Volume 2 PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND 2nd Session VERBATIM REPORT Tuesday, April 10, 1973 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE JAMES M. RUSSELL Number 50

April 10, 1973 The House met at 3: 00 P .M. Hr. Speaker in the Chair. Tape no. 1131 Pagel - MRW BON. J.C. CROSBIE (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matter of a breach of the privileges of all the members of the House. 1 will speak fo~ everybody,! hope,on this. There is a headline in the "Daily News" this morning, Mr. Speaker, and the story is false, completely untrue.

There is not a word of truth in it ; This says.in connection with the conflict of interest legislation that has been distributed in the Bouse, the headline reads: "Fine Officials, Not Politicians." Then if you go down the story and come to the final two paragraphs it says: "A civil servant who is late filing such information would have his salary docked during the period. It plainly disclosed that the information would result in fines up to $1,000 or three months in jail: Mr. Crosbie said. "While the penalties would not apply to Legislature members, Mr.

Crosbie said that it would be difficult for a person to sit in the House of Assembly if he were found to be breaking the conflict of interest law." Now the story is completely false, Mr. Speaker. There was no interview by the St. John's "Daily News" with myself. I was not called by them. I was not interviewed by them. I was not spoken to by them. I was not contacted by them.

This is a story cribbed from the CBC interview, an interview last night with the CBC,I gather from reading it,and which the "Daily Newa",in its usual irresponsible manner. got wrong. '·'hat they were taking down what vas said in this interview with the CBC, it is directly contrary to that. The etory is false. It is an example of journalistic 4185

April 10, 1973 Tape no. 1131 Paga 2 thievery where the aource ia no_t attributed to the CBC or CJON whichever station it was, "nlen they take it down incorrectly. Then the atory reads aa though it were an interview with me when they never interviewed me. It is the height of irresponaibility. Then it ia put in a headline,on the front page of the ''Daily News", that thia legialation provides for fines for official• and not for the politiciana. Now the legislation, Mr.

Speaker• provides for penalties of fine or imprisonment for anyone who violates the ac~. whether he be a member of this Houae or a civil servant to whom the act applies or a member of the cabinet or anyone else and the penalties are exactly the aa•. It provides that if the act be not complied with in the disclosure statement fil~d that whoever ia guilty of failing to comply with the act is no-c entitled to be remune~ated during that period. It is an extremely damaging story. It is completely false.

It should be retracted by the ''Daily News" tomorrow and if it is oot retrai:ted by the "Daily News" tomorrow, then in I my view the Bouse should take action. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. CROSBIE: Well we do not need to go that far, I feel sure Mr, Speaker. Certainly this is an insult to every member of the House,to imply that we would pass legislation that would fine officials and not apply the same penalties to other people to whom the act applies. I would like to table a copy of the paper in case we n~ed to take any further action on it.

It is not in the scurrilous,yellow journalism class, it is in a class all by itself. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. CROSBIE: If I thought it would do any good,I would. Why does not the honourable gentleman? HON. G. DAWE (Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations): Mr. Speaker, I would just like to clear up a point that rose during the estimates 4186

April 10, 1973 Tape oo. 1131 Page 3 of my department last week. In the "Evening Telegram" the next day dated April 4, it states, if I might quote from it: ''He also revealed that the Hattenhauer Enquiry into working conditions at the Electric Reduction Company of Canada Limited, Long Barbour Phosphorous Plant,cost the government $6,739. This amount covers Dr. Hattenhauer' s fee of $ 100 a day, plus expenses as well as legal fees and other expenses." It goes on to say: "the enquiry last summer.headed by H. o.

Horgan, Vice-President of Memorial University, into strikes in Labrador West cost $4,500." This implies that Dean Morgan was paid $100 a day, the same as Dr. Hattenhauer. I would like,for the record,to straighten it out. Dean Morgan undertook that enquiry for the grand sum of $1.00. In other words he donated his services.for which we are very happy. I am also very happy indeed that he drew this to my attention. There is one other point and that is that the $12,000 or the $11,900 which so far has been paid out for the history of the labour movement of Newfoundland was not paid to Professor Hattenhauer.

It was paid to the Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University. I would like, if I might, to read the last paragraph here. I think it is important in view of the work which Dean Morgan is trying to get underway and the encouragement he is trying to convey to other people to undertake these surveys or enquires at no cost to government. "I am particularly disturbed by the implication of the disclosure of the $4,500 cost of the Labrador Enquiry without any breakdown of these costs. As it follows, the statement that Professor Hattenhauer received a fee of $100 a day, plus expenses.

The implication is that I also received a fee. You are no ~oubt aware that my fee for this enquiry was $1.00.which incidentally I have not received,and presumably the $4,500 covers the expenses 4187

April 10 1 1973 Tape no. 1131 Page 4 of the visit of four _people to ~rador City in connection with the enquiry and the espene•• of bringing member• of the bargaining units, both in Wabuah and Labrador City, to St. John'• for diacusaioaa with the commission and the cost of · the publication of the report. "You preaumably made no mention of the fact that I had declined a fee. My chief concern here is my endeavour to encourage members of the faculty of the university to contribute their servicu,without any gratuity,to the Provincial Government.

The reported accounc of the Labrador Enquiry will give little credence to my efforts." WH:&RS TO QUESTIONS HON. T. DOYLE: (Minister of Tourism: ) Mr. Sp001•er I I would like to tab~e the •~ers to Questiozu-°NoA · 201 through 206 1 asked on the Order Paper of March 28 by ~e hon.member for White Bay South. HON. DR. A. T. ROWE (Minister of Health) There was a question from the hon. member for Fogo two days ago. There was no thalidamide infant born in the Province of Newfoundland.

The only association Newfoundland has had with this particular disaster was the fact that there was the wife of an American serviceman who delivered a child,in Get'lll&Dy.that had the thalidamide deformity,who came and reaided in Labrador while her husband was serving a part of his time with the Armed Forces. There is no documented case of any thalidamide disaster in Newfoundland. ORDERS OF DJE DAY MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, I have a very simple question for the Minister of Manpower and Industrial Relations.

Is he in a position where he can tell us anything at this stage ( i gather the gentleman from Labrador West has reported to him or consulted with him, whatever the phrase is) about the labour sitatuion in Labrador West I gather that again 1,800 men are out of work because of a withdtawl of service  l•t me say.to put it in a neutral tel'lll, by twenty-three men w~o 4188

April 10. 1973 Tape no. 1131 Page 5 feel they have-a juat cliuse. I think they do. !.Qt. DAWE: This strike,as we know by nov,was caused beeause- twen:ty ot twenty-three railro.ad workers decided to go on a wildcat strike. These people have applied to the Labour Relations Board for certification and aince a queation comes up here as 4189

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 1B-1 to which govenunent baa a jurisdiction over these employees 1 since it is an interprovincial railway, I am afraid that since it is in a state of subjudice 1 1 would say that any comment right now might be detrimental,other than that, MR. ROBERTS : A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. My information and 1 wonder if the minister can confirm or deny this, is that this strike dates back to an arrangement made to which the Government of Newfoundland were a party,through one of the officals of the Department of Labour. I am not sure when it was done. Was it a year or two ago?

AN HONOURABLE MI:MBER: June of last year. MR. RORERTS: June of last year. An offical was sent there by the minister,in the normal course of events. An arrangement was made with the Government of Quebec,on one hand through an offical and with the employer concerned on the other hand. Apparently that is where the problem was caused, If that be so, I wonder if the minister would undertake to look into it and take the appropriate action? It does not seem to be at this stage a matter for the Labour Relations Board, does it?

MR, DAWE: There is some reference to the transaction back in June of last year and ram getting reports from various parties with regard to that transaction. I cannot elaborate any further than that on it. It certainly appears to have been illegal once, since it involved I think it is the Ministry .- of Transport or the Transport Commission. MR. ROBERTS: A further supplementary question. I understand that che minister does not know eyerything about the department. Could we expect a statement from the minister at some time?

I think this matter is of some considerable public interest particularly in Labrador City but also throughout the province as a whole. It is one of the largest operations we have. ~R. nA'•.'E: I will take the honourable Leader ot th~ Opporlition's 4190

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 IB-2 question as notice and go into a statement later. CAPT. E.W. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon I asked the question of the honourable Minister of Municipal Affairs. Unfortunately, he is not in his seat this afternoon but I feel duty bound to direct that same question now to the honourable Minister for Transportation and Communications. The question is this, "Has he had any representation from the council at Change Islands regarding the road conditions there?". I understand that the bus has not been able to operate for the past two days, busing school children back and forth.

HON. DR. T.C. FARRELL: (MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATIONS): Mr. Speaker, do you mean, Sir, did I receive any representation in the past two or three day~? CAPT. WINSOR: Yes. DR. FARRELL: Not to me personally directed. CAPT. WINSOR: Sir, the department? A supplementary question. Has the Department of Transportation and Communications had any correspondence or discussion from the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing on this matter? DR. FARRELL: Mr. Speaker, in answer to that question; this may be so, Sir, and I will ask to have it tabled and I will get a report on it. MR. MARTIN: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the honourable Minister of Health. There are at the moment rumors circulating in my district to the effect that the nur~ing station at Forteau is about to he closed down. T wonder if the honourable minister can inform the House if there is any shred of truth to that? HON. DR. A.T. ROWE: (~INISTER OF HEALTH): Mr. Speaker, I have no knowledge of this information but I will inform the member for Labrador South as soon as I can contact the officals involved. I will advise him: On motion that the House go into Committee of the Whole

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 IB-3 on Supply. Mr. Speaker left the Chair. MR. CHAIRMAN: Order pl~ase. When the committee rose at eleven last evening the honourable the Leader of the Opposition had the floor. MR. ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was saying a few words about bus transportation or transportation of school children as it is called in the estimates. I was saying that the problem with the policy that the government have now adopted, a legacy from the gentleman of St.

John's North,from his short but altogether disasterous tenure of the ministership, the problem has been caused because the policy does not take into account the realities of the situation. To recapitulate very briefly, Mr. Chaiman; the situation is in reality that tenders are called for a given bus service. One or more people tender on it. There :may be cases where nobody tenders and then a tender in the normal course would be awa-rded. That is fine. That is what always happened over the years.

It happened time and time again and the costs went up and the Minister of Finance, whoever he was,had gray hair and the Treasury Board people had gray hair because the Minister of Education would come in and he would say, "I have got to have another million or another million and a-half or another $826,412.08 for bus transportation." People would throw their hands in the air and say, "Why?" Can you not cut it down?" He would say, "Yes, we can cut it down by cutting out bus routes," It would be agreed that that could not be done. Then he would say, "Well, tenders. have been called and this is what it would cost".

So, the governme:,~· felt that they had no choice except to pay that bill. Now, ~e have a different policy whereby no longer is it a matter of calling for tenders for the service and then deciding the best tender and usually of course the lowest tender, giving in to that and then paying the bill. Rather it is 'a mat'ter of saying that there is a given amount of money, we will buy service 4192

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 IB-4 with that. The only problem with that, Mr. Chairman, is that it does not work. It has not worked. We have now had a full year of this system. The fears which we expressed a year past have been borne out in full measure. It just does not work. I am most familiar of course with the situation in my own constituency. I probably know more about that than I do about other districts.

The honourable gentleman from Port de Grave who,in private life,when he is not a member of the House,is among other things an operator of a school bus, he has a contract,as he told us last evening,from a school board. He has confirmed what I said. The problem is going to become more acute because last year, at least in White Bay North,the two bus routes that are being operated in the St. Anthony area, one within St. Anthony and the other North of St. Anthony, the communities feeding in there, are both integrated. There is one Pentecostal bus system centered around their school at St. Lunaire.

Last year the board was in a situation where operators had contracts and fixed prices. This year the contracts have expired, tenders will be called. Now, what is going to happen, Mr. Chairman? I would like the minister to answer this if he would,please. What is going to happen if the board call tenders, as they will? The Vineland Board based at St. Anthony call tenders for these services and in comes one or more bids. Let us assume there is more than one but certainly arms-length tenders. No question of anythinr, wrong or improper and I do not think that there ever has been any of that, not to my knowledge.

