Volume XL Monday Province of Newfoundland FORTIETH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND First Session VERBATIM REPORT (Hansard} Speaker: Honourable Patrick McNicholas L-'S~'f?- Number 71 2 December 1985

The House met at 3:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Order, please! MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker, privilege. on a point of MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Menihek on a matter of privilege. MR. FENWICK: On November 27 in this House I received a tabled answer to a question that I had asked of the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands (Mr. Simms). It was a question I- asked about some seedlings that had been damaged in the Wooddale Forest Nursery and asked for a list of those individuals who has been hired on.

The answer the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands gave said that he did not indicate at any time last Spring that there was a temporary programme to replace damaged seedlings. Since that time I have managed to check on Hansard of June 10, 1985, on pages 1486 and 1487, and it clearly · states in there that the minster, in replying to a question, indicated that indeed there were damaged seedlings, indeed there was a transplanting programme, and indeed there were temporary employees hired.

My point of privilege, Mr.Speaker, is that the minister was under no oblilgation to even answer the question, but having answered it, in my opinion, there was a deliberate attempt to mislead the House in this particular answer. I would like a motion, since I have to end this question of privilege with a motion, that the minister answer the question, which is very clearly specific to what information he gave before L3833 December 2, 1985 Vol XL and that a motion before this House to minister for his mislead the House. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: be brought condemn the attempt to The hon.

President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, there is no point of privilege. If the hon. gentleman is dissatisfied with any answer that he has gained from any minister in this House, there is a proceeding that is set forth for Thursday in the Late Show for him to debate it. I could say if there is any lack of order or breach of privilege, it is really the hon. gentleman saying that the minister has deliberately misled the House, which is out of ord -er. Apart from that the hon. gentleman got up on a point of privilege that is not a point of privilege.

As I say, if he is dissatisfied he has another avenue to debate it. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of privilege, I have had a chance of looking at this matter because the hon. member for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick) did come to me on Thursday and asked me how he should deal with the matter. I said I would have a look at it and get back to him, which I did just a short time ago. I suggested to him that he have a word with the hon. Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. He said that he had done that and he did not appear t~ be satisfied with the reaction, if you like, from the minister.

I said, well, naturally he was free to take it up or deal with what he figured was a problem in any way he felt was correct. As I said, I have had time to consider the matter and I have looked at the No. 71 R3833

reply that the minister gave, and the best that I can say about it is that there was not a programme to replant damaged seedlings but there did appear to be a programme, a necessity if you like, to replace seedlings that had been damaged. So, on that basis, I must rule there is no point of privilege. MR. BARRY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Your Honour brought down a ruling on Wednesday when I was out of the House.

This is my first opportunity since Your Honour brought down the ruling to ask Your Honour, at this time, if he would request that the Premier withdraw the remarks which Your Honour have found to be unparliamentary. I would ask the Premier himself, if he is a man, to present an apology. PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: of order, Mr. To the poit~t of order, the hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Thank you for your ruling, but I am not sureJ you mentioned anywhere where the words mentioned were unparliamentary. i MR. BARRY: l Yes. Page I. MR.

PECKFORD : 'Two recitals are unparliamentary,' and therefore you have r11led the motion out of L3834 December 2, 1985 Vol XL order and I do not know what else needs to be said about it. The motion was ruled out of order as far as I know. MR. BARRY: Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Further to the hon. Opposition. MR.

BARRY: that the point Leader of order, of the The procedure in this House, as Your Honour knows and as the Premier knows, is that when a matter of unparliamentary language is raised, first Your Honour makes a ruling with respect to the language and then, once Your Honour finds that the language is unparliamentary, Your Honour requests a withdrawal. In fact, if the member does not withdraw Your Honour directs that he withdraw; and if he then does not withdraw, the procedure is for Your Honour to name him.

So that is the accepted procedure on unparliamentary language and either the system is going to work for everybody or there is going to be no system at all. PREMIER PECKFORD: M:r. Speaker, the motion has been -; withdrawn, so theref_ore, ' obviously, the comments have been withdrawn. MR. TULX: The motion was not withdrawn, it · was ruled out of order. MR. BARRY: No, no. The language is there, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I am going to refresh my memory on all the 4 No. 71 R3834

events and I will rule on that matter tomorrow. Statements by Ministers MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: On September 24, 1985, the government released its legislative programme along with copies of most of the legislation which was comtemplated to be considered at the adjourned session this Fall. Mr. Speaker, it has been the policy of this government to deal effectively and more systematically with the legislative process over the past five or six years.

