period of three months, which would be April, May and June. We would expect that the Main Supply Bill will be passed before the end of June and, therefore, this three month interim supply should suffice. This is a routine measure, it is brought in every year. In the very unlikely event that the Main Supply Bill would be passed before the end of the fiscal year, obviously you would not need an Interim Supply Bill. But I do not think that has ever happened not only in this jurisdiction but in any province.

An Interim Supply Bill is a necessary bill to be brought before the House, that is unless we want government to close up. On this particular occasion, the amount of total allocation in the Interim Supply Bill is over $700 million for the three month period. That is about 10 per cent greater than the Interim Supply No. 3 'Rl39

! Bill last year, but it really covers the same proportion of the year. The Interim Supply Bill is basically to allow the functions of government, the ongoing services of government and the ongoing obligations of government to continue until the Main Supply Bill is brought in. Almost 90 per cent of this Interim Supply Bill is for that purpose, to allow programmes currently being exhibited and that type of thing to be ongoing.

However, The- Financial Administration Act also permits government to bring in supply for new projects, if tnese are brought to the attention of the House at the time the bill is introduced, and I now do so bring to the notice of the House that we have included in the allocation a total of just over $81 million, and this is in addition to what is commonly referred to as the housekeeping expenditures, for new capital account and other matters.

Let me just briefly enumerate them: For the improvement and construction of roads $17 million plus - I will just give the round figure if I may, it is all in the bill - road and bridge rehabilitation just over $13 million; bridges and causeways $3,600,000; highways, that is Transport Canada arrangements, $22,700,000 plus; forest resource roads, this is in association with the federal government under DRIE, $1,290,000; coastal Labrador water and sewerage projects, this is under the Native Peoples Agreement, $2 million; airstrips in Labrador, which in actual fact are 100 per cent funded from the federal government, so we will put this in our Interim Supply Bill Ll40 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL but we will ultimately get reimbursed; $1.5 million; the wood fuel conversion at the Wooddale Nursery, this is also part of a DRIE agreement, $400,000.

Then out of the Offshore Development Fund, which hon. members of Committee will remember, of course, is a federal/provincial fund, funded by both levels of government, the Centre of Earth Resources $4. 5 _ million; the survival centre $2 million; the design facility in engineering to go into Memorial University $1 million; and then there is an amount for block funding which would mainly will be used, likely, for smaller projects, for training activities, $3 million. That is totalling $72, 175,000. In addition to that there is an amount of $6 million put in for Baie Verte Kines.

That was announced recently by government, that government will be funding certain operations at the B~ie Verte Kines to allow that enterprise to continue operation. So there is $6 million in for that, and then there is a further amount from the offshore fund for training equipment, which amounts to $3 million, for a total of $9 million. That brings it up to $81,175,000 for those new capital accounts that I mentioned, in additi~n to the housekeeping. Now, Hr. Speaker, we have a public service salary - MR. FENWICK: A point of order, Kr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN (Baird): Order, please!

A point of order, the bon. the m~er for Kenihek. MR. FENWICK: Kr. Chairman, with all the hubbub I did not get all those figures of No. 3 R140

extra spending that he was talking about there. Is it possible to have that tabled, or be able to get a copy of the actual detailed list? It is not in the list here. These are a special list. Is that possible, Mr. Chairman? MR. CHAIRMAN: To that point no point of member asked think he will MR. BARRY: of order, there is order. The hon. a question and I get an answer. Mr. Chairman, I would like to raise a point of privilege. MR. CHAIRMAN: A point of privilege, the hon. Leader of the Oppos _i tion. MR.

BARRY: I just saw the newspaper and apparently the Minister of Kines made a statement with respect to Daniel's Harbour yesterday, a very serious statement, and did not see fit to inform this House. The minister just referred to money now contained in Interim Supply for Baie Verte. We would like to know why is there not money contained in Interim Supply to ensure that Daniel's Harbour continues to operate?

But more particularly, on a matter of privilege, we think it is an extreme discourtesy to this House, and improper practice, for the Minister of Kines to be issuing press releases on matters of this importance, affecting so many Newfoundlanders, without informing this House. Now, the minister has said he did not have the statement in time for the opening of the House. We can understand that, but the normal practice would have been for the minister to stand in his place, Ll41 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL say he had an important statement and ask leave to present it. We submit that practice was not followed.