I am quite certain about the St. Anthony area. In come tenders and when the amount is added up it is far more than is available under this formuln. The amount under the formula last year was $140,000 In round flP.11rr11. Tl1At is going up ten dollarl'I per a turlen t. Tl1t-re 11rr. wlint7 1'-'nvhe n t!lousnnd to twelve hundred 4193

April 10 • 1973 Tape 1132 IB-5 students in that area. Let us call it fifteen hundred, Let us say that it is going up · $15,000, So, let us say roughly $155.000 to the Vineland Integrated School.Board. What happens if they cannot get people to perform the services within the price that they have? It is easy to say that they should. If they do, well and good. Part of the problem of course is that people know $155,000 is available, They know it is so much per student. Multiply it by the number of students and the minimum will become the maximum. I am sorry, the maximum will become the minimum.

What is happening there is exactly what the Minister of Education and the Minister of Finance told us last night would happen if they gave out figures on how much was in for school teachers salary increases, What is going to happen? What are the board going to dof The board hav~ no resources of their own. It is all very well to say that they should raise money but people in the area are now paying a s·chool assessment of five dollars per month.

It is more of a burden for them than a comparable amount would be for many other people in this province bacause the average incomes are lower and many people are financially not so well off, Maybe the people who work for IGA are well off, They are being paid provincial scales but the fishermen and other people in the area are certainly not well off. So, what are the board going to do? I could repeat this. I think it is probably true in Labrador South ar.d in St. Barbe North and in many other parts of the province,because the formula does not take into account the realities.

It does not take into account what is actually happening. I make no apology for going over this again. I think it is the very heart of it, Last year we skated on what we had. As far as I know,there were no crisis. In white Bay North what happened is that the maintenance of the huses is down. The buses that now run into the schools are a shamble ,

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 IB-6 The windows are broken, The se~ts are ripped. I am told there is supposed to be a radio on those buses in case of being stuck in a storm. I am told there is none. That is not the fault of the operators. The operators, as the gentleman from Port de Grave told us last night and we all agree on this, it is good common sense, are not going to run at a loss. They are not. They cannot. If they are not being paid an adequate sun, then what choice have they got?

This year they have let their equipment go down because they are locked into a contract and so forth,bi.1t next year they are going to put in a price that will guarantee them an adequate return or they will not take the business. If they do not take the business, who is going to do it? Is the School board going to do it? That is - fine but can the school board do this service any more cheaply than private operators? If so, I am all for it but I must say; if that can be done, why have not school boards done it all over Newfoundland? Maybe some school boards do operate their own buses.

The Pentecostal people I know at St. Lunaire own and operate the buses but most school boards in Newfoundland have gone through the tender process. So, it is a real problem. I think we may face the crunch this year on school buses. We got away with it last year. I wonder if the minister could explain what position he will take if this does happen? It is hynothetical but I do not think it is very hypothetical. I wonder if he would undertake to review the entire system? I said hefore that I think that there are only two acceptable alternatives, one of wh:lch I would recommend and the other which I do not.

The one which I do not recommend is that the government operate all the buses either directly or through the school board. I think that that woulcl le11d to ballooning costs and would lead to ndmf.nlAtratlvc- rh:ao,i hut ft could he done. The ·on" wll I ,·Ii I ,lo recommr.nd iH the one which was ln effect

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 for years, namely a bus route is approved, standards are •et down of how many children and what· distances and so forth and a bus route is approved by some offical within the minister's department. Then tenders are called. Maybe they should be called province-wide and not just in one area. If somebody from Gander wants t~ bid on a tender to carry students in IB-7 Goose Bay, he should have the right to do so, move in and become a corporate citizen of that area. The~e is nothing wrong there, nothing wrong at all.

When the tenders are called Rnd it is arms-length tendering and fair and all that, everything done proper and according to "Hoyle", then the lowest tender gets the bid and the government pay that price. That is what was always done. Now .we have a completely ~rtifical system bearing no relationship to reality.. Some boards I suspect make money on school buses. I suspect they do not need, they do not have to spend the amount that the government give them on this formula because they may have a lot of students within a relatively small area.

Other boards such as the Vineland Board of White Bay North and the board in the Straits of Belle Isle, board so called, the integrated board there, I suspect lose money because they happen to have relatively small numbers of students spread out over relatively large areas- tither. The minister or his predecessor pointed out last night the cost per student in the St. Barbe Integrated School Board Area apparently is the lowest in Newfoundland. That just shows in my view how thinly spread out the resources are. They do not have the money to put out. We are seeing it in bad buses, in deterioratin~ equipment.

You can get away with that for a year or so. If Your Honour has a house, he can get away with ~ year or two without maintaining it, :twill not ahow,but 1 n th!! 1U1cond year or the tht rr1 yeiu nr the forth ve11r or the ff rth 4196

April 10, 1973 Tape 1132 IB-8 year the lack of maintenance will begin to show. It will begin to show clearly. I am afraid that that is what is happening with our school buses now. I am not saying that we will have any accidents. I do not think it will lead to that. It will lead to many students being miserable, to travelling in needlessly llllCOmfortable conditions. Busing is an emotional subject. There are children in White Bay North being brought thirty miles to school. That is an hour and a-half,on fourteenth class dirt roads.

It is a long time to bring chjldren to school, an hour and a.half over in the mornings and an hour and a-half back. To get them to school at eight thirty or nine, it means that the parents get up at six, the children get up a six. By the time that they have their breakfast and get on the hus and get carried over to St.

Anthony and get into school - I suppose there are arguments pro and con and I do not propose to get into them but the point is that in human terms this system is having its toll. · I know of cases where children get quite sick travelling on the buses because of the combination of bad .roads and worse buses. The roads are a bigger problem. 4197

April 10, 1973, Tape 1133, Page 1 -- apb We are not talking about roads. Not much can be done about them I suppose,in the short term anyway. It would take millions to :improve the roads. The bussing policy is wronti;. We are going to have to pay the cost and the cost is going up each year. It has ~one up ten percent this year. I think the money could be better distributed. I think the policy introduced last year was wrong, We said at the time it was wrong and the minister made some modifications (or the then minister) which were improvements but it is still wrong and I think it has been shown so in practice.

All I can do is to ask the minister if he will reconsi<ler i~ or,if he will ~ot reconsider it, perhaps he could offer some defence to the policy, because I for one have been unable to understand it. I think that is the experience of those of us who have talked to the school boards and the people who had to try to make this policy work. ~- OTTENREWER: Mr.

Chairman, to review briefly some of the points I made last night and to COl!ll'lent on the matters raised by the honourable the Leader of the Opposition, when this policy was introduced last year it was forecast by a number of honourable members that it would be impossible or it would lead to catastrophe and disaster financially. (I do not mean in terms of loss of life) That has not been the case. I certainly do not deny that some school boards have had difficulties in financing under this arrangement.

Some school boards, certainly the ' one to which the Leader of the Opposition referred, that is among them, have had difficulties. Of course, that and other school boards have financia~ difficulties, not only in the bus transportation service but in general as the government does have financial difficulties as well. However, tt is our opinion ancl the opinion of th<' Department of frlurntlon that the ten ~erc~nt incrrnAP ~hnulrl, w~ll, will ohvinuA1y allt-vl11t .. the ituation but 11hn1~llf nlles.,l~tes 1t 111 NUl"h A m11nnC!r 1 ·, 98

April 10, 1973, Tape 1133, Page 2 -- apb whereby those school boards which were having such serious difficulties will not be in anything · close to that position. We have an official in the Department of Education whose baA1c reAponsihility is school bus transportation. He visits and meets with bonrds and is more or less at thejr service and disposal in terms of guidin~ them and passing along the infomation and knowledRe that he has. Certainly the department would be very pleased to send him to St.

Anthony to discuss with the school board their overall transportation problems, bearing in mind the ten percent increase which is forecast in these estimates. The other matter I wish to refer to and this was mentioned by a few honourable members last ni~ht when thev asked whether the formula could in ·fact be improved and they mentioned a nurnber of th:ln~s which should be brought into it: ft.s honourable members know, it is distance and then roads paved or unpaved. As far as I can see, the only additional factor one could put in would be a division of unpaved roads into classes (

a) and (

b) bearing in mind that some are in worse condition that others, operatin~ costs would be hiiher. This is certainly something we will look into and see if it is feasible or practical to do it. ~eanwhile, all I can say is that from our examination of the situation,(the Department of Education) there should be no insurmountable difficult:les next year. Obviously, if any board or boards because of very particular circumstances have very particular problems, then certainly we shall be ilad to meet with them and work out an acceptable solution. MR. F.B.ROWE: ¥r. Chairman, I would like to make a su~gestion if I may.

In spite of this ten dollar increase on a per capita basis or per student basis the minister mentioned, I am con~inced• havin~ talked to members of school hoards,that there will be certain school boards that will still experience a tremendous amount of difficulty this year in financin~ their school bus o·pertaion.

April 10, 1973, Tape 1133, Page 3 --·apb On the other hand, Sir, I am convinced in looking at the situation with respect to some school board areas, that they will actually make money, they will have money left over as a result of the use of this formula. The problem is the formula itself, because it only takes distance and pavement or no pavement into consideration, I will admit and I thank the administration for thi• increase. However, I have to point out that there are some school boards that will still not have enough money

whereas there is a distinct possibility that other school boards will have money they will get through this formula. They will have more money than will actually be spent on school bus operatione and they can use this money to spend in some other sort of area,as mentioned by the member for Port de C.rave last niRht. He mentioned that some school boards at the present time are spending school bus money in other areas of school board expenditures. here is a suggest·ion that I would like to make.

Because of the fact that we have areas that will not have enou~h money and areas that will have more than enou~h money for school bus transportation, (and I can give examples of that but I do not want to mention any names of school boards or names of communities here) I would suggest that the minister give some consideration to working in a plus or minus ten or fifteen percent leaway in the formula.

In other words, once the formula has been worked out and the amount has been worked out for an individual school board, if it works out to fifty thousand dollars say, if you have a built-in i,lus or minus,say ten percent or fifteen percent or it may even be necessary to be twenty percent but then that is a forty percent difference Probably a plus or minus ten percent would be satisfactory, 'Ihat means that some school boards instead of getting the fifty thousand dollars,if they are in an area where you have dirt, narrow, hilly roads that are closed a lot of the winter because of the inefficiency of the snow clearing operations, where you have tremendous water holes in the spring and in the fall, where you have a lo't' of. wash-outs, where the maintenance is high 1200

Aprn lO, 1973, Tape 1133, Page 4 -- apb because of the condition of the roads, where the weather is severe, where you have a scattered population, that school board, instead of gettinp; the fifty thousand dollars,would probably get fifty-five thousand dollars because it is recognized by the officials of the department that this is n very poor area but~ very expensive area for operating school buses.

On the other hand, if you have an area like in around the Gander Area,where you have a good snow-clearing operation, where you do not have the high winds that you would get on the Northwest Coas~for instance, with the snow blowing off the Straits, where you have a lot of pavement, where you have a fairly concentrated population, that school board, instead of getting the fifty thousand dollars according to the formula, the officials of the department may come to the conclusion; "Well this school board can quite adequately r,et along with forty-five thousand dollars." There is a difference of ten thousand dollars that is being manipulated in such a way that these areas that have severe conditions can r,et a little bit extra.

Probably the percentage could be fifteen percent difference, probably the percentage could be a twenty percent plus or minus thing build-in to the formula. I would like to hand that out as a suggestion to the minister because I am convinced that there are school bus areas (if I may call them that) that will not have enough money this year, in spite of the increase of ten dollars per student, and there will 1 • school bus areas that will have more than the money that they will be spendinr: on school bus operations. ~Ir.

