PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 58 5th Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1971 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

Hay 19, 1971 The l!ouse met at 3:00 P.H. l'r. Speaker in tne_· Chair. MR. SPEAKER: Order! Tape 694 (afternoon) PRESENTING PETITIONS PK - 1 liON, G,/1.. FRECKER: (MINISTER OF PROVINCIAL AFFAIRS): Hr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition on behalf of the citizens of ~ount Arlington Heir,hts and Long Harbour. The burden of the petition have to do with shortening considerably the access for the citizens to the E!l.CO Plant. It would involve placinr. a causeway at the. lower end of the harbour where the water is shallow, and not only would it shorten the distance but it would do away with a very dangerous

section of the road that the people now have to ne~otiate going back and forth to the plant. The burden of the petition, Hr. Speaker, reads · as follows: ''We the under­ s:f gned, the people of Long Harbour and Mount Arlington Heights,hereby petition the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to construct a causeway across the narrow east end of Long Harbour and to upgrade and pave the r~mainin~

section of highway to Long Harbour and Mount Arlington Heights." I beg leave to table this petition presented and ask that it be ref~rred to the proper authorities for their serious consideration,with my strong support, ?IR, U. STRICKLAND: ?-Ir. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to support the prayer of this petition,In doing so I would point out two facts~ First of all, the hon. the Ninister of Provincial Affairs,who is the me.mber for that district,and I have a lot of things in col1'D!\on, because our district$adjoin each other and almost overlaps in ce~tain areas.

It was our privilege a couple of years ar,o to meet with the people of Long Parbour and Mount Arlin~ton Heights. There were a number of the officials of the company there as well as the parish priest for that area. It -came out very plainly in that meeting that the people of that area think that this is the greatest gift that ever they had come their way in all of the lonp. years of their history. Seeinp. fron the turn out of that meetinr that they arc determined to' make that plant

:tay 19, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK - 2 HR. ST~ICl'.LMID: very worthwhile 1 they are prepared to put everything that they have into it to make it a huge success. If there is anything that this House can do to help the people acheive this success and I am sure anybody whoever goes to that plant and can see the clouds of dust five o'clock in the eveninr,,that is on that road leaving . -~ ... ..... • from the paved part up to Lon·~ Harbour and ?-~ount Arlinp.ton lleights, they could be convinced that it is a dan~erous

section of road,with so much dust and so 111any cars. If we can do anythinB to help the people in their endeavours and their efforts to make this plant the success that it should hi;', then hy all means. I for one would strongly support it. On motion Petition received. ~•F.STTONS: HON. F. P. -P.O\_~E, (?,INISTER OF EJ)lTCA 'l'ION AND YOUTH) : !-!r. ~peaker, when the estimates for the DepartMent of Education were being studied in com~ittee some questions were asked, information was asked for that I could not supply at thnt ti~e, some detailed information.

I undertook to ~et that information for hon. members and.I take it, it would be in order to have them tabled now. I will not of course to attempt to read it or give any details, simply to say that there are three lots of information that I arn supplyinr, one 1s the list of the recreational grants, comrnunity recreational grants as distinct from capital grants that were given out during the last financial year. It is a fairly long list, there are, I think, three pages, there are a hundred or rnore of them.

The others consist of the grants given out to provincewide ~overninp.: bodies likc,for example, Newfoundland Amateur Baseball Association, Newfound­ land and Labrador Campin~ Association arid Newfoundland Lawn Tennis Association, NePfoundlancl. Amateur SwiTl!I'ling Association and so on. These are the grants r,iven, these are the associations for the Province, as distinct from cor.,munity.

The thirrl piece of information consists of the regulations governinf!' th·e caf'ital p,nints, recreational prof!ratnme0 They are fairly len~thly as Pell. nut hon, mP.mbers I am sure are askccl. f~r information r.y their constituerits, from tfr1e to tiMe on this pror,raMme, and I would surr.est it mirht he useful to kr.rp th:fs info~i.,tion in their files for re'ference "11c>n any of their

May 19, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK - 3 t!R. RrJWE , F.W. constituents will contact them, as I am sure they are doing and will do from time to time. I will table this information. I have sufficient numbers of copies for all hon. members. ORDERS OF THE DAY tlR. CROSBIE: On Orders of the Day, Mr. Speaker, on the question to the hon. Hinister of Education and Youth.

Could the minister tell the House whether he has received an application from the Day Carnp,people, that is a summer project,to use ~he old premises out in Healey's Pond;" The old sunshine camp is r,oing to be used as a day care centre this summer, the summer day camp. I understand that an application has been made to the minister for a $~000 grant. They have received a grant or going to receive $17,000 odd from the Federal Government, and an application has been made to the Province for a grant of $5,000. Has the minister received that application and has he made any decision yet? ~m. ROWE, F.W. Mr.

Chairman, I do not recall offhand, I do know that we h:ive a very larr:e number of applications not yet processed, Mr. Snow tells me he has, I would think,forty or fifty applications. It could ,~ell be.that. that particular application is in the list that he has, which have not yet come to my attention. I do not recall offhand that that particular one has been broup:ht'.to me for consideration. JIR. CROSBIE: Mr, Speaker a supplementary question.

This is a project for summer employment, I imar,ine the minister already knows, made up of !!emorial Univen:ity studcmts, as a Day Camp for underprivileged children, including recreation. so could the minister check, I think they need an answer quite soon, because you know the summer is just about on us. ~_. RO\!F., F. W. I would be very glad, Mr. Speaker. ~,r_, r.Rosnrr.:: They have a grant from Ottawa, they need $5,000 more. NR. rmrr.:, F.W. I would be very p,lad to have that matter looked into as early as possible. rm. cm.u;:s: 'fr, Speaker, I have a question for the hon. !1inister of 4084

May 19, 1971 Tape 694 PK - 4 HR, COLLINS: llip,hways, I under!'ltand that he has received a report,on safety conctitiom1 on t:he Trans-Canada Hir.hway ,from the Newfoundland Safety Council. If this is so, could the rninister indicate to the House when the report will he tabled? Hf)N. }I. STARirns: (mNISTER OF HIG!IWAYS) : Mr. Speaker, we have received a report from the Safety Council some weeks ago.

We held a rneetinr: with them this morning and• unfortunately, I had to leave be'fore the ':rµeetin.g .was over ,• ~- --~ - and I have not had a chance since to confer with my Deputy and I have no report to make at this time. ?IR. COLLINS: Mr, Speaker, a supplementary question. In view of the importance of this particular report, I understand it was a thorour.h-r.oing study of the lack of proper safety and the causes on the Trans-Canada. Would the minister consider'tabling the report in the House so that all members can have a look at it as quickly as possible. MR. STARKES: I assume, Mr.

Speaker, that the report will be public, 'Ihere is nothing private or secret about the report. The report of'Safety Council in fact, if they want to make it public they can have it published in the Telegram tomorrow. It is a report fro111 them to us. we did not ask :hem . ~ .... for the report, it is one they make to us,and asked us to accept. There is nothing secret about it. }IR. COLLINS: TheJ?e is nothing wrong with us requesting a report from the Safety Council. HR. STARKES: What is that? MR. COLLINS: There is nothing wrong with members requesting a copy of the report from the Safety Council. : fR.

STARKES: Not that I know of. amend ~OTIONS: On motion of the hon. the Premier a Bill, ''An Act Further to the F.lection .,.ct," read a first ti111e, ordered read a second tirne on tomorro1-1: 40B5

Hay 19, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK-5 On motion of the hon. the 'Premier, a Bill, '"Am Act Further to Amend th£' Local Governl"lcnt Act, 1966," read a first time, ordered read a second ti~r on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Premier a Bill, ''An Act Further to Amend the Local r.overnment Elections Act, 1965," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow: ("In Jnotion of the hon. the Prer.,ier • a Bill, ''An Act Further to Amend the City of St John's Act, "read a first tillle, ordered read a second time on tomorrow: RESOJ.lTTION (Hon. MeMber for St John's East.) ~~IF.RF.AS the Fishery is the basic !TIOst il"lportant natural resource of tl1e Province of Newfoundland; AND

WHEREAS the Fishing Industry has experienced grave and serious problems which have become critically ar,gravated over the past decade by reason of depletion of stocks caused primarily by the Massice catches taken from til'!e to time in the North Atlantic by ocean r;oing cessels of foreirn nations' AND WHEF.EAS the inahore fishermen of this Province have particulatly suffered by reason of apparent over-fishing in the North Atlantic; AND WlIERF.AS the Prime Mintster of our Nation, the Right Hon~urable Pierre Elliot Trudeau, is presently making a state visit to Russia for the expressed purpose, amongst ~ther things, of discussing with Russian Leaders problems of mutual concern to Canada and Russia; AND l·ffiEREAS it is vital to the interest of Newfoundland and particularly to the welfare of its inshore fishermen ·· that immediate steps be talren to:-,conserve the fishery in the North Atlantic; AND

WHEREAS it would appear that effective steps townrds :Improvement of the fishery could be realized by the Prime l-'iniste.r discussing directly with Soviet Premier, Alexei Kosygin, or Coll'lll'unist Party Leader, Leonia Brezhnev, or both of them the problems experienced by the fishermen on the east coast of Canada and in particulat depletion of fish stocks in the North Atlantic; AND WHF.RF..AS the J-1embers of Parliament for Newfoundland have initiated representation to the Pri~e }'inister con­ cernin~ the natters herein resolved: 4086

1-1oy 19, 1971 Tnr>c- 6<l4 (Afternoon) PK-6 AND t-nlE'PF.AS it is rlc-sirous th~t all the elected ?!embers of the people of Newfounclland join with Newfoundland's representatives in the llouse of r.ommons in uq~inr, the Prime ¥inister of our Nation to take up with the Leaders of the Russian peoples matters herein resolved; THEREFORE

be it resolved that this House of Assembly for the Province of Newfoundland hereby expresses its s~rong desire that Prime Hinister Pierre Elliot Trudeau, discuss with the Russian Leaders the grave problem experienced by fishermen on the east coast of Canada and particularly the depletion of fish stocks in the North Atlantic and that the said Prime Minister initiate meaninp,ful discussions with a view to conserving all species of fish in the North Atlantic in order to better assure the future of the fishing industry in this Province and particularly the inshore fishing industry; And Be It Further Resolved that this House of Assembly urges the Prime Minister of Canada to invite Russia t, join with Canada in convening an International Conference for Conservation of Fisheries in the North Atlantic comprisinr, all Nations ultilizing the fisheries of the North Atlantic Ocean and that such Conference be held as soon as possible and, if expedient to the Nations concerned, be held in the ancient port of St.

John's: And Re It Further Resolved that this House of Assembly directs that the contents of this resolution be communicated forthwith by tele~ram or otherwise to the Honourable Prime Hinister while he is still visiting the U.S.S.R. and apportunity exists to take up the matters set forth herein with the said Leaders of the Russian peoples. 40~7

Mny 1(), 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK - 7 MR, rtARSHALL: nr. Speaker at the outset with respect to this resolution, I might indicate that we would hope that this resolution will be accepted unanirno~sly hy this House because it touches on a matter of very vital and sip,nific~nt interest to the people of Newfoundland. ThP.re is no need for me,Your Honour,to go into the plir.ht of the fishery in this Province, in particularly the nlight of the inshore fishery. This is well kno"m, This is well known to all hon. members in this House and particularly to the fishermen of the Province of Newfoun<lland.

Certainly over the past ten years it would appear that the inshore fish, that the catch of the inshore fish has been halved and that there are less people prosecuting the fishery in this Province than heretofore. While there are certain points each :,ear with which we can rejoice, the hon. the Premier has already pointed out that the price of fish is goinr, up and this is a very, very good thing. The fish plants are now, some of them anyway1 in the black and · hopefully all of them will be this year and the price of fish this year augurs well for the fishermen.

But the price of fish, Your HonC"ur, depends, as we all know, not only on the demand but on the supply as well. It is to the supply of fish in this Province, the supply of fish to the fishermen,that we must look and conern ourselves, because it concems us very, very vitally. It has for centuries and it will for centuries to come. It has always got to be remembered that the basic greatest natural resource of this Province is the fishery itself.

Now the tiresent pli?.ht of the inshore fi.shery ,in the fishery of this Province,has been caused in part This has been caused,by the same by depletion of stocks in by token.the presence of the " the North Atlantic. hur;e draggers of foreir,n nations, by the huge trawlers of foreign nations. We have heard great descriptions of factory ships and various devices like electronic suction devices that are sucking the fish up from the sea. The stocks of fish are fast depletinr.,with consequent results.

