March 26,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLI No. 14

The House met at 9:00 a.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. HOGAN: With leave, Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to

extend deepest sympathies to the town and municipality of Main Brook and to the

family of the late deputy mayor, David Gibbons, Sr., who died yesterday in a

tragic accident in his community. Mr. Gibbons was a long-time member of the Main

Brook town council and served many years in the Federation and in municipal life

in this Province. A dedicated family man, a dedicated community man, he met with

this unfortunate accident in helping his fellow man and his neighbour. I would

like to have this House send the deepest sympathies of all members to the family

and to the council and community.

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

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the members on this

side we want to associate ourselves with the remarks made by the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs, and send to the family of the late Mr. Gibbons

and the town of Main Brook our sincere regrets on the unfortunate event that

occurred there yesterday. The explosion of the oil tank points out the kind of

volunteers that we have in this Province - people willingly going out, without

pay and without any kind of compensation, helping fellow citizens in time of

need. We want to share in the remarks made by the minister.

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

seeking leave of the House.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I don't understand any more

leave is required for this hon. member in this. This matter is a personal one

and I would join with everyone in the House to offer the condolences of the

members of the House to the Gibbons family and to the people of Main Brook in

this tragedy.

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

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I should like to have leave

for a few seconds to offer congratulations. Newfoundland had two athletes sent

away to the Special Olympics or the special winter games, I am not sure which it

was.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair wants to make sure the hon. member has leave.

By leave, the hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: It will take just a minute, Mr. Speaker.

I want to inform the House that Wayne Maloney, a young man who happened to be a

neighbour of mine for quite some time, whose father I know, has won a gold

medal; and Ms. Durdel, the young lady who was 'away', has won a silver medal in

cross-country skiing.

I want to inform members of the House that these young people

will be returning to the Province at 1:05 Sunday morning, and there will be a

reception for them from people around the Kilbride area. Anyone who would like

to come out certainly will be welcome.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs.

MR. HOGAN: This side of the House would certainly like to

be associated with the remarks of the hon. the Member for Kilbride in extending

our congratulations to yet another achievement in the field of athletics. The

people from the west end - in this case, it is the hon. member's neighbour -

have always done well in the field of sports, and this side of the House would

like to be associated with any congratulations, indeed, any support, that can be

rendered in this particular area of athletics.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to join in to say that I was delighted to hear

this morning of the success of these athletes in these games. It was very

encouraging to note that, for one of the participants, this is the first year he

has been involved in sports, and it is remarkable to see that such an

achievement can be reached by someone who, apparently, previous to this year,

has not been involved in competitive sports. I think it is an inspiration to all

those who would like to be involved in some activity and yet hold back for fear

they cannot do well. This is indeed a remarkable achievement, Mr. Speaker.

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the

Minister of Social Services.

We have heard of a somewhat strange decision being made

already concerning the Day Break Centre. Now, we are hearing of another decision

that can only be described as a heartless decision, I suppose, and a clear

example of being out of touch with people.

I want to ask the minister this: Can he tell the House why he

and his Cabinet colleagues have decided to take away the assistance that has

been provided to and allowed disabled students to pursue their post-secondary

education, and why, indeed, now they are forcing these students to go the

student loan route, particularly when we all know there are a lot of

administrative problems with the student loan program in process, which is

difficult enough as it is?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, we have asked that students at

institutions of higher learning, whether it be the University, or otherwise,

through the VRDP program, would be now required to apply for student loans

first, as the first step, if they need funds to assist them. If, through that

process, and afterwards through the remainder of the procedure, it is discovered

that they still need assistance - basically what we are saying is, it is more of

a means test than we have had in the past. We have not had that step in the past

so that loan process will come first and if it is deemed afterwards - after the

loan application has been processed - that they still need assistance and still

should be involved with the VRDP program they will still be able to access it.

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Is the minister saying that the disabled students who have

been receiving this assistance in the past did not need the assistance? Is that

what he is trying to tell us here this morning? Secondly, let me ask him this,

is he not aware that these students and their families go through the more than

usual financial difficulties than normal families would go through? Is he not

aware of that? All this is doing is putting them through more difficulties from

a financial perspective.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. GULLAGE: We are not saying, Mr. Speaker, that many of

these individuals and their families do not need the assistance that was

provided in the past but there may be circumstances where some of the students

do not require the assistance and I think it would be unfair, given the

circumstances we are in fiscally, to continue to provide assistance to those

people who may be accessing assistance, who are reasonably well off, have income

sources and really in fact should not be on the programs. We are introducing the

means test and changing the procedure.

You are quite right in saying that people, most of them, are

in situations where they require special considerations and special needs as in

fact we have with other client groups, single parents, for example, where we

provide assistance out of the norm because they have requirements for day care,

for transportation, and other means that normal students in the normal sense do

not require. Yes, they are in the same category where they have special

consideration but as far as income is concerned we have to, in those difficult

times, ensure that if a person has means of income other than student loans and

in fact can pay their own way through higher education, wherever it might be,

university or otherwise, then that has to be considered in these difficult

times. That is why we have changed the program.

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, is the minister aware that the

group speaking for these disabled students do not agree with his particular

assessment? Is he aware that many of these 600 or 700 disabled students, by the

way, which is the number I hear, often find that they are unable as it is, to

handle the same kind of workload that other students might have to handle during

the course of post-secondary education? It is even making the situation more

difficult financially for them, as I suggested already, and why would he be

trying to do something that is going to make it more difficult for people who

have enough difficulties as it already is?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, we have not received the

reaction the Leader of the Opposition describes. Certainly I have heard nothing

to the contrary that we introduce this step where we do require a loan

application and we ask that a means test be applied, so that if there is amongst

the group those individuals who have means of accommodating their needs at the

university and providing for themselves because they have adequate income, then

that may be a very small segment of the group when we go through the procedures.

But I think it only fair that if they are able to pay their way through that

they do so. I can assure the Leader of the Opposition that we will make sure

that anybody who has a need for assistance through our program will get it.

There will be no situation where anybody will be denied assistance and denied

access to VRDP, if indeed it is justified. I am sure there are a number of

people accessing the program now, there may be a very small number who have

means to look after themselves and that is the group, simply that group, that we

want to identify.

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, the minister is now saying there

may only be a few, it may not be very many. Can he tell us then where he is

going to find the money because it is not provided for in his budget, where

would he find the money then to give the grants and the assistance back to those

other hundreds of students who are likely to still need the assistance?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of the program

being eliminated from the budget. I think there is money identified in the

budget but I have not checked that particular subhead. I did not anticipate the

question this morning but certainly I will check it. There is no money

eliminated from the budget for the VRDP program that I am aware of and I would

be very surprised if that is so, because we certainly anticipate, Mr. Speaker,

that we are going to have to expend money under this subhead and we will do so,

if necessary. If they all qualify after they go through the procedure, loan

application, the means test and so on, if they all qualify, then they will all

be compensated and all be accommodated within the budget.

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Let me ask the minister one final question.

In view of the fact that there appears to be in the case of

the way the minister is trying to describe it, there certainly is not that kind

of an understanding among the group, the Consumers Association Organization for

the Disabled for example, who have been publicly speaking about this situation

and expressing grave concerns about what the government is trying to do. Will

the minister at least call this group in and will he have a discussion with them

and if they are able to argue to the minister that their case is much stronger

than he sees it, would he be prepared to reconsider the decision?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I have had nobody from this

group approach me for a meeting or even for a discussion about the matter.

Certainly, if there is concern I will address it and discuss it with them. But,

Mr. Speaker, I do not believe it is open for review in the sense that if there

are amongst this group people who have means and are able to look after

themselves by way of adequate income, I think that policy will stand, Mr.

Speaker, but certainly as far as discussions are concerned, listening to their

concerns, I will be more than happy to do so.

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

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to

direct a question to the Minister of Education. Most of the budget cuts in this

budget are still cloaked in a shroud of mystery but one of the few proclaimed

ones is the $750,000 cut for program consultants, curriculum consultants, in the

Department of Education. The minister has said that there could be anywhere from

12-23 consultants who will lose their jobs. I ask the minister, does he now know

how many consultants will actually lose their jobs in the department?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, there will be six people who

will be laid off. There will be nine people who are seconded from school boards

who will return to their positions back at the school boards. There are two

people who will be reassigned to cost shared federal-provincial programs and

there will be two people who will retire. So there are nineteen people who will

be affected, Mr. Speaker, of which five will be laid off. It is regrettable that

anyone has to be laid off but the previous administration built up such a

massive administration in all different aspects of government, they put the

trappings of an elephant on the back of a mouse and it is my unhappy duty to

have to try to bring some reasonable semblance to the way this Province delivers

their programs, Mr. Speaker. It is unfortunate that people were led to believe

that they were in jobs that would go on forever before this was done. That is

what makes it so unfortunate when you have to deal with people's lives but hon.

members opposite, when they were in government, built up such a massive

bureaucracy that it is going to take years for us to try to straighten it out in

a humane manner.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Ferryland, on a

supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, it is very

unfortunate, yes, the vital years of curriculum has been gutted out completely.

Well, if there are nineteen layoffs occurring in the department, what steps has

the minister taken to ensure the school curriculum is kept up to date and that

teachers are kept up to date on the latest developments and methods in teaching

this curriculum?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, as I explained to the hon.

member, I do not know if he heard what I said or not, there are not nineteen

layoffs. I expect that nineteen people will be affected but there are not

nineteen layoffs, I think the hon. member probably misunderstood me. I am

confident, Mr. Speaker, that by re-aligning duties, by looking at - let me give

an example. There were two consultants responsible for co-op education and

enterprise education. When you look at it objectively, do you really need two

people for co-op education and enterprise education in the Department of

Education, and a consulting...? I think, being reasonable and fair, the two

areas rightly belong under the one person. Even if we did not have a fiscal

problem, in the interests of good management in my opinion it would be

reasonable and proper to do that. The hon. member must know that when we were

elected we were entrusted with the responsibility of getting the best value for

every single cent of money our taxpayers pay. That is one example of what we do.

The Department of Education is no longer a place where the

minister goes out the night before and meets some person and brings that person

in the next morning, and says: give this person a job. That luxury is no longer

there, Mr. Speaker. I'll tell members it used to be there. They used to call

them 'Charlie's Angels'.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for

Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess that's the

basis of the minister's advice to Cabinet in preparing the Budget of slashing

$750,000. They were needed last year but this year it's not. So there's a lower

priority being placed on curriculum, on these consultants and their need within

the department. Is that the minister's rationale for making a statement this

year? Will he admit it's strictly a budgetary thing and that the curriculum now

in this Province and keeping teachers and schools up to date on the latest is

severely damaged as a result of these cuts, without any thoughts whatsoever to

improving and maintaining a standard in the curriculum?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member seems to equate

curriculum development with money. That's the mistake that the previous

administration made for seventeen years and practically put this Province into

bankruptcy. Their approach to dealing with any problem is to throw money at it.