Chairman, I hand that out as a suggeRtion to the committee and I would ask the minister if his department would r,ive this some serious considerat1on because it makes no difference in the vote. The money is there in the vote, it is the actual distribution of money that will be handled in a different manner. I think this would aid some school bus areas tremendously in the coming year.

April 10, 1973. Tape ll33, Page 5 -- apb MP • OTTENHEI!-'ER: I will take note of the suggestion and have its implications looked into. It certainly sounds good~ Its implications obviously, we will have to work out. We will certainly look into it. MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall 03-06 carry? t-lR. OTTENHE™ER: Mr.

Chairman, as honourable members know, this is the amount which has been made available for capital construction during the past few years and I think honourable members will recall as well gov~rnments' policy to implement or develop,in consultation with those responsible for building schools, to develop and :Implement a long-term financing progrannne. I think this is certainly necessary for the school !><'ards and the nenominational Educational CO!llmittees. I think in the long run, well,obviously, they and others would like to see this $8 million increased.

I think the system of lon~-term financing is even more benificial than,let us say, an extra million or a half million or whatever happens to be on a per annum basis. ML F.B.ROWE: ~r. Chairman, it is obviously useless and futile for me to get up and say more about the small amount of this vote compared to what is needed in the province. I can only point out the fact that the Denominational Educational Committees,during the sutn1:1er announced the fact that they needed $70 million for approximately two thousand new classrooms for the schools this year.

At the time, I thought that this two thousand dollars was somewhat of a modest request on the ·part of thr Denominational Educational Committee. I am sure that the need is much greater and in fact the Den0t11inational F.ducational Committees realize the financial constraints imposed upon them by r,overnment,because of their financial problems,as stated by the minister (alleged financial problems,as stated by the minister). I thought that this was a very reasonable reauest. However, Sir, this seventy thousand dollars they needed 4202

April 10, 1973, Tape 1133, Page 6 - apb up to 1975, so that is over the next two and a-half to three years the Denominational Educational Committees claimed that they needed seventy thousand dollars to carry out the capital pro1ects that they wanted to carry out. AN HON. !'F.?'JlETI: $ 70 million. MR. F.B.ROWE: ------~- - $70 million, I mean. That works out on an average of $23 million per year and we see only $8 million in there which represents one-third of the total amount needed by the school boards.

I have to admit of course (Am I correct here) that there is $11 million in there for capital construction this year through DREE, I am assuming that, That $11 million is that outside the stated need of the Denominational Educational Committees? In other words, when the Denominational Educational Committees stated that they needed the $70 million, where they excludinP, any DREE construction or where they includinp, any DREE construction? Could the minister just •.• ~. OTTF.Nl1F.I1'4'F.R: -----·--------- They did not refer to DREE a.t all 1 but I would certainly imply that they were thinking of the total needs.

What needs are filled through DREF. are part of the total needs. That would be what I would infer. }'R~_.'ROt-.'y._:_ What we are really sayinp. here is; of the $23 million- ( we can say thanks to the federal governrnentJ th~y are goinp, to be getting $19 million th:f.s year, that is $11 million from DFF.E and S8 million from the provincial government for capital exoenditures. Is that correct? It is still $3 million short of what the modest stated sum was that was made by the Denominational Educational Committees.

The most serious aspect of this whole thing,as far as I am concerned,is the financial whirlpool that the boards of education find themselves in. We all know what the situation is -with respect to a whirlpool: You ~et stuck in the centre of it and there is hardly any way out of it at all. What I mean by the financial whirl­ pool as far as the boards of education are concerned, is the example 4203

April 10, 1973 1 Tape 1133, Pa~e 7 -- apb as pointed out by the Roman Catholic School Board here in St. John's. The Roman Catholic School Board is $7 million in debt. That is just one school board in our province. It is $1 million less in debt than the total grant. What we are saying here really, Sir, is that if we added up the total debt of the school boards of this whole province, even the capital grant to the school boards that is passed out by this administration now does not even go close to covering the debt.

This is why I tried to make an argument earlier in this session~ that the $24 million that was coming to the provincial government should be used for purposes of education in order to write off the debts of the school boards so that they could use the money for the stated purpose and that is the capital construction,instead of havin~ to use that money or a fair sum of it for servicing the debt.

I believe, I am not an expert in bankin~ but I understand that if you have a $7 million debt~ this means approxi~ately one hundred thousand dollars per year has to ~o toward the servicin~ of that debt, year after year.after year,after year .• In ten years that is $1 million. A ten year debt is $1 million for the servicing of that debt. Sir, that is an extremely great sum of money. 4204

April 10, 1973 Tape 1134 (afternoon) PK - 1 Now I suggest, Sir, that we have to try and do something to get the school boards out of this whirlpool of financial trouble that they find themselves in. I do not know what the answer is but I would sur,geat that the first ste-p is working out some way to liherate,to liquidate the dehts that the school boards have at the present time. The quicker we can make use of some federal money that is coming to this province for that purpose the better off the school boards in this province, the better off the children going to school will be.

Now, Sir, I w~lcome the statement made by the Education Minister that the government will he working out some sort of a system of long term financing. When did the minister sugpest that this would actually start? Is it this coming year? MP. OTTFNPfP'r'P: This presc>nt year •. MR. ROWF. F.B. This present year lonp, term financinr. schemes would have heen worked out with the hoards. Sir, I sugp;est and I have to be repetitious, hut T sup.rest that the minister go one step further and put a complete freeze on the establishment of any further school tax authorities in this province.

I stated yesterday and the day hefore and on othc>r occasions in this f1ouse and I would like to get this strair.ht, Sir, hecause I heard a couple of newscasts last nipht that concerned me just a little bit because it kind of left the impression that I said that school tax authorities were inefficient and stupid and unfair and inequitable and all this sort of thing. At'. Pml. }'F'HIFR • Tnaud1hle. 'TR. Rnl"f_. _ F. R. Yes. Rut I am just going to clarify that.

The honourable Minister of Finance is always ready to try and lead me up the garden path.He almost caught me the other day on a suggestion 1 that I might he calling for strikes by teachers for some reason or another, ~ut he did not quite manage. Rut, Sir, the point that I am trying_ to make is that I recor.nize the extremely valuahle service that memhers of school tax authorities are providing in this province. They are dedicated r.entlrrncn. ThPy arC' hare! worl·ing gentlemrn. Thc>y :trf' trying to provide 4205

April 10, 1973 Tape 1134 (afternoon) PK - 2 an educational service to this province. I am certainly not calling the individual memhers oE the school tax authorities stupid, unfair, inequitable, cumbersome or anything else. It is the whole school tax authfrity concept that I am criticizing and that I am calling cumbersome, inequitahle, unfair, stupid and, Sir, I have no hesitation in say that in spite of the fact that it was the previous administration,! believe it was,while they were in office that the school tax authorities started to be set up. I am still a Liberal.

We still sit over here on this side of the House. 1 have no hesitation in saying that if this school tax authority keeps going the way it has,we are going to have massive duplication and we are going to be cutting into the revenue collected.

Sir, I ask the minister very seriously to put a freeze on the estahlishment of any school tax authorities in this province immediately and over the next year phase.out any existing school tax authorities that are operating in this province at the present time and over the next year while they are phasing out those school tax authorities set up one of two things, either a provincial school tax authority with one office. with one administration, one collection system or better still make the authorities put a division in the Department of Education that would be responsible for collecting revenue for educational purposes in this province.

Because, Sir. as long as we continue on with school tax authorities we do have this duplication. We have ten per cent or twelve per cent of the money collected going towards the administration of these school tax authorities. If you have a dozen of those or fifteen or thirty of those you can see where the money' is ~oin~. ReAides that, Sir, school tax authorities are controversial. lt is difficult to collect money in the first place.

It has been a very troublesome thing anywhere it has been aet up, I maintain that it is inefficient, it is cumbersome, it is stupid if we are ~oing to branch out into ttirty or forty of these schopl tax authorities all over the province. I cannot find adjectives enough to describe the inefficiency of continuing to have school tax authorities continuing to work in this particular province. ~?Ob' ~-

April 10, 1973 Tape 1134 (afternoon) PK - 3 So, Sir, I would like for the minister to relate to the fact this whole business of phasing out school tax authorities, putting a freeze on them and having government made responsible wholly and soley for the collection of taxes or the collection of revenue for school hoard purposes. I would like for the minister to give the House some indication of what the school boards actually owe in this province and how much it is costinp, per year to service the debts of the school boards. I do not know if the minister has the information readily at hand.

I have been trying to p,et the information from the Denominational Educational Committees. I got scattered information hut not enouP,h to put the full picture together. But, Sir, if you can ~ive this committee some indication of what the total debt of the school hoards is. how much it is costing, the province.in other words, to maintain this debt. Sir. I am convinced that this debt should be wiped out one way or the other and we can have this lonp. term financing.Then you would see an awful lot more capital construction of schools goinp, on in this province.

I guess it ii:i too late to mention it now, Sir, hut I am sure that the construction of these new DFF.F. schools is going to cause headaches in the final analysis hecFuse the operating grants are insufficient in order to operate these schools - but that particular

section has gone through now. !AR. 'IARTIN: Just a few words, Mr. Chairman: We heard so much when this present administration wereenrleavouring to get themselves el!:'cted, we, heard so much about planning and priorities and the necessity of putting the priorities in the rirht place. It is rather perplexing to look at the way that education is being treated because one would have assumed that education would automatically have the highest priority of all. If this budget shows anything at all, it shows the importance of education due to the fact that we are spendin!!; more money on that than anything else.

Also, the amoun~ of money nvn11."llilc- 1A so woc-ful ly 1nncl<'q11ate. I ,_.nuld certa1nly ar:rec> most wltnli•l11•nrt,•rlly wftlt my frlC'n<I from ~t. P..,rh(' North thnr th1A whole>

April 10, 1973 Tape 1134 (afternoon) PK - 4 matter of raising of revenues for education must be looked at in entirely a new light. The whole concept of school tax authorities must be done away with. It is another way for a provincial government, any 'provincial govemment,to renege on its responsibilities to provide the revenues. I think everybody will understand that education is important enough that if taxes have to be raised.then they have to be raised.

Whether it is raised through a school tax authority or private subscription or whether it is raised through the Department of Finance or whatever other means,everybody recognizes that we must have more money for education,and it is time to stop beating around the bush and get on with the business.

I think, Sir, that we must not dismiss this idea too quickly about how we have to go around raising revenues and I believe if this administration were to impose another · small tax on the general public, right across the board,I do not believe that anybody would complain . . too loudly if everyone knew that it was going to be used for the purposes of education. HON. A~PRY: (MINISTER OF SOCIAL ASSISTANCE): Mr. Chairnan, if I rnay· just have one or two words. I have just sat here being sort of amused, and I listen to the honourable member here talk about school taxes.

I throw myself back about four years in memorywhen I sat there and not junior but senior over here talking about imposing school taxes , how we were going to get the money. I j.ust want to say this that I certainly wish that the honourable the memher for St. Barbe North had been "here with us at that time when the great conversation, the great ~ap.~a Charta of education wae being drawn from the back benches here three or four years ago. You just look back and things have chanp.ed and still they remain so different, not the same. MR. CROSBIE: Thank you, ~r. Chaiman, a very apt re.mark.

Fred .1unior is attacking Fred senior ferociously here today,' ' by turning his back on the school tax authority,that magnificent innovation instituted during the rei~n of King Fred 1, We have not come to the reign of King Fred II yet. 4203

April 10, 1973 Tape _1134 (afternoon) PK - 5 Mr. Chairman, I only want to make a few comments. The honourable gentleman for St. Barbe North has such tender sensibilities for the deht incurred hy one of the Avalon school boards here, it has $7 million deht. The honourable gentleman wants to see that debt is done away with. It is a shocking thing for that school board to have a debt, just because it built schools and spent moneY, now it has a debt. Tt is a shocking thing for that school hoard to have a debt but it is nothing shocking about the province having a debt. This is what amazes me and it confuses me.