One of the bi~ results, as I ~ay, has been the failure - one of the principal causes of the failure of the inshore fishery had heen the depletion in the stocks. 4088

!-'ay 19, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK - fl MR. ~•ARSJ!ALJ.: The failure of the inshore fishery has to be viewed by everyone in Newfoundland with serious alarm, because there is no doubt it has hrought serious consequences to this Province. tt has meant~ in e~fect,that people in the smaller villages, the smaller communities around the Province and in many of the smaller communities could no longer obtain a decent and adequate living for themselves in the places where they resided arid they had to resettle.

It has meant the failure of the inshore fishery, it has meant to many communities the death of the communities themselves and the quashing for many years to come of the hopes and aspirations of the hearty people who lived in these villages and communities and fish from them. The Premier has indicated,in the debate on the estimates.that there are times. when he himself and many other people on the Government side, indeed some people over hear,have V?ndered and despaired about the future of the fisheries.

It has its peaks and it has its valleys, as we all know, We on this side perhaps look to , probably a bit more than the Government side has in the past, look with great hope towards the fishery of this Province and realize that,this being our basic natural resource, this is what we should concentrate on we should always concentrate on our natural resources.This is the only way to bring Newfoundland into the Twentieth Century. The result of the inshore fishery has been directly related as well to the depletion of the stocks in the North Atlantic.

It has been more directly related to the failure of the inshore fishery in Labrador. During remar ks that I made durin~ the Throne Speech, I mentioned certain items about the inshore fishery of Labrador, ,rhe hon. the Minister of Fisheries asked a question as to whether or not he was being blamed or his department for this failure? ' ,ne answer is,of co.urse, no. nut, certainly we could expect the Minister of Fisheries, as a matter of fact all members of the Government, everybody in this House,to support this reasonable resolution, which is aimed to do the upmost in order to preserve the fishery of this Province.

Indeed, the failure of the inshore fishery, which I link and has been linked to the depletion of stocks in the North Atlantic,has also had disasterous 4089

1!ay 19, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK - 9 rm.. IIJ\R~llALl.: effects on the growth of this Province. It is a well known fact 1nc the Gordon Commission has already pointed this out, that the growth and population in the Province of Newfoundland has not been commensurate with that in the rest of Canada. It certainly ~as not been commensurate with that which was expected when reasonable projections were made some years ar:o. Here ar,ain, i1e all well know that the reason for this was the failure of the fisheries.

So, I think that it is given that the fishery of this Province is in a dire, has been in times past and probably will be in the future,in a sorry situation and in a dire · plight and this aggrevated situation, this critical situation can be linked in the presence day to the huge rape ,as it were, of the fishery in the North Atlantic, by t'~ese huge foreign nations, these nations that send the many, many trawlers off our shores. It is also a well known fact, Your Honour, that the Prime Minister of this country is presently in Russia.

Now Russia itself is a nation which I has reportedly the most of these huge trawlers and draggers off our coaat ~nd the North Atlantic. It is certainly one of the biggest interest that representc the interest on the other side. The interest,that is, of prosecuting the deep sea fishery in the manner that foreigners want to and do in the North Atlantic. '':-'' \ The Prime Hinister,as I say, has gone to Russia to talk about certain matters of mutual concern to Russia and Canada.

I mention here that the members of Parliament, .our members of Parliament,have bought up quite strongly in the House of Com~ons and requested the Pri~e Minister to put tht~ on his agenda and to give an assurance that it will be given some priority and talked over with the Leader of the Russian people. Now I refer to the members of Parliament here, not as Tory, M'~P's hut as patr,lotic Newt6um,lo11ders, I hope everybody in this House would See,this is an issue that is really above politics itself, it is an issue thnt transcet'lds a link between Federal and Provincial parties.

It is an issue that lws to concern :-:er-foundlanders and is not in essence a political issu<' but i!': rrtther a pntr:lotic one -if there i~ a~;Y distinction het1,·r.en th<' two. ~090

Hay 19, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK -10 ?-ffl. }fARSPAJ.L: We had all expected, we had all waited hoping that the Prime Minister would give the assurance that this urF,ent and vital subject of grave, grave concern to the Bast Coast of Canada would be taken up by the Prime Minister with the Leaders of the Russian people. Unfortunately we have no indication to this effect, certainly no public indication. It is not on the •~enda. We do know that certain matters are on the agenda of the hon. the Prime ~inister, such as NATO. which is important. 'I-he reduction of arms, obviously,it is very, very important.

But these weapons are inert, they are not operational. Certainly the inertness, lack of mobility of the fishery,for the most depressed part of Canada,should bear a certain priority with the Leader of our Nation.

It is very necessary, Your Honour, I feel, that we pass a resolution, this resolution which has been placed before the House, because it is necessary that all elected people in this Province speak as one, speak as one to the Federal Government and inform the Federal Government that we expect and we would hope that the greatest possible action would be 'taken at all times to conserve the ~ource of supply that was and that will always be the b~sic natural resource of this Province. I think that the effect of passing a resolution of this nature by thts ·.

House, by t.~e elected representatives,Provincially, of the people of Newfoundland,coupled with the elected representatives,Federally,of the people of Newfoundland,ought to convince Ottawa quite forceably of"' the situation with which we are faced, with which the tens of thousand of fishermen in this Province are faced and that we must have some action taken and taken very, very soon with respect to this very important matter of conservatior of our fisheries, if we are to progress into the Twentieth Century and really realize the promisesof Confederation.

We certainly have to focus attention on the fact that there are tens of thousands of people in Newfoundland who are not sharing the benefits of Confederation, not necessarily through any internal fault in Canada itself, but mainly because a source of supply, as I say, of fish,that had been available to them and their forefathers long before, isbein~ disseminated to a friRhteninr. extent and there is promise, an awesome promise, of it being 4091

May 18, 1971 Tape 694 (afternoon) PK - l} HR._ HARSl!ALL: decimated even more in the years to come. So therefore the first part of this resolution. which I feel, is very, very reasonable,merely requests, it merely is a resolution of this House, the elected members of the people of Newfoundland, just merely requesting the Prime Minister of this nation to discuss,with Russian Leaders,deplction of our fish stocks in the North Atlantic,to better assure the future of the fisheries here. particularly. the insho~e-fishin( industry, which certainly needs to have an added impetus to it.

The other part of the resolution, which I also say, Your Honour,is well taken 1 is the fact that the Prime Minister,while he is over in Russia should invite Russian Leaders and the Russian peoples to jointly convene an International Conference for the Gonservation of Fisheries in the North Atlantic.

Now, I know we have various fishery commissions that are ~eeting from time to time and it is reported that the Atlantic Fisheries Commission is going to meet in Halifax shortly, but this is a Co111111ission,and we are faced with a grave,serious and a very grave and weighty ptoblem , and one t 1·1at merits the attention of the Leaders of our Nation and one that requires a conference of leaders of the bation~ of the ~orld concerned, in order to determine what is the correct balance, what correct balance can be maintained between the natural desires of these Nations to acquire as much fish as they possibly can and the right of our people to maintain an adequate standard of living.

Do not forget that here in Newfoundland. in this Province, we are much more vitally concerned with the fisheries of the North Atlantic than any other area in the world. Certainly these nations which would visit off our shores and take 4092

May 19, 1971 (Afternoon) Tape No. 695 NC - 1 MR. MARSHALL: huge catches of fish from time to time, when these stocks are depleted can relatively easily move their factory ships, their draggers and their trawlers, take them to other 'parts of the world, take up fish from other areas. But we here iln this Province,on this Island and in Labrador itself, are left here with the source of supply in effect, this source of supply that has gone on for centuries and it has been in abundance for centur,cut off for years and years to come.

The economic effect on the people of Newfoundland will be very, very detrimental to put it very, very mildly. I do not see why it could not be suggested to the Prime Minister when he is in Russia that the most appropriate place to hold this fisheries conference would be right here in this ancient sea port of St. John's.

After all this Province stands out in the North Atlantic and it would certainly focus the attention of all the world, I feel, on the problems of this Province ,that it is experiencing the growing pains that it is experiencing no", particularly in adjusting to the deep water fishery that has come to pa~s in recent years. Of course there are other questions that will have to be thrashed out at such a conference as well. There are more problems I know. The major one, the major problem in the fishery I say is the depletion of the fish stocks.

We have a situation where I believe it is the Danish Government is depleting the salmon stocks off Greenland · This has to be met as well as the depletion of the cod fishery to our inshore fishermen as such.

This Party, and I would like to attempt to and I would hope that members on the other side would attempt to keep politics out of this resolution because this is a resolution that transcends political considerations altogether, I think it is worth mention that this Party has always stood for the development of our inshore fishery prior to the declaration of the twelve mile limit, the eforcement of .which, .. •' by the w~y, is also another topic that should be brought up in this conference.

But prior to the declaration of the twelve mile limit, this l'.:trty had n pol Icy, the p£"ople on this side of the House hml nlw.:tys 4093

-~ May 19, 1971 (Afternoon) Tape No. 695 NC - 2 MR. MARSHALL: promulgated that there should be inshore fishing zones, applicable throughout the Island, within which draggers should not come. So we are very, very interested and we always have been interested. But as I say I am not speaking on this resolution as • member of the Opposition, nor a member of the T~ry Party, nor am l speaking of it because the members of Parliament, the Tory members of Parliament, who have done so much for the fisheries of this Province during their sojourn there since 1968, because they are political colleagues of mine.

But I make this resolution as a Newfom1dlander. Many of us over here represent urban areas as well as rural areas. I feel quite certain that the member for St, John's West, the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Gander,who represent pretty well urban areas, have just as much right to be interested in the fisheries of this Province as the hon, the member for Burin, the hon. member for Fortm1e Bay or the Hon. member for St, Barbe South and indeed any member on the other side of the House are, because we are tie~to it; our economic future and well-being. Industrialization is good.

We should have industrialization as much as we can, but it can never be forgotten that our basic natural resource is the fisheries and our future is tied to the fisheries, There is nothing. This resolution has been drafted in a manner, it deplores nothing, it does not deplore anything, nor criticize anything with respect to the Provincial Government. It does not criticize anything with respect to the actions of the Federal Government. It is not intended in any way to criticize the Prime Minister.

It is purely there to bring to the attention of our Prime Minister, he is the Prime Minister of Newfom1dland as well as Canada, our Federal chief officer of the Government, a matter of urgent public importance to the newest Province in Canada, requesting that we get what I feel we ought to be able to expect as Newfoundlanders, the full and complete support of the Prime Minister when he is in Russia. 4094

May 19 1 1971 (Afternoon) '!'.ape No. 695 NC - 3 MR. MARSHALL: We hear for instance., as I heard just yesterday on television,to the effect that amongst other things he was going to discuss NATO which is an International matter. But he is also going to discuss the matter of international trade as between central Canada or the bread baskets of Canada and Russia itself. I feel that,if this is so, that surely he can discuss the fishery of this Province as well, particularly since the Russian ships are doing such damage to the inshore fishery.

Finally, your Honour, of course there is no point in having these two resolutions set forth unless they are communicated. The final part of the resolution is that the contents, the desires, the people of this Province nave expressed through their elected representatives in the House of Assembly, be communicated forthwith to the Prime Minister, while he is in Russia,to assure that this matter is brought to his attention. I say in closing, as I began, we all look forward and expect to receive the unanimous support of the House on this resolution. MR. SMALLWOOD (J.R.): Mr.

Speaker, it .is a matter of life and death urgency for us in Newfoundland that the stocks of fish be preserved and conserved. It will kill us in Newfoundland if these stocks of fish are not preserved. Newfoundland can scarcely live if these stocks are not protected from swift destruction and disappearance. The hon. member who just sat down said, and I quote his words precisely, "it is very necessary for us to pass this resolution," Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, it is quite unnecessary.

Before the Prime Minister went to Moscow it was agreed between Ottawa and Moscow that this very matter of conserving the stocks of fish in the North Atlantic would form a subject of discussion between Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Kosygin. This was a part of the agenda for their discussions. It was agreed before Mr. Trudeau went to Moscow. it was agreed, it was part of their agenda so there is no need of this House passing a resolution asking 4095

May 19, 1971 (Afternoon) Tape No. 695 NC - 4 MR. SMALLWOOD: the Prime Minister to do what he had already agreed with Hr. Kosygin to do and had agreed before he went to Moscow. Se~ondJy, yesterday in the House of Commons, yesterday, it was announced that this agreement had been made between the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of the Soviet Union. It was announced in the House of CoDD11ons yesterday, I believe by the Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Davis, or perhaps it was by the Acting Premier, Mr.