This administration is putting 25 per cent of our Budget

towards education. No matter which administration is running this Province it is

very unlikely that we will be able to spend any more than 25 per cent of our

Budget on education, unless we're going to close out all the other departments.

The secret to running the Department of Education, the Department of Environment

and Lands, or the Department of Works, Services and Transportation, or whatever,

is to spend our money wisely and get the best value for the money that we spend.

I am totally satisfied that by making the changes in the administration that we

are making we are spending our money wisely and we are going to be able to

deliver the program development at the same level that we were doing before,

only we will deliver it more efficiently.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation. For almost two years now we have been

waiting for that minister to provide information to the Public Accounts

Committee relating to contracts awarded for three health care clinics. I note in

the recent Budget that funds are made available to open those clinics now. I

think it's certainly long overdue that the information requested by the standing

committee of the House from the minister be provided. Almost two years has

passed. Would the minister tell us when he's prepared to provide that

information?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the member

indicates, this information was requested some time ago. But since that period

of time I have communicated in writing the position of the department and the

government to the member. The difficulty with this information is that as far as

I understand the matter is still before the courts and the information contained

in the proposal and tender documents is proprietary information. We have to

await the opinion of the Department of Justice with respect to the litigation

and the proprietary nature of the matters contained in the documents before we

can release that information to the public. The government cannot be placed in a

position where it's subject to litigation to jeopardize its case before the

courts by untimely disclosure. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, just for the information of the

House, let me remind the House that it was on November 25, 1991, that my

colleague for Kilbride first wrote to the Public Accounts Committee and asked

that this matter be investigated. Subsequent letters of January 17 of 1992 to

the deputy minister of the department from the research officer of PAC, response

of March 6, 1992, approaches to the minister in writing by myself on June 1,

1992, June 18, 1992, November 3, 1992, November 10, 1992 -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary. He should get to it.

MR. WINDSOR: - we finally got a written response, and so

forth. Finally, Mr. Speaker, having been advised, as the minister said, that the

matter had been referred to Justice, I wrote to the Minister of Justice on

February 10, 1993. I have yet to have the courtesy of a reply from the Minister

of Justice, my letter to him, asking when a legal opinion might be given to the

Department of Works, Services and Transportation, since it was requested by the

department more than a year before.

The minister has not responded to me. Can he tell me when he

might respond to the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon the Minister of Justice.

MR. ROBERTS: I apologize for the apparent lack of

courtesy. I can tell my hon. friend nothing is intended. He will understand that

the last little while has been unusually busy and I confess that I have not been

able to keep up with my mail, and I can only say I am sorry to him.

I would say to him, with respect, that I cannot tell him when

I will provide opinions to my friend or not. I can make sure that an answer goes

to him on a substantive matter, but as I recollect his letter he was asking as

to what advice we would tender. I do not think I could tell him that. What I

will ensure - today is Friday - he will have an answer by Monday as to what the

government's position is with respect to the matter.

What advice I tender is another matter altogether. One would

hope there might be a degree of congruity, but that is not something I can go

into; but I do apologize to my friend. The volume of mail - the letters and

cards keep coming. I can only say that I am sorry that I have not been able to

get back to him. I can assure him that the letter has been dealt with.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl on a

supplementary.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I might remind the minister that I also asked him back in

December for a meeting with the co-chair dealing with legislation for the Public

Accounts Committee, which he responded in writing very quickly and said: I will

get back to this as soon as the House closes. That was three months ago.

Let me ask the minister this; I do not know if he will tell

me or not. It is my information that his officials have advised him that the

information should be released, that there is no basis, in fact, to keep this

information from the Public Accounts Committee. Will the minister confirm that?

And if that is the truth, will he now provide the information requested?

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

MR. ROBERTS: I have no idea to what keyhole the hon.

gentleman has his ear to get information, but let me say that I would not dream

of saying in the House -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: I am sorry? The gentleman from Kilbride

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. ROBERTS: Well that could be, yes, but I am talking

now about people with ears to keyholes.

Let me just say, Mr. Speaker, with no intent to be anything

other than entirely straightforward, I would not dream of saying what advice my

officials give me. I will gladly say what position the government takes, and I

will answer for that, but what advice I get is - when I take decisions in legal

matters, in consultation with my colleagues where that is appropriate, I answer

to this House for them.

I suspect that the hon. gentleman, if ever again he becomes a

minister, would continue to take that position because it would be thoroughly

irresponsible - thoroughly irresponsible. I would suggest to him that he might

better put his mind to something besides picking up what amounts to gossip, I

suspect.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl on a

supplementary.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I can assure the minister that gossip comes from senior

officials.

Mr. Speaker, maybe I could address this question to the

Premier. The Liberal policy campaign manual of 1989 has a

section which reads:

Provide for a Public Accounts Committee that cannot be improperly interfered

with by government members sitting on the committee as it happens now.

Let me be very clear that the government members sitting on

the committee have been absolutely co-operative. The problem we are having is

getting information from this government. When is he going to put his money

where his mouth is and give the information that is requested by the Public

Accounts Committee so that he can fulfil his campaign promise of 1989?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: The member is entitled to his wrong

opinion, and he is entitled to express it. I just disagree totally with him.

The Public Accounts Committee, as he said, functions very

well. The government members on it are performing very well. I am very impressed

with the Public Accounts Committee and leave it that way.

As to the opinion the member expressed, I think he is dead

wrong and I have no hesitation in saying so.

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

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Forestry and

Agriculture. I believe it was in January of this year that the minister received

his report on the agricultural zone in the northeastern Avalon area, which was

done last Fall by Mr. Simmonds. I wonder if the minister could inform this House

when that report might be released and has he reviewed it and will he be

releasing it in the near future?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry and

Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is right, I

received the report from Commissioner Simmonds I think about mid-January. It is

a fairly thick report, Mr. Speaker, there were a lot of observations made on the

way the zone was administered over the last twenty years by the previous

administration, a lot of recommendations. My officials have been perusing and

studying the report and I can tell the hon. member that we will be dealing with

it now, government will be dealing with it, and undoubtedly it will be released

publicly sooner than later.

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

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, he told the people, the

committee, who are involved in this a month ago that it would be released sooner

rather than later and it is getting too long now. Does the minister realize that

the agricultural industry in that area is hampered in planning proper investment

for the future? There is quite a bit of activity planned for that area on an

environmental level by building proper storage facilities for manure pits, and

all of that activity has been put on hold until the minister puts out his report

so the farmers can see if they are going to continue farming in that area or

will they have to shut their farms down and move off into some other

agricultural area in the Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry and

Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, with regards to people in the

Goulds-Kilbride area or anyone affected by the land freeze in the northeast

Avalon, the plans of people both in farming and and out of farming have been on

hold for seventeen years, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FLIGHT: It has been going on for seventeen years, Mr.

Speaker, a good many of which the hon. gentleman himself was the minister of the

Department of Agriculture.

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

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the minister is so much

against agricultural activity in the northeast Avalon, I do not understand that.

It is his job to create the industry.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to get on with the question.

MR. R. AYLWARD: God help this Province, Mr. Speaker, if

that crowd ever gets any control over the fishery when we see what they are

doing with agriculture. We were the only Province -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. R. AYLWARD: - in Canada, for ten years -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. R. AYLWARD: - who had broken the agriculture industry

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. R. AYLWARD: - and, Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member knows that on a supplementary there should be

no

preamble and he should get into the essence of the question, and the Chair

has not yet heard the question. If the hon. member would kindly put the

question.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I apologize.

Mr. Speaker, will the minister undertake to have this report

tabled, even while you are looking over it, you do not have to say what you are

going to do with it, just table it so that the farmers and the land owners in

that area can get on with their lives?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry and

Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, one must remember that not only

was the hon. member the Minister of Agriculture when most of the problems were

created in the district, he was the member for the district, Mr. Speaker, and

day after day his constituents did to him what they have been doing to me,

coming in and pointing out the problems created by the way that zone was

administered by the hon. gentleman. So, Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. member

and the people of the northeast Avalon, that the government is dealing with that

report in a timely way and I would expect, as they expect and as they have a

right to expect, Mr. Speaker, that the report will be dealt with very quickly

now and be tabled and released publicly so all the people in Newfoundland can

see the way that the agriculture zone was administered by the previous

administration.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEWLETT: Getting to your feet in Question Period

these days is often something like being in a sprint or in a run in the

Olympics, you have to be quick off the mark.

I have a question for the Minister of Transportation. The

minister is aware that with regard to wood trucks, there are a lot of wood

trucks -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. HEWLETT: - hauling wood, not wood chucks. You can

make fun if you want but the wood truckers are not happy. They have a problem in

that when they haul loads of wood out of the woods the wood can be green and

wet, it can be dry and light, it can be encrusted with ice and snow, so they do

not know if they are over weight until they hit the weigh scales. I put this to

the previous Minister of Works, Services and Transportation in the House and he

laughed at me. I put it to the current minister and he has written back to me

saying that they are now going to do a pilot project. The people trucking the

wood have been asking about this for two years so why has it taken two years to

have a pilot project to do something as sensible as measuring a wood truck load

by volume rather than by weight?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am aware of the difficulties being experienced by the -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister to take his place, please. The hon. Member

for Green Bay has put a serious question and hon. members should give the

minister the courtesy of giving it the serious answer it deserves.

The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am aware of the difficulties being experienced by the wood

truckers in this Province. Government has taken their concerns to heart and as a

result of taking their concerns to heart we had some consultation with the paper

companies about the implementation of a volume loading system for wood as

opposed to a weight loading system for wood. I would indicate, Mr. Speaker, that

to my knowledge if this Province adopts a volume loading system for wood, a

complete volume loading system for wood, we will be the only jurisdiction to

have adopted such a system, so we are proceeding in a novel area where no other

jurisdiction has even been prepared to consider proceeding.

In any event for some time consultation has gone on with the

paper companies about the ramifications of volume loading and the paper

companies, I will say, have expressed to me, and to my department, serious

reservations about implementing a volume loading system. In addition, Mr.

Speaker, as the Minister responsible for Transportation, I have to be concerned

about the integrity of the highway system and overloaded wood trucks, or

overloaded trucks of any kind, will cause more rapid deterioration of the

pavement in this Province which will lead to increased capital expenditures as

well as the safety issues associated with the loading of trucks.

So, Mr. Speaker, this government has committed that we will

do a pilot study on volume loading. I believe the truckers have been selected

and I believe the study is ongoing right now to determine if this is a feasible

system, and if it is a feasible system then I have no doubt that government will

give serious consideration to introducing that system to alleviate the problems

of the truckers. Mr. Speaker, if we do so we will be the only jurisdiction in

the country to do that, so this government has a high degree of concern for

those people who are out there struggling to make a living in this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay on a

supplementary.

MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker, what in heavens name is wrong

with Newfoundland being first in something good in Canada for a change, pray

tell? I fail to understand why the paper companies are heavily involved in this.