Fere it is in exhibit oue, the total debt of the province .- March 31. 1973. Direct ~761 million, crown corporations $56.5 million, guaranteed borrowing $327 million . total Sl,144,000 . last year it was ~1,026,000. Rut the honourahle gentleman is not concerned and he is not worried and his sensihilities are not aroused or his fears or anxieties are not aroused by this deht that the province has. But if a school hoard has a debt. hy Gc>orp;e we have to do something about it.

Wipe it outJ Now these were dehts incurred by that school board and others during the past twenty-thrc>e years not just in the last twelve months. hecause of a system that we had in effect in the province of financing school construction and the test of it. That is a prohlem that they have. It is so easy to sit opposite with all the solutions. What is the °llonourahle gentleman doinr,. ~1r. Cl,airman? 1-le wants to do away with the school tax authorities, aholish them.

Rtamp them out, eliminate thc>m, ~uillotine them, assassinate them, they are stupid, they are ridiculous, they are jejune, they are silly, they are foppery, they are nonsensical. HR. Rnt,'E . F. P.: nn a point of order, ~r. Chairman. ~ just for the record want to point out that it is the honourable the ~finister of Finance who is uRinr. these ad1ectives and it was not the honourahle the mefTll,er for St. P.arhe North who usC'd these words. The nc>xt thinp:, I w111 he quoted as sayin~ this. A•) 0 ~. 'i..., J

April 10, 1973 Tape 1134 (afternoon) Pk - 6 MR. CROSBIE: Well, all right, then perhaps you did not use all those words but it is the same effect; it is silly to have the school tax authorities, do away with them. The member for Labrador South he is up too, he is juat as irreaponsihle as the member for St. Barbe North. He wants them done away with. They are silly: they are nutty, they are tutti-frutti, they are footless, they are fruitless, they are expensive, they are inefficient, they are barbarous, they are degrading, they are degenerate.

We can think up a whole lot of things that the school tax authorities are. So these honourable gentleman, Mr. Chairman, what is there answer to the public? What they are urging the government to do is to put up the income tax. When we put the income tax up one per cent,that will brin~ us in some $900.000. That $gon,ooo is going to go nowhere. Tossed into the thirsty, hungry, grasping maw of the educational system of this province,that will go nowhere. So ~ne per cent of the personal income tax, not even in it. If we are going to do away with the school tax authorities we will have to do hetter than that.

He will have to up it another per cent. That will give us $1.8 million. That is not going to be enough. Fine? We will put her up five per cent. That is $4. 5 million. Now we are getting somewhere near what we will need. But $4.5 million will not do it. So that is only a five per cent increase in the personal income tax. Well, we will have to put up the S.S.A. tax. We will put that from seven per cent to ei~ht per cent. What will that do for us? That will bring in nn additional $8 million. That is all that will hrinr, in,another ~8 million.

Will that satisfy the demands for education, $8 million plus $4.5 million is $12.5 millionl That is what we will get this year if we put them both up. That is not enough. What else? Let us put up the p,asoline tax. It is already the highest in Canada, but let us put that up another cent a gallon. That may get us another, I for~et the exact: figure, $700 ,ono or SBOO,onn, a drop in the bucket. Jt is no good puttinp up the 421.0

April 10, 1973 Tape 1134 (afternoon) PK - 7 gasoline tax one cent, let us knock her up ten cents, bring in something decent for the purpoRes of education; Still that is not enough. Well,let uR helly up the corporation tax. The honoura~le gentlemen opposite when in opposition do not think much of corporations. They will be all for that. ~owe will put up the corporation tax. What will that bring us in here in Newfoundland when we do that? One per cent on the corporation tax, that might get us - I forget the exact figure. $800,000 to $1 million. One per cent is no good. We will have to drive her up five per cent.

Well then we will not attract any companies here, the ones that are here w:f.11 want to leave if they can do it. But that is all right. Now we have $20 million near abouts. And $20 million is the amount the educational hudpet has gone up thiR year. The estimates of the Department of Education are up s2n million this year. So then the honourahle r,entleMan Rlides on to the favour suhject of the honourahle myopic r,entleman opposite, the $24 million that we are suppose to have ~otten or hopin~ to get this year,increased tax equalization. They say that should be ~one. That should p.o into education.

Well, it has p;one into education. If it is going to he $24 millior:, you can say that s2n million of that has pone into education because the education estimates are up $20 million. And who knows how much more we will need during the year. So that is no solution. ~o I suggest. 4211

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NM - 1 MR, CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, what we all need to be concerned about is where we are going to get the revenue from. No matter w~o is in power, where are we goi~g to get the revenue from to carry the province on at all? Whether it is education, health, welfare and the rest of it, where is it going to come from next year? Perhaps we will get another boost from the tax equalization next year.

But when the honourable gentleman talks about doing away with school tax authorities and this can be done easily and is sensible and we can replace it by increasing one of our other taxes, I would like to know which one. If we increase all our other taxes for that purpose,where do we get the additional revenue we are going to need next year for all of the other services we are involved in and what services do we cut out? Now that is the position the province is in. I know, Mr. Chairman, it is not the worry of the opposition. They are not responsible and we are.

We have to grasp with the problem and they are making these little suggestions which will look perhaps good in the paper. The honourable gentleman made a mistake yesterday. He got a couple of phone calls today from irrate members of school tax authorities. "What are you doin~,calling us stupid and ignorant?" The honourable gentleman got dusted off this morning because when he spoke this afternoon he wanted to - MR. F. ROWE:· Mr. Chairman, I do not know if the honourable Minister of Finance is serious but that is a complete untruth. He is lying through his teeth. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman.

I l:now the honourable gentleman is upset and he does not mean that, so I will say all right, I agree. Nobody contacted the honourable gentleman. MR. CHAIR.'-fAN: If the honourable Minister of Finance would permit. The honourable member for St. Barbe North has uttered a completely unparliamentary phrase and it calis for the strict 4212

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NM - 2 MR. CHAIRMAN: intervention of the Chair. The honourable member for St. Barbe - MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Chairman, a rose . is a rose by any other name and what the Minister of Finance is uttering there now is a complete falsehood and,I repeat,lie and is without any substance or substantiation whatsoever,and I refuse to withdraw it, You ask the honourable Minister of Finance. MR. ROBERTS: To a point of order, Mr. Chairman, my colleague from St. Barbe North has used an expression which we all know is unparliamentary.

I am quite sure he will withdraw it but I think first the Minister of Finance should be required to withdraw a statement he made with reference to my honourable friend,wbich is ~qually unparliamentary and equally untrue. The honourable Mnister 'of Finance made a flat statement that the gentleman from St. Barbe North had received some phone calls. My colleague says that is completely untrue. 1hen I think it is incumbent upon the Minister of Finance to withdraw his statment and I am quite au're my colleague will do as 'four Honour wishes and withdraw his statement. MR.

CROSBIE: No problem Your Honour, no problem, if the honourable gentleman says he did not get any calls, I accept that. MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Chairman, I withdraw - MR. CROSBIE: If the honourab.le gentleman did not get any calls,! am disappointed in him, But if he did not get any calls, Mr.

Chairman, do you know what happened, he read his own words and he tnew he was going to get calls if he did not fix that up because when he read this morning that he 11nlrl thc-y werr. 11tupl1I and this,that 11nd the other, he knew Ju,. w,u, i:ulnp, to ~:••• ,·111 lu and now thJ,1 nftr-rnoon hr. l• sayinr; that Lt 111 not the people on the uchool tnx authority that are stupid. Well.I am glad he di~ that.

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 MR. CROSBIE: He is a young man just starting in politics, destined for defeat in the next election if he does not mend his ways, Therefore, of course, we can forgive him for it. NM - l So just to end up, Mr. Chairman, all I want to do is point out that it is just not as simple as the honourable member for St. Barbe and the honourable member for Labrador South appear to think it is.

If we do not have the school tax authorities and heaven only knows they are a clumsy enough device and I am sure the minister is examing them and if they can be reformed in some way or made more effectiv .e, they can continue. Perhaps some day they must go, because they are too clumsy. But they are another revenue source and if they are done away with and we have to assign revenue from increasing the few taxes we have in this province, what do we do to meet all the other heavy expense for the country's upkeep? I think ·that should be kept in mind.

The matter is not as simple as honourable gentlemen want us or the public to believe. MR. ROBf.RTS: Mr. Chairman, not carried.I want to say a word or two. I have heard some performances from the Minister of Finance but rarely have I heard one where ne has distorted and twisted the facts as he has in this one. Let me deal first of all with what my friend and colleague said a number of times. He said the problem with school tax authoriti~s is that they are an inefficient way to collect money.

He may have used the ad_1ect1ve stupid, "they are a stupid way.' 1 The school tax authority syGtr.m is a stupid w~y to collect money. Th~ fa~t thnt 1t wnR offcre<l by the Lih~ral Ad11fnistr.1tion ~l_R_._llY~_P!'!..:.. Inaudible. ~m. llO!H'.llTS: I am sorry. I have not heard. r1r. Chnirm,1n,

April 10, 1973 Tape No, 1135 NM - 4 MR. ROBERTS: t have not heard the honourable r,entleman from St. John's Centre object to the fact Babb Construction are P,etting contracts without tender. I have not heard the honourable gentleman from St, John's Centre object to the fact the Premier's brother-in-law was hired for $20,000. I have not heard the honourable gentleman from St. John's Centre object to the fact that this administration are paying out $800,000 to George McLain. MR. ~RI'HY: Let us talk about Come Home Year. MR. ROJJRTS: Yes, I am all for it. \'fR, '!PT?PJlY: Who was in charge of that? '1R.

P.Ollt:RTS: Fred Rowe. '!R. Mll'RPHY: l:ho was responsible. - 'fr. Chairman ,do I have the floor? "fR • ~rr·r rr:Y: Yes sure,but tell us that. ~~ ROBERTS: I will tell the honourable gentleman anything he wants to know. I only wish I could make him understand. ~m. '.·!l:RPHY: Inauc.lihle. ~IR. ROBERT~: Now, tlr. Chairman, the ~anis ter of Finance got up and deliberately or otherwise,and I prefer to believe othPrwise, twisted and distorted and misrepresented the positior.. taken by rny friend from St.

Barbe ~orth which is, to repeat it, that the school tax authorities are a very inefficient, ineffective, etc., etc., (one could r,et a thesaurus and r,o throu~h it) way to collect money. Then the minister went on in his usual defeatist way and I have never seen a man, Mr. Chairman, in a year. in the twelve or fourteen months that man has been in office, come from bein~ so bir,h ar,d proud and so arrogar,t to being so willing to adqiit defeat. Next we will get an attack on Ottawa because Otta~a 1s not hallinr. him out. ~ly God, Mr. Chairman, do those men want Commission of Government?

Do they want Cornriission of Government in this province? That is what they seem to be saying. We did not he.1.r .mythinr,, 'Ir. <:hnirm.-in, a year ago,about tl-ae /, ;• 1 r: A.-.1.&t.l

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NM - S MR. ROBERTS: difficul~y of providing money for schools on capital account,when they were tryin~ to get elected. What did we hear then? •ive are going to give you everything you want." Th~y were flitting about in govemm,.nt helicopters. The honourable Minister of Finance has a short memory when it suits him. He has a long memory when it suits him. It is too bad he does not apply the same standards. Now let us look at the problem. The problem is one simply that more money must be put into education. That is what the gentleman from Labrador South was saying as well. MR.

CROSBIE: Inaudible. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, let the Minister of Finance be quiet for once in his life. Let him even be willing to admit that :he may just learn somethin~ by listeninr, to other members of the House. The arrogance .of the honourable gentlema~, let him be quiet. Mr, Chairman, let him be quiet. Order please. The honourable Leader of the Opposition has the right to be heard in silence. MR. ROBERTS: The honourable gentleman should listen even if he cannot learn. The point being made by the gentleman from St.