Mitchell Sharp, it was annotmced in the House of Commons yesterday that this was one of the matters being discussed by the Premiers of the two Countries, the conservation of the •tocks of fish in the North Atlantic. One week from today, Wednesday,next week, one week from today, fourteen Nations,including Canada, including the Soviet Union,are meeting in the City of Halifax and on their agreed agenda for their meeting is a discussion of the fish stocks, the stocks of fish in the North Atlantic and the proper steps for the Nations to take to preserve and conserve these stocks of fish.

Was there ever a resolution so completely unnecessary a~ this one here todayl The resolution asks this House to send word to the Prime Minister that he should do something that he has already arranged to do and that he has done today in Moscow. It is now,in Moscow, nine or ten o'clock tonight or whatever hour it may be and the second conference between our Premier and the Soviet Union's Premier has taken place and this discussion of a conference to conserve stocks of fish in the North Atlantic has already taken place.

If we were to be so foolish, so foolish as to adopt this resolution and send a telegram to the Prime Minister in Moscow, he would receive it sometime tomorrow, Thursday, and his reply to us would be, "Thank you for your message, I have already taken up the matter with the Premier of the Soviet Union." How foolish could we make ourselves look? How foolish? He would add perhaps that,next Wednesday. fourteen Nations,~ncluding Canada and the Soviet llnion,are meeting for that very purpose. 4096

May 19, 1971 (Afternoon) 1.ipe No, 695 NC - 5 MR. S~tALLWOOD: Mr, Speaker, the Prime MinisteT of Csnad, is very vividly aware, he is not at l ignorant but veF vividly aware of the need, of the dire need, the life and death need to conserve the stocks of fish in the North Atlantic. He is very conscious of the need. Ht! does not need this House to inform him of that need. He is already thoroughly briefed, thoroughly briefed. He was briefed before he went to Moscow.

It was agreed between the two Countries,long before he went, that one of the matters to be discussed between the two Premiers would be this very matter dealt with in today's resolution, and having agreed to a discussion of this matter, I would assW11e that the Premier of the Soviet Union, Mr. Kosygin, who is an engineer by trade and a man of thorough going knowledge, I myself was amazed,in the five hours I spent with him, to discover how wonderfully well infonned he is and how wonderfully curious he is to learn everything he can learn.

I have no doubt that he is thoroughly well briefed by his Minister of Fisheries in the Soviet Union and J certainly know that our Premier, the Premier of Canada, Mr. Trudeau, is abo thoroughly well briefe·d on the same matter by our Canadian Minister of Fisheries. So this resolution introduced in the House here, no doubt with good motives, is a work as the Westminister Confessions of the Presbyterian Church or is it the thirty-nine articles of Faith in the Anglican Church one of them, uses the term"this is a work of supererogation.'' ....

Completely unnecessary, redundant, superfluous, unnecessary, and a waste of time because it ~ould ask this House to send the Premier,in Moscow,a request to do what he had already decided to do. It has formed part of the formal agenda.

I discussed the matter this morning with the Minister of Fisheries of Canada,to confirm for my own satisfaction what I already knew, but knew from another source, Now I got it from the Minister himself, the Minister of Fisheries, that when Canada and the Soviet Union were arrangjng the matters that were to be discussed by the two Premiers in Moscow, the conservation of the stocks of fish in the North Atlantic was one of th,•,;c- matter~ and this fact was announced in the llouse of Commons ycst<'ru;1y. I must confess, Hr. Spc.ikcr, th.'lt 1 ·<lit.I not ask the Minister ~ n c..,

May 19, 1971 (Afternoon) Tape No. 695 NC - 6 MR. S~LLWOOD: whether the announcement had been made by him as Minister of Fisheries or by the Acting Premier of Canada, Mr. Mitchell Sharp. It matters not which of them made the announcement, what matters is that the announcement was made, that the very thing that this resolution would ask this House to do, that is to aay,to ask Mr. Trudeau to do in Moscow what Mr. Trudeau had already arranged to do. This was yesterday and as of today he has done it. He has had his discussion 1 this very day,in Moscow,with the Premier of the Soviet Union.

So while we are all lost in admiration of the thoughtfulness·and patriotism of the hon. gentlemen, we regret that it is totally superfluous. A work of supererogation. unnecessary, uncalled for and a mere ·waste of time. I therefore suggest to him that he withdraw the motion and let us get on with something that needs to be done. This does not deed to be done. Thie is a work of supererogation. This is unnecessary.

This asks the Premier of Canada to do something that he had already agreed to do and has now done and which indeed on Wednesday, a week from today, fourteen different Nations, in~ludine the Soviet Union and Canada,are meeting in Halifax to discuss for three days. Nov what can the adoption to this resolution add to that situation? Can it make it more likely that Mr. Trudeau will discuss the matter with Mt. Kosygin! No. No. That is already done. That has been done. It was done today before this House met. Hours before the House met here this afternoon it was done between the two Premiers.

So it is not going to get the Premier to do it. They have already done it. There was no need of this resolution to get them to do it. They had already decided to do it. They had already done it. Will the adoption of this resolution make the matter of an International Conference more likely? No. The Conference has already been called. Will it make it more likely that the Conference will be called: No, because the Conference is being held one week from today in Halifax. Will the adoptiQn of this resolution bring 110re Nations than was likely to go there! No. Lecause fourteen Nations have agreed to go there. 4098

May 19, 1971 (Afternoon) Tape No. 695 NC - 7 MR. SMALLWOOD: Will the adoption of this resolution get that Conference in Halifax to deal with this matter? No, hecause they have already put it on their agenda. What purpose will t~e adoption of this resolution accomplish? All it will do is to lay the House open to the acquisation. the just ,-nd j~stif.iable acquisation,that we are sleeping. We are asleep. We are asleep. We are asleep at the switch. That we did not know that this matter was already set for discussion between the two Premiers.

That this matter was already set for discussion amidst fourteen fishing nations. What would they be? They would be Canada. They would be th~ United States. They would be the United Kingdom. They would be France. They would be the Soviet Union. That is five. And five from fourteen - a lot of other Countries as well. Spain, Portugal, France. I think Poland, 1°am not sure, but all the Countries and I am not sure if it in~ludes Japan.

I am not sure , if they are one of the fourteen nations but it certainly includes the overwhelming majority of the Countries that engage in the fisheries off this Coast and certainly, Sir,this Conference includes enough NPtions to make it certain that what they agree on will be done. That what they agree on other n~tions 1 not attending, will have no choice but to respect and observe. A week ago this resolution, a week ago today, Wednesday of last week. might have been justified, before we knew that the matter had already been set on the agenda for discussion between Mr. Trudeau and Mr.

Kosygin. before we knew that this was going to be discussed this day, Wednesday,in Moscow,by the two Premiers. Before we knew perhaps that this was on the agenda, the principal item,the .main item of the agenda of discussion of the fourteen nations in Halifax,meeting one week from today. There might have been some reason for it a week ago, Wednesday of last week, but there certainly is no reason for it today and I suggest that the hon. gentleman withdraw it 1with the consent of the House. He will need the consent of the House to withdraw it.

That he withdraw it and express his happiness to learn from me that the Prime Minister has already done the very thing that his resolution,if adopted, would ask him to do. He has already done it. 1he matter is well " in hand. It cannot go any 4099

May 19. 1971 (Afternoon) Tape No. 695 NC - 8 MR. SMALLWOOD: higher in Canada than the Prime Minister of Canada. It cannot go any higher in the Soviet Union than the Premier of the Soviet Union. It cannot go any higher than the Conference of fourteen gre~t fishing Nations meeting a week from today in Halifax. So if he would withdraw the motion, then he can bring forward some other matter. Any hon. member of the House who is not a member of the Government, any backbencher, any private member of the House,had the right to bring forward any business,as this happens to be private member's day.

So drop this unnecessary, this superfluous matter, drop it, ·rt has already been taken care of. Let us not waste the time of the House . any further. Please withdraw it, and take up some other matter. MR. CROSB-IE: Mr. Speaker, what we just heard,of course,is what we would expect to hear from the hon. the Premier in connection with this resolution. The Premier has just suggested that we- should not waste the time of the House discussing this resolution,when he has just discussed the resolution himself for twenty-five minutes. 4100 .•

May 19, 1971. Tape 696. Page 1. Afternoon Session. lion. the Premier felt it worth discussing for twenty-five m1nutes,then I think it is worthwhile to have a few words on this Resolution, because thC're is nothing that the Hon. the Premier has said, nothing, not a word, not a scrap, not an iota of information he has given the House that takes anything away from this Resolution.

Now, the Hon. the Premil!r said;"it was announced in the House of Commons yesterday . that the matter of the depletion ' of fish stocks in the North Atlantic is going to be discussed by the Prime ~inister with the proper authorities in Russia." This Resolution was introduced 1 incid­ cntally,·Mr. Speaker, before any announcement was made in the House of Commons at Ottawa yesterday. It was introduced in this House yesterday afternoon at three of the clock, which would be half•past one,Ottawa time, > · which would be a half hour before the House of Commons at Ottawa rnet.

But Jn any event,whether the author of the Resolution knew that this announcement t,ad been made in the House of Commons at Ottawa or not is of no moment.

This Resolution has nothing in it that can harm the discussions in Russia. ~11 it does is demonstrate to the PrimP- Minister of Canada the concern of the m,1mbers of this House of Assembly, not just the concern of the Premier, I presume he has some concern about J.t,nor the concern of the Government, but the concern of all members on both sides of this House about the serious situation affectin~ the fisheries, particularly of this Province,because of the depletion of fish stocks due to over-fishing by Russians and others in the North Atlantic.

Does this Resolution do anything to deter Prime Minister Trudeau from pressini his point? _ No, it does not. Does it do anything to discourar,e his trsolution, enthusiasm, courage and devotion to duty in pressing the polnt at ~oscow? No, it does not. It encoura~es him. hecause,if the Resolution is passed he will know that unanimously the members of this House of Assembly feel that this matter should be discussed; that we consider it to be a ~rave problem; that meanin~ful discussions are badly needed; that an international conference is hadly needed. Now, ~Ir.

Speaker, I a111 goinr, to leave to another member on this sidl' of the House more carable than I or more fully briefed on this suh_1ect 4101

May 19 , 19 71. Tape 696 Page 2. Afternoon Session. to discuss the great point the Premier has made on the International Conference to be held in Halifax next week. He will deal with that. lie will tell what kind of a great International Conference that is. It is certainly not the conference that is contemplated by this resolution, not at all. But I will leave that, The hen. member for Fortune Bay is fully familiar with that Conference, He has been at many of them, He will expound on that.

The RPsolation asks th1s House to express our desire that Prime Minister Trudeau discuss with Russian Leaders the gra.ve problem experienced by fishermen on the East Coast of Canada, particularly the depletion of fish stocks; that he urge them to join with Canada in convening an International Conference for Conservation of Fisheries in the North Atlantic,comprising all Nations utilizing the fisheries of the North /.tlantic; tf'.at we communicate this forthwith by telegram to the Hon. the l'rime Minister. Now, Mr.

Speaker, apparently the Government of Canada succumbed vesterday to the constant pressure that was put on the Government of Canada by the eonservative M.P's in Ottawa to include this on his agenda. This House well remembered, the people of this Province well remember that this item was not on Prime Minister Trudea ·u•s agenda, was not to be discussed at Moscow, would not now be discussed at Moscow if Mr. John Lundrigan, Walter Carter, Jim McGrath, the other Conservative M.P's at Ottawa, representinp Newfoundland, had not made an issue of 'it in the House of Commons.

On two question periods they made an issue of this. Prime M:l.nister Trudeau or his Government have agreed now to add that to the agenda. Does that show that the fact that this had to be brought up in the House of Commons two or three times and pressed by the Opposition Members , does that show a burning enthusiasm by Prime Minister Trudeau to discuss the matter'? He is discussing it under pressure 1because he was pressured by the Opposition at Ottawa to discuss it. What harm, Joey ~other sunk~ ~~at harm can it do, Joey got her sunk even lower? ~~at harm can it do,~r.

Spe~ker, for this House to pass a Resolution 4102 •

~ay 19, 1971. Tape 696 Page 3. Afternoon Session. sayinp; that we unanimously desire this to be discussed; that- we unanimously are concerned about itj that we unanimously feel there should be an Inter­ nationnl Cflnference, not this Conference of next week, an International Conference convened to discuss this whole topic and do something about itj what' possible harm could there be? The only harm is this: That the motion is introduced not by the Government or by somebody on the Government side but by a member on the Opposition Side in the House. The Hon. the Premier just cannot bear that.