It is the wood truckers who are being ticketed off the road because when they

leave a woods road and go on the Trans-Canada they cannot be sure if they are

under or over weight. I wonder, because of the number of people being ticketed

literally out of existence in terms of their business, measuring wood by weight,

is that not bringing in thousands upon thousands upon thousands of dollars to

the treasury of this Province, and is that not the main reason why this

government has been slow in moving on this matter?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Mr. Speaker, what that member has said is

utterly false, utterly and totally false. The revenues generated by penalties by

overweight truckers are of no consequence to me as Minister of Works, Services

and Transportation. Every trucker has an obligation to abide by the legal limit,

to come in on the legal limit, to maintain the integrity of the highway system.

Why has it taken so long? Mr. Speaker, we have to put this system into effect,

if it can be put into effect, in a manner which ensures the viability of the

pulp and paper industry in this Province. That is the reason why the companies

are being consulted. What is the point of putting in a volume loading system if

the pulp and paper companies go out of business, Mr. Speaker? There is no point

whatsoever. We have to proceed in a manner which guarantees the viability of the

workers in the mill and the truckers on the road and that is what we are doing,

Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

After that weighty question and the weighty answer Question

Period has expired

Before proceeding with our routine business, on behalf of

hon. members, we would like to extend a cordial welcome to a couple of groups in

the public galleries today. In the first group are fifty-eight Grades V and VI

students from St. Mary's Elementary School, in the district of Waterford -

Kenmount. They are accompanied by their teacher, Eric Hiscock, student

assistant, Margaret Penney, and chaperones, Millie Hayley and Barbara Rousse.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: We also have students from the Seal Cove

Campus, Conception Bay, accompanied by their instructor, Mr. Ed Power.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

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

annual report for 1992, of Newfoundland and Labrador Computer Services Limited.

Notices of Motion

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

DR. KITCHEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I give notice that I

will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting A

Smoke-Free Environment In The Workplace And In Public Places In The Province".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice and

Government House Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: This may be the end of the smoke-filled back

rooms, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave

to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Internal Economy Commission

Act". Unless there be any misapprehension, this is the bill to reduce members'

salaries, Mr. Speaker, which my friend, the Minister of Finance, spoke of in the

Budget. We will be dealing with this before Easter, Sir.

Petitions

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

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I have a petition from 648 residents of Fogo,

Fogo Island, Tilting, Joe Batt's Arm and various other communities on Fogo

Island. The petition is to the Members of the House of Assembly: 'We, the

undersigned, are committed to the highest quality education for the children of

our Province. We support Roman Catholic Schools and want to keep them. In the

same way, we support the rights of others to have the schools they desire. We

also support co-operation between the churches in education, especially shared

service schools where they are needed. We do not want our rights and the rights

of other people in our Province taken away, and we ask you, as our

representatives, not to tamper with the rights we now have under the

Constitution of Canada.

The petition is from, as I said, 648 residents of Fogo Island

and, Mr. Speaker, Fogo Island was perhaps one of the guiding lights in

educational reform in this Province, when it began back a number of years ago

constructing one school to service an entire Island. An high school originally,

it was a shared service school - shared between both the integrated and the

Catholic denominations.

Seven or eight years later, Mr. Speaker, an elementary school

was built, closing seven smaller schools throughout the Province. It has been a

model, Mr. Speaker, that the rest of the Province can use to share as a kind of

direction we can take in education. Mr. Speaker, what is happening in that

system, is that while it is a shared service, all denominations preserve their

rights that have been guaranteed under the Constitution of Canada and under the

Terms of Union in 1949. This is a serious issue that has arisen in the past few

days. Some of the problems, I believe, that have arisen, are the result of the

approach that the present Minister of Education has taken in dealing with the

denominational education system. I think, his bullish approach to it, and I use

the word "bullish", Mr. Speaker, has perhaps set the wheels of shared service,

which has been a very effective method of utilizing the dollars of this Province

in educational advances - has set the wheels back years, Mr. Speaker, years and

years, in fact. Because what we have now is total chaos out in the system as a

result of the minister's response in the past few days.

The people who signed this petition are asking that the

rights they have had for the past thirty or forty or fifty years be maintained.

Because they recognise the vital role that the church has played in education in

this Province. Initially, the churches supported the schools - in fact, built

and financed them. It was only in recent years that the public purse has been

used to finance education.

We have a good working model in Fogo, a school built in the

center of Fogo Island serving the needs of every community on Fogo Island, both

at the elementary and at the high school level. It is a model that we would do

well to use for the entire Province. It works, it has worked well.

The attitude of the minister, I think, has been very

detrimental in the past few weeks, and that is why we have, for the past number

of days, been flooded in this House of Assembly with petitions requesting that

rights that have been guaranteed under the Constitution be protected. We take

little assurance from what we saw the other day here, because we know all too

well how government uses its majority in this House of Assembly - we saw it with

amalgamation, we see it with other issues - to use this Legislature, and perhaps

the Legislature of Canada, to take away rights that were freely guaranteed to

municipalities.

I support the people who presented this petition, because I

believe we have the best working model in this Province of how a shared service

should work. I am sure the former Minister of Education, the Member for St.

John's North, appreciates that, having spent some time on Fogo Island and having

known the situation as it existed when he taught school in Joe Batt's Arm a

number of years ago, and can now look at the model that we have. We can hold up

for scrutiny anywhere in this Province, the system that we have.

It is this present minister who wants to wreck, to throw

away, all that we have accomplished in the past ten years because of his bullish

approach to the kind of education that he envisions we should have in this

Province. I think it is most regrettable.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: As a matter of fact, it is more than up.

The hon. the Member for St. John's North.

DR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I would like to rise and support

the petition presented by the hon. the Member for Fogo. I have had a long

personal association with Fogo Island. I remember the days when the communities

couldn't even agree on a lot of issues. I remember the rivalry between Joe

Batt's Arm and Fogo, itself.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

DR. WARREN: Well, they had rivalry between the

communities. I remember one older gentleman - I was talking with him in Joe

Batt's Arm at one point in time. He was saying that in Fogo they had the

hospital, and they had the nurse, of course, the doctors, they had the RCMP. He

said: 'They have the RCMP because they need them up there.' The rivalry was

there. I remember when they discussed one school to serve various communities.

They couldn't agree on a site, so another older gentleman, in a public meeting,

asked: 'Why don't we put it on wheels and tow it back and forth?'

That kind of rivalry existed - but it dissipated, and now we

have not only community co-operation but we have denominational co-operation. As

the hon. member said, we have a model here which can be extended throughout the

Province. In fact, I would give a little advice to the current Minister of

Education, if I may. I would suggest that we need to put on record the success

of Fogo Island and other areas as we move forward to extend that model to other

parts of the Province. It has been a real success story for the people of Fogo

Island and the people of Bay de Verde, Old Perlican, Plum Point, and many other

communities in this Province. I think we need to put on record, perhaps on video

tape, the success of these experiences so that we can distribute them to other

parts of the Province.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Fogo Island should be

congratulated. The early leaders - one of them is Mr. Cyril McCormick. Mr.

McCormick is about to retire as deputy minister. He was instrumental, as the

Superintendent of the Roman Catholic School Board, in developing that model - he

and Mr. Hudson Davis, and the people, of course, of Fogo Island, itself.

So I would like to support the petition. I am pleased that

the government is moving forward to implement the petition, that we have

consensus with the churches on moving forward in this area, and I think it will

mean quality education for more people in the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Orders of the Day

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

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, could we address Motion No. 2

first, please, Sir?

MR. SPEAKER: Motion No. 2.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Municipalities Act," carried.

(Bill No. 16).

On motion, Bill No. 16 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: (Inaudible). The hon. the Government House

Leader.

MR. ROBERTS: Alright, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

I am usually not inconspicuous, particularly when I am

wearing my infamous tie.

MR. TOBIN: I was wondering when that was coming up.

MR. ROBERTS: I say to my friend from Burin - Placentia

West that this tie is a very dear one, and I don't mean that in financial terms.

My younger daughter made a trip to Europe last year, and that may or may not be

the price element, but she brought this back as a souvenir, so I cherish it for

that reason.

MR. TOBIN: It is a nice tie.

MR. ROBERTS: I thank my friend. Most people don't

compliment me on my ties, but the gentleman from Ferryland had a crack at it the

other night.

Your Honour, could we go into Committee of Supply on Interim

Supply - 2.(

a) on the Orders of the Day? Perhaps I could inform hon. members, my

understanding is that we have now used four hours and nine minutes of the

eighteen hours that remain to us under the supply formula set out in the rules

of the House.

On motion, that the House resolve itself into Committee of

the Whole on Supply to debate Bill No. 12, Mr. Speaker left the Chair.

Committee of the Whole

MR. CHAIRMAN (L. Snow): Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to have a few words to say on Interim Supply,

obviously. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice brought in an amendment, or I

guess, a new Interim Supply bill, basically. In the changes that have been made,

the reprint of that bill, it is my understanding that the bottom line still

remains the same with $1,016,202,000.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) no changes.

MR. TOBIN: I know that. There are just some changes

there, as he said when he introduced it, as it relates to the allocation of

funding from the Legislative vote to the Department of Justice vote, which has

some bearing on the Election act that has not been proclaimed, I guess.

MR. ROBERTS: Well, the Chief Electoral Officer had it

moved back to Justice from the Legislature.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, we understand that.

While it is unfortunate that the government, who promised to

bring in this new invention in terms of the Election Act, have decided at this

point in time they are not ready to go with it and that we will operate under

the old system for this election, I guess it doesn't place any more of a

handicap on us than it does on them. We will certainly proceed under the old

Election Act. Whether we are under the old act or the new, we intend to make

sure that the people of this Province are offered a very legitimate alternative

with regard to the prospect of electing a government. We feel very confident

that the people will return us as the Government of this Province.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Pardon? The Member for Eagle River -

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Same old gang? Mr. Chairman, there will be

more of the gang over there than there will be the gang over here, I say to the

Member for Eagle River. There will be more running over there from the present -

the people will be offered more new faces from this side of the House than they

will be offered from that side of the House when the election is called, I say

to the Member for Eagle River. So, if it is the same old gang, well, then, the

majority of the same old gang, fifty-two, will come from the Liberal side of the

House.

AN HON. MEMBER: Won't be the same old faces.

MR. TOBIN: Well, they won't be the same old faces back

here but the majority of them will have the same old faces going out there. In

any case, Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Justice has said from time to time, the

electorate will decide our fate and we will accept his judgement on that aspect

of it.

Apart from that, when we get into the Interim Supply and the

funding that this government has proposed to spend in various areas - we have

concerns about all departments and we all speak for our own. I see the Minister

of Fisheries here and I say to the minister, I have some grave concerns about

his department, some very serious concerns. I will tell him why.

I have had several calls - I would like for the Minister of

Fisheries to listen to what I have to say and probably he could. I have had

several calls from constituents who owe money to the Fisheries Loan Board. I

guess they got what you call the guaranteed loan. They went to the bank and it

was supported by the Fisheries Loan Board. As a result of the hard times that

they have fallen upon - and as the minister knows, last summer in certain parts

of Placentia Bay there was a very poor fishery. These people have now applied to

the Fisheries Loan Board for funding, or, I guess, to determine their

eligibility under the plan you have brought in to pay the bank - to pay the

interest on the loan, I believe, is what it us.