Barbe North and the gentleman from Labrador South is a very sound one, The honourable gentleman talks of wasting time. He got up and went back. I wonder why he did not blame us for the fact that in 1949 the budget on education was only $3 million and in 1q3-2, Mr. Chairman, school teachers' enlaries were cut in half, probably by a Liberal Administration or elae by the Tories. I am not sure, The government changed in that year. ~.aybe I am at fault ·for that too. Now, Mr. Chairman, as we were saying, if the honourable gentleman from St.

John's Centre has nothing to add to the debate,he would be wise not to try to subtract from it. The point is, Mr. Chairman, that we have ~ot to _put more 421·5

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 HM - 6 MR. ROBERTS: money in education in Newfoundland. True, we have to put more money into other things as well. We are talking about education. We are talking about capital grants for schools and the question is from where that money must come. The administration opposite, as part of their concerted attack, their campaign to pretend that all of the ills of Newfoundland can be cured if only Ottawa will give us more money, snibbling,weak-kneed,begging attitude that they have, and they pretend they are big men about it. They have no more plans than children do.

We will come to that in due course. The crowd opposite, Mr. Chairman, have no answer. What we are saying is that the present system we authorized it and now we are saying it is wrong. We tried it and it does not work. The present system does not work. It is unfair, ~t is inequitable and in that sense it is stupid. It is a stupid system. The people running it are not stupid. Fobody said they were. The Minister of Finance is deliberately trying to distort because he knows what asses the government are making of themselves in this matter. The problem carries with it the solution.

The problem is that the tax burden in this province is inequitably distributed. We use in Newfoundland the most regressive forms of taxation - the sales tax, gasoline tax. The gasoline tax might not be as regressive because it is related to one's consumption. The sales tax, which falls alike on rich and poor but hits the poor far more, The school tax assessments, whatever they are called, whether they be assessments as the boards have now or school taxes in the areas where there are school tax authorities,all of them raised for c~pital account, for the $8 million that is being spent on capital account.

Apdl 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NM - 7 MR. ROBERTS: By law, Mr. Chairman, the money can only go for that purpose or for certain very limited specific purpo ea. The present Mini~ter of Justice helped draft the law. He was the Minister of Justice at the time and if one checks Hansard one will find hie eloquent explanation of it, which certainly convinced me at the time to vote for it. I was young and impreasionable in those days. Mr. Chairman, the problem carries with it the solution. The solution is - how can we distribute the burden of taxation in this province?

It is all very well to say that we are being tender because the Roman Catholic School Board of St. John's have a debt. So does every school board in the province,! would assume, and the Minister of Finance aays,'Oh well, let them have it, not us." It is all the · same. A school board in this province, Mr. Chairman, represents the public. It may not be legally the government of this province. I do not even know if it is morally the government of this province, but certainly the government of this province would not allow a school board to go under. That has happened time and time again.

It has h~ppened in this administration, the government have bailed out school boards. The question is where the tax burden should fall, We now use methods that make it fall very unfairly. The suggestion I would make is that the mini~try might consider setting up either a royal commission on taxation in this province or some other form of enquiry. I am not necessarily sold on royal commissions. some of them have laboured long and produced results which were not acceptable to the administration - they may be in time. My own thinking on taxation is quite simple. The income tax is by far the fairest tax ever devised.

It is not a popular tax, no tax is popular, but it hits the rich fnr hPavier than it hits 4218

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NH - 8 MR. ROBERTS: the poor and the honourable gentlemen opposite will point out that under the inflationary - I mean when the minister attacks Ottawa, as he has a number of times -"Money rolling out of its ears," I think is the phraae he. is using these days, his wordsmiths have crafted for him. He is right because the income tax works in an inflationary era ,such as we live in,to produce far more revenue. Well we have an income tax in Newfoundland. When the honourable gentlemen in this House, Mr.

Chairman, and when Your Honour yourself fills out his income tax form and sends it off to Ottawa this year, something like 30.5 per cent of the tax goes to Newfoundland, not on tax rental~, Mr. Chairman, not a tax rent at all ., that is a Newfoundland tax, levied under statute of this House bec~use we have the right under the constitution. [very province has the right to levy a direct tax. Now maybe we should abolish the school tax authorities, abolish them. They do not produce a lot of money.

Abolish assessments, whatever they produce in a year, $2 million, $3 million or $4 million is the whole kit and caboodle, $4 million,and wack five points on the income tax and then the fishermen in Labrador South would not have to pay as much as I would pay, making $20,000 a year, or the gentleman from Labrador lforth who makes $500 or $1,000 a week. We would pey more and so would the Minister of Finance and so would all honourable · gentlemen in this House,.

Sut surely we can afford it better than can many of my constituents who are living on socialassistance and living on unemployment insurance or catch as catch can, or many of the people living in Stephenville or out on that peninsula, Your Honour, those tn Your Honour's district. Maybe that -is a fairer tax. It iA not for me to sur,r,P.At, though I put it forth AA n Hllf".f'""tfon. Tt ,·.,n hr nttnc:J,..,,f, It cnn I,~ l<norfr,.,! ,t,,,,m. T

April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NM - 9 MR. ROBERTS: do not like to see taxes increase ·but I would like to see the tax burden laid fairly and equitably and in Newfoundland it is not and it is becoming less fair and more inequitable as time goes on. We now have in Newfoundland, Mr. Chairman, a class of people who are very wealthy, relatively speaking. If you look at the incoD1e tax statistics in this province .Your Honour, you will find that we have people who are well off. They are not paying their fair share,.they are not. The poorer people in this province are paying relatively far more than their fair share.

If you want to blame the Liberal Administration you can. because the system has developed over twenty-three years - not twenty-three years,I suppose it has developed over four hundred and twenty-three years. Maybe the time has come when we should have a long, hard 9 impartial look at our tax system. Ue have the right to levy direct taxes. We do ·1evy direct taxes, in income tax, sales tax, Perhaps we should look at them and just shift the burden. We cannot lighten the burden,Your Honour. Toe burden if anything will get heavier in Newfoundland.

We will have to put more money in than thi3 $8 million - The Minister of Education knows that and will I think quite readily admit it. The problem with that $8 million is that it is all spent now. It is ~oing to service debt. I do not imagine $1 million of that ~e million is ~oing to provide new facilities this year. I do not know if the minister has any figures or not, but it is a very small p~rt, The school boards have had to do tliat. That $8 million is only two or three years old. It used to be $4 million not so very lon9: ago and we have report • Is it nr.

Harren or om• other profe~sor at the univerRity.in •ducntion,did 11 report? Professor Fisher as well, It shows half the schools in Newfoundland should be condemned. ha1 f the bulldinr;s. 4220

• " t ·-· April 10, 1973 Tape No. 1135 NM - 10 MR. ROBERTS: I ·know schools are more than buildings but it ill difficult to use the modem methods in some o.f · the school buildings we have. I wish they were all like the schools in Labrador West but there we are lucky,we have the iron ore companies, for their 4221

Apr11 10, 1973 Tape 110. 1136 Page 1 - MllW own selfiah PU1"POe but genuinely have contributed ubatantially. Indeed I believe, if my memory serve  me, that the achool  in Labrador City are a private ystem. The high school at Labrador City ia a private chool because the company for their own PUl"Po•es - fair enough, ve will take advantage of that - are providing good schools. that is Labrador West's good fortune. Mr. Chairman, that is the point my colleague frOlll Labrador South is saying.and I think they deerve better from the Minister of Finance. He is obviously getting to him.

He has been making these personal attacks, silly, irrelevant tripe. Let him deal with the issues. I do not mind him dealing with them in his debating style, that is good. The iaaue is simply: Where should the }>urden of tuation lie? Of courae, we should be putting more in than $8 million. Every member of the Bouse knows that. Every member of the House would do it. Every member of the Houae knows the financial situation of the province, knows that our needa, let alone the demands of the people of the province, are far more than this province can afford.

We· did not hear that a year ago when the Progressive Conservative Party were raising expectations. Did you hear the &nibbling dribble that characterized the Budget Speech,and the minister made three or four speeches in this House. That is the issue. The issue is: Where should the burden of taxation lie? How should we get that $8 million? Where should it lie? Who -should bear it? We cannot lighten the total burden. Perhaps we are going to have to increase it. Obviously, we are going to have to try to get help from Ottawa. It i  ignificant, Mr.

Chairman, that we are providing $8 million this year out of our own resource  and ve are providing $11 million through DREE of which half is grant and half is loan. AN HON. HtlmER: (Inaudible). 4222

April 10, 1973 , Tape no. 1136 Page 2 MR. ROBERTS: I am sorry. Ia it a fifty/fifty grant loan? We are putting up out of our resources roughly $13 million this year. Ottawa is putting up $6 million. I am using round figures but I think the proportions are roughly correct. That is most significant. On current account - well it is not shown, it is no longer an university grant. The post-secondary education grant from Ottawa is very substantial. They chunked in the extra $24 million specifically linked to school taxes, Mr. Chairman, because in other provinces they have a system of municipal taxation.

Perhaps in Newfoundland,if we do not want an income tax, perhaps we should look at property taxation for school purposes. I am not reconnnending it. I think it may bear looking at. Certainly here in St. John's it is now going to fall on rich and poor alike. Some fellow living down on Flavin Street or Monroe Street will have to pay the same tax on a poll tax basis as will somebody living in Elizabeth Towers or in one of those $80,000 or $100,000 houses over here on the Logy Bay Road. They will each have to pay $10 or $20 a year, whatever it is. That is not very fair.

If you could afford to pay $100,000 or $150,000 for a house or even $50,000 for a house, surely you can afford to pay a little more towards the educational system than some person who is living on Monroe Street or even for that matter in a subsidized rental unit. That is the issue. I think that that is a real issue. It is one which the government of this province are going to have to deal with, whether the government be formed by the Progressive Conservative Party, by the Liberal Party or by any party. Nobody is going to try to pretend to the people that miracl.es can be worked.

That is what happened to the present crowd, Sir. They pretended that a year ago and now they are betng hoist on their own petard. Th@y will pay dearly for tlu,t. ·n,ay wl 11 la11rn that 11'10pl• can h• fooled onra. " ') ") ', 6. , .. {-,1 •.I

April 10. 1973 Tape no. 1136 Page 3 M Abrah- Lincoln eaid, ''You can fool all of the people eome of the tiM·and some of the people all of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the tie. 11 They are finding that it i  coming hou to roost now • That is why the Minister of Finance - I hope he will ay a few more word, I suspect be will - 1 getting so uptight and so angry and deliberately trying to distort ·the debate. The gentleaao froa Labrador South, with whom I have my diagreementa. and the gentleman from St.

Barbe Horth, with whom I am in perfect aaity with political matters and presumably family matters one of thoe days, if all goes well, th••• gentlemen put forth a problem. They offered a uggution, be it good or bad, instead they were scorned and abused and had their remarks twisted and distorted for cheap aeneationali  • I think we can expect better than that from the Finance Minieter. What about an impartial enquiry into not just education but the whole coat of taxation in this province. Let us ee who should bear more.

Are the wealthy people,the better~off peopl&, paying their fair hare of taxes in Newfoundland? Our income ta~ is now among the lowest in Canada. Manitoba baa higher. I think the only province  that are lower than W!I are Ontario and British Columbia, wealthy provinces, maybe Alberta. Well maybe it is undue. I am not putting forth - I looked at my income tu form this morning and in the form there 1a a table showing the provincial one. Ours is thirty point five, I believe or ia it thirty-six point five, I am not sure.

The point is that there are several provinces with higher income tax rates than ours: New Brunavick for one; Nova Scotia for another; Manitoba for another - three at least. No, there are at least three provinces. Hova Scotia has a higher income tax rate than ours and so does New Bruusviclt. ·well let the minister check it. I looked at it this morning. Ontario is lower and British Columbia is 4224

April 10, 1973 Tape no. 1136 Page 4 lover, although I eupect that when Mr. Barrett and hi adminietration are finished in British Columbia, they will ehift the burden of taxes. That is all we are talking about,shifting the burden. It is largely regarded in Newfoundland that we uae the ales tax too much,it 1• an unfair tax. I guese I will have to talk about that on the budget and not on this but nonetheless I think the school tax authoritiea are ineffective. The time baa surely come when we should have a long, hard look at their functions.