Just cannot bear to think that the Government side should support anything suggested over here. It is a r,reat pity that every feeling and think:!.ng and every act of the Premier is dictated by such partisan consideration. Mr. Speaker, there is no more serious problem for this Province. The House remembers the failure of the fishery :In Labrador South last year. The House well remembers the failur~ of the fishery in Labrador South the year before. The House well ren,embers what has happened to the Labrador Rchooners that used to go down to Labrador to fish. How many went last year?

They nre no longer getting fish in along the Labra~~r Coast because it is all being caught off in International waters,off in the North Atlantic. What is the 800d of an inshore fisherman waiting for fish to come in to his nets,if they are all being caught outside~ knat is the good of the longliner man goin~ out to fish,if all the fish . is being caught by trawlers out in the North Atlantic? Russia is the country that :l,s taking, I forget the pl!rcentage, but almost half the total catch.

I have not the number of tons but it is stunning, We all remember the general difficulty in catching fish inshore in Newfoundland any lonrer. What could be more serious to this Province1 What difference will collective bargaining for fishermen make? What difference will a new marketing system for fresh frozen fish make? What difference will National Sea Products make.coming into St, John's here wi,th their six new trawlers? . t-'hat difference will any of that make, if in five or ten years tine there is no f _ish out there to be cau~ht? What difference "•ill it he then?

This is the central pro\,] em of the Newfonndlnnd 4103

May 19, 1971. Tape 696 Pa~e 4. Afternoon Session. fishery. Th<'re have been twenty-two years when no proper co-ordinated approach has been taken to it. There are some signs that a proper approach now is going to be taken to the organization of the industry 1n Newfound­ land, Finally the Government is showing some initiative.we hope. But what is the good of that '·if,after the new system is instituted and improved upon in the next two or three years, there is no fish out there to be caught at all?

What is the good of Newfoundland being on the fishinr, y.rounds of the North Atlantic,if there is no fish or very little on the fishing grounds? So, what could be more important to this House of Assembly? The Hon. Premier says that Mr. Trudeau has already discussed this item in Moscow. What is the source of his information? I saw a National T.V. interview with Mr. Trudeau before he left for Moscow, They asked him what was on the agenda, l\e mentioned, for example, the situation of the Jews in Russia, !IATO , a number of other things.

I never heard him mention, this was two days ago, when he left, I never heard him r,1ention that very important question of the depletion of fish stocks ~n the e11st coast of Canada • He rever mentioned that in his interview before he got on board of the plane. How much was that on his mind? How much was he seized with that question? What great importance did that have with the Prime Minister? He never mentioned it as one of the items, as they interviewed him waiting to go aboard the plane. Now the Hon. Premier says it was discussed yesterday. Who says? For how long, what fishery expert was there from Canada?

Who is the fishery adviser with the Prime Minister? What fishery expert is with him? Who advised him yesc~raay in his talk with Mr. Kosygin on this question? The Hon. Premier said he had a five hour chat with the Prime Minister. I am sure that must have been a great education for the Prime Minister. If the Premier did not give him some better sonrces than he gives this House for some of his statements, he is not very well informed in the fishery. We heard a difficult statement the other nip.ht. Ninety per cent of all the women working in Newfoundland, Premier said, were 4104

May 19, 1971. Tape 696. Page 5, Afternoon Session. working in fish plants, supermarkets and with the Government. Yet when he is asked to give the source of his statistics; was it DBS, what was it~ No, No, I am not roini to give the source. Never! No! MR SPEAKER: Order ..: MR.CROSBIE: You think that is far away,Mr. Speaker? The hon. minister who just spoke is a non-person, did not hear him. Now, Mr. Speaker, _ we know of this concern at Ottawa for the west coast fishery, we know there is some concern at Ottawa for the east coast fishery.

But, if we did not have the six Opposition M.P's at Ottawa now, or the five who are there (one is busy down in Newfoundland preparing for a change of Government• That is a vrry important public task and duty. Nothing more important to the interest of this Province than what that hon. gentleman is doing) ' ~f we did not have those five Opposition M.P's, in Ottawa what would we be hearing now in Canada on the problems of the fishery in Newfoundland! You would not hear a scrap, you would not hear a peep, there would not be a sound.

Yet these five r,entlemen, b?cause of their activity and interest in the queRtion , have made the fisheries one of the big issues in the Louse of Commons in Canada. They have forced the Prime Minister,because of their' pressure,to include this on his agenda. No matter how hard he presses it - MR.SMALLWOOD: Go away, - becemes a great Tory now­ MR,CROSBIE: Poor old Premier, poor old Premier.' Expel me! MK,SMALLWOOD: A Liberal Reformer - MR.CROSBIE: There is the hon. premier;expelled me._now he is crying,. Now he is crying, now he regrets it. He wants me back. He wants me back. What is the offer?

MR.S~ALLWOOD: Tory now. ~.CROSBIE: Who is Tory now, that is the question that is bothering the Premier - disguised as Liberals,all around the Province. MR • SHA T.LWOOD: I am not bothered by it. I am not bothered by it MR.CROSBIE: They are all around the Province. A Tory here a Tory there. t!R.,SMALLWOOD: I am harpy to see him· go Tory. 4105

Muy 19, 1971. Tape 696 Page 6. Afternoon Session , M~.SPEAKER: Order please! I would like to remind viRitors in the gallery that they are not supposed to make their presente known in the House by noise nor movement nor applaure nor laughter "lot· anything of that nature. I would like to ask the hon. member wbo is speaking to get a little closer to the subject • MR.CROSB!.1.':~ Yes, I think I was discussinr Tories, but the Hon. Sneaker says it is not_ lt is a topic that was introduced by the Hon. Premier. So, Mr.

Speaker, this is one of the main problems and is going to he increasingly a main problem, the fishery in Newfoundland. Look at the problems we have had with foreign vessels and Canadian vessels coming within the three mile limit and the twelve mile limit. With what vir;or has that been pressedl Wi~h what vi~our is this question of conservation of fish stocks being pressed? I mentioned last week the herring yield, how the catch of herring 1 we ·Are told, .this year is a half of last year's catch. That is just one aspect, herring.

I noticed in the paper the day other/that Russian fishing vessels off the coast of Massachusetts were sweeping up in their trawls lobster pots set by the American fisherme!', They are not p,oing to take that lying down. In fact they are out in their vessels now discussing it. So what possible harm, I say, if the Prime Minister of Canada has already discussed this with Mr. Kosygin,let us ask him to discuss it again. Let us ask him to discuss this with renewed vigour. Let us . ask him to discuss this several more times before he leaves Moscow. He is there I think for eleven days.

Let us express our strong desire for this to be discussed and fish to be conserved. Let us express our strong desire for a real international conference,comprising all nations utilizing the fisheries of the North Atlantic. The fact that this is being discussed in Moscow or was discussed yesterday is a wonderful tribute to our. five conservative M.P's, in Ottawa, a wonderful tribute to them. MR.SMALLWOOD: Now low~ ltow lm,,i How lot.•~ ~IJLCROSRU:: Jf the Premier wants t9 heckle, I will stop -i.·hile he heckles. Does the Premier w~nt to heckle? Heckle away! The !!on. Pr.el'lier says that ~106

May 19, 1971. Tape 696. Page 7. Afternoon Session. th<.- Pdme f-'inister does not need this House to remind him about this flshc-rfcs question. No, he does not need this House as Jonr. as he has those five r:onservative M.P's. up in Ottawa to remind him. But, it will -do no harm for this House to remind the hon. S!entleman,the Hon. the Prime Mfnister,also that we are all very much concerned with this question~that we are all as concerned as the five Conservative M.P's, at Ottawa are. That is important to all sides of this House. That is no~ a partisan matter.

That we want it discussed not just, not just; "there are fisheries f,{r. Kosygin, I must mention fisheries in the North Atlantic.' Premier Smallwood wants me to mention it. Conservative M.P's in the House want me to mention the fisheries." Premier Kosygin says; "Yes, Mr. Trudeau, there are fisheries in the North Atlantic. We can consider that discussed." That is not what we want. We want it discussed in aepth. We want the Canadian-Newfoundland position put, that we want some conservation measures for fish in the North Atlantic. We want it stressed, we want it discussed again, ~hat this Resolution asks.

That the Resolution b,: passed and wired to Moscow can do no harm at all,can only do good in t~e interest of this subject,f,{r. Speaker,at Ottawa. So I for one am certainly going to vote for it. · I do not believe the hon. member for St.John's East is going to withdraw, in fact he will not have unanimous consent, if he does attempt that. It is an excellent Resolution. He is to be congratulated He is in the great tradition of those five Conservative M.P's, at Ottawa whom we all thank today, whom the Premier has to thank for having this matter on the agenda at Moscow. MR.EARLE: Mr.

Speaker, in sp!te of the Premier's as~istance or suggestion that this Resolution be withdrawn, I think that without doubt it is about the most important Resolution that has come before this House in many a long day. It cannot be covered up or camouflaged by insisting that all of this has already been done and the Resolution is completely useless. It is a strange sequence of events, very strange that a few hours after this Resolution ;,,as brought before this House a statement was made in 4107

May 19, 1971. Tape 696. Page 8. Afternoon Session. Ottawa,saying that the matter was being taken care of and that the Prime Minister would be talking to the Russian authorities on the subject of the East Coast Fisheries. It is a very,very strange coincidence indeed.

However, that is not half as strange as the fact is that,if our Government was aware of this, that this was one of the prime items on the agenda of the Prime minister when he visited Russia,why did they not shout to the rooftops in support of what the Prime Minister of Canada was doing] Why did they wait for a Resolution of this type to be brought before our House? Certainly this fa of vital interest to our Province. We are all behind the Prime Minister.

The Government should be the first to lead the bandwagon and say the Prime Minister of Canada, the great Pierre Eliot Trudeau,is at last showing a great interest in the fisheries, he is going to Moscow to talk about our fisheries. When do we hear about it? We do not hear about it,Mr. Speaker, until the Opposition in this House introduces a Resolution. MR.SMALLWOOD: In addition to turning Tory,away from the local Liberals, has he also turned Tory against the Liberals in Ottawa? completely Tory? MR.EARLE: That is a silly remark, MR.S~ALLWOOD: Answer it. Answer it.

MR.EARLE: It does not difnify a reply, it is too silly. Is he gone MR.SMALLWOOD: It does. it does. ts he definitely gone whole-ho, Tory? MR.EARLE: Every word that I have said in support of the Tories in Ottawa and the Tories in Newfoundland. ~l of whom have been fi~hting with all of their ability and today is ample evidence of it, in support of the - MR.SMALLWOOD: - A fei..• sr..eers a~ainst Trudeau. Go ahead! MR.EARLE: I am not sneerinp,, I have praised the Hon, the Prime Minister of Canada.

Do not try to cast such silliness, That is only worthy of the Minister of ~ncial ;,ervices, This. is the sort of thin~ we have been r,etting thrown at us from across the House. We hope we are not called upon to ignore the Premi.er at this C.c,nference,as we have that r.entleman. But 41U8

~fay 19, 19 71 • Tape 696. Par,e 9, Afternoon Session. this is just a red herring. We are t11lking on fish. Here we go with the red herring again coming up,to try to divert me from what I am saying. This is obvious, and should ~bviously have been a prime concern of the Government of Newfoundland to come out wholeheartedly, publicly and every means,of the way in their conversations with the Premier and every other means they could use, to say that at last the fisheries of Newfound­ land are retting great attention. We are one hundred per cent behind the Prime Minister of Canada.

We wish him well, We support him with all the resolutions he wants, This is the sort of thing we have been prayin!? for in Newfoundland for years. But how does it come out in this House; It comes 011t because a Resolution was introduced by the Opposition on this side, Thts is sneered at, it has been all too late. Whose fault is it that ft is too late? Why was not the Government of this Province making the d,e people of Newfoundland aware of what _, Prfme Minister of Canada was eoing to do on our behalf?

Certainly that would have been the greates ·t feather fa the cap of the Prime Minister in his support by Newfoundlanders. 1 think ~his is a tremendous,unforgivable ·amouflage. It is a sort of thing that is just said to throw people off. Anyhow;Mr. Speaker, in speaking to this Res_olution I will try to confine my remarks to the suggestions that an International Conference is to be held in Halifax: this time next week, is I pres\Dlle the meeting of ICNAf (International Commission for the North west Atlantic Fisheries), This Commission consists not of fnurteen nations but of fifteen nations.