Anyway, the banks are knocking on their doors. Day-in and

day-out the banks are coming to these fishermen asking them for the money. You

know: We want your money, we are going to take your boat. As a matter of fact,

lately, as I understand it, the banks have even been talking to people about

having to do something with their homes. It is very serious. So they have made a

request to the Fisheries Loan Board, some of them as long ago as three months, I

say to the minister, to see if they would qualify under this program.

Now, as I understand it, there is a committee set up which

includes the Department of Fisheries and Treasury Board officials who will sit

down and determine the eligibility of these people. Three months have gone by. I

have made some enquiries as to why the fishermen have not received a response,

why they have not been told what is to happen, particularly with the harassment

they are getting from the banks.

Mr. Chairman, I have been told that they haven't got around

yet to having a meeting. After three months with the request on the desks of the

Department of Fisheries officials, they cannot co-ordinate their schedules with

Treasury Board. While this is happening - and I am sure the minister understands

it - the banks are down. We all know what the banks can be like if they decide

to go after somebody. They probably show the least amount of mercy of any

organization or any group in the world when they decide to go after somebody.

They are now here harassing people looking for the money. These fishermen - and

I would be prepared to give the names from my constituency to the minister

after, if he would have them checked out for me - have been waiting now for up

to three months to try to get an answer back from the Department of Fisheries.

I don't think that's good enough, I say to the minister, that

that should go on, and be allowed to continue.

AN HON. MEMBER: He agrees. Don't you, Minister?

MR. TOBIN: I think he does, I think he agrees. I really

do. I say to him that while that was happening - and it is interesting enough

that it was the morning of the Budget that I checked out the problems that have

been in the Department of Fisheries for three months, or the Fisheries Loan

Board - it was that morning, and that afternoon they announced there were five

or seven or so, laid off down at the Fisheries Loan Board.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, I don't know - I am not saying that. I say

to the Minister of Justice, I realize that, but what I am saying is that it was

three months that they were waiting to do it and the Fisheries Loan Board told

me that they hadn't had the time, they couldn't jibe their schedules with the

Treasury Board people to make a decision as to whether or not they were eligible

for the program, in terms of having the interest paid to the bank. Then they

laid off five more people that evening. The banks and the minister have been -

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible) Treasury Board.

MR. TOBIN: Being a lawyer, Mr. Speaker, I am sure the

Minister of Justice knows how the banks can be rough on people when they want to

be. Here is a fisherman who owes money

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I heard a fellow, a businessman,

describing the banks one time, and he said they are something like the weather,

when the sun is shining you can't get clear of them and when it starts to rain,

they wouldn't give you an umbrella.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: He must be a lawyer for the bank. Imagine if

they are loaning to people like me.

MR. ROBERTS: If they are, they are selling their shares

(inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I tell you, if you have shares in the bank -

the Bank of Nova Scotia, I think, is the one I owe all the money to.

Anyway, let me say to the Minister of Fisheries, I would like

for him to check that out and see if something can be done. Because people are

being harassed by the banks, particularly when it comes to talking about their

homes being on the line. That is very serious. And seven million dollars cut

from the Fisheries Department's budget is something else.

Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Social Services is not here.

Now, the Minister of Tourism and Culture: I don't have the opportunity to go

through the Budget of that minister in great detail, but yesterday, my colleague

from Grand Bank - I would say to the Minister of Tourism and Culture, if I could

get his attention for a minute, we all know that last year the library boards in

this Province had to close. The libraries had to close down for a certain period

in this Province because of cutbacks. I have nothing against, as a matter of

fact, I totally support, the people of Roddickton, in trying to have their crab

plant open, but I would like to know how the Minister of Tourism and Culture can

state in a letter: 'Dear Chris: I am pleased to be able to assist you with your

feasibility study with a grant of $5,000.' Now, how the Department of Tourism

and Culture can assist in a feasibility study on a crab plant, with $5,000 - I

don't know how that could be done or what subhead it comes under or anything

else, but I am sure the minister will have the opportunity in due course to

explain that to the House. I know that my colleague from Grand Bank will

probably be pursuing it further upon the thorough investigation he is going to

be carrying out, that he is in the process today of carrying out as it relates

to that situation.

Mr. Chairman, you see the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation today standing in this House ranting and roaring.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I say one thing to the Minister of Justice,

the Minister of Transportation has done well since he was a poll captain for me

back in 1985.

MR. ROBERTS: "While the light holds out to burn, the

vilest sinner may return."

MR. TOBIN: That is right.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible) find the application signed by

the hon. (inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Well, Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of people,

I will say to the Minister of Justice, a lot of people in this world who have

had some immoral thoughts from time to time but they didn't proceed.

MR. GRIMES: I had an opportunity many years ago but I

made a wise decision.

MR. TOBIN: I can tell the Minister of Justice that the

Minister of Employment and Labour Relations was almost ready to run for our

party. Just in conclusion -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I am sure that if you want to

talk about -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, if the Minister of Justice could

remember when the Member for Port au Port ran for the Liberals, I can certainly

remember when the Member for Fortune - Hermitage ran for the Conservatives. As a

matter of fact, I went down and spent a few days in the district with him and I

spoke at fund -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. TOBIN: As a matter of fact the polls showed up to

that time he was behind in the district until I went down with him, and I

remember the rally we had down in Terrenceville, I say to the Member for Fortune

- Hermitage, I remember it well, when I went down and spoke at functions instead

of the Leader of the Opposition who was then the Minster of Development I

believe who was down on the other side of the district, so we have all been

involved with these people over time, that happens. I remember when the Member

for Baie Verte - White Bay was a Tory and it is not that long ago either. But I

would say, Mr. Chairman, as a matter of fact, I remember when the Chairman was

going to seek the nomination for the Conservatives but everybody changes from

time to time but I do not think there is any chance that I would change or the

Minister of Justice would change, but people do that.

I remember, I would say to some hon. gentlemen opposite, that

a former Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Neary, I remember when I came in the

House first, Mr. Neary used to look at us and he would say: anyone can get

elected once, so that still stands, Mr. Chairman, anyone can get elected once.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, the Minister of Justice said he remembered

when the Member for Port au Port ran for the Liberals, I wonder, does the

Minister of Justice remember when he was Leader of the Opposition?

I want to say to the Member for St. John's South, I wonder,

does the Minister of Justice -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, but I wonder if he remembers when the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs ran for the Tories down in

Placentia?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Do you remember that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: The Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs ran for the Conservative party once upon a time -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I beg your pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No, Mr. Chairman, he would never fit in our

party, the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, could not fit in our

party. It was not -

MR. R. AYLWARD: He couldn't fit in a polling booth at the

time.

MR. TOBIN: What is that?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: No. The Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs did not fit in with the plans for our party, he was rejected by the

Tories in Placentia back in '71, Mr. Chairman, so it is fair to say that the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, back then did not fit in our

party. The Member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir, Mr. Chairman, for years, was very

active in the Conservative party. He is not here and I wish he was here. Here he

comes, he is coming in, Mr. Chairman, he is about to enter the room and when you

talk about people being active in parties, for the Minister of Justice to say

that he remembers when the Member for Port au Port ran for the Liberals, how

could the Minister of Justice forget who was a former president of the

Conservative party of Newfoundland and Labrador, how could he forget who ran for

the leadership of the Conservative party of Newfoundland and Labrador and if he

is not careful -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Justice.

MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, I will only be a second

because the hon. gentleman for once is being entertaining and I am listening to

him with interest, but he should know that in 1957 I was the second

vice-president of the University of Toronto Progressive Conservative Club. Now I

resigned from that post that fall when I put a motion before the Club which they

did not accept. The motion was to censure John Diefenbaker who was then the

Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and the Prime Minister of

Canada, over the Term 29 incident. I went into a club meeting and moved a motion

as the vice-president and said: RESOLVED that the University of Toronto

Progressive Conservative Club censure the Right Honourable John Diefenbaker for

his treatment of what we then called Newfoundland. We now call it Newfoundland

and Labrador. The club, not surprisingly, did not accept my motion although I

did get a seconder, and I thereupon resigned, as I should have.

So I would say to my hon. friend that as my friend for St.

John's Centre, who has also represented other districts for the Liberal Party,

and will be re-elected in the centre, of course, that many of us take a little

while to find the light, but I would again say to him in the words that Mr.

Smallwood use to use, the old methodist hymn, and he is from the Burin Peninsula

and would understand the Methodist tradition to be very strong down on the Burin

Peninsula over the years, that while the light holds out to burn/the vilest

sinners may return. It time that his eyes were opened and if so, brothers, ye

too shall be saved.

I will now turn it over to my friend for the Strait of Belle

Isle because I am getting into the territory that he occupies normally.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. ROBERTS: Well, I would say, Mr. Chairman, that if we

took a vote on the other side, the hon. Member for Burin - Placentia West would

be impelled across here like a rocket scientist, which is as close as he is ever

going to get to being a rocket scientist, I hasten to add.

We have not talked of my friend the Minister of Fisheries. He

and I were together on an airplane recently coming from somewhere to somewhere

and comparing notes. He and I have been friends for many, many years. In fact he

preceded me in White Bay North. In 1962 the gentleman for Twillingate was

elected as the Liberal member for the old White Bay North seat which ran from

Harbour Deep down to Raleigh. Then in the Fall of 1966 when the election came he

did not seek re-election and I was nominated by the nomination process used in

those days and in due course was elected. I got 85 per cent of the vote, and I

say to my friend for the Strait of Belle Isle which now embraces most of that

area, part of it is in Baie Verte - White Bay, that after I came back feeling

not displeased with 85 per cent of the vote, somebody said: Roberts you only saw

15 per cent of the electorate did you?

Anyway, my friend the Minister of Fisheries and I were going

somewhere recently, I forget where, but no doubt on the Queen's business

together on an airplane and we were comparing notes. I guess the Naskaupi

by-election was over and I had said, that is the seventh time I have seen my

name on a ballot in the Province, three times in a leadership, twice

successfully, and once with a little trouble on the fourth ballot, but I said

that is seven times I have been returned to the House of Assembly. I said,

Walter, how about you? He counted them. He had to figure out how many times he

had been elected. He had to take his fingers and then he had to take off his

shoe. He has been elected ten or eleven times, the hon. gentleman for

Twillingate. To St. John's Municipal Council, to the House of Assembly for three

separate constituencies, White Bay North, St. Mary's the Capes, and then

Twillingate, then the House of Commons. I do not think there is another person

in Newfoundland and Labrador who has sat at every level of government. He has

been in two Cabinets.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible)

MR. ROBERTS: My friend for Burin - Placentia West cannot

even let me have the line and my friend for Twillingate then looked at me and

said, I have been there for almost every party.