I would be a very happy man and I would suggest that my colleague  would be equally pleased and happy if the Minister of Education told us that he is in fact looking at them from thi point of view, with a view to abolishing them, not to wipe out the tax, because that tax will be wiped out and another . one will be imposed of some sort. The money must come • . I am not going to be the sort of a two­ faced person who stands here and pretends that it ie going to come. I am not going to do what that crowd did, Mr.

Chairman, wipe out one tax before an election and then slash it to the mothers two weeks or two months after the election - take away $2.00 for every $1.00 they gave, not that sort of rank double-dealing hypocrisy. Let them have a look at it, Mr. Chairman. The $8 million is not enough. That is common ground. More will have to be provided. More will be provided but the question is: Haw can it be best provided? Our people can only afford to pay what they can and the question ia: Are they being asked now to contribute fairly?

The old slogan: "From each according to his means, to each according to his need," It may be a socialist slogan but it is also, I think, good taxation policy, I think the time has come in Newfoundland when we should have a long, hard look at that because our system does not look at it now. _MR. MARTIN: Mr. Chairman, I feel compelled to respond to the remarks made by the hon. Minister of Finance, if only to clear up a point. Surely the honourable minister does not believe that I waa auggesting and the hon. member from ST. Barbe North was suggesting that 1225

Apdl 10, 1973 Tap• DO. 1136 Paga 5 u a ruult of wiping out the school tax authority ud putting on a one, two, three or five per cent parsonal income tax that .we vould automatically vipe out all theae further financial requirements of this country. I cannot believe that the honourable gentleman was trying to auggut that, Sir.

What we were trying to aay vas that the achool tu: authority, as one meana of collecting revenue, ia an in~fficient syatem and that if we can save a few hundred thousand dollars or even a fev thousa~d dollars by making this system more efficient,that ve should be doing that. 'l'hat is simply all we are trying to prove. Of course, we need more money and of coune we have to go to Ottawa, at least 111 the interim, until we get on our feet and get more money.

I do, Sir, resent the inference that the honourable gentleman made that in trying to do justice to my job here as an opposition member, that what I am really trying to do is to gain cheap publicity by making such a auggestion. I would have raised that as a point of peraonal privilege except that I thiolt probably the honourable gentle-n is trying to provoke me. If that were his game, tben he has succeeded and I accept that in graciousness as his contribution to my further political education. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Chairman, in fact I cannot remember saying that.

The point is anyway that what the honourable gentleman said when he stood up or offered was a very simplistic aolution that the school tax authorities are clumsy, inefficient and cumbersome and should be done away with and the thing to do is to raise the incoM tax. All I pointed out, Mr. Chairman, is thia, that of the three or four aources of income which we have and the income tax is one of them,that a one per cent increaae in the income tax is $900,000 and to replace the $4 million now collected by achool tax authoritiea would require a five per cent increaae in the personal incOIJle tu.

When you have done that, you are 1D exactly the same poaltion revenuewiee. You DOW 4226

April 10, 1973 Tape no. 1136 Page 6 have $4 million from the personal income tax and you have lost $4 million from the school tax authority. Now the honourable gentleman has just suggested that if there were some way of making school tax authorities more efficient or more effective, this should be done. Naturally! But that is not what he suggested the first time the honourable gentleman spoke nor what the hon. gentleman from St. Barbe North suggested. Now to come back to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Chairman.

It gets a bit tiring and a bit sickening in this House every time you enter a debate to have the Leader of the Opposition jump up and snivel and falsely state that you just made a personal attack on someone. If an argument is advanced from the other aide and the counter-argument is advanced from over here, that is a personal attack on the poor member for St. Barbe North or the member for Labrador South or somebody else, which it is not. We are entitled to attack any suggestion which the hon. Leader of the Opposition puts forth or anyone else, if it is worth attacking. That is what I attempt to do in this House.

I do not indulge, Mr. Chairman, in personal attacks. I am a little tired of having the Leader of the Opposition sneaking up to his feet, snivelling and falsely stating that somebody has been personally attacked, in his usual insidious and sneaky manner, while he himself is enga~ing in the very thing. MR. ROWE (F.B.): Point of order, Mr. Chairman. MR. CROSBIE: What is the point of order? MR. ROWE (F.B.): The point of order is that he is irrelevant to the particular vote under consideration and I would assume that we will be given ci1e same degree of latitude when we get up to speak on this. 4227

April 10, 19 73 Tape ao.1136 Page 8 illy refarencea by th• Leader of the Opposition to attack.a on Ottawa. We haft our point of view, Mr. Chairman, a provincial point of view that does not agree with that of Ottawa. W• do not adopt the attitude of the last administration that we must. when we go to Ottawa. be quiet or Divel quietly with our hands out, waiting for a handout.

We have adopted the poition that the province• of Canada and this province have legitimate constitutional and financial proposal  to put before the Governme11t of Canada to urge them to change ome of the things they are doi11g there to u ist the provinces and give us the fiscal ruources we need. That is not attacking Ottawa. That is putting forth what we consider to be the right policies they should adopt.

Nowhere else in any province that I am aware of do we hear the oppoition attempting to put out this canard, that when the government deal w~th Ottawa, it is attacking Ottawa or if somebody say that the Canada Student Loan Programma should be made into grants instead of loans, that th~t is a savage attack on Ottawa. It ia an attack on no one. It is a uggution that policy should be changed by Ottawa. I just want to point that out because thi• piece of deceitfulness gets repeated in the House every day and · aoon somebody may believe it, even the Leader of the Opposition, if it is not pointed out to him.

It is interesting to note that the Leader of the Opposition suggested possibly increasing the personal income tax or a property tax for school purposes. These are two suggestions. Perhaps a royal commission should look at them and see what they bring in. Perhaps it 1• time to have a look at the tax system here,by a royal c011111lission. If either of thue things are done, we can always say who first suggested them anyway. 4228

April 10, 1973 Tap• no. 1136 Page 7 MR. CROSBIE: The Leader of the Opposition has just had exactly the same latitude. MR. ROWE (F.B.): Well I just hope we get the same latitude when we get up to speak. MR. CROSBIE: Latitude? Mr. Chairman, there is not another House in the world that would put up with the nonsense we are getting on with. _MR. ROWE (F .B.): Mr. Chairman, is there a ruling on this particular point of order or not? MR. CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Minister of Finance will permit me. There is a fair amount of latitude given in the committee stage.

Quite often the estimates will pass much more quickly and to everyone's satisfaction if a certain amount of latitude is given. However~ the latitude must not turn into longitude. Honourable members should keep .their remarks as close to the topic as possible and digress as little u possible. MR. CROSBIE: It is a very good admonition, Mr. Chairman. I know you will make it for people on the other aide too. They are always up crying. Now, Mr. Chairman, there is one other point before I sit down and I have to make this because it is a deliberate campaign of deceitfulness by the hon.

Leader of the Opposition about attacks on Ottawa. I have yet to hear an attack made on Ottawa in this House during this session. But I have heard and I have made myself references to our position vis~a-vis Ottawa, what our position •is vis~a-vis the Government of Canada; what the Government of Canada's financial policy should be, in the opinion of this province and some of the other nine provinces. That ia not an attack on Ottawa, Yet week after week we hear th••• 4229

April 10 • 1973 MR. ROBERTS: Tape 1137 IB-1 I do not intend to prolong the debate but the honourable gentleman called me,as I understand, deceitful. Well, that is a matter of opinion. All that I can say is that there are thirty speechs in the House. They are attacks on Ottawa. They have been eloquent, loquacious and interesting, just complete attacks on Ottawa. That is one of the basic postures of this administration because when they talk about the constitution, Mr. Chairman, the British North American ·Act,ae the Minister of Education knows, fpecifically says that education is an entirely provincial matter.

In fact. the minister himself has made references to the fact that Ottawa should be doing more. Well, I say, Sir. that this government are on the verge. of, with reference to capital account• Your Honour • proposing to Ottawa a·form of commission of government. That is what they seem to be working towards. Mr. Power and I happen to be in the same oolitical party. We have not always agreed on political items. We did not vote for the same party last ~arch, Mr. Chairman. We certainly supped together and a very good supper it was. The honourable gentleman may have supped with Mr. Power, I do not know.

He certainly shared a political bed with Mr. Smallwood. His supper with Mr. Smallwood was like the Last Supper. If we were casting, we would know which of the thirteen apostles the honourable gentleman would be. Mr. Chairman, as long as the gentleman from St. John's West does not attempt to kiss me. That would be too much both on grounds of good taste and on political grounds,to draw the analogy. The point remains that this administration - AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible, MR. ROBERTS: There may be none of it in their party. Nr.

Chairman, but if the Premier ever returns to this House, the honourable gentleman. the Minister of Finance, may find out what next time · ha ~ets off with• "People like Shaheen". Oh Lord, if he had

April 10, 1973 Tape 1137 IB-2 aeen the look on the Premier's face. It waa worth the cash. It was eighty millions cash. Now, Mr. Chairman, to come back to the - I do wish the Minister of Finance would not drag me off the point, Sir. I am speaking about 612-03-0b, it. just leaps off the page, Your Honour - erection and equipment of schools (capital) ,$8,000,000.

The fact remains that this administration in their approach to - I am not going to debate their approach to Ottawa but in their approach to the problems of this province,as exemplified by this,are throwing up their hands and admitting defeat and despair This underlies their approach is the minister's budget speech. I will save it for the budget speech. Anyway, the point is the minister may think that I am being deceitful, I know he is being deceitful. He is not serving the best interests of the public of Newfoundland. I think that that will be proven by events. MR, F. ROWE: ~r.

Chairman, I never thought that I would see the day when the honourable Minister of Finance and the honourable member for St • .John's Center would be in the same political league but we have seen this this afternoon. Both of these gentlemen, Sir, missed the point completely. All we were doing was we were saying what a fact is. The fact is that school tax authorities are a cumbersome and inefficient means and an inequitable means and an unfair means of collecting revenue for purposes of school board funding. That is all we said, Sir.

As a matter of fact, honourable members on this side of the House have pointed out a number of _examples where revenue might be more fairly and more efficiently collected for school boards. We did not say that that should be the way it be done. We did not say that the sales tax should be raised. We did not say that income taxes should be raised. We said that the administration should take a serious look at this. Sir, I would like to remind the honourable members on the 4231

April 10, 1973 Tape 1137 other aide tha-t it is they who are now the admini tration of this province not the opposition. · It is they who have to formulate policy and administer this province and it is not t~e opposition who is supposed to formulate policy for the running of this particular province. We will have our policy formulated in plenty of time for the coming election. It is not now. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: I cannot believe it. MR. F. ROWE:: You cannot believe what? IB-3 Mr. Chairman, here we go again.

Every time an honourable member on this side of the House gets up, we get badgered with questions and snide remarks. The simple fact of the matter is that this administration is responsible for administering this province. If they are expecting th~ opposition to do it, they might just as well forget it from this point onwards. Sir, the two honourab°le gentlemen are in the same league because they sunk so low in comparing Fred Sr. with Fred Jr. Sir, I will point out for the record of this House that I am quite proud of anything that Fred Sr. happened to do for this province.

Of course Fred Sr. and the whole of the previous Liberal aciillinistration were not one hundred per cent - MR. MORGAN: Mr. Chainnan, on a point of order. We are not debating the caliber or the ability or the conduct or the things done for this province by the honourable member's father. We are debating the education estimates and let us stay relevant. MR. F. ROWE: Mr. Chairman, to that point of order,I deliberately got up and asked the Chairman if we were to be given the same latitude as the honourable Minister of Finance w~s given,because I wanted to refer to this particular point specifically.