They are,if the House is interested, Canada, Denmark, France, Federal Republic of Germany. Iceland, Italy. Japan. Norway, Poland. Portugal, Roumania, Spain, Union of Soviet Socialists Republics, United Kingdom. tlnited States of America. These are the members of ICNAF. Now it so happens,Mr. Speaker, that ten years ago I was the Canadian Commissioner on that body, the same international body as exist~ today.with the same members,with the exception at that time, Japan. I do not think Japan was officially a member~ when I was there, Meetings were held, The 41i19

Mny 19, 1971. Tape 696, Page 10. term of a Commissioner is for two years. I served on that body for two years. Meetings were held,the first year of my office,in Washington, Washinp,ton, U.S.A., the second year in Moscow. We spent, I spent,in company with all memhers of these delegations from these various nations, nine days in Moscow,discussing the fisheries. Now I was by no means the first Canadian Commissioner on l(NAF. This organization had been going on for many years. I came in some~•here when the thing had been functioning and going on.

But, the Premier has displayed amazing ignorance of what this hody does. Ever since this body was formed, this International Lody, the main item on its agenda, one of the principal items,has been the conservation of the fisheries. The fisheries of the North West Atlantic has been their prime motive. They have been talking about it now ever since the organ- iaation was formed. At the time I was in Washington and again in Moscow I would say that this subject took up about at least fifty per cent, perhaps seventy-five per cent of the time of the agenda . of this Conference.

Let me tell the House how it was done, why it is so necessary that the Praliament of Newfoundland stir up the Government of Canada and stir up this International body to take a proper look at what is our basic problem, that is the conservation of fish stocks, The ICNAF Organization in those days, it..is still true today, was largely governed and largely influenced hy scientific people.

There were very heavy delegations of scientists,from all the countries of the World.serving on that organization, When it came to a conservation measures these chaps,who were learned gentlemen of the highest educatlonal quality,spent hours and hours talking about the scientific approach to the fisheries. They prepared papers. I remember in Moscow by the time we finished we had a stack of scientific documents on the fisheries. They talked from a scientist standpoint, from a scientists viewpoint,on the conservation of the fisheries.

Even in those days the scientists vere '3arninr, of the depletion of the fisheries of the North Atlantic.of the ":aters of the North West Atlantic. They were urr,inp 4110

May 19, 1971. Tape 696. Page 11. Afternoon Session. caution, But where this orr,anization fell down, where it is so necessary for the Newfoundland Government, if it is truly interested in the fisheries, to try to put some influence on that organization was.that,while the thesis and the scientific approach was excellent, the practical approach to actually doinr. something was almost non-existent. Because,while I was in Moscow,! had a great opportunity to look at some of the fisheries, fishery operations over there.

Now, it may seem strange to the House that the city of Moscow, which is 700 miles from the nearest sea.is one of the greatest f:l.shing manufacturing ports of the world. Seven hundred miles from the sea, yet it is a great fish-producing area. How is it a fish-producing area? There are ringed around Moscow large, huge fish processing plants. I was in some of them. I was in one of them that had 3,000 workers, in which there were seventy-two items of fish being prepared. Where did that fish come from?

I ate fish in that plant,for lunch,which came off the Grand Banks of Ne~~­ foundland • I ate fish which came from the Japanese Sea. I ate fish which came from the far north. I ate fish which came from every conceivabil.e corner of the globe. That fish was taken into·•Moscow by river boat an~ barge, from the ports on the seacoast,and processed in Moscow. This is almost something which the House may find difficult to believe. The quality of that fish that I ate in Moscow was far superior to much of the fish that you will get today in the supermarkets in St. John's,Newfoundland.

Now that seems to be a wild statement but it is true. Some of the quality of that fish,which I ate in Moscow in 1961,was superior in quality and flavour to some of the fish which you or I can get in a supermarket in St. John's today. AN .HON •°"'Ef-'BF.R: (inaudible) ~fR • F ARLF.: There were all types. I said there were seventy-two varieties there. I tried my best to eat all seventy-two. I am very fond of fish so I sampled just about everything that was there. I wanted top.et an insight into the types of fish that they were preparing.

The strange thing about the way they prerared this fish, thi_s is 'lo!here a nation such as Russia, I 4111

M.1y 19, 1971. Tnpe 6%. Pa~e 12. Afternoon Session. hnve no r.rcat br1.ef for the "''"'Y the Russians do their business , or the w:i}' the Russians do their international affairs or anythinr, of that sort but ,when it cc,mes to the fundamen tal facts of supportinp . their people 1.ith food,they arc in many instances head and shoulders over us, ~articularly in the fisheries. Secause in this particular plant, which I mentioned ,of 3,000 worker~, wh-Jch- was ioverned by a lady; who was a scientist of the hir.hest degree, she controlled that plant and she ran it. Believe me,she wns n -~ood fish plant man:1.r,cr. I wish t••e / 4112

rtay l9, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - . 1 ~m. EARLf.: had a dozen of them in Newfow,dland. 8ut that woman ran this huge orr,anization and they produced all of this fish and the strange thing about it was that the equipment in that plant largely came from Holland, from West Gennany, from Belgium and from Canada. The conveyer belts and all of the equipment used for conveying the fish was made in Canada. MR. SMALLWOOD: Hould the hon. gentleman yield a moment? The late John T.

Cheeseman, when he was Minister of Fisheries in Newfoundland,and I were in Paris together, We went to the famous Paris market, which then was in the heart of Paris. It i~ now built out near Orly Airport, right along side of the airport.

But; we saw more fish and John Cheeseman, who knew fish, admittedly knew fish, John Cheeseman s·aid to me; "look,! am ashamed to go back to Newfoundland, We do not know anything about fish." We saw more fish there in the fish part of the market. we went there about four o'clock in the morning, five o'clock,when the stuff was corning in from all over France,pouring into the market,starting about three o'clock, By five o'clock in the morning . it was pretty well full. We saw more fish in the fish part of the Paris market,that morning at five o'clock,than you would see in Newfoundland in a whole year.

That morning and every morning was the same thing, Like - it must have been similar to what the hon p,entlerran s31 7 in Moscow. }tR. EARLE: What the hon. the Premier says is very correct indeed ln fact it is true. It is true of so many places in the world that I have been that the fish available to the public in these cities and the variety and species and even the quality is so greatly sµperior to some of the s~uff we get in North America that we wonder if we have been asleep for generations. The miracle which I was pointing out,that Hoscow is 700 miles from the sea.

It is 700 miles from the ocean and yet they were able to produce this fine quality and they are doing some of it with Canadian equipment. This is the point I was making. Now they have developed tremendous techniques of smoking and processing fish. I think there is a greater variety of smoked fish in Russia than you will ~et anywhere else in the wor1d. Very, very delicious fish, delightful 4113

May 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 2 ~IR. F~l{_!~~ to eat. They go in for smoking very heavily. But strangely enough,certain species which are available on our Grand Banks they throw over hoard. For instance, you cannot get a scaliop in Russia. rhev do not like scallops. They do not thing they are fit to eat. For some reason or other 1 they will not eat them and certain other species which they will not eat. In spite of that they are preparing,in this particular plant and probably the others are like it, they had seventy-odd varieties of fish products 6 of excellent kinds. Now what I am leading up to, Mr.

Speaker, is this; that the lady who ran that plant spoke very fluent English and over lunch I sat down and talked to her. One of the most frightening observations,which amazed me at that time,was the statement that if the people of Moscow could not get fish to eat at least three or four times a week, there would be danger of another revolution in Russia •. They are such tremendous fish eaters, it is ·so much apart of their daily diet that they eat fish practically everyday of the week. They are great fish consumers.

By the way, herring is one of the biggest items that they consume• tre.nendous quantities of herring. The" are very, very fond of it. Now this all pin-points that the fisheries are of such great importance to the Russian and the feeding of their people and there are so many millions upon millions of their people that they are not just going to sit down and have a small country like Canada dictate to them. Canada is not in a position, Canada cannot wage gunbolt warf.are,over the fisheries,with Russia. So it must be done by International ar,reement.

The point which I made about IC~:AF will be meeting in Halifaz next week ,that for years and years of that oranization's operation and functioning, it concentrated so heavily on the exchange of scientific information, By the way, I am very proud to say that Canada is quite foremost in the provision of scientific information, Some of our scientists who operate here out of St. John's have world famous nanes,as far as the science of the fishing is concerned,and we have every reason to be proud of it.

But, when it came to items on the agenda, such as restricting of fishinr,, the inspection of fishinr- gear, the conservation 4114

May 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 3 MR. F.ARJ.F.: and restriction of fishing of any sort, then y9u came up with a complete blank wall. There was no co-operation, no desire to get on with the job and certainly no indication at that time that these nations were willing to listen to Canada at all. So I pTedict,unless things have changed very, very tremendously over the past ten years ,the Prime Minister of Canada, if he discusses fisheries, is goinr, to have a very difficult task on his hands indeed. Because,

whereas in Canada, apparently, Canada gives the imp~ession that they can sometimes live without their fishery, Newfoundland may not be able to, but certainty the impression one gets Federally is that the fishery are not too important. Rut Russia cannot live without the fisheries. Russia is very dependent on the feeding of its people upon the fisheries of the world and · they are going to exploit them to the greatest extent they possibly can. So, Mr.

Speaker, I think, the hon. the Premier's ,, remarks ' :as to why we should withdraw this Resolution and not get behind it are completely out of place and unwarranted at this time. Because,whether it is too late or too early, there is nothing, nothing, absolutely nothing of more importance to Newfoundland than this :Jouse's support 1in every conceivable way,of any efforts which can be made to preserve and conserve our fisheries. Now I would, I think, have gone along with the Government if they had been men enough,instead of trying to ridicule my hon. friend from St.

John's East, when he came out with one of the most sensihl1kt'esplutions that has ever been presented in this House, instead of trying to ridicule him and make him look small, if the Government had been men enough to up and say; well, the Prime Minister has already got this well in hand and it would look foolish for us to go back to him now.

But .cannot the House jointly have this resolution amended to support the efforts of the Prim~ .Minister over there~ Now I doubt that,if we can only go along with that at this late date, but this whole argument has been hrour,ht up and brought to fruition by the action of this side of the House, which surely,if nothing else, must indicate to the people of Newfoundland where the real interest· in the fishery of Newfoundland lie\ It is not · a post facto statenent by this side 4115

~lny 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 4 MR. EARLF.: of the House. The only post facto statements that have been made are from the other side of the House. These statements 1 that were made by the Premier today, should have had been made a week ago, not today. This is where the whole thing has been thrown completely out of gear. So he has in his own words condemned his Government for showing a lack of interest and publicity on the sort of thing which he contends that the Prime Minister of Canada is now doing.

Mr.Speaker, unless this House uses all its influence on the Federal Government of Canada to ~ake it,in its tum,use its strongest influence on the International body of ICNAF and through every other means it possible can on business of its officials to various countries interested in the fisheries, I am afraid that the Federal Government of Canada may say to itself, and rightly so~•~here is the interest of the people of Newfoundland,where this item is vital, This is the very life.blood of their existence and what are we hearing from them?"The only thing that we are hearing from at the moment, Mr.Speaker, is a very loud appeal for the co-operation of both sides of the House on a subject which is of the upmost importance to the f~ture benefit and welfare of this Province.

MR. T. A. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker, _ in supporting the Resolution, I think, there are certain facts that we should take note of, when deciding whether or not the Prime !!inister of Canada had gone to Russia just bubblin~ with enthusiasm for the discussions and in anticipation of the discussions of conservation methods in the North Atlantic.

The history of the Prime Minister 1with respect to conservation in the North Atlantic,even up to three days ago.should indicate to this House very clearly that there is not any fierce loyal enthusiasm for the alledged discussion on conservation of fish and marine species in the north Atlantic at the preserit Conference in ?loscow. Last week there was a very lenr,thly and detailed brefing of the Prime Minister preparatory to his trip to Moscow, The siRnificant thin~ is that at that briefing the subject of fish conservation, the subject of fisheries, fish generally, was not mentioned. There was no reference to it.

It was not on the agenda. The PrfJT1c ~linister was not briefed. The reason that was given, !1r. Speaker, 411G

May 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK -5 MR. IIICJ-...1·1AN: following the briefing, as to why that was not discussed, why there was no briefing, was that the Government of Canada and the Government of the U.S.S.R. had already settled the importance difference and the important problem that existed between them,namely that of conservation of Canadian fish stocks in- Canadian territorial waters in the Pacific. Now what was the next step that was taken? The next step was taken was on Friday morning.