It is a precedent that we would not like to see set, that the most important matters are dealt with through press releases outside the House. MR. DINN: Mr. Chairman, privilege. KR. CHAIRMAN: to that point of The hon. the Minister of Kines and Energy. MR. DINN: It is not a point of privilege, but it is a good point. The fact of the matter is, last Thursday I was supposed to meet with Kr. Halbauer, who is the Vice-President of Teck Corporation, so that he could give me an update on Daniel' s Harbour. Now, as the hon. member knows, there is an exploration programme going on there.

I have been in contact with the union officials down there, and the members, and I promised them that when I got the information I would inform them immediately. Now, what happened was I had to leave Toronto before the meeting took place - the meeting took place about nine o'clock, and my flight took off early because I-~ad business in the Province - so I did not meet with Mr. Halbauer myself but my officials did. Now, the problem was that I had a statement from Toronto, over the phone, but it was not clear enough for me to be able to inform anybody, let alone members of this House.

My deputy came back - I have been quite busy over the past few days - he informed the assistant deputy, Mr. Fleming, and No ·. 3 Rl41

Mr. Fleming put together a press release yesterday and he called in to me to ask if it was okay to release it. MR. BARRY: Is there any chance of our getting a copy? MR. DINN: I will certainly get a copy for the bon. member today. MR. BARRY: We do not know if it is all detail or not. MR. DINN: Well, I can give the bon. member detail by leave of the House, if that is permissible .. MR. BARRY: We will accept a copy if it is available. MR. DINN: Okay. I apologize to the House, but the fact of the matter is, I did not have a copy of the statement to make it.

Possibly I could have come into the House and said what I understood to be transmitted to me, but I wanted to have a copy of that statement. Now, in the meantime, the union leadership out there wanted to know on a fairly urgent basis exactly what was going on with that meeting. Since I had no communication from my deputy, I informed my assistant deputy to answer the telegram and put a copy of that release with the telegram to the union leadership, the people out there who are most concerned, and also to have a copy for me this morning.

Well, I got a copy of it but the copy I have is not even the correct copy, so I could not use that today. But I can inform the bon. member of Ll42 March 20, 1986 Vol XL exactly what the story is on Daniel's Harbour, maybe a little later on. But there is no point of privilege. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Chairman, in light of the very reasonable and informative response of the Minister of Mines, something which should set a good example for other ministers on that side, I would withdraw that matter of privilege and I will accept the minister's undertaking to supply members of the House with the information contained in his release. I thank the ~inister for his information. MR. CHAIRMAN: To the point of privilege, there is no point of privilege but rather a clarification of information.

Before I recognize the bon. the Minister of Finance, we have three questions for the Late Show and I would like to announce those now: One is from the Leader of the Opposition in relation to a response from the Premier during Question Period. The Leader of the Opposition was not satisfied with the answers. Another one is from 'Beaton Tulk', the member for Fogo, who is not satisfied with the answer given by the Minister of Labour in Question Period. The third one is from the member for Windsor - Buchans (Hr. Flight), again to the Minister of Labour, who is not satisfied with the answers to the questions he raised.

So there are three questions for the Late Show. The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: No. 3 Rl42

Mr. Chairman, the hon. the member for Menihek wanted this tabled and I would like to table it. Perhaps we could get an odd copy made very shortly, if you wish it. Just to finish off with a few brief remarks, Mr. Chairman. We do have a pay day for the public service, I think it is on the second of April, so it would be most unfortunate - I am sure all members of this Committee hope and expect the Public Service to be back in full strength at that time if their pay was in any way delayed. So I would anticipate rapid passage of this bill.

Now, I know that the other day the Opposition put a ~aveat on their agreement to pass this bill before the end of the fiscal year, and that was that they would hope that the present work problem would be resolved by that time. I think there is every good expectation that that may be the ease, and I think it would encourage the process if we now very quickly passed this Interim Supply Bill. MR. SIMMONS: Kr. Chairman. MR. CHAIRMAN: The bon. the member for Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman, first of all let me say how pleased I am to see you, Sir, occupy that particular position.

I welcome you to the role. MR. SIMMS: I hope he does not - MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! I would ask the Minister of Forest L143 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Resources and Lands (Mr. Simms) to restrain himself. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Chairman, I thank you for that, because the first thing I wanted to say to the Committee, and indeed to the whole House, is in relation to something that I very inadvertently said during the course of the heat of debate earlier and I did withdraw immediately.