That is why I asked that question at that time. So, am I allow~d to continue, Sir? MR. CHAIRMAN: Honourable members have been made aware on numerous occasions of the rule, long-standing, well-precedented, time-steeped 4232

April 10, 1973 Tape 1137 IB-4 rule that discussion is to be relevant. However, there is an equally long-standing tradition that honourable members are allowed a certain amount of latitude within that rule. That latitude has been stretched to its limits this afternoon, largely in the interest of amity within the committee. However, the point is reached where the Chair can no longer tolerate the further stretching of this latitude. The honourable member for St. Barbe North may continue but hopefully he will make his remarks brief and to the point. MR. F. ROWE: Thank you for your ruling.

I will indeed make them brief, Sir. The point that I was trying to make, Sir, is that I had the courage and the guts to ~et up here and say when we were referring to this particular vote that not every single thing that the previous administration had done was perfectly correct or one hundred per cent correct. These school tax authorities was an example that I gave of something that might have been suitable at the time but they are growing out of control now and it is the sort of thing that should be abolished and a freeze put on it immediately. The honourable Minister of Finance and the honourable member for St.

John's Center turn that around and twist it around to try to create an embarrassing situation for me on this side of the House, Sir. That is all that I have to say about it. Sir, I believe that if we check Hansard we will find that the honourable Minister of Education did suggest some weeks ago in this Assembly that he would be prepared to take a very serious look at the abolition . of school tax authorities within two or three years. Sir, the simple question that I have to put to the honourable minister is, "Why not give this immediate consideration?

What is going to happen in two or three years time that will create a different situation from what we have now?". If the honourable minister is prepared to

April 10, 1973 Tape 1137 look at the ituation in two or three year  ti•, I would like to know the reuon why he does nQt think the situation is ripe now for taking a very erious look at putting a freue on chool tax authoritie  and abolishing within the next year exiting school tax authorities and phasing in a provincial chool tax authority or making th• govemment completely raponsible for the collection of educational revenue in thi province. Why is it necesaary to have two or three year  before the honourable Minister of Education does take a look at it? Because, Mr.

Chairman, the minister did say t~at probably in two or three years time we could take a very serious look at the abolition . of these authorities but now is just not the time. I would like to know the reason for that. HON. v. EARLE: Mr. Chairman~ I did not wish to contribute to this debate because it has rambled all over the place. I will be very brief and hope that I will be somewhat relevant to the point which has not always been the case I am afraid in this debate on education so far. In the case of the vote for school construction, there is rather an interesting background to this.

Back some years ago I was Minister of Education and frankly I accept full reaponsibilitv for what happened at that ti• and what I Ya& part and parcel of in the former Liberal administration. I recall very well that when the stipulation or the thought was broached about discontinuing school fees, the Premier of· that day asked me if I thought it was a good idea. I said, "Yes if we can afford it,but where are you going to get the money?". He said, "How much do you think it will cost us?". My answer immediately,without even checking any figures,was $10,000,000 at least. He said, "You are crazy, completely crazy!

It will not cost us $10,000,000." IB-5. Well, it has not been many years and it is up to $10,000,000 4234

April 10, 1973 tape 1137 in what it is costing us actually. the point is this; that as soon as the school fees were removed and supposedly abolished by the former government, they were i11D11ediately substituted by assessments for capital expenditures. These assessments have now risen higher than the former school fees had ever reached. So the public are still paying for it. Also, at about that time some members may recall that there IB-6 was a large scale education conference and the graphs that were produced which were showing the costs of education were just going straight up, skyrocketing.

These graphs were essentially correct because what we have seen since and particularly what we see in these estimates show that all costs of education,be they school construction, teacheri salaries or what have you, are just headed straight u~. We are not alone in Newfoundland in that particular problem because it is pertinent all over North America and oarticularly in Canada. I think it behooves the province that knowing that and having known it for some years,that we are headed for tremendous escalation in education costs, lf we are to exist at all, there are only two courses to take.

One is to cut back on education, to reduce the services or,as my friend, the honourable Minister of Finance, said,get the revenue to pay for these services. There are not too many areas of tax that can be further expanded. You can talk glibly or what you like about expanding the income tax or anything else but to bring in any worth-while amount of revenue, the increase of taxation on our people would be quite unbearable. Now, I want to make only one more point before I sit down.

There seems to be a theory, there always has been among the denominational authorities - I was chairman of one of the largest school boards in St. John's for many years - that school · construction was something that had to be paid for immediately or 4235

April 10, 1973 Tape 1137 within the matter of a couple o/ years. I think it ia an unrealistic way ·to look at it because school• when they are built are built not for five year  !Jr ten year  but poHibly for fifty years and maybe a hundred yeara. We hould look at the scho.ol construction picture in Newfoundland a a very long-range programme in which we are building th• useta of our economy, namely in our educated youth, We muat look at the lB-7 · school construction programme over a long-ranging, aelf-liquiclating affair which must be spread over many, many years.

I am not •ure that we may not some day have 'to come to some sort of an arrangement in this country, If it is not a school tax authority or a combination of school tax authorities, it might well be something in the nature of a crowned corporation or·it could be like the Municipal Financing Corporation or something of that sort set up under the government where schools would have to be financed over a long period of time with proper built-in liquidation of the monies we spend and completely divorced from the normal expenditures of government.

I cannot go into detail now but I think that something of this nature must be looked at because when you take exactly a quarter of our whole expenditure for the year going on e4ucation, if we are to continue in that direction for many more years to come,we must certainly look at that big block expenditure and treat it as something completely different, something c~mpletely aside from our normal expenditure and something which has to be met by extraordinary means.

Now, the method that I am suggesting may not be at all practical but I think,in an exigency such as is facing us in the cost of education, we have to look at all means, practical and otherwise. MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, I feel as if I were sitting down here just about gding into two days and a night listening to this 4236

April 10 • 1973 Tape 1137 conversation on education. I ,un greatly concerned, Sir, and I will tell you the reason why. We are arriving at a place that if we do not do something about it,_ Chen I do not know where IB-8 the province is going to end up at and the people that are into it. With the bit of experience that I have of working on school boards, building committees,and you will know 4237 •-

April 10, 197.3 Tape 1138 what we were faced with in the past it 1 unbecoming to me to it down and take it on the chin and to know and to be active and see what is goin~ ahead and to listen to what 1 going on in this honourable House, First, we had started here with university students ~bout what money they had to raise to get a university education. We heard in this honourable House that the present govermnent were barring students from going to university.

I _yet fail to se~ where there is anybody or any student got it about him to attain a higher edu~ation~ I am right here to say now that I never saw that person with dollars and cents intervene whatso.ever and I have the privilege of knowing it. I · had the privilege of putting them in university who travelled the streets of this town with knee rubbers on for a winter and got a scholarship and went on to principals of eleven and twelve room schools.

This is hard to take for one who came up with not the privilege to get a higher education, to be placed in the position thAt I am in here now and I am asked to defend it. Something has to go along somewhere along the line about the bus system, about our school system, about our tax system and all the rest of them. How are we going to pay for the education of the youth? The youth of today are the men and women of tomorrow. We will hear people say, "Well, what am I going to pay for?

I have no one going to school." Well, I am here in this honourable House to say that someone along the line,if tbey have no children going to school as far as that is concerned,should have to pay the fee as well as a man who has them going. It is only for the people who have children going to school that I probably would not be sitting in this honourable House. It took a lot of these people to do this and keep me in business and what not,and why •hould I not be taxed a~d have to pay it too. Thi• t somethin~ sad t~at ha happened. Someone tiaure 4238 JM - 1

April 10, 1973 Tape 1138 because they have no children, a man and his wife.that they do not have to pay anything for education. I say that if we do not think any more about the youth of our province than that,I should say we are going to end up nowhere. I say here now in this honourable Rouse about the school buses ie another thing.

When you come to turn around the Board of Education paying or this government,as it is now,the school bus services,to go and pick up seventy~six pupils in the morning, seventy-six hockey sticks, seventy-six pairs of skates and possibly eighty-eight or a hundred or ninety children on the same bus, seventy pairs of skates and seventy hockey sticks,now somewhere along the line there is something wrong. There is a school bus going here, another one going back and forth and then there are four or five cars on,probably,for the deaf and dumb.

God knows they need to get to school as far as that is concerned but wl,y are we paying empty buses to l:!e going back and forth? Why pay $750,000 to get a school built when you ~it down with a contract of $420,000 to do the job and end up the Board of Education paying $750,000 to get the same _job done? I say ri11:ht here now to the government and I am one of the crowd over here, if they want to do anything in education,throw out what the former administration had in and build a new one and if they go wrong in four years time,bang us out. That was nothin~ else only a political game.

If you belonged to the ri~ht church, sat in the ri~ht pew you got just whatever you wanted,whether it cost $500,000 or Sl million you got it. Nowt know what tam talkinr, about. I happen to be in a place where they built a school and the price quoted on that was $47,000 to build it and I came up with a price of $25,000 and that school was built and the pupils are in it and there had to he Rome fipht to ret it. There is wha~ we are into, as lon~ as von re.t abonrd th,i lJ feboat and go 11long with it. I tell you thu,,~hat education w~nts to be looked lnto fully and I am not 4239 JM - 2

April 10, 1973 Tape 1138 willing to deprive .any of the youth of our province·of education. I wish that I could onl7 put some of them, the amarter onea who are not interested enough to go to university,to put them there to make something. The only pupil who I have found to have done a good job in rrry area was a pupil who went there and worked his way and he knew what it was to get an education and it was not all thrown at him. He worked his way and it made a man out of him.

He learne4 on the way and he learned how to do hia work and he learned what it was to borrow •~d have to pay it back, I say here now,you can give all you like to him and he would be like the rich young ruler. Thank you! · MR. OTTENHEIMER: Before the vote is carried, Mr. Chairman, just a few remarks on the school tax authorities and I am pretty sure I made the same remarks or remarks to the same effect yesterday. A correction, it must have been some weeks ago,probably on interim st!T)ply.

I made a statement to the effect that in two or three years it might "be necessary or advisable to get rid of the school tax authorities but not that we would look into it in two or three years. Obviously we keep our eyes open on this all the time and within the past three months we have had meetings on two occasions with executives of the provincial school tax authority. But certainly the ~overnmen~s position has not chan~ed. It is not now our intention to abolish or put a freeze on school tax authoritie.s.

We are givin~ serious study to various recommendations of the school tax authorities with a view to amending the legislation and the regulations in order to make the system more efficient. It may well be,as the Minister of Finance indicated,that a commission,royal or otherwise,might well be advisable in the very near future to examine taxation in the province, That may well be the case but we are now working to endeavour to make school tax authorities more efficient, to bring in neceasary 4240 JM - 3

April 10, 1973 Tape 1138 amendments and changes to the legislation,to the regulations. It is not the governmen~s intention now to abolish them or to put•· freeze on them. On the other matter,and that is the capital grants to schools of $8 million, much has been said about the indebtedness of the school boards and there is no doubt that the school boards, every school board in the province is in debt. I would hasten to add or I would venture to guess that every school board in Nova Scotia and Ontario and probably British Columbia is in debt.

I do not know if there would be any school boards in Canada apart perhaps from some private schools for wealthy people but I would not think that within the regular public school system that there would be any school,at least which has been in operation for a couple ~f years,which is not in debt.· The most serious aspect of it,from the school board~' point of view,is not that they are in debt butthe fact that they do not have a long term-position in which to work. It is not the fact that they are in debt but it is the term within which they have to work.

That is why we feel that a policy of lonr,-term financing for school boards will go very far to alleviating their difficulty there. They think that it is not the indebtedness so much as the term in which they have to pay that debt back. On motion, 612(03)(06), carried. 612(03) (07): MR. ROWE(F .U: Mr.