Thus, we have adopted such proceedings as having no night sessions unless they are absolutely necessary, and we have broken the sessions generally into two sections, the first one being the Spring for the Throne Speech, budget and such urgent legislation as had to be dealt with; and the Fall for the remainder of the legislation.

This year we opened earlier and the government advanced its legislative list in expectation that there will be ample time to deal with the legislative programme and we would not have to sit long into the Christmas season, recognizing that during this time all members of the House have extra duties and functions to perform, than they normally have at other times, in their own districts. We set a target that the House should rise in the first week of December. We see no reason to L3835 December 2, 1985 Vol XL change this programme.

Government will therefore propose - and I want to advise the House that government will be proposing that the House rise on Friday of this week. I hope in the meantime that we can make substantial progress and that much of the legislation can be dealt with. As to the Atlantic Accord, Mr. Speaker, I am sure hon. members are aware the Federal Government House Leader had indicated that the federal government would be introducing -the legislation earlier in the New Year.

I can report that the drafting of this legislation is going very smoothly indeed and there are really only minor technical details needed to be addressed before submitting them to both Houses. Since the Accord, though, Mr.

Speaker, and I think this should be understood, will incorporate some provisions of the new energy policy as set forth in the new Canadian Petroleum Resources Act and that certain elements of that act will be incorporated into the Accord legislation pursuant to the agreement, and this relates to land tenures and sales and what have you, The Canadian Petroleum Resources Act must logically be presented to Parliament before the Accord legislation can be presented.

Now we want to introduce legislation simultaneously, at the same time, on the same day, and for these reasons we will not present the Accord legislation before Christmas. But the House will rise on Friday until the end of January or the first week of February, when we will reconvene solely to consider the Accord legislation, which will be brought in, of course , within the No. 71 R3835

framework of

Section means that it has to 57, which be brought in, introduced - not as the Energy Critic (Mr. Flight) said the other day, passed - on or before February 11, the first anniversary date of the signing of the Accord. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER : The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, we are very disappointed to hear what the minister has just said with respect to the Atlantic Accord.

If Your Honour recalls, the Premier stated to this House that that Accord would be presented to the House the second week of November, I think that was the Premier 1 s statement. Mr. Speaker, we have been waiting to have that legislation presented. We are ready at any time to adjourn other business and move on to deal with that. What we see now, Mr. Speaker, is again, a sad lack of planning, a sad inability to meet deadlines and meet schedules, and a sad lack of planning to bring (o completion the detail, Mr. Speaker.

Now I would hope that any delay is being caused by members opposite fighting harder than they have been to date to s~e an improvement to Clause 54, ~o see the Come By Chance refinery protected so that we can have that resource processed on land. With respect to the other points, Mi:'. Speaker, really what has happened is that this past week has seen so many bills go through the House, Mr. Speaker, so quickly that the Government House Leader (~. L3836 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Marshall) is now faced, since the Atlantic Accord is not coming forward, with the prospect of not having any business, Mr.

Speaker, to lead before the House. MR. MARSHALL: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. MARSHALL: The hon. gentleman is debating a ministerial statement. If the bon. gentleman wants to address what has happened in this House, we spent twenty-one days in Supplementary Supply, two days on a routine bill whose counterpart was passed in five minutes last year, and on Friday, in Committee stage, we were redebating, again, bills that had already been passed. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, there is no point of order. MR. BARRY: Now, Mr.

Speaker, let me say to the Government House Leader that we are prepared to expedite the business of the House. MR. SPEAKER : Order, please! The Leader of the Opposition 1 s time has now elapsed. MR. BARRY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! A point of order, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, what we have just seen from the Government House No. 71 R3836

Leader is closure by another name. We would ask Your Honour to consider whether it is proper for the Government House Leader to get up and threaten the Opposition and say that we must sit by and just rubber stamp legislation as it comes up. We are prepared to expedite the business of this House. We are prepared to see that legislation moves forward expeditiously. But also, Mr. Speaker, we have a responsibility to point out when the matters that are raised by members opposite have flaws, errors, defiencies or otherwise, constitute bad legislation. That is our responsibility and our duty.