There is a long history in the parliamentary tradition, Mr.

Chairman, since we are on Interim Supply which covers all these matters.

Churchill was elected to the British House of Commons for Oldham in the election

of 1900. He was re-elected in 1904 and crossed the House to sit as a Liberal. In

1922 at the end of the Lloyd George Coalition Government, that administration,

the Right Honourable Winston Churchill, as he had then become, rejoined the

Conservative Party and in fact went into the Conservative Cabinet in 1924 as

chancellor of the exchequer, in Mr. Baldwin's first Cabinet. Somebody attacked

Churchill in the House and said, the hon. gentleman is a political rat. I do not

know whether that is parliamentary in Westminster or not but words were said to

that effect. Churchill who was a parliamentarian of infinite finesse and the

ability to use the rapier wit - he was the man who once looked at the Prime

Minister of the day, Attlee, and said: There is a sheep in sheep's clothing.

Somebody once said to Churchill, Aneurin Bevan, who was a

great labour figure, 'Aneurin Bevan is his own worst enemy.' And Churchill

growled, 'Not while I'm alive he isn't.'

AN HON. MEMBER: Anyway, what did they say about a rat?

MR. ROBERTS: He said: Anybody can be a political rat, but

a political re-rat - that takes ingenuity.

Anyway, there has been a long tradition and this House is no

more immune - I mean, I was elected with John Crosbie. I was at a conference

recently on the mainland with a group of business people and political types and

all that sort of stuff. My turn came to say a few words and we were all asked to

give our cv's. I said: Look, I am a lawyer and a politician. I may look old and

scarred, but I have been around so long I can recall when John Crosbie was a

Liberal, which got a great laugh from everybody, except Bernard Valcourt did not

think it was so funny, and Harvie Andre was not overwhelmed by it either.

In any event, Mr. Chairman, I commend these estimates to the

House and I think we should get on with Interim Supply.

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

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I found some of the comments by

the Minister of Justice to be extremely educational. For example, he was in

university in Ontario before I started in primary school.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Well I never went to university in Ontario but

I remember my days in university, back in 1971-'72, I guess. At that time there

was myself, and the Member for Fogo was around; John Baker, the brother of the

Minister of Finance, and Donna Butt. There was a whole group of us involved in

the PC club at the university at that time. It was during the time that the

Minister of Justice took the leadership.

I remember at that time taking time away from university to

campaign with a great Newfoundlander by the name of John R. O'Dea who was

running for the nomination up in Ferryland district. Fortunately he did not win

it, but Tom Doyle won the nomination at that time.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: John R. O'Dea, yes. He ran for the nomination.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Right, and then in 1972 he ran for the Tory

nomination again up in Ferryland district. I was involved with him, as was one

of your learned friends, Frank O'Dea, who was probably a nephew.

We went up on the southern shore to try to get Mr. O'Dea

nominated, and Tom Doyle won the nomination so I became involved with his

election at that time -

AN HON. MEMBER: He lost in Twillingate in 1971.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, well he lost up the shore in 1975.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Well we all know there is a long history for

Charlie and Tom on the southern shore. Then he went to Twillingate.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Myles Murray's period.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, I remember that.

MR. ROBERTS: Myles and Peter Cashin were slogging it out.

MR. TOBIN: I remember that. I remember, as a matter of

fact, when -

MR. ROBERTS: You don't remember that.

MR. TOBIN: Well -

MR. ROBERTS: You may have read about it. It was 1951.

MR. TOBIN: I remember Myles Murray being a Liberal and I

remember when Aiden Maloney was a member - a great man, by the way, Aiden

Maloney, I say to the minister.

MR. ROBERTS: Aiden and I came in 1966.

MR. TOBIN: Being from Ferryland district, from Trepassey,

I say to the Minister of Justice, if you were not interested in politics up

there, there was something wrong with you. As a matter of fact, my father goes

back to the days of Peter Cashin.

MR. ROBERTS: And in those days Ferryland district went up

to St. Shotts, and St. Mary's picked up there.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, St. Shotts.

MR. ROBERTS: And Dr. Jim was in St. Mary's district.

MR. TOBIN: I never met that man - I understand a very

distinguished person, but I never met him.

On the southern shore, I tell you, they took their politics

extremely seriously.

MR. ROBERTS: And were good at it.

MR. TOBIN: As I said, my father goes back to the days of

Peter Cashin in the national referendum. He was involved in that campaign - not

overly involved; but my first involvement in politics, even before I finished

high school, was with the present Minister of Fisheries. I was a poll captain

for him when I was not very old, I say to him.

MR. ROBERTS: Did you carry the poll?

MR. TOBIN: Yes we did. We carried it the first time ever,

and we carried it -

MR. ROBERTS: An amazing tribute to the candidate.

MR. TOBIN: And we carried it -

I lived on a place called Daniel's Point. I do not know if -

MR. ROBERTS: I know, out in Trepassey - outside

Trepassey.

MR. TOBIN: Talking about amalgamation, it took place many

years ago before the amalgamation -

MR. ROBERTS: It is outside Trepassey.

MR. TOBIN: The priest -

MR. ROBERTS: Old Father Maloney?

MR. TOBIN: Father Maloney.

MR. ROBERTS: Maloney, yes.

MR. TOBIN: As a matter of fact, he told us that we had to

amalgamate and there was no more question. That was it. If the priest said you

had to amalgamate, you amalgamated. That is what took place, and that would have

been back in 1966.

MR. ROBERTS: The election, the federal election? 1968.

MR. TOBIN: No, but I am talking about the amalgamation

process.

MR. ROBERTS: Oh, it was before the -

MR. TOBIN: It was very interesting I say, as we talk

about amalgamation here in this House, as we are talking about the Budget, it is

very interesting what took place, there was Daniel's Point and Trepassey.

Daniel's Point got a community council first, which my father was involved in

and some other people, and they got the water system put in. Daniel's Point had

a water system put into every house before there was one house hooked up in

Trepassey. So, all of a sudden, Trepassey being the biggest place, they got a

little bit jealous probably, a bit jealous that this suburb had it done. So, a

group of people in Trepassey approached the Priest, they wanted something done

about it. So, the Priest decided now the best way to deal with this is to call

you all Trepassey. So, he met with the crowd, the council and the crowd, and he

said you have to become one and that was in Myles Murray's days whenever that

was.

MR. ROBERTS: Well, Myles was re-elected in 1966, no I am

sorry, re-elected in 1962, Aiden ran in 1966 and Tom Doyle won the seat in 1973.

MR. TOBIN: No.

MR. ROBERTS: He lost the nomination in Ferryland.

MR. TOBIN: Aiden Maloney resigned then, didn't he?

MR. ROBERTS: Aiden resigned but there was no by-election.

Aiden resigned in 1969 or 1970 and became president of the Saltfish Corporation.

MR. TOBIN: Okay, right. I remember John Nolan was the

Liberal candidate -

MR. ROBERTS: John ran in 1971 for us in Ferryland. Mr.

Smallwood ran in Placentia East.

AN HON. MEMBER: I did not know you two were the same age.

MR. TOBIN: We are not the same age but we have an

interest in politics, both of us.

I remember that, and being involved in politics, I followed

it, Mr. Chairman. I can remember as a matter of fact - I doubt if the Minister

of Health remembers it - but I remember meeting the Minister of Health when he

was involved in the leadership campaign back in -

MR. ROBERTS: For which Party?

MR. TOBIN: The PC Party, that was back in 1969.

MR. ROBERTS: When Frank came back?

MR. TOBIN: Yeah, 1969.

MR. ROBERTS: After they dumped Ottenheimer, when Frank

came back.

MR. TOBIN: Yeah, in 1969 Frank came back and that is when

the Minster of Health was involved in the leadership of the Conservative Party.

As I was saying earlier to my colleague from Fogo, when we

were in university, our university days, when we hung out around. I remember

Cabot Martin, at the time he was a professor, when he would come into our little

club and give us advice and fortune, if you would listen to Cabot from time to

time.

MR. ROBERTS: It is pretty frightening, is it not, to hear

Cabot giving advice on politics?

MR. TOBIN: But they were very interesting days back in

that period, probably more interesting than they have ever been since, I would

say to the -

MR. ROBERTS: We have never had an election like the 1971

election. The whole Province was politicized. Astonishing -

MR. TOBIN: Yes, I have a story, I will not tell it here

but I will tell the Minister of Justice a story some time as it relates to the

leadership convention of the Liberals -

MR. ROBERTS: Were you there?

MR. TOBIN: - that is when he ran the first time.

MR. ROBERTS: And you were there?

MR. TOBIN: No, I was not there. No, no, no but I will

tell you a story about it sometime. No, I will tell the story some other time.

It is not the right time to tell it.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Oh go on boy tell it.

MR. TOBIN: No, something happened on the southern shore

which I was party too, I say to the Minister of Justice, but they were great -

MR. R. AYLWARD: - do not tell that, you could go to jail,

you would be right in jail in a week.

MR. TOBIN: What?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, oh yes. Although I remember then, little

wallet's, the card carrying Liberal's, remember the little wallet's? You could

flip them over.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: What is that?

AN HON. MEMBER: Would the person on the other side please

vote.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Yes, yes, I remember well. As a matter of

fact, I would say to the Minister of Justice that when he won the leadership

convention the second time - he won it -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Right, and then the second time he won it was

in -

MR. ROBERTS: 1974 and the third one we will not talk

about.

MR. TOBIN: The night you won the leadership in 1974, I

was in a hotel in Halifax with my colleague who is now the Leader of the

Opposition -

MR. ROBERTS: Hotel where, when? He was a Liberal at that

time.

MR. TOBIN: No, well I do not know what he was but he was

with me in Halifax at that time or Sydney, I am not sure, we were at a Kinsmen

convention actually. I phoned CBC -

MR. ROBERTS: Lundrigan was elected in 1975 in Grand

Falls.

MR. TOBIN: I phoned CBC in Halifax to find out if they

knew who won the leadership in Newfoundland and they told me that Mr. Roberts

had won the leadership. So, I tell him that I followed his career somewhat as

well but I would -

MR. ROBERTS: I must say I would rather have him where I

can see him rather than behind me.

MR. TOBIN: I say to the Minister of Justice that the

night he won it the third time - I was not the person that you should have

worried about seeing behind you - I am not that person, I say to the Minister of

Justice, your former colleague and probably your former seatmate, Bill Rowe, is

the fellow -

MR. ROBERTS: No, I agree, the hon. gentleman -

MR. TOBIN: - and Steve Neary.

MR. ROBERTS: The hon. gentleman has always been upfront,

and that's the way to be.

MR. TOBIN: That's right. Well, there's no doubt about

that.

MR. ROBERTS: But the gentleman for Port au Port was a

member of the fourth ballot club.

MR. TOBIN: Is that right?

MR. ROBERTS: So was the former premier, who then -

MR. TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Rideout.

MR. ROBERTS: - sat for Baie Verte - White Bay.

MR. WINSOR: Where's Beaton Tulk in that?