Chairman, Grant in lieu of DREE(Capital) 1 . • This is the grant(is it not) .whereby a certain denomination which might have been, for want of a better word, discriminated a~ainst JM - 4 with the DREE money coming in, I do not mean deliberately discriminated against, I mean that they were discriminated against in that they got less money out of DREE than proportionately they should have r,otten. So this is for the PentencostAl Denominational School Board. While we .ue on that point, Sir, I think this is a

April 10, 1973 ·Tape 1138 relevant matter, could the minister give us just an·idea aa to how long this 1• likely to go on, $500,000 thi• year and I notice there was $536,000 last year. Do we have to keep doing this for the next few year• under the current DREE agreements? - number one Number two, could he give us some indication as to what ha happened with regard to the resolution forwarded to Ottawa six years ago 1 I think, asking that the rights of the Pentencostal Denominati.on be entrenched in the constitution?

I was under the impression a year or two ago tha,t the Govermnent of Canada was going to bring it into the House of Connona and that it was going to be sent over to Westminister for inclusion into our constitution. Perhap  the minister might be able to ~ive us some indication on that etnce it is related to this, Mr. Chairman, because this vote 1a here because of the fact that they are treated for intents and purposes as having their rights entrenched in the constitution. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Yes, 'Mr.

Chairman, this vote is for denominations which their school boards have not had any funding frOlll DREE and in line with the ~ants on a proportionate per capita basis, The honourable gentleman asked how long it would continue if the denominations did in fact get a DRE! school. That would be iepending on what the cost was there,but in all likelihood it would be more than that. A.~ HON. MEMBER: Is this only for the Pentencostal? MR. OTTENHEIMER: The Seven Day Adventists would have a very &111all portion of that or certainly less than half.

But if,for example, that denomination were under a DREE programme to have a school, then there would not be this grant in lieu of that,because this is since they have not yet had that new school, Now with respect to the question re~arding the resolution which was pass~d in the le~islature some years ago and sent to the Government of Canada with, I think, the sug~eation then that the 4242 JM - 5

April 10, 1973 Tape 1138 Government of Canada would ask that the constitution be amended in order to put that in the British North America Act. I do not know what the status of it is as of now. The last I heard was, and perhaps the Minister of Justice might be more knowledgeable on this, that the Government of Canada,bearing in mind various constitutional issues~was somewhat hesitant to RO to Westminister to amend the British North America Act because of I suppose nationalism in Canada and the fact that certain Canadians feel that we should be totally aton~mous in any amendments to our own constitution.

That to the best of my knowledge is the reason that it has not ~Otten any further. Of course for all practical purposes in this province and in this legislature there was total, complete recor,nition of the rights and the ~rants were made on a proportionate basis and on a per capita basis and for all practical purposes there is fairness and equity and I never heard it suggested that there was not. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, the minister has skated neatly away but I think we should ask him to skate back.

The status of the motion in question, actually it appeared on the order paper at one stage in Ottawa,in the name, I believe, of Mr. Jamieson. It was a government motion. It did not come to a debate but that was in the House which was dissolved last August or s~ptember or whenever it was dissolved with the election which was held the end of October. I do not believe it has appeared on the order paper since.

What I would like to know from the minister, and I think we augur a clear and unequivocal statement of the ministry's policy with respect to this, have this administration, Sir, pressed this matter with the C-0vernment of Canada? Have they made representation:.? If so, what are the representations? 1f so a~ain, what result if any has come? MR. OTTF.:NHF.U!F.R: Mr. Chairman, I would have to take that as notice because.as the honourable gentleman knows,I have only been minister 4 2 4;; JK - 6

Apri.l 10 • 1973 Tape 1138 for approxiutely thl'ff or three and.a half moaths. I would have to conault with - Ho, I have never l!een to Ottawa act-lly since I have tbta portfolio qd I would wish to COD8Ult there with two or three of my colleagues who have in fact been tbe-ce and who would know· from pereoaal knowledge. HR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, the honourable gentlmnan 1a still s~ting. He ha been a member of the ministry, Sir, since · ~he day it waa formed. I agree it is fair to take notice with respect to what reprea..itaticnl9 had been made. t realise he does not carry in Ma head all the correspondence even 4244 JM - 7

April 10, 1973 Tape 1139 (afternoon) PK - 1 on a matter such as thia. Maybe the question should be directed to somebody else. P.ut I want a statement of the ministry's policy. That was the first question I asked with respect to this matter. We have a unartlmous resolution of the House of Assembly. I do not recall if the honourable member at that stap,e - AN HON. 'IF."IBF.F: He was a member. 'f,fJ!. ROJIF.RTS: He was a member. Tn that case he did vote for it, as did the honourable member for Burin, the honourable the member for St. John's Centre. Those are the only ~entleman on the other side, Sir. ~N RON.

M':MRF.R: Inaudible. MR. ROBERTS· Yes. But he is not, I was only naming people who happened to be in the - the honourable the member for Fortune Jlay would have heen as well, and St. John's West. I am only speakinr, of people who were,in the chamher at present. I would like to know the minister's attitudr towarrls it. That is why I asked for a clear and unequivocal statement of policy.

HR • OTTFNJTFTHF.fl : Certainly our attitude is that it was passed ----- -· unanlmously in the lc>p;islature sometime ago,in a previous session, It is our policy that the Pentecostal Denomination have the same rip;hts as all the other denominations,reco1211ized for educational purposes,and that should he !ecognized constitutionally as in fact it is recor.nized hy the government and in this legislature. MR, ROBERTS: I thank the minister. I think that is a fair statement --------- of policy. Will the minister undertake, Mr.

Chairff!an, to make,either at some point in the estimates or other heads where this is appropriate or if he wishc>R alternatc>ly as a miniRterinl Atatemrnt, within the next thrre or four days a clear and definite Rtatement as to what steps, if any, the present administration have taken with respect to the Government of Canada to press this matter. l-lhat has been done since January 18, 1972, the day of infamy, what has been done to forward this matter at Ottawa? I do know that it was oh the Order Paper at Ottawa.

A:: of the end of August, I think it was the 25th., the Parlia~ent of r.anada was dissolved and of course it disappeared

April 10. 1973 Tape 1139 (aftemoon) n - 2 with the diaaolutton. So perhapa what I need to be told really i  not what on January 18, what hu happened eince say the 30th. day of October when the present Parliament of Canada was elected. What eteps have the government taken? What have . they said? To whom? On what occaeion? What result has come from these representations, if any? So could the minister undertake to make a statement on that matter,pleaae? MR. W. N. ROWE: .Juet before it carries. Mr.

Chainnan, because of the fact that the $500,000 is apparently deatined for Pentecostal Denomination facilities, does this imply that the other DREE capital grants, loans and p,rants, have been almost ideally proportioned to the population of the other denominations? MR. OTTfilTHEIMER ! On the whole it has worked out that way. But I do not think that either of the other two have insisted that there be a parity, because one series of negotiations might ~o one way and one the other way. I suppose almost 1the law of averages, on the whole it has worked out that way. On motion 03-07 carried. MR.

CHAIR?-'.AN: Shall 03-04 carry? MR. ROWE. WH. On 04, Mr. Chairman, Educational Development. There is a requirement in the specifications with regard to these schools which DREE helps to fund by way of ~rant and loan, that there he free accessibility by students. This raised some alarm among the various denominations as to whether this was going to be a public school system as the t~rm is usually understood elsewhere,outside of Great Britain. A public school system where church and state were completely separate, ~te-owned school spatems with regard to any religious matterJ ~ilataoever.

We had a meeting with the DREF. officials on that before we left office and they , gave a fim undertakin~ that they were in no way desirous of intrinRing on the conatitution. I think that amoni 11ome of the otf1cial1 Cher• was a •certain anathema on their part

April 10, 1973 Tape 1139 (afternoon) PK - 3 towards the denominational system .as they conceived it in this province. They perhaps thou~ht that they could get the thin ed~e of the wedge into this system by these DRF.E irants and by the inclusion of that type of a requirement, the free accessibility. We drew to their attention that the merits or demerits of a denominational system did not come up for consideration hecause it was a part of the Canadian Constitution.

Neither the Government of Canada nor the Government of Newfoundland nor any House of Commons or a House of Assembly could unilaterally or even together violate the Constitution of Canada in this rep.ard. Now I am wondering if that provision is in the new DREE Agreement. Perhaps some of the officials of the department could inform the honourable minister about free accessibility. And if so, how is it being treated hy the government in its talks and nep.otiations and transactions with the various school boards? For example, if a Roman Catholic School Board has a school built in St.

John's East, with DRF.f. help, is th1s school then to have free access as far as all the students in that area are concerned or just the Roman Catholic students or the Protestant students as the case may be, integrated students as the case may he? What is the situation with re~ard to that? I must say the honourable the ~inister of Justice when he was over on this side of the Fouse waxed rather eloquently on this whole point.a couple of years a~o.

I think at that time he was saying more or less that - I am not quite sure on the point the minister was makin~ at that time but I got the firm impression that he was all in favour of free accessibility being considered literally. If you are ~oinr, to have a school with Canadian money p.oing into it, that free accessibility should mean that all students within that area of whatever denomination they mi~ht be should have free access to that school. Perhaps he mirht want to enlighten. give the ~ouse some ideas ·now as to what his position is now that he is in the p.overnrnent and 4217

April 10, 1973 Tape 1139 (aftemoon) PIC - 4 has to uphold the Conatitution and uphold the law and uphold the policy of the government. Perhaps th~ Minister of Education could give us some ideas .on it. MR. OTTENHEIHF.R: Mr. Chairman. that _policy is the same,that is that DREE schools are suppose to be accessihility to all. There has been, certainly since we have formed the administration and during the past few months. no attempt that I am aware of at all, none ' whataoeverof the Federal DREE counterpart to infringe upon or attempt to modify or even to c0111111ent upon our own system within this province.

There has been no attempt for the~ to put their nose into that area of provincial jurisdiction. The DREE schools are indeed suppose to be accessible to all. That has never cauded any problem because I would think there are very few schools in 'Newfoundland where there are not people o.f a number of denominations. I would think there are very few Roman Catholic schools without some pupils of other faiths and very few inte~rated schools who probably do not have Roman Catholics, certainly in areas outside of the large cities, even I would think in St. John's and in Corner Brook. But there has never been any problem.

Forexample, an integrated DP.EE school is in a certain area, what in fact does not happen is that a ROl!'an Catholic school perhaps a half mile away is depopulated because I suppose parents in general send their children to the schools representing their own faith. But this has not caused a problem,yet no DREE school is suppose to refuse any person hecause of his faith. As a matter of fact, I do not know if any school in the . province DREF. or non DRF.F. refused admission to any pupil on that basis.

But there hu been no attempt,certainly since our period of office.for the federal officials to interfere or atte~pt to influence, to the best of my knowledge, even to comment upon our own provincial system of education nor has the accessibility condition posed any problem. 4248

April 10, 1973 'Cape 1139 (afternoon) MR, ROWE, W.N. On that point, the honourable the Minister of F.ducation and the honourable Minister of Justice are of course rip,ht in theory,all schools have free accessibility to them. What is the situation though with regard to one of these DREE schools or any other school, if say a Roman Catholic younp,ster PK - 5 is living next door to an integrated school and his parents apply on his behalf to go to that school? Is it the policy of any of the boards to take first the members of their own faith so-called or do they take it on a first come first serve basis?

The denominational aspect is merely'! s~ppose the fact that a certain church or a certain denomination happens to run that school has no practical effect as far as anyone trying to get into that school is concc-rned. Is that tha idea? Is it a first come first serve basis or do hoards take members of their own denomination first? MR. OTI'ENFF.I~F.R· I would say that in an instance where that school or that classroom was not full then the person applying would be immediately accepted.

If it were the case that there were perhaps more pupils than places, the usual procedure is that the two school boards meet locally, rer,tonally within that area,to resolve the situation, lookinp. at the total places available for both of them, the total space available. the total number of students. This is usually done on the basis of mutual consultation. On motion 03-04 carried. On motion total suhQead 612 carried. MF. ROHE,F.B. The total.yes, ~~r. Chairman, I did not see any other area to brinp. this up hut could I get a word from the minister on this whole business of school board elections.

A number of school boards have voiced concern over the fact that they do have to fund the cost of school board elections and they said this is an unfair system and they would like the government to put some sort of a vote in