That is what we are going to see carried out. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear! Hear! MR . MARSHALL: To that point of Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: order, Mr. To that point of order, the hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL : That is not a point of order, Mr. Speaker. All I did initially in this House was rise and advise the House as to when we are going to rise and advise them as to the course of business and try to approach it in a co-operative fashion. The hon. gentlemen need not get paranoid with me about every single issue I raise.

It is one thing to spread it into the energy area where the government's success is a reflection of his failure, but it is another on simple matters where I am trying to accord common courtesy and civility to the House. L3837 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I must rule there is no point of order. Statements by Ministers MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. Minister and of Rural, Northern MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased today to inform hon. members that there has been a dramatic increase in the sale of crafts in this Province since the removal of the twelve per cent -sales tax which was announced in Dr. Collins' budget of May 16, 1985. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. RIDEOUT: My department is presently conducting · a survey of crafts the Province and stores in preliminary increase in year. figures indicate an sales of $300,000 this Several craft businesses have indicated a significant increase in sales since the removal of the sales tax.

The following is a quote from a letter received from a well known, long established craft store in St. John's: npleased to inform you that we have shown a remarkable increase in sales at our Water Street retail store during the summer tourist season and we attribute this mainly to the removal of sales tax on all handcrafted No. 71 R3837

goods." A spokesperson for the Craft the the Newfoundland and Labrador Development Association said sale of crafts at Association's annual show was up over twenty per cent over last year. She said she does hesitate to give full credit to the Provincial tax exemption for the increased sales. Mr. Speaker, Minister of complimented taking this measure. the hon. Dr. Collins, Finance should be for his foresight in stimulative fiscal SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. KELLAND: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Naskaupi. MR. KELLAND: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I again thank the minister for providing me with a copy of the statement and I will tell the House anything that stimulates the economy in this Province, with our desperate straits at the moment, is certainly welcome. I am glad and very pleased to see that kind of an increase. Another report, for the minister's information, if he may not have it already, is that the Labrador contingent at the annual Christmas Craft Fair, even though weather kept the numbers who visited down, experienced a significant increase in their sales.

However, claims vastly L3838 before the minister full credit for these increased sales, I would December 2, 1985 Vol XL like to see a few figures on the type of quality control now in place, which is responsible to the minister I believe, and also it might be interesting to see some figures on quantities produced this year as opposed to previous years.

But, if all of the statement could be face value, elimination of sales tax is and the what increase in sales, taken at indeed 12 per caused then its the cent the that certainly would be a good indicator .for government to get another plank out of the Liberal platform and electoral stand and realize that a reduction in the retail sales tax in this Province would generally tend to stimulate the economy to a great level, as has been indicated here. I think that is what we should see, Mr. Speaker. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER (McNicholas): The hon. the President of the Treasury Board. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that the tentative agreement reached earlier with the Newfoundland A~sociation of Public Employees on behalf of approximately 3,500 employees of hospitals, nur~ing homes and other institutions across the Province has now been· ratified by the membership and a new three year agreement will be signed shortly. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! No. 71 R3838

Ji_· MR. WINDSOR: In addition to improving the terms and conditions of employment in areas relating to lay-off, union security, and certain fringe benefits, the three-year agreement includes a two year wage freeze with the third year providing a salary increase of 4 per cent. Members of the House will note that this will be the eleventh collective agreement signed since the introduction of a two-year wage freeze.

Agreements were previously signed with the Newfoundland and Labrador Nurses Onion, the Public Libraries Board, hospital support staff, Waterford Hospital support staff, ferry workers, the teachers' association, the teachers of Labrador West, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, Newfoundland Farm Products Corporation, the Newfoundland Liquor Corporation and that includes something in the order of 16,000 persons, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hen. the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Leader of the Mr. Speaker, I thank the minister for giving me a copy of his statement beforehand.

We are happy to see, Mr. Speaker, that this tentative agreement, which was reached with NAPE, has now been ratified. We note the numbers of agreements that have been signed since the wage freeze was brought in. But, Mr. Speaker, let nobody feel that this has been done without great hardship to the employees of government in this Province and, Mr. Speaker, without great damage to labour relations L3839 December 2, 1985 Vol XL between government and the workers of this Province. The fact that the workers have had their backs to the wall and have had no choice, Mr.