MR. TOBIN: By the way I

MR. ROBERTS: Yes.

MR. TOBIN: - can say to the Minister of Justice that my

former premier, Mr. Rideout, from all of the time I've been around him, from all

of the conversations I've ever had with him, he never said anything except in a

very respectful way as it relates to the present Minister of Justice.

MR. ROBERTS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: I think he always stuck with you. Rough times

and bad he was there with you.

MR. ROBERTS: He came into the House -

MR. TOBIN: When the Bill Rowes and Steve Nearys and Roger

Simmons were ganging up on you -

MR. ROBERTS: Oh, no. Rideout was part of the fourth

ballot club.

MR. TOBIN: What's that?

MR. ROBERTS: Rideout was part of the fourth ballot club.

MR. TOBIN: Yes, okay.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That's somebody you might see again, Bill

Rowe.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I -

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes, out in LaPoile for us.

MR. WOODFORD: In the 'Hall of Fame'.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, I won't say it.

AN HON. MEMBER: You won't say what?

MR. TOBIN: What I was going to say.

AN HON. MEMBER: Say it boy.

AN HON. MEMBER: Are you getting shy all of a sudden?

MR. TOBIN: I wouldn't want to embarrass some of the

members opposite.

Anyway, Mr. Chairman, to get on with it, myself and the

Minister of Justice I guess became a little bit sidetracked.

MR. ROBERTS: I would say to my friend, those stories get

tiresome. Because every now and then in the Cabinet these days someone says: why

has this ever been done? I say: I can recall being in the Cabinet twenty-five

years ago - and all I get is a groan.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, in conclusion just let me say to

the Minister of Justice -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

MR. TOBIN: - for one second, I say to the member. Another

thing we have in common is that he was the first parliamentary assistant to the

premier in this Province -

MR. ROBERTS: The job was created for me.

MR. TOBIN: The job was created for you. I had the

distinct honour to serve in that post as well with Brian Peckford. I say again,

having served as parliamentary assistant, having served in Cabinet, that I

honestly believe that the most rewarding and educational experience that I've

ever had in my political career - and it's not very long, it's twelve years -

was the time that I served as parliamentary assistant to Brian Peckford. I

thoroughly enjoyed that job.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a few words. It

was nice to see the Member for Burin - Placentia West so complacent, so laid

back and so soft. It's nice to see that. I was away from the House for four

days. I was down doing business on behalf of the minister, down in Kansas City.

MS. VERGE: Kansas City? What kind of business were you

doing there?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: I was looking for a cook for the new dining

room.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible) eleventh floor.

MR. MURPHY: I heard the Member for Humber East was doing

her usual, resurrecting things that mean absolutely nothing. I enjoyed the

Member for Burin - Placentia West this morning, giving us a little dissertation

about his political background. It's too bad it has to end so soon. Sad. That's

the way life goes, I suppose. He's a nice gentleman and he was a good member. He

worked hard on behalf of his constituents. As a matter of fact he's done better

off of this government than he ever did off his own government. Exceptionally

good.

MS. VERGE: (Inaudible) Tom Murphy for his campaign now.

MR. MURPHY: That's all right, he can use it. I don't know

that it'll help him. If he doesn't spend some time in his own district and stay

away from Hermitage he might find that he's going to lose two seats instead of

one. Because he's wasting his time in Hermitage. Totally wasting his time. He

knows it. But then he was a little nervous. The word is, Mr. Chairman, he was a

little nervous that if he didn't say: Kathy, you run for us against Oliver, that

Kathy might have run in Burin - Placentia West for the big red machine.

So he talked Kathy into going up the road, then he said: I'll

go up and help you. But he also - remember the time he told ex-premier Brian

Peckford: don't worry, Brian, I'll help you? I hate to bring up the bus incident

again. 'That's the welcoming committee, Mr. Premier, there they are.' Peckford

said: what are they holding the guns for? He said: that's to welcome you.

Peckford said: why are they pointing them at me? He said: don't worry about

that, that's nothing, they're blanks.

I can remember, because the tape was on t.v. not long ago. We

all remember - and of course the hon. Member for Burin - Placentia West was

stood up like this. There was a good friend of mine, a co-worker from FPI, Mr.

Stockley, was there and he was giving it to Premier Peckford.

I happened to see a piece of material last night that - I

don't know where it came from but it would seem to me that it's election

material.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Election material?

MR. MURPHY: Yes. It's got very interesting colours, blue

and green. It says: putting PCs first. No, they've done that for seventeen

years. I think it says: putting people first. This House has been open now, I

ask my colleague for Eagle River, three weeks?

MR. DUMARESQUE: Thirteen days.

MR. MURPHY: Thirteen days. For thirteen days, Mr.

Chairman, we have heard the squabblings and the squeals from the Member for

Kilbride about silly doorknobs and about a piece of secure material that the

minister for - and openly - had to buy to look after documents.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. MURPHY: I say to the Member for Fogo, he should ask

his colleagues who were ministers in the previous administration how much money

they spent. So what do they do? They sit here and they ramble. People have asked

- the Leader of the Opposition was on yesterday morning, and I was winging my

way home, but I found out last night - because I have tremendous informants -

that he was on yesterday morning trying to defend - no, he didn't try and

defend. He said: wait till the time comes and we will tell the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador what our plans are.

The House is open thirteen days, they haven't offered one

single solitary solution. Not one. Now this is the clique, this is the gang,

that got this Province in the terrible economic state we find ourselves in. You

people. The Member for Humber East, she was the Minister of Education, she was

the Minister of Justice. Now day after day she stands in the House and she gets

on with: how come you're not doing this? Nine years she was a minister.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: How many? Ten. Now she informs me ten. Done

absolutely nothing for the people. Only borrow, give it to her, downstairs,

private dining rooms, all kinds of dining rooms. All kinds of chefs, booze,

cigarettes, bills flying around the place, all over the place.

I don't blame my friend for Kilbride for getting up and

getting on with his foolishness. He's going. He's not going empty-handed, I

heard. I heard that news while I called up. I heard they're taking $28,500 each

with them.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Yes, that's right.

MR. MURPHY: There's the bunch that has the concern for

the people of the Province.

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: I was down in Kansas City trying to get a few

jobs for the people in my district. The hon. member knows what that's like. How

did he feel when Marystown got widdlywooed and turned over? You know what it's

all about. I'll go to the end of the world, I'll go into outer space, if I can

get fifty or sixty jobs. So would the member. So he should. He knows it.

MR. TOBIN: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West on a point of

order.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Chairman, there's no need for the hon.

Member for St. John's South to get irritated because I asked him. I commend him

for going to Kansas City to try to get jobs for the workforce. But I wonder

would the government do the same thing for me? Will they send me to Norway to

try to get money for the workforce at the Marystown Shipyard?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please! Order, please!

There's no point of order.

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. MURPHY: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Now I want

to remind the Member for Burin - Placentia West - I hate to bring up this story

- but remember the $14 million shrimp trawler. Fourteen million dollars worth of

work.

MR. DUMARESQUE: That could have been at Marystown.

MR. MURPHY: Somebody told me down on the Burin Peninsula,

he said: the advice our member gave was, stand fast, hold the line. What

happened?

MR. DUMARESQUE: Went to Norway.

MR. MURPHY: That's right. The shrimp trawler for FPI was

built in Norway and we lost $14 million worth of work. This is the member who

gets up talking about Norway. He wants to go to Norway.

AN HON. MEMBER: He didn't really give them that advice?

AN HON. MEMBER: He did. He wants to go to Norway so he

can send more work over there.

MR. MURPHY: Yes. He should go to Norway, Mr. Chairman. I

am waiting, as the people of this Province are waiting, to hear from hon.

members opposite, who have unbelievable experience in government, who know how

to borrow like nobody else ever borrowed. They were in seventeen years,

seventeen years I tell the Member for St. John's North. There has been

twenty-three years in the first administration, four in this administration for

twenty-seven. That is ten years longer, and these folks borrowed 70 per cent of

the provincial debt, and they have the gall to stand up and talk about

doorknobs, and the gall to stand up and talk about warrants. I suppose it makes

good copy if the media jumps on it and likes it, but you know what really is a

fact, the people in Newfoundland and Labrador can see them for what they are,

but we are waiting, we are waiting with bated breath, Mr. Chairman, to hear

about putting people first - what is the slogan, putting PCs first?

MR. DUMARESQUE: Yes, that is it.

MR. MURPHY: Putting PCs first. All the campaign

literature is printed now, it is all ready, putting PCs first, I understand all

their stuff is done. Putting people first -

AN HON. MEMBER: Putting PCs first, the sequel.

MR. MURPHY: Oh the sequel, that is right. Putting PCs

first. Now can you imagine asking the people of this Province to put ye crowd

back in?

AN HON. MEMBER: Don't the put people first anymore?

MR. MURPHY: What? I know they are upset and you cannot

blame people for being upset. They have a standard of living and everybody knows

where the government is, they have a standard of living and the government just

cannot give them any more money, just cannot.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Just a couple of minutes to clear up?

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MS. VERGE: No leave.

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

No leave?

MR. MURPHY: Okay, that is alright.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, if it was not so serious I would make a few

comments on it, but what the Member for St. John's South just got on with, in a

Province today that is just about closed up, Mr. Chairman, I think the truth and

hope of the Budget that the minister just brought down probably could be summed

up in a statement that someone told me a couple of days after the Budget was

brought down, he said the only way to describe what this government is doing, is

to advise the last person who leaves the Province to turn off the lights and

shut the door. Mr. Chairman, that is what this Budget is doing for our Province

and it is no wonder the Member for St. John's South was down in Kansas City

looking for jobs for his constituents, because they will have to go to Kansas

City as there are no jobs around here, the government is doing nothing in this

Province to create jobs, actually they are doing just the opposite, to do away

with jobs.

Now of all the important issues that are happening in this

Province today, the Member for St. John's South has to get up and get on with

his tripe, his political rhetoric and tripe, and never mentioned one substantive

issue concerning the bill we are doing now, Interim Supply, or the Budget which

is all tied into the one. One very important issue that you should have

mentioned, because it affects your district, I do not know if you were aware of

it or not when you were down in Kansas City, if anybody told you that it

affected your district, but the Day Break program in this Province, Mr.

Chairman, affects your district.

Now, I do not know if you know that or not, but I knew it

when I was representing most of your area, I knew it when I was representing

Shea Heights that the Day Break program affected your district and every other

district around this area in St. John's, and it was a very important and helpful

program that was doing some good, and if anyone at all looked at the program

itself, and if anyone had any thought for the future of our Province or for the

future of individuals who go through the program, which is more important, if

anyone looked at that for five minutes they would not be able to cancel the

program. Even if you are looking at it on an economic basis, even if you are a

cut and slash government like the government that is here now, you should be

able to look a bit further into the future, past your next election, is what you

have to do, if you're going to be good government.