That was the day following the briefing of last week, The six Opposition Hembers of Parliament, all six, from l!ewfoundland wrote a formal letter to the Prime Minister asking that this be included on the agenda. This was on Friday of last week. Setting forth very clearly to the Prime Minister why in their opinion this should he included on the agenda, wny it is a vital importance to the people of Newfoundland and to the Canadian fishermen, and strongly urged that this be done.

Yesterday, Tuesday, just yesterday there was an acknowledgement of the letter written by the six Opposition Members, not from the Prime Minister, but from his office. 'Ihat letter simply said; "The Prime Minister had been made formally a,-1are of your representation. 11 He di.d not go on to say that conservation m,-asures and conservation discussions will be included on the agenda. Today, this morning,there was a question asked of the Minister of External Affairs 7 in the House of Commons,by Mr. John Lundrigan, M.P., one of the Opposition representatives from this Province.

The question asked was( 'May I ask the minister whether the question of conservation of marine resources will be discussed during the Prime Minister's current visit to the Soviet Union?'" The hon. Mr. Sharpe in reply said; "yes, Hr. Speaker, it is my understanding and it has been confirmed by the Minister of Fisheries that this is one of the items on the ar-enda. 11 Now let us consider . the efforts that had to be made.

The Ottawa news papers referred to the efforts of the six Newfoundland ?'embers of Parliament as an eleventh hour appeal to Prime Minister Trudeau to include the over exploitation of fish stocks of the r-:orth Atlantic on his af'.en da for discussions in,the Soviet Union. An eleventh hour appeal~ Why would there need to be an eleventh hour appeal to the Prime '!inister, if he left here just 4117

Hay 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 6 NR, HICJJ1AN: bubbling over with enthusiasm for the conservation of our fishery stocks in the North Atlantic? No, Mr. Speaker, the evidencE points up very clearly that the most that we can expect from any discussion that may take place in Moscow is simply a preliminary talk may be a warming up to the item, so that it can be said at the end; "yes, we did mention the fishery." Well, ~1r.

Speaker, the whole history and the attitucle of the Government of Canada towards fisheries have been put, not only by this side of the House, it was put in a dehate last week by the Leader of the Governmen·t, that he fears that there is very little concern on the part of parliamentarians for food producers in Canada, This is a very correct and factual statement. ,-:e have tried, representatives in the House of Commons during the past two or three years,from this Provincethave tired and tried to get Canada to assert some of its rights insofar as fish conservation is concerned particularly in the Nort9 Atlantic, but to no avail.

But let me direct this House's attention to the Convention that was entered into in 19581 at the Law of the Sea Conference, At that Conference, llr. Speaker, it was unanimously agreed that any marine nation such as Canada had the right to unilaterally impose conservation and manap,ement controls over the waters adjacent to its territorial waters ( in the convention 1by definition,this is our Continental Shelf) if the country in question was unsuccessful,during a six month period,of eliciting multi­ lateral ar,reements. Now that was agreed at the Law of the Sea Conference in 1958.

Canada has been woefully unsuccessful in exercising any conservation riRhts over its fish stocks in our territorial waters. Indeed, not only has it been woefully unsuccessful, it has been woefully disinterested in protecting and conserving and managi.n~ the fish stocks in our territorial waters. This has been raised during the past two or three years,time and time again,by the Newfoundlanders of ParliaMent. Until up to ahout eir,ht months ago, the reply always wasi"we are going to take this up ::ir.ain nt the next Law of the Sea Conference.,which ,,e hope will be held in 1971.

Now the faint hope ha!=: been expressed, by the ~f:lnister of Fisheries in Ott::iwa,that the Confer~nce will he held in 1973. nut there is n recent 4118

May 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 7 MR. JTICKJ!AN: statement emanating from the United Nations which indicates (1) there will be no Law of the Sea Conference in 1973. The agenda is not ev~n heen close to being finalized. That this takes years of negotiations amon~st representatives of the participating nations and that the optomistic members of the United Nations anticipate that .~aybe in 1975 this Law of the Sea Conference will be held, But there has been an indication from the United. Nations, Mr. Speaker, as to where conservation will rank in order of importance at. the Law of the Sea Conference, There has been some agreement as to the priorities of this Conference. Priority (

i) pollution of the waters. Priority (2) mineral rights underneath the waters. Priority (3) territorial rights; Priority (4) air corridor rights. There has been no indication at all yet where conservation or management will fit in the Law of the Sea Conference, if and when it is held in 197~. But what p,ood is it going to do? Canada was given rights at the last Convention, in the Convention that I just referred to,that were approved at the Law of the Sea Conference in 1958 and eanada has done nothing about it. :fo, :Mr.

Speaker, the evidence points up very, very clearly that the Pren.ier' s statement, that in the House of Commons there is very little concern for the food producers of this nation and that includes fishermen,is quite correct. Canada is most reluctant and most unconcerned to take any action which may help the fishermen,on tle Eastern Sea Board in particular. Now let us take a look at this ICNAF Conference that is coming up. We had one here last year or in 1969-70 and that Conference too dealt with conservation and certain resolutions were passed. Did it have any effect?

Did it improve the situation of the Newfoundland fishermen or the Canadian fishermen? Not on your life, }tr, Speaker. If anything it was totally ignored. Just listen, Mr, Speaker, to some of the resolutions that were passed, that each contracting Government,and this includes Canada and the other fourteen col.D\tries who attended, which had participated in the fishery for Atlantic salmon,take appropriate action to limit the aggregate tonnage of vessels employed or catch taken by its nationals. Did Denmark pay any attention to that Convention? Not on your life, Pr. Speaker. 4119

!fay 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 8 HR. llJCK ttJ\N: TherP. :f.s another one ,the conservation of herring in the convcnt:f .on area, The urge and the restrain of the further expansion of the herrinr, fishery be restricted, Any action taken to conserve herring as a result of the ICNAF resolutions? No, Mr. Speaker, So are we going to sit back, are we going to use this as an excuse for not passing this resolution?

That next week in the City of l~alifax we will find a meeting of the fourteen participating nations.going all the way from the U.S.S.R. with their master production,to Japan which is a r,reat producer, Romania and all the others. Did Ice]and pay the slightest bit of attention to ICNAF resolutions and ICNAF conventions when it extented its territorial waters some years ago and arrested British trawlers? Did Iceland pay the slightest bit of attention to the protest from the participating nations? They did not.

And they still cont:lm,e to operate in the same manner and exercise the same jurisdiction as they did before ICNAF passed the resolution. 'l'he ICNAF meeting is not an answer to a vote against this resolution, Nr. Speaker. To give this House just some indication as to where our Newfoundland r0 ople sit on this resolution and w!,at over fishing is doinp, to our stocks, let me quote from an

article which appeared in the March 18, 1971 of the "Burin Peninsula Post''- "Apprehension is mounting concerning the lack of effective conservation in the waters off Newfoundland. Fishermen are concerned that cod and flounder may soon become as scarce as haddock and that the entire region may become fished out within a very short period." Then Mr. Harvey ?fajor 1 a very experienced Newfoundlanders who spent his - MR. S!IALT.POOD: a staunch Liberal.

MR. llCIKN!N: A staunch Liberal, but he puts loyality to Newfoundland ahead of Liberalism.That makes him rather peculiar, rather different, but he is a fist class~loyal,patriotic Newfoundlander, very knowledgeable of the frozen fish industry. Now listen to Hr. Major,an employee,on the Russian policy: Hr. ?-lajor said that• they, the Russians, had predetermined the sustalnahle yields of fish on the grounds close to their homeland and had est~h]ished a system of restriction to prevent over-fishinp. Their vess els have 1:1ercly left the !-:ussian fishing J!:rounds and now concentrate their 4120

May 19, 1971 Tape 697 (afternoon) PK - 9 !:!11.:.....!.HCJ:?-1AN: efforts in the waters which most fishermen believe are rightfully Canacl:ian. This is what is happening, There is no nation in the world more conservation conscious than is the Russian Nation, when it comes to its marine stocks and its fish stocks that lie within and off their territorial waters. They enforce it very ri~idly. You do not hear of Canadian or Danish or Norwe~ian or any ICNAF country ships invading the Russian territorial waters and fishin~ in their conservation, their conserved areas. So the Russians Move out here.

They cleaned us out of haddock. That is a scientific, factual statement. They ~rar,ged the spawning grounds. Eaddock which used to be 7even in 1960, the early 60's, the greatest landing of any species that the offshore fishery brought into the South Coast of Newfoundland, It has now become a luxury itelll!. They do not fish for it any more, they cannot find it. We have statements from our Newfoundland fish producers that the cod and the rose fish may have passed the point of sustainable yield, and that these two species will follow in the footstep of the haddock.

Again, Mr, Major 7in that same article,expressed the opinion that the t~elve mile limit,which is i~posed by the Federal Government,is a step in th.: right direction and is essential to the preservation to the inshore fishery. He feels, hcn,~ever, that is insufficient and that the limit~ should be extended to the entire continental shelf. Now this continental shelf theory, Hr. Speaker, is not new. The Americans are exercising it. Chile has exercised it. Other South American countries have exercised it.

They have unilaterally imposed a two hundred mile limit 1 under the ?,Ui~e of •. th~ theory of their territorial rights,over the continental shelf off their shores. Now apparently we are not p,oing to do that. Apparently it is p,oing to have to be done by ne~otiation. ICNAF will not be the sourcenor the implementnor the instrument by which that kind of nep,otiation, whenever it comes to fruition. If it is going to be done at all, it is going to have to be at the ministerial level, an International Conference of the marine 4121

May 19, 1971 Mr. Hickman. three nations. Tape no, 698 Page 1 - MRW Then, Mr, Speaker, maybe we will find some results. Mr. Speaker that is why this House should unanimously reflect the feelings of the people of Newfoundland and make no mistake of what the feelings of the people of Newfoundland are on this issue, Regardless of partisanship, regardless of where a man sits in the House of Assembly, that we want this conservation item not to be an appendix to the Prime Minister's agenda but at the top of the list, It certainly is not at the top of the list right now.

The whole evidence of compulsion that was necessary in order to get it on at all would indicate that it is not in that place. Mr. Speaker, if we want any indication as to what the Russians are doing right now,( The Russians seem to be the greatest - I do not know if offender is the word) they are spending more effort and using more advanced techniques than any other nation fishing in the North Atlantic.

They are having a more serious affect on the fish stocks of our North Atlantic than any other fishing nation, To give you an idea,Mr, Speaker,what they are doing and the kind of planning and the kind of technology that the~ Rre using in their assault upon our traditional fishing grounds, may I remind the House once again of the new 43,000 tons ship,~Vostok;'which recently went into action off our shores. This ship, hon, members will recall, carries on board a whole flotilla of small draggers, 56 feet, S inches in length.

To give you some idea of the size of the boat, her ship's company is 594 persons, That is almost half the dra~ger fishermen of this Province,on one boat - 594,the complement of the~Vostok~ Every possible modern technique is used so that that ship and the flotilla operating from that ship will catch every fish that is swimming in our territorial waters, So are we going to wait until next year or the year after and then come into this House and wring our hands and lament the fact that the cod and the rose fish and sole have now disappeared and talk about the good old days when we use to have lots of fish off our shores and say: 'You know, it did happen to. the haddock in 1961 or in 1962, We really did not think it was 9oing to happen to all species.

Maybe we should have p.aid attention, Haybe we should have listened to that Resolution 4122

May 19, 1971 Mr. Hickman Tape no, 698 Page 2 that was brought before this hon. House on May 19, 1971 by the hon. member for St. John's East. At least we would have shown the people of Newfoundland that we were alert to the dangers and that we would leave no stone unturned. We did not care who we embarrassed to make our position abundantly clea 0 r." That Mr. Speaker is what this Resolution is all about.

To even suggest that we would look ridiculous in the eyes - I do not know who - of the Prime Minister, to send this on now, to send off this Resolution,to unanimously pass this Resolution,just does not make any sense. To suggest that the meeting of ICNAF in Halifax will . discuss this problem and that this again is an answer to this Resolut:1 .on, is not in accord with the facts and the results that did not flow from previous ICNAF meetings. According, Mr.

Speaker, to the statistics of the Department of Fisheries and Foresty, the Federal Department of Fisheries and Forestry~ in the Province of Newfoundland,in 1968, there were 24,000 people directly employed in the fishing industry.out of a total work force of 130,000. In the three Maritime Provinces, excluding Newfoundland, there were 31,000 people directly employed,out of a total work force of 466,000. All told, in the four . Atlantic Provinces,in that year, there were 55,000 Canadians directly employed in the fishing industry, In the other provinces, in the other Atlantic Provinces, Mr.