Speaker, but to succumb to these Draconian measures, which were brought in without proper consultation, does not mean, Mr. Speaker, that they entered into these willingly or that they feel very good about the position they now find themselves in. Oral Questions MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hen. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: I would like to ask the Premier a question concerning the First Ministers' Conference. I would like to ask him whether the infliction of prosperity was extensive as a result of his consultations, Mr.

Speaker, and whether phase two of the Prosperity Crusade has brought about considerable improvements to the resources of this Province, and whether, Mr. Speaker, the Premier's comments with respect to reduction of the deficit is now an adoption of the policy put forth by the Liberal Party during the last election, where we recommended just that, less attention, Mr. Speaker, or going slower with correcting the deficit and making a greater effort to stimulate the economy by such things such as I just noticed by the minister who has indicated - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. No. 71 R3839

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: The hon. speech. and he speech. gentleman is making a This is Question Period is obviously making a MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I was just going to draw that fact to the hon. member's attention. MR. BARRY: I will bring it directly to the point. The Minister for Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development (Mr. R. Aylward) just indicated the removal of the sales tax, Mr. Speaker, has meant a significant increase in craft sales.

This is the very point that we were making during the election, that a reduction in the sales tax generally would mean a great increase in business expansion around the Province. Has the Premier now decided to adopt the policies of the Liberal Party and are these the policies that he was putting forward to the Prime Minister in Halifax in order to have prosperity inflicted on this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Unfortunately, Mr.

Speaker, the first thing 1 I had to do when I went to Halifax was explain to the First Ministers that the Liberal Party of Newfoundland did not favour factory freezer trawlers being outlawed in Newfoundland. That is the first thing I had to do. SOME BON. MEMBERS: 1 L3840 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Bear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: I had to explain to the Premiers across Canada why the Liberal Party of Newfoundland wanted factory freezer trawlers coming in and raping the Northern cod resource, and that was difficult to explain. Mr.

Speaker, they could not understand why there was not unanimity in Newfoundland, especially after I explained to them what was at stake here as it related to the Northern cod stocks. That was the first thing. The second phase of the Prosperity Crusade will come when we sign the Hibernia development early in 1986, for the benefit of the Leader of the Opposition. I know the Leader of the Opposition is jealous because he is not the one who is going to see that Hibernia development get underway.

He has taken credit for just about everything that happened in Energy since about the year 1900, even though, when I became Minister of Energy, there were no oil and gas regulations. All I can say to the Leader of the Opposition is· that I am sorry if he is jealous but the second phase of the Prosperity Crusade will occur when the Hibernia development gets underway and the green light is given in 1986. As it relates to the deficit reduction, in dealing with the national debt, I am saying that has to be done over time, gradually, and cannot be done overnight or in two or three years. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: No. 71 R3840

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Premier would indicate whether he was able to have the Prime Minister change his position with respect to factory freezer trawlers or whether he was merely engaging in the same little bit of play acting, Mr. Speaker, that he was engaging in in the House of Assembly? Did the - Premier indicate to the First Minister that we pointed out in this House that we were against factory freezer trawlers, but we were even more against the Premier of this Province trying to deceive the people by play acting in this House? Did the Premier indicate that to the Prime Minister? MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I do not know about the Leader of the Opposition, but I am sure anybody who watched the First Ministers' Conference, not only in Newfoundland but in Canada, knows that I was not play acting, that I was trying to defend the interests of Newfoundland and Labrador. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: If the Leader of the Opposition wants to call it play · acting when I am trying to defend the interests of Newfoundlanders, let him come right out and tell all Newfoundlanders that all I am ipterested in is play acting.

I am trying to ensure that we gain the majority of fish, if not all the fish, off our shores, and if the Leader of the Opposition is against that, that is too bad. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! L3841 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Leader of the Mr. Speaker, I noticed that the Premier dropped his opposition and agreed to start negotiating the amount of cod that will be available for factory freezer trawlers. He totally caved in at the First Ministers' meeting in Halifax and stopped the fight against factory freezer trawlers and decided to negotiate the amount of cod.