The Premier is pretty good at telling us about his economic

development commission or whatever you call it. Doug House's commission, and the

recovery commission, I think it was. These were long-term plans that we were

setting up for the benefit of our Province in the long-term. That's what he was

supposed to be doing. Actually they're doing very little. But if his plan,

supposed plan, is put in place, he's looking to the long-term.

What does he do with a social program - a program that the

people on that side thought involved a group of people with no power, involved a

group of people who couldn't fight back, that's the reason they cut it. They

thought these people would not fight back. So they said: we'll cut that out and

save a few thousand dollars today. In ten years time when the problems occur

because we do not have this program in place, in ten years time when we have to

spend more money on trying to help people who should have been helped at a

younger age, this government won't be around. They'll have washed their hands of

it and walk away from it.

Another thing this government, and our government actually,

were trying to do with our health care system - it's too bad the Minister of

Health is not here now - we were trying to get to provide the most efficient

health system that we could for the money we had. That was a plan, both

education and health, of ours, and supposedly of that government.

What we tried to do was get people out of hospitals quickly

and provide a home care service which was saving thousands and thousands of

dollars in our hospital system. It was cheaper to treat people at home, to try

to help them at home, after they got out of hospital, so they wouldn't have to

stay in hospital for so long and cost thousands of dollars. Mr. Chairman, this

government is cutting the home care program because it's getting too expensive.

I don't understand the logic. So if you cut the home care program you're going

back to the same problem you had ten years ago when people were staying in

hospitals longer. What you decided to do was throw them out of hospital the day

of their operation and cut the home care program, the result of which will be

drastic to a lot of people.

To get back to the Day Break program, this government figured

they were a powerless group. They weren't a very strong lobby. They're not going

to cause us too many headaches if we cut them completely out. We'll say that

we'll distribute the young people in the system to other daycares, which is

impossible. Any expert, anyone who's involved with the Day Break program will

tell you there's not enough capacity around to put these other children into the

other daycare centres. If you listen to people like Patricia Burry, president of

Newfoundland and Labrador Daycare and Pre-school Owners and Operators

Association, the volume of children at Day Break would not feasibly be absorbed

in daycare centres in and around St. John's.

This person is an expert in the business. She is the

president of the Association which governs the daycare. This person's advice

should be listened to, at least. If not heeded, that person should be listened

to. That person says it can't be done. So who is the expert on that side of the

House who says it can be done? Where's the counter-argument to what Patricia

Burry has said in a letter that was distributed to all MHAs?

I doubt very much if anyone on the other side even looked at

this. The day it came in the mail this was thrown in the garbage. Nobody over

there looked at it. Especially the Member for St. John's South. It was in the

garbage before he came back from Kansas City, I'd say. Made a phone call back

and said: get rid of the junk mail and just leave the cheques and the expense

account cheques there so that I make sure I get my $25,000 or $35,000 in

expenses again this year.

Listen to Dr. Carole Peterson, chairperson of the board of

Memorial's child care facility. She states unequivocally that the services of

Day Break are both unique and critically important. Now if an expert, such as

Dr. Carol Peterson, would say that, where is the counter-argument? Who over

there can give me an argument to say that this expert's advice is wrong? That's

all I want to hear. That's what I'd like to hear before I pass an Interim Supply

bill that has not a nickel for Day Break in it.

Mr. Chairman, if we listen to Mary Goss-Prowse, Director,

Newfoundland and Labrador Canadian Day Care Advocacy Association: 'I cannot

believe your government would choose to hurt children and families, for the most

part, who are hurting already.' Now, what member on that side of the House of

Assembly can read that and say they made the right decision? There is nobody

over there who could read it and say they made the right decision, not a member,

not even the Minister of Education who is the most ruthless person over there.

He couldn't even read that statement and say they have done the right thing. I

am sure the Member for Eagle River couldn't read it and say they are doing the

right thing. So they either didn't read it or they are just ignoring it. Maybe

they are more heartless than I think they are, Mr. Chairman. If we listen to

Christine Maclean, Co-Chairman, Association of Early Childhood Educators in

Newfoundland and Labrador, another person who should be an expert in the field

of early childhood development, a person who is involved in the system - what

does Christine Maclean say? 'On behalf of the Association of Early Childhood

Educators from Newfoundland and Labrador, which represents approximately 200

professional early childhood educators from the Province, I am writing to

express my shock at your government's decision to close Day Break Parent Child

Centre.' Here is another expert who represents 200 professional people who work

in that business, who have done the studies, put in the training, and put in the

practical experience to understand what is needed in that industry, what is

needed in early childhood development. That expert says she is shocked that you

would do this. Now, how can any member on this side of the House seriously say

that they have made the correct decision by cancelling the Day Break program

when they have such overwhelming evidence that they have made the wrong

decision?

Now, the Member for St. John's South should have been up in

the House of Assembly the last ten minutes pleading with his government to

reinstate the Day Break program. That is what he should have been speaking

about, not the garbage that he got on with, whatever it was, his huffing and

puffing. That is all you hear in the House of Assembly when he stands up, a lot

of noise and very little content.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. MURPHY: The Member for Kilbride obviously doesn't

quite understand, and perhaps if he would look at the Estimates again he will

see that in home care there is an additional $1 million put in there by the

Minister of Health. Now, that is in that department. He then gets on with his

insulting rhetoric towards me. It doesn't make any difference to me. While he

was speaking, I wrote a little something I thought might be appropriate: "The

Member for Kilbride rose to speak/He spoke in quiet reverence/The poor were on

his mind, he said/ And not his whopping severance."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DUMARESQUE: Read it again.

MR. MURPHY: "The Member for Kilbride rose to speak/He

spoke in quiet reference/The poor were on his mind, he said/And not his whopping

severance." He can say that I am getting on with gobbledygook. The hon. member

knows that never in the history of this Province have we been faced, through

real recession not created in this Province, with so many people on social

assistance, and never have we had the strain that we do now.

MR. R. AYLWARD: You are proud of that.

MR. MURPHY: Well, it is not a case of our being proud of

it. I suggest to the hon. member that Nova Scotia, where there is a Tory

government, has never had as many people on social assistance. The Province of

Ontario, where my learned friend from St. John's East is - oops! I was looking

for an

article - that is my briefcase.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. DUMARESQUE: Sixty-seven dollars at Woolco.

AN HON. MEMBER: That's right.

MR. MURPHY: It is a pity the Member for St. John's East

is not here, because we still have not heard one single solitary word after

putting PCs first over there, to tell us what they are going to do with the

economy of this Province when they face the electorate, not a word, not a

sentence, nothing.

DR. WARREN: All these serious issues that face them.

MR. MURPHY: Exactly, all these serious issues. If they

think that the people of this Province, the people in this building, the school

teachers, the nurses, and everybody else are really impressed with the

Opposition and their silly rhetoric about doorknobs and other things, then they

are wrong. They are dead wrong.

People are too smart. They should give Newfoundland people a

little more credit. 'Austerity on the way, Rae says.' I saw a sign, I tell the

hon. member, a billboard in Ontario - a huge billboard that said: 'Buffalo's Man

of the Year - Bob Rae.'

MS. COWAN: Who is he?

MR. MURPHY: The Premier of Ontario. 'Buffalo's Man of the

Year' up on a billboard.

MS. VERGE: Why don't you talk about Day Break?

MR. MURPHY: I can talk about Day Break. I can tell you,

if you look backwards over the ten years of administration from 1989 to 1979,

when the hon. the Member for Humber East was the Minister of Justice and the

Minister of Education, and she sat in Cabinet and made Cabinet decisions

associated with an aircraft - does this government have an aircraft any longer?

AN HON. MEMBER: No.

MR. MURPHY: What did we do with it?

AN HON. MEMBER: Sold it.

MR. MURPHY: How much was the aircraft?

MR. SULLIVAN: I don't know, I wasn't here.

MR. MURPHY: The Member for Ferryland wasn't around any

more than I was. Let's talk about a little bit of austerity. You had downstairs,

and this hon. member went down and sat down, and if she didn't, let her stand

and deny it - and had, day-in and day-out, the best wine, the best liqueurs. She

watched the Member for Burin - Placentia West light the best cigars, cigarettes,

and she has the gall to talk about daycare in 1993. She could have saved enough

in three months to pay for all the daycare in this Province for a whole year -

never did it.

Remember the dastardly story we have over here on Torbay

Road.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Well now, the hon. member is over there

shaking and shaking and getting on. He doesn't like it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Oh, no. He can stand in his place and ask

questions, trying to embarrass the government over silly little things, but what

does he do when we bring something back to him? He does not like it. He doesn't

want to take it. He doesn't want to hear it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: No, you don't want to hear it.

MR. DUMARESQUE: He can give it, but he can't take it.

MR. MURPHY: That is right. You know that putting PCs

first is going to catch up with you. You have done it for seventeen years, and

the time is here. The time has arrived. The people will not support you.

MS. VERGE: Where do you stand on Day Break?

MR. MURPHY: Where do I stand? I would love to see every

community in this Province, if this government had the funding, provide daycare

centres for all those who needed it.

MS. VERGE: What about St. John's Day Break?

MR. MURPHY: I totally support it. The hon. member knows

that the only opportunity somebody up here gets to express their opinion is in

caucus. She knows that, I don't need to tell her. I will go on the record as

saying that I support the daycare centre.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: I don't have the finances, but five of your

colleagues are walking out of here with $130,000 as soon as the election is

called, I tell the Member for Fogo. Why doesn't he stand up and ask his

colleague - why don't you go to your caucus and tell your people to leave the

money behind them?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: Oh sure, be foolish. I am foolish. When I

tell him the truth he doesn't like it. And I tell the Member for Humber East

that I support the daycare centre, but I am a realist. We don't waste any money

over here. You have tried, with your -

AN HON. MEMBER: Tell her to go give her husband another

contract (inaudible).

MR. MURPHY: No, I am not getting into that. I am not

getting into the family issue at all. I am not going to get into it. I refuse to

get into it; but I remind the member, and I know, and she knows I know, that we

can go dig up the log book when they had the aircraft, on the same day from Deer

Lake to St. John's, St. John's Deer Lake, with shopping junkets, and how much

that cost the taxpayers of this Province.

So don't get on with this putting PCs first situation.

Putting PCs first is going to get you guys nowhere. The people of this Province

understand that this Province is in very serious financial difficulty, and I

think the people of this Province understand who created and generated that

financial problem - not this government. We have been four years mending

financial fences, through no fault of our own. And what are the hon. members

doing? They stand up and get on with silly statements like: 'The Premier said he

was going to bring every mother's son home,' and other such junk. It is time for

them, as the Loyal Opposition, to be responsible, stand in their places and tell

the people of this Province what they are going to do, instead of putting PCs

first. They did it for years. They put this Province in the hole beyond the

capability of this government, and I ask members opposite, if we are looking for

$50 million on current account, and going to the bond markets of the world, we

don't sell it, we don't get $50 million, then what happens in this Province?