I just want to expand on that to the degree that it was one of those comments that one never wants to make, and I never intended to make, and I want to say to all members of this House, those whom I-consider my friends and those who may not consider themselves to be my friends, but all members of the House, that I regret having made that statement. Of course I have nothing but the utmost respect for every member of this House and I regret, without qualification, having made that statement. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. J. CARTER: Would the bon. member permit a question? SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

BARRY: He will get one back ten bad, and he will never Interim Supply completed. the tone right now. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! times as see his You set The Chair recognized the hon. member for Fortune - Hermitage. MR. J. CARTER: No, the member is yielding to me No. 3 Rl43

for a moment. MR. SIMMONS: I say to the gentleman from St. John's North (Mr. J. Carter), yes, I would permit a question if it is in the spi"rit of (inaudible). MR. CHAIRMAN: I understand the member for Fortune - Hermitage (Mr. Sinunons) yields to the member for st. John's North (Mr. J. Carter) for a question? MR. J. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, it has been my experience that when a person withdraws an offensive remark they should do it humbly. I do not think the member has withdrawn that remark humbly enough. I call upon him to withdraw again. MR. BARRY: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order. MR.

CHAIRMAN: A point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: I would like to say that unlike the member for Fortune - Hermitage (Mr. Sinunons) , the member for St. John's North (Mr. J. Carter) is a humble person and has a lot to be humble about. MR. CHAIRMAN: To that point of order, there is no point of order. The bon. the member for Fortune-Hermitage. MR. SIMMONS: Humility is a relative characteristic, and I suppose he and I have humility in relative terms. Hr.

Speaker, the second thing I L144 March 20, 1986 Vol XL wanted to say on behalf of the official Opposition is to reiterate the conunitment that we have made in writing to the gentleman from St. John's East (Mr. Marshall), the Government House Leader, the conunitment that we intend to give our co-operation to the passage of this Interim Supply Bill with a couple of caveats on a couple of conditions. One, I think, is a fairly obvious condition, that we will get fairly forthright and full answers to the questions we put to the minister.

We have no reason to doubt that, because in the past, in similar circumstances, he has been very forthcoming. So that is our first condition. our second one, of course, relates to an even more pressing matter, and that is the current labour dispute in the Province, the NAPE dispute, and from our standpoint we do not intend to co-operate in the passage of this bill until that dispute has been settled. Hr. Speaker, I come now to a couple of points that I want to make in respect to the Interim Supply Bill. You will note that today is March 20, eleven days before the end of the fiscal year.

Had there been an election in the past few weeks or some other intervening circumstance, one could understand the lateness in time at which the Minister of Finance has elected to bring in his budget. I am aware that he has set a date and it is next week but if you will check practice in this House over the years, when there has not been some intervening circumstances, such as an election, the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) and the administration take it upon themselves to bring in the Budget Ho. 3 Rl44

Speech reasonably early to allow its passage so that we do not have to go through this business of Interim Supply. Now, having said that, I recognize that Interim Supply is not exactly unique in this House. We have had it on many, many occasions since we became a Province but that alone should not be an excuse to do it year after year after year. Mr. Chairman, the Bill itself has some interesting figures in it and I will come quickly to these. Perhaps the minister in his response can tell us why these particular figures are here.

My understanding of Interim Supply is to get enough Supply for Her Majesty to pay the. bills until the main Estimates have been passed by this House and, given that, I am wondering why in_ the Public Works Interim Supply vote the minister is asking for just over the full amount of the last fiscal year. It was $39 million last year and he is asking for $41 million now just for an interim period. There must be some reason for that relating to contract commitments or something but would he respond on that particular point.

Secondly, he is asking under Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development for an amount which represents about 90 per cent, about nine-tenths of the full expenditure for the 1985-86 year. An amount of $15 million is being proposed. Also, under Transportation the minister is asking the committee to approve an amount which represents about 95 per cent of the total budgetary expenditure on transportation matters during fiscal 1985-86 or the projected expenditure during that fiscal year.

Ll45 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Two others: In Social Services he is asking for about half the amount and in the case of Career Development and Advanced Studies about 40 per cent. So in those five cases but, particularly in the first three, where he is asking for essentially the full amount for the entire year I wonder why that is seen to be necessary given that he must anticipate that the main Estimates should pass this House sometime well before the end of the coming fiscal year. Mr. Chairman, my colleagues inform me that at about this time in the day it is Spring.

Let us hope that the change of season connotes a change in attitude in this particular chamber, a change for the better I would sincerely hope. Mr. Chairman, the other issue that I want to address because I think it is the overriding issue in this Province at this particular time and it obviously has budgetary or fiscal implications. It has other very serious ramifications for the Province as a whole. I refer, of course, to the current NAPE dispute.