Speaker, the fishery,whilst it is an important segment of industry in all four, yet the diversification of industry in these provinces do~s not make them as dependent on the fishery as we are in Newfoundland. Whilst the fishery is most important to them, and they have made their wishes known from time to time, it is even more important to this House.

If we have to pass a Resolution every day and if we have to look silly, we still should do it, 1ecause there has yet to come from this House of Assembly, since 1949 • a unanimous Resolution directing · our concern and bringin11; our concern for the depletion of our fish stock to .the Government of Canada. If you were Prime Minister of Canada, concerned with all the problems that he has to fact and if you were faced with powerful lobbies from practically every industry and every area in Canada and you heard nothing from the House of Assembly of 4123 - : ~ .

Mny 19, 1971 . Tape no. 698 Page 3 Mr, Hickman. Newfoundland, would you not logically come to the conclusion that we have no problems insofar as the fishery is concerned, that we are not really concerned about the depletion of the stock, that when people write about this in the paper they really do not know what they are talking about It is only to make good reading? But if this Resolution is passed, Mr. Speaker, it will not be denounced. Of course it will not be denounced and nothinr, close to it.

But it will be the first siep to indicate to the Prime Minister of this nation that the House of Assembly is reflective of the views of our people . and that we believe that conservation of our fishery stock is a most important issue facing Newfoundlanders today. Newfoundlanders will accept no compromise, no slick

interpretation of the wording of the Resolution. They will not accept the statement that ICNAF is going to deal with it next weekand say; 'therefore, it is a silly resolution." They most assuredly will not accept the statement that this is going to get the priority it deserves at the meetings in Moscow. Mr, Speaker, I furnished to this House the statistics as to the number of people directly employed in the fishery in our area.

I think this House should be once again reminded that for every man who goes out on a trawler, he keeps three employed on shore, You can multiply that figure by three, Then you will get a true picture of the impact the fishery has on the work force of this Province and why we should not be cute and slick and partisan and vote against this Resolution.

I would like to hear the hon, the member for Burgeo- LaPoile stand in his place and saY,• HI will not support this Resolution, I am satisfied with what the Prime Minister is dQing and it is sufficient." I would love to hear the hon, the member for Hermitage or the hon, the member for St, Barbe North, St, Barbe South or Placentia West - the hon. member for St.

Barbe North is satisfied - br Labrador South - yet when he goes down there in his district, he hears of destruction of the gear and fishing nets of his people and theTe are threats to call to arms, He hears all about it but he does not think or he is satisfied that this little appendix to an agenda will be sufficient at this time to satisfy his people and to satisfy 4124

May 19, 1971 Tape no. 698 Mr. Hickman Newfoundlanders that this has been taken care of. MR, CROSBIE: What about Labrador South? MR. HICKMAN: I mentioned Labrador South, MR, CROSBIE: Yes, but there is not a fish up there. There is no snow clearing equipment. There is no fish, Page 4 MR, HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker there is not much doubt that the Canadian nation.during the last twenty-one years,and the Government of Canada have sat idly by and watched our fishery resources be depleted, watch the haddock disappear, watch the rose fish crisis, the cod fish crisis.

It is significant that the catch in quantity of our inshore fishermen in Newfoundland has dropped roughly by one-half over the last ten to fifteen years. The average catch of the small inshore fishermen in Newfoundland is down to about fifty per cent of what it was in the mid 50 1 s, It is equally significant, Mr, Speaker, that at the same time the total catch in the North West Atlantic,by members of the International Commission of the North Atlantic Fishery, increased by 2 million tons in 1958 to 4 million tons in 1968.

It is equally significant that the Soviet catch in this same area increased from 117,000 tons in 1958 to 741,000 in 1968, It is significant, too, that the cod fish catch of the member nations increased from 880,000 tons to 1,860,000 tons. On the other hand, in the same period, from 1963 to 1969, Newfoundland's total cod catch dropped from 450 million pounds to 300 million pounds, despite t11e fact that Newfoundland fishermen had been operating at their efficiency peak and were better equipped than they were ever before, 1:_his happened during a period after the stern draggers had been introduced.

They are a far more efficient operation than the side dragger. But when you look at these statistics Mr. Speaker, they leave very little room for doubt that the fishery of this Province, as far as conservation is concerned and as far as stocks are concerned, is in a state of crisis and qµote Mr. Gus Etchegary, "in a state of collapse." Look, at the statistics on haddock. In 1965 the total catch in the North West Atlantic was 249,000 tons, of which the Russians took 4125

Hay 19 • 1971 Tape no. 698 Page 5 Hr. lUckmnn. 129·,000 tons, In 1968 the total catch of haddock by all North Atlantic nations was 97,000 tons even though some nations had quadrupled their effort. The decline in red fish was from 325,000 tons in 1958 to 182,000 in 1968, Now,according to Mr. Harvey Maugher and Mr.

Etchegary and Hr, Russel and those knowledgeable Newfoundlanders who were engaged in prosecuting the deep sea fishery off our shores, this decline,since the period that I just referred to 7 has become even more pronounced, Yet we sit in this !louse and we hear today that the Leader of the Government,in concluding his speech,saidi "let us not waste the time of the House discussing this Resolution." That . , Mr.

Speaker, in six words sets forth so clearly and so unmistakeably the attitude of the present administration, the present Government, towards the fishery of this Province, "Let us not waste the time of this House," Let us not waste the time>indeedi When you read these statistics, when you realize that we need at least twenty-seven to thirty modern, large draggers,just to maintain the present production and even then there is no assurance or guarantee that we will .- all we are told is that the Prime Minister mentioned it this morning. We do not know what he said.

We do know that he did not want to talk about it in the beginning. We do know that he was shamed into talking about it, We do knt"W that it is an appendix to his agenda. Now, Mr.

Speaker, this is the time for the members who represent this Province and in particular the members who represent the fishing districts of this Province to put their money where their mouths are and stand up and vote for this Resolution and put silly, party politics out of it, Even though it will not bring the great results that we must have, the dramatic result that we must have, the dramatic steps that we must have in conservation forthwith, Yet for the first time,May 19,1971, for the first time we would be able to say that this Legislature reflected the views of all Newfoundlanders and we were prepared to stand up and be counted, We do not care who we embarrass• • because we have a message to give and that message has to be loud.

It has to be 4126

May 19, 1971 Tape no. 698 Page 6 Mr. Hickman clear. It has to be repeated. It has to be embarrassing. That message is that we want action now, lf you can do it by way of negotiating, start negotiating today. If you cannot do it by way of negotiating, then have the courage to exercise some of the rights that were conferred on you under the convention,in the Law of The Sea Conference that was held a few years ago and which I referred to earlier. None of this has been happening. The suspicion is that some members of this House will vote against this Resolution.

I am glad that they are going to have to face the electorate and explain why. It is unexplainable and it is inexcusable. MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, there are a few words I would like to say on this particular Resolution. We believe that the fishery is among the most important natural resources in this Province. It becomes mandatory that every hon. member in this House 1 regardless of what side he might be sitting on, is obliged to!tand up and support it.

He is obliged to stand up and vote for it, The hon. member for Burin,who just resumed his seat, annunciated very well the problems of the fishery, over. fishing on ti,'? part of the European countries. He used a lot of statistics 1 which I have already used in this House and was about to use again. However, they cannot be used too often because the statistics do point out the very serious nature of the problem of fish depletion. He referred to hon. members opposite who are representing fishing districts in Newfoundland. He referred to the two members from Labrador, St, Barbe.

He also included White Bay North, Twillingate and Fogo, Bonavista Bay, Trinity Bay and Conc,pd.on Bav districts. Certainly those people who are representing fishennen in this House will stand up and support this Resolution and,as I said,will stand up and vote for it. It is all very well, Mr. Speaker, for the Premier to say that he has had a conversation with the Prime Minsiter to . the effect that he is taking the matter up with Mr. Kosygin during his visit to Moscow·. Information which 4127

May 19, 1971 Mr, Collins. Tape no, 698 Page 7 we received from our members in Ottawa would indicate that not even lip service has been paid to the drastic problems facing the fishery>by any one up there,with the excep'tion of the Conservative M,P~'s. Certainly we have seen very little evidence of support coming from the Government benchers in this House. This is not a problem that came up on us la!t weeknor yesterday nor today. It is a problem which has been growing on us for years and nothing has been done to try and prevent it. What the Premier has told us today, Mr.

Speaker, is nothing more than an afterthought. He has realized the impact of the efforts of the Conservatives in Ottawa. He has realized the impact of this particular motion,which has been brought in by the Opposition on this side of the House. He is just trying now to become identified again with the fishermen of this Province, That is not enough,because the fishermen of this Province deserve better treatment.

They deserved better treatment for years and they certainly deserve it now, Mr, Speaker I remember reading a while ago that similar problems existed in the North Sea prior to the last war, It was only because the war was started and fought for several years that the fishery recover~i, the fish resources recovered in the North Sea, Unless we can come up with an inter­ national .. arrangement which is going to enforce quota systems, quota restrictions, unless we can do that,then I would say that failing a war and goodness knows no one wants another war, failing a war,then we can just about forget the fish stocks on the East Coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.

I urge all hon, members opposite - I am representing the district of Gander and people might wonder why should I support a Resolution such as this. I can say, Hr. Speaker, that a good fishery in Fogo means a good year for Gander and a good fishery in Musgrave Harbour means a good year for Gander, A good fishery anywhere in Notre Dame Bay is a good fishery for all Newfoundland and St, John's and the whole Province because the success of it or the failure of it is reflected all over the Province. Certninly let us forget petty partisan politics and all members rise up and speak and support this motion, · 4128

May 19, 1971 Tape no, 698 Page 8 MR. SPEAKER: If the hon, member speaks now he closes the debate. MR. W. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker,first of all I might state that I think it is quite obvious that I absolutely have no intention of withdrawing this Resolution, It would take a lot more eloquence than was shown by the hon. the Premier and certainly a lot less sarcasim and aynicism to make me do that.

The hon. the Premier mentioned a few points and obviously his supporters on the other side are not going to say and they cannot say that they did not have a chance, They had a chance and they did not say anything with respect to this Resolution, -The first thing that the hon, the Premier said was that this was unnecessary.

Yes this is very, very unncessary, The fact remains, Mr, Speaker, that the fisheries on the East Coast of Canada ought to have being at the top of the agenda of the Prime Minister of Canada before he went to Russia, before there were any questions raised, had to be raised by representatives of Newfoundland, the Federal M.P's in Ottawa,or before there had been any representations,which apparently there were none until yesterday,from the Provinc~al Government. This thing, this matter, this aspect of the conservation of the fisheries in the North Atlantic ought to be on his agenda.

After all, there was a problem on the West Coast with respect to the conservation of fish stock. That was put mighty high on the agenda of the Prime Minister of this nation. It was subsequently removed,when the difficulty was resolved, There was nothing about the fisheries on the East Coast.

There was absolutely nothing until he got pressured, I say (the Premier says it is very unncessary) the very fact that this item was not on the agenda and indeed at the top of the agenda of the Prime Minister before he was pressured to do it, before the Government of Canada was pressured to do so, and this is a very vital reason which shows a very vital necessity of why it should be there. Another question,arising out of the remarks of the hon, the Premier, the Leader of this Government, the Leader of this fishing Province, 4129

Hay 19, 1971 Tape no. 698 Page 9 Mr. Marshall. that I would like to question and question very seriously and that is: Why were we not informed, why were not the people of this Province, specifically the people of this Rouse, informed before today that there were representations made to the Prime Minister of our country with respect to the conservation of our basic natural resource? I had hoped myself to put thia on a plane above politics. the hon. the Premier, in his usual fashion, made this c0111pletely impossible.

So now I ask the question: Why were we not informed1 Why were not the people of Newfoundland informed before? The reason is quite obvious. The Prime Minister of this country was catering to the interests in Central Canada and Western Canada. We h•ve seen this to the 4130

Mny 1 ~, l'J71, Tar,c 609, Pa~e 1 -- aph Afternoon. ~'!':.:._ ''A~~~•ALL_:. detriment gf the east and particularly to the detriment of Newfoundland. Through the pressure, the interest and the intellectual probing of the menbers of Parlial'lent, the Tory }'et"~ers of Parliament, he , .. ,as forced then to put it on the agenda. I do not !-.now, I really suspect the fact that not having been placed there in the first place, not having taken its rir,htful position in the first place, I ,-mnder just hm-: seriously the Prine '·'inister is going to talk this over with Communist Leaders in ~ussia.