Basically, we are now bankrupt, bankrupt, but the members

opposite would want us to borrow $120 million, or do what Mr. Rae is doing,

'Austerity on the way' - Rae; 18,000 civil servants in Ontario, the 'have'

province, the province that this Province depended on for years to get transfer

payments. When you people were in government - $800 million more than this

government has today. So, when my friend from Kilbride gets up, he should

remember that: "The Member from Kilbride rose to speak/He spoke in quiet

reverence/The poor were on his mind, he said/And not his whopping severance."

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, once again we have the Member for St. John's

South standing in this House and saying absolutely nothing substantive, when he

has before his own eyes the evidence of experts from this Province, experts in

the Daycare Early Childhood Development field, who tell us that the decision of

government is wrong, totally wrong. They are unanimous when they say it. Now,

Mr. Chairman, the government say they needed to save money. They had to save

money, so they cut the Day Break program. But if we look at it, if they had done

any studies - and this is a prime example of what a government does when it acts

with knee-jerk reactions, when they decide at the last minute they are going to

cut this and cut that, cut another million dollars, everywhere throughout the

system, without doing any kind of a study as to what effects they are going to

have.

Now, they cut the Day Break program, which is a program - and

the Premier didn't even know this, which I find strange, because, technically,

really, it is his Budget. He is the one who should be making all the decisions

on the Budget, but the Premier didn't even know when he answered the question on

Day Break that it was a 50-50 cost-shared program. Fifty cents of every dollar

that went into that program was Federal Government money. So they going to cut

out the program and the best they can do is save fifty-cent dollars, because

they are going to lose fifty cents back to Ottawa, they saved them fifty cents.

These are the people the Premier is always fighting about, saying they don't

send enough money to Newfoundland; they are cutting back on transfer payments;

our equalization has been cut by so much per cent, I hear him saying that every

time he is on television; then he cuts a program that saves Ottawa fifty cents

on every dollar that was in the program. It doesn't make the least bit of sense

in the world.

Now, Mr. Chairman, the other fifty cents, we assume, is

provincial taxpayers' dollars. A lot of that fifty cents, you could assume,

would be going to wages, to hire the people - twenty people was it? I can't

remember how many.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Well, the people who worked at Day Break,

how ever many people worked at Day Break, a good part of that fifty cents went

to their salaries, so whatever salaries they were making, they are paying back

between 20 per cent and 30 per cent on income tax. So, out of the fifty cents we

thought we had saved in our provincial share of that money, we are going to lose

the income tax. You have 20 per cent of that back, anyway, the minimum of that

fifty cents, we got twenty cents of it back in income tax. We got another fair

portion of it back in retail sales tax, so that is another - well we will say 7

per cent out of the twelve.

So we had fifty cents now that we were supposed to save money

on cutting out the Day Break program. We have saved the federal government fifty

cents right off the bat, which we would have gotten a share of that for income

tax, too, by the way. We have lost the income tax of the people who were working

there. We have lost that 20 per cent, so we are down to saving around thirty

cents now - twenty-five or thirty cents. We have lost any retail sales tax that

those people might have paid when they spent their earnings - spent their wages.

So we are down to saving about thirteen cents on the dollar - maybe twenty cents

- probably around thirteen to fifteen cents on the dollar. This is the decision

that this government made to say this is a wise decision and this is going to

get us out of debt. Some time in the future this will cut our current account

deficit by saving thirteen cents on the dollar to close down Day Break.

What are the costs going to be in ten years time, I wonder?

Will the cost be less than thirteen cents on a dollar that we are going to have

to spend on people who will need more help, and people who would have benefitted

immensely now by having the program open? What is going to be the cost in a few

years time for those people? It will be a cost that we will not want to

calculate when the time comes.

Now the hon. Member for St. John's South said that members on

this side are standing up and not saying what they will do when they get

elected. If I was running again, the first thing I would do if elected, and we

formed government, I would, and I will - even though I will not be running - be

advising the new Premier, Premier Simms, when he comes, that the first thing he

should do is reinstate the Day Break program. That would be the first thing I

would do if I was coming back here. The very first thing I would do is reinstate

the Day Break program, because it has been in this Province - I think it was

established almost twenty years ago. It has run for twenty years, helping all

the people who go through it. If it had helped only one it would be worth the

money - only one if they had help - but they helped all the people who went

through the program, for twenty years. They actually brought money into our

Province - money that we would not have gotten otherwise. They brought fifty

cent dollars in from Ottawa, which the Premier is also complaining about is not

sending enough money down here.

Mr. Chairman, we are not going to save anything more than a

thirteen or fifteen cent dollar by cutting it out, or we will be spending a

thirteen cent dollar if we kept it. So for the investment that we would make in

the people who would go through the program, do you not agree that it would be

the right decision to continue the Day Break program? It would be the correct

thing to do. What odds about the political fallout of changing your mind. You

did not expect that there would be such resistance, because you figured that the

people involved in the program would just make a bit of noise for a day or so

and then they would die out. You know the one, when this decision was made, who

should have actually quit her job as a Cabinet minister when this decision was

being made - the Minister of Environment and Lands. That is the person who

should have resigned. If anyone on that side, even more so than the Minister of

Social Services, if there was someone on that side who should have stood up to

keep this program in place, she should understand, as an educator in our

Province, the value of this program.

MS. VERGE: Minister responsible for the Status of Women.

MR. R. AYLWARD: She is the minister responsible for the

Status of Women. She is the person who is the educator in this Province. She is

the person who used to be President of the NTA of our Province, and yet she sits

there silently when one of the most valuable early childhood development

programs in our Province is just being thrown in the garbage. I do not

understand how she can do it. I do not understand how the Minister of Labour can

do it. He is an educator also, but he was probably tied up at the time trying to

write his apology to the Premier and the Minister of Education, so he was

preoccupied; but the Minister of Environment does very little else. She gets her

picture in the paper every now and then at cocktail parties or whatever I saw

her at last week.

She does not have very much more to do and she is the one who

should have been fighting tooth and nail to keep this program open. Now I do not

know if she is so politically narrow-minded that she said well, there is none in

Conception Bay South so there should not be one in St. John's, that is the

Premier's answer, there is none in the Bay of Island's so there will be none in

St. John's. The Member for St. Barbe, saying there is none in St. Barbe, so

there should be none in St. John's. There is no Day Break Program in the Strait

of Belle Isle District, so there is none in St. John's. That is the logic that

they use to cancel it. They did not save any money they just did it on a

strictly political basis.

We do not have a member on that side from the St. John's area

with enough guts to stand up and say no, we are not going to close it. We do not

have a Cabinet Minister on that side in the Cabinet room, with enough conviction

to be able to stand against the Premier and a few of the people that say, we do

not have the program, so you do not have it. They never had the stomach to stand

up to them and say we want this kept open and if you do not keep it open - if

there was anyone over there who thought with a bit of logic, it is not hard to

figure out. It was not hard to figure out that you are not saving any money by

doing it.

The Member for Pleasantville still sits over there and

supports it, he will vote for this Budget if we ever get around to voting for

it, he will vote, Mr. Chairman, for closing the Day Break Program. He is a St.

John's member, he is one of the members who's constituents benefit by this

program, we all benefit by the program regardless. If we help one young person

anywhere in Newfoundland, the whole Province benefits, we all know that, that is

motherhood. Yet, we can see a government come in here and to save a few bucks,

save about thirteen-cent-dollars, that is what they are saving. The rest of it -

they are giving money back to Ottawa, fifty cents to the dollar they are going

to give back to Ottawa. The Member for Pleasantville is the one who is always

whining about Ottawa's transfer payments being cut down and now he is a part of

cutting a program that is going to save Ottawa fifty cents on every dollar that

the program costs. It does not make the slightest bit of sense to me.

MR. NOEL: (Inaudible) you better watch that your pension

does not get cut.

MR. R. AYLWARD: If my pension gets cut or my severance

gets cut, Mr. Chairman, I will be here until the day before the election, now, I

guarantee you that. If you think I am in here, if I am motivated by money, if

you believe that and if that is why you are in here, get out of here. You should

not be in here if money is your motivator, your district should be your

motivator, your constituents should be your motivator and if the severance pay

goes out, Mr. Chairman, it goes out. I cannot control that and I do not worry

about it. If it is there, Mr. Chairman, when we all retire, anyone who does not

want it does not have to take it. The Minister of Education can stand up here

now when he is defeated because of the scandal in the Roddickton fish plant in

the next little while, Mr. Chairman, I do not know but he will be in jail over

that one before it is all over.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Minister of Education.

MR. DECKER: Mr. Chairman, if I go out of here with a full

pension, I will not be taking severance. I challenge the hon. member to make the

same statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, if I go out of

here with a full pension, I will not take severance.

AN HON. MEMBER: Good.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I get 60 per cent of my salary and that

is not a full pension.

MR. TOBIN: You walked into that one Decker, you walked

into that one.

MR. R. AYLWARD: That is exactly what the member was

saying.

MR. TOBIN: Now, he said it, now he said it.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Now, I said it, what is the big deal?

MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) he is wasting time in the House.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I will come down to the penitentiary and

visit you -

MR. DECKER: Point of order, Mr. Chairman.

If I go out of here with a pension, I will not take

severance. I challenge the hon. member to make the same statement.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Kilbride.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Chairman, I will be living around

here, if I got to go down to the Pen to visit him because of the scandal in

Roddickton, I will do it. I will give him that promise. I will bring him down

some gifts and maybe a bit of food, that I will buy out of my severance package,

Mr. Chairman. I will spend some of it on him, Mr. Chairman. But it is like the

Member for St. John's South seems to be pretty worried about, it is $28,000 just

to make it clear, it is $28,000 and I will take it if it is there without a

doubt but the Member for St. John's South, in the three years that he has been

in here, in the district that is next to mine, I worked fourteen years to build

up a $28,000 severance, the district that is right next to the District of

Kilbride, my expenses are $6,000 per year and the Member for St. John's South

expenses are $28,000 per year. Now, there is something wrong with that, he has

gotten a severance package every year since he came into this House, every

single year, he will have fourteen times my severance- well, no he will not have

it because he will not be around, and most members over there will never have to

worry about what they will have to do with their severance package. They will

never have to worry about it because they will never be here long enough to see

it.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I will tell you how much you are saving by

cutting down Day Break. You are saving thirteen-cent dollars and you will get up

and talk about what a great decision it is to close down the Day Break program

in this Province and affect your constituents. You will get up and tell me what

you are doing on that side of the House to save the Day Break program. You tell

me what you are going to do to keep that program open. You tell me what you are

going to do to keep a program that existed in this Province for twenty years -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Did you cut that out to give me my

severance, is that why you cut it out? Is that why you cut it out?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Is that why you cut it out? Of course

not. Mr. Chairman, we have other experts in the field who have commented on the

closure of Day Break; we have Mary Coleman, Fisher Children Centre, Corner

Brook. Now this is a person from Corner Brook who made a comment on the closing.

Day Break is a model in the community, a model of community, families and early

childhood education helping each other.

MR. CHAIRMAN: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave?

MR. CHA