I have heard what I regard to be the sanctimony today about how delicate this issue is and my only wish at that particular time was that the whole NAPE membership could have been looking in. There were two occasions in the past few days, Mr. Chairman, when it would have been most appropriate to have cameras in this House. One was during the Question Period today so that the whole NAPE membership could have seen that exercise here today, that exercise about what was delicate, etc., and the other time when the cameras actually were in the House. That was when the No. 3 Rl45

Premier was responding in the Throne Speech to debate. We will be aware from the public airwaves, of course, that it was that performance by the Premier that triggered the walkout of the General Service. That is on the public record. As I sat there on Tuesday night I found myself saying, to myself, there is the proof, there is the proof if anyone needed it that we should have cameras in the House all the time, to show the public of this Province exactly what is being said ostensively on their behalf, particularly today, Mr.

Chairman, during Question Period when there was that charade about the issue being d~licate. Was it not delicate twenty-four hours before? Was it not delicate when the President of Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) was provoking irresponsibly, rubbing their noses in it, telling them they were breaking the law, etc. Do you remember all those clips on television, Mr. Chairman, during the past few days? Where was the sensitivity about delicacy then, Mr. Chairman? Did this thing just become delicate now? I submit yes, Mr. Chairman. In one respect it just became delicate. It became politically delicate.

The message got home in the last few hours that this is a politically delicate thing. That, Mr. Chairman, unwittingly, is what the Premier meant today, is what the gentleman, the Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) , meant today and the others. That is what they meant by delicacy. Suddenly they had recognized that this is politically much more of a hot potato than we had thought. What they had thought before is they could ride this one out, they could intimidate those people and they could orchestrate and, Mr. Ll46 March 20, 1986 Vol XL Chairman, I say to you they orchestrated.

Let us not hide behind any court injunction. Let us not hide behind any Chief of Police. They, the political bosses, Mr. Chairman, and the Premier and the President of the Treasury Board (Mr. Windsor) and maybe the Minister of Justice (Ms Verge), if so, unwittingly, because she admitted to us yesterday she did not know what was in the injunction - I find it hard to believe but I take her word. Now, Mr. Speaker, no innuendo , a straight statement up front. The Premier of this Province, Mr. Chairman, and the President of Treasury Board (Mr.

Windsor) have participated covertly in the orchestration of the intimidation of innocent people. Mr. Chairman, last week nobody in the law enforcement branch had any difficulty deciding that people such as Mr. Bill Parsons, by way of example, were included in the injunction. There was no dilemma then. There was no decision then behind closed doors that we will not look at this for fear we find the wrong thing, we will not look for an

interpretation for fear we might find something we do not want to find. No fear then, Mr. Chairman. Then they rushed out and arrested people, Mr. Chairman, arrested people who were not members of the NAPE unit at all. But yesterday, very conveniently, somehow not only did they need an

interpretation to tell them whether NAPE were NAPE people - that is what they wanted an

interpretation of, by the way, they wanted somebody to interpret for them whether NAPE people were NAPE people. That is what the No. 3 Rl46

complicated matter was all about that the Minister of Justice (Ms Verge) talked about yesterday. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! I would like to advise the bon. member he has two minutes left. MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Kr. Chairman, I think it needs to be put on the public record that this has been an absolute charade. I appeal to the Minister of Justice (Ks Verge) in the Chamber and I appeal to others involved in this to examine their actions in this particular matter because, Mr.

Chairman, if we t~ke the Minister of Justice at her word, and I do, yesterday in Question Period, then one of two things must be concluded from her statement. When she says that she had not had an opportunity, whether that was the term - the information to the House was that she had not cogitated on this matter of an

interpretation of whether the General Service was included. That is the essence of what she told the House. It later emerged that this had been a deliberate act, at least on the behalf of the Premier, that it would not be done. The net result was that it had not been done. She told us that was the case. Mr. Chairman, two things. is c:learly competent in with

an act that means one of Either the minister something less than that she is dealing that is two or three years old to start with and she is dealing also with an injunction that is several days old, a couple of weeks old. She is dealing with some basic common sense matters, i.e. if Bill Parsons is included in the injunctipn, not being a Ll47 Karch 20, 1986 Vol XL member, how can it be construed that the direct membership through the General Service unit are not covered by the injunction. So, Mr. Chairman, it is clearly a matter of either a lack of competence or some wilful blindness on her part. Either, Kr.

Chairman, I submit to he~, is not good enough for the chief law enforcement office of this Province. It is just not good enough. Now one final point, Mr. Chairman, and I will have a time to come back at this, this nonsense that we hear from the Premier in this matter that somehow they washed their hands and that they are the government and all that kind of thing but they have nothing to do with