Certainly; the presence of the telegram containinp, this reso]ution ought to drm,, :f.t I brinp: it forcefully to his attention, that we in Newfoundland stand l>ehind the fishermen, not as Liberals, not as Tories, not as s~cialists or "-'hat have you, or Federal r-1.P's or Provincial }1.P's, but as f-?ewfouncllandcrs. As Newfoundlanders we de!T'and that the basic natural resource of our rrovince, that steps be taken to protect the basic natural resource of our Province.

The hon. the Premier also said, the hon, the Prenier also pointed out then,yesterday, all of a sudden, yesterday, this announce~cnt was r.tade in the House of Commons. That must needs be corrected. The hon. the member for Burin,while this debate was going on, was in contact with one of the effective, r.1ost effective tl'er.ibers of Parliament that Newfoundland has ever sent to Ottawa, ~rr. John Lundrigan and Hr. Frank 11oores, fir. Jim :t-•cr.rath and so on, all six of them •. ?AR. P.OBF.RTS: (Inaudible) ~•p_, !-'ARSHALL: He certainly heard an awful lot more about Newfoundland in Ottawa as a result of 1968.

The hon. the Premier said that yesterday that was announced, Now that has to be corrected Today the (Juestion ,Jas as ked, and today we were informed that it is the understandinr:. 11r. Sharpe, the Actinr, Prir.ie f'inister, said it in response to the question•, 1 ·it is my understandin~- and it has been confirmed by the 1'inister of Fisheries, that this;bC'inr. .the r.iarinc resource of the ?forth Atlantic Conservatic>n,"is one of the itc-:,s on the ngencla.'' So it "'::is today not yC'sterday,for accur.ic~, sal·c. 4131

May 19, 1971, Tape 699, Page 2 -- apb Afternoon. He did not receive this news,you will notice ,throug11 the medium of the newspapers, or radio 1 or television, through electronic media. All I can say is the telephone wires were pretty hot yesterday after this resolution was introduced. Of course, the good members of Parliament from Newfoundland were doing their duty,as usual, and as a result this is being placed on the agenda.

We have to brinr- it 1I say, forcibly to the attention of the Prine Minister of this country, that we require him to ta1'e steps to protect the diminishinr _economy of the most depressed part of Canada. When you get on to the business, great ' scoffing was made with respect to the conference, the Internat:l .onal Conference on Fisheries. The hon. the member for Fotune Bay,who has more knowledge of the fisheries than all reembers of this House put together . and then some, has already dealt effectively with this. MR. STRICKLAND: Oh yeah~ MR.

HARSHALL: The hon. member for Trinity South had his opportunity to speak, and I would ask Your Honour's ruling that the hon.the member foT Trinity South and the others, unless they are going to raise to a Point of Order, - keep quiet. ?-IR. SPF.AKER: I request all hon. members to allow the hon. me!!lber for St. John's East to continue uninterrupted,please. ml. MAR SP.ALL: Thank you,Mr. Speaker.

When we r,et on to this business of the International Conference, and it is going to be dealt with in a few weeks time, this great conference, this continuing conference, this commission actually that is meeting in Halifax, has been meeting for a number of years, you tell the tens of thousands of inshore fishermen of this Province, you tell them that their fate:. is going to be suddenly secured by the meeting of this commission. What we need ~r.

Speaker, is a fresh, new International Conference for the purpose of the conservation of fisheries in the ~orth Atlantic, for the purpose of conservin~ the fisheries of this Province. We are told,hy the hon. the Pre~ier, the only person on the lt 11? - - - , W

nay 19, 1971, Tay,e 699, Page 3 -- apb Afternoon. Governm~nt side to speak, that it would be foolish to send it.

I say ,, this~ it would be foolish to send it because, the Prime Minister has already taken the matter uy,." I point this out, this C:overnment ought to have sent a communication of this nature.without the necessity of a resolution,before it became necessary, as soon as it became apparent that the Prime ~inister of this country was prepared to put the economic welfare of the people of Central Canada, the economic welfare of the people of Western Canada.to advance their interests,which was proper, and to forget the economic welfare of the citizens of Eastern Canada and particularly the poor oppressed fishermen of this Province.

He is aware,we are told. The Prime Minister is aware of the life and death need of this topic being discussed. Well, if he was so aware of the life and death need,Mr. Speaker, I say again, why was it not on the agenda in the first place? Why did it have to wait the probing of the Tory M.P's in the House of commons to do it? To them should y.o the credit, should certainly go the credit of bringing any kind of approach that may be made. Albeit, it may be weak, it probably will be weak by the Prime Minister to the Leaders of the Russian people. No, l'r.

Speaker, it is very important that all elected members, all elected members of this House and all elected members in the Province of Newfoundland, indeed, all Newfoundlanders, bring very forcibly to the attention of our Prime Pinister that we want to hear that he is advancing the interests of the fishermen on the East Coast. A vote of this nature on this resolution would show that this Le~islature and all of its mel'lbers stand four square behind it. The hon. the Premier said that if we send this resolution · l.'e "·ill appear as if we are asleep. The issue nr.

Speaker, is to make sure that the Federal Government does not remain asleep to the needs of conservation in the North Atlantic . and the protection of the fisheries of this Province. Indeed, thanks ar.ain,I should say, emphasize again, have to go to the Federal M.P's in Ottawa for making any kind of an inroad in this area. I would love to see the rel'!ction,if I could speculate for a moment. 4133

Mny 19, 1971, Tape 699, Par,e 4 -- apb Afternoon t-fr. Speaker, I would love to see the reaction if the Prime Minister of our country happened to be the hon. R.L.Stanfield, or the hon. John Diefenhaker. I would love to see the reaction of the hon. the Premier and the members of the Government. They would be biting carpets between here and Roache's Line in their vehemence to get at the Prime ~inister of the day. We would not hear the last of it for the year, ten years. We would he reminded of it again and again and again.

Unfortunately, it would appear that this r.overnment is not prepared to put the interests of Newfoundland above p~rtisan politics. There are two issues facing Newfoundland, two very important issues,Mr. Speaker. First, there is the state of the fisheries. Sec<>ltdly; there is the state of the r~vernment. We have five Tory M.P's who are dealing effectively with the state of the fisheries. We have one Tory t~.P. who is dealinr, effectively with the state of this Government. The five Tory M.P's are doing all they can to solve the problems in our fisheries.

The one Tory M.P., Mr. ?-'oores, will soon be solving the problem in this Government. I regret, Mr. Speaker, that it was necessary to bring politics into this, but the hon. the Premier could not resist from bringing it in. Ue invited me to withdraw this Resolution,when he stood up in his usual eloquent style of 1920. I now invite him to withdraw his objections_ and stand like the Newfoundlander we know he is. or certainly was and put Newfoundland first and his partisan politics second. MR.

SPEAKER: Those in favour of the Resolution please say "aye" contrary "nay,'' In my opinion, the "nays" have it, DIVISION: Those in favour: Mr. Marshall; Mr. Collins; Mr. Earle; Mr. Hickman; Mr. Crosbie; Mr. ?-!yrden. Those Against: The hon. the Premier; the hon. President of the Council; the hon. }'inister of Highways; ¥.r. Dawe; Mr. Noel; Mr. Smallwood; the hon. ?-'inister of L;ibrador Affairs; ?'r. Hodder; Mr. Strickland; tlle hon. 1-'inister of Frlucn.tion and Youth; the hon. Minister of Public Works; the hon. ~•inister 4134

~ay 19, 1971, Tape 699, Page 5 -- apb Afternoon of Finance; the hon. Minister of Community and Social Development; the hon. the Hinister of Social Services and Rehabilitation; Mr. Barbour; the hon. the I-~inister of Health; the hon. Mr. Hill; the hon. :Minister of Supply and Services; Mr. Moores. HR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion lost. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, could we possibly call order (4)? Second reading of a Bill, ''An Act Further To Amend The Public F:nquiries Act," (No. 51). MR. lfARSIT.ALL: Mr.

Speaker, this is a very simple Bill that one would not have really thought,in the first instance, it was necessarv to. introduce before this House. It is a Bill to amend the Public Enquiries Act, and quite si~ply would require that all public enquiries be held in public. The wording is very short.

It says, "the commission or commissions to which this Act applies shall not refuse to allow the public or any portion of the public to any proceedings of the commission." The reason for this Bill, introducing this Bill, Mr.Speaker, that was introduced some time ago.,at the beginning of the session, is the fact that a public enquiry was held into the affairs of the Town of Bay Roberts, and probably there were more besides, where the commissioner,acting under his authority, as he was allowed to under the Act of the time, decreed and declared that the holding of the enquiry should be held entirely in private~ the evidence would be held in private and all matters relating to the enquiry would be held in private.

In effect, we had a public-private enquiry,which is really a contradiction. It would certainly appear to me that if one has the machinery set up where one is to have a public enquiry, it should be public. It should be open to the public, there should always be the procedure set down in

an Act whereby the natter under consideration is going to aired in public, evidence taken in public, questions asked in public, and the machinery should be set up for this purpose. When a Government of the day turns around and says;"wc are roin!? to have a public enquiry into a certain issue, we all know that the matters are going to be - everybody is goin~ to know what goes on 4135

May 19, 1971, Tape 699, Page 6 -- apb Afternoon. in thnt enqu:f.ry l'nd that is only foir. If the Government wishes to have,I might point out, an enquiry of a private nature, they can have it by means other than through a public enquiry as such. I think it is only fair to the persons involved in the enquiry, and tl1ere are always going to he people involved in enquiries of this nature, and certainly to the public themselves, that when this procedure is brought into effect, the whole matter should be aired in public as such and justification referred to everybody.

As I say, if one wants to have a private one, you can have a private investigation without the necessity of calling in the Public Enquiries Act. Now, in going over the Acts of the other Provinces in­ relation to this matter, one finds that most of the Acts are silent with respect to this particular item, _ but they are all styled Public Enquiries Acts, and I think most peoplc,in Provinces outside of ours, would expect that when a public enquiry is called it is going to be held in public.

In other words, there is no need; because of the description, the adjective qualifying what is going to tnke place, that it is so going to be publ:.c. One looks at the Acts in England, and one has to remembei. that the British Government would have jurisdiction with respect to a wider number of matters than this Government does, because, we are in a Federal Country. In that Act, it provides that enquiries will be public except when matters of, in effect, issues of treason arise,affecting the overall welfare and safety of the state.

In that event, the commissioners can hold the enquiry in private, but otherwise, it is to be public. Of course, that qualification is unnecessary here, because such matters come entirely, matters of treason and the overall danger ta the state, the defence of the country.rests with the "Federal Government as such. That would be an appropriate qualification in any Federal Act. Certainly, in the Provincial Acts, I feel that we ought to have a public enquiry and open enquiry.

I hope t~lis Bill would pass, and I would respectfully su~~r.st that the first public r.nauiry of a nature, real puJ)lic enquiry that we should have afterwards,would be an enquiry into who 413G

May 19, 1971, Tape 699, Page 7 -- apb Afternoon. is behind and wh~ owns the liquor licenses or liquor leases. MR. SPF.AKER: Is the House ready for the question? HON. L,R.CURTIS: I would move that this Bill be read a second time six months hence. You will not get anybody to sit as a public enquiry connnissioner if you put this clause in the Bill. Under this Bill, every enquiry has to be public. Everybody knows that there are enquiries which should be public and there enquiries which should not be public. The object of this Bill is to make all enquiries public, without exception.

Of course, that would be unacceptable, completely unacceptable. Nobody would accept such a commission and theEe is no alternative but to ask that the Bill be read a second time six months ·hence. MR. CROSBIF.: r•r. Chairman, I would like to support the second reading of the Bill and the speech against the amendment suggested by the hon. minister. I do not know what the hon. minister means when he says that everyhody _knows this and everybody knows that and everybody knows the other thing. Who is everybody? Who is the everybody that the hon. minister is t:alkinr, about?

If he means himself,then he should say, "I know this." The minister cannot speak for everybody. He does not speak for me. He does not speak for the hon. gentleman who moved the Bill. He does not speak for hundreds and thousands of others. The l!lini~ter should have said 1when he was on his feet,"the Public Enquires Act.'' The name of the Act is, "The Public Enquiries Act.' ' It is

chapter (24) of the Revised Statutes of Newfoundland, 1952. The Act has not been amended since. What does the Act say? ''Whenever the Lieutenant