Would the Premier confirm whether that was in fact the case? Would the Premier indicate if he has been successful in obtaining a provincial veto, a Newfoundland veto on matters relating to free trade? I noticed the Premier is saying that the Premier will give a mandate to the federal government, to Mr. Rheisman who will be the fedeal negotiator? Does this mean that there will be no control once negotiations start on the part of the Province or will the Province have a provincial veto? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: on the first part of the question, because there were two questions there, Mr. Speaker, rather than one, no, I have not given up the fight on factory freezer trawlers. Everybody in Newfoundland knows that, and if the Leader of the Opposition does not I cannot help it. On the second part on the question, of free trade, there is a ninety day period in which the Premiers are going to be negotiating with the federal government on that. MR. KELLAND: Mr. Speaker. No. 71 R3841

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Naskaupi. MR. KELLAND: I have a question for the hon. the Minister of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development (Mr. R. Aylward). Notwithstanding anything that has been said in the House, through the media or otherwise to date, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the minister if he would clearly state the government's position on the expanded use of Goose Airport and advise the House, other than the health study recently announced by the minister responsible, what steps are being taken or contemplated to address the concerns of the Native peoples which will be affected by expanded use? MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural, Northern Mr.

Speaker, this government has made it quite clear that we are very interested in expanding and improving the Air Force Base at Goose Bay. We would like to see and are promoting this being base used an a NATO training centre. We have addressed all the concerns that the Native peoples have brought to our attention. We have instituted a health study by th~ Canadian Medical Health Association - I believe that is the name of it. We are presentlf studying the affects of low-level flying on the wildlife population, caribou in particular. These are the two main concerns that we have heard from the Native peoples.

It is our intention to promote the l L3842 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Goose Bay Air Base and see i£ it cannot be used as a NATO training centre. MR. KELLAND: On a supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the member for Naskaupi. MR.

KELLAND: Again to the minister, in the event that we do see expanded use of the airport by our NATO allies, has the minister given any consideration to perhaps some specialized form of training if it does become a fait accompli, so that the aboriginal people can be incorporated, those that wish to be incorporated, into the workforce and take advantage of the spinoff effects of increased use of the base? MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agriculture Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural Northern Mr.

Speaker, sometime this Fall several of my colleagues visited the Cold Lake area in Alberta, which has a similar operation to what we plan for Goose Bay. We visited it for several different reasons. We had the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth (Mr. Matthews), who had some discussions with people there concerning the wildlife affects. The Minister of Environment (Mr. Butt) was with me to have a look at what possible affects there might be on the environment. That area has an even more intense NATO training centre, or North American training centre, where No. 71 R3842

they have what they refer live bombing, which is approved in our plans at all. to as not We also had Mr. Shouse, the Mayor of Happy Valley - Goose Bay - he may be the former Mayor now, I am not quite sure - and several of . my staff, including the Assistant Deputy Minister for Northern Development, who, with the wildlife biologist for the area, stayed around for a couple of extra days to speak to the Native people and some of the wildlife people in the area.

And if we can promote Goose Bay and develop it, as is Cold Lake developed now; the community of Cold Lake, which would be similar to Happy Valley - Goose Bay, is very involved with the base at Cold Lake. There are special affirmative action programmes for Native peoples. There is a reservation on the boundary of this training area; on the low-level flying reserved area, there is an Indian reservation, and these people work in co-operation with the armed forces. They do get training.

I personally have made representation to Colonel David to ask what their feeling would be towards having affirmative action programmes for our Native peoples, and they are more than willing to co-operate with the Native peoples in Labrador for any of their concerns, and particularly if they wish to apply and be trained for jobs that might become available. -They would be only too happy to look at it. And when the planning is finished and - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, ohl MR. R. AYLWARD: Do you want an answer? I mean, it is up to you. I can give it to someone else later. But the hon.

L3843 December 2, 1985 Vol XL the member Kelland) is in this. for Naskaupi (Mr. geniunely interested Mr. Speaker, a hit further down the road, if the Native peoples are interested, I intend to make some representations to the Minister of Career Development (Mr. Power) and we can work out a plan. We have to get the Native peoples interested in our programme and the planning. They might wish to come to work on these jobs, which I am sure quite a few of them are. If you still want to hear, there is another benefit for Native peoples.

There will be a lot of new people moving into the Goose Bay area, particularly people from Norway and West Germany, with a lot of relatives, from fairly affluent countries, coming to Newfoundland to visit their relatives and using the services of the Native peoples as guides to take them into the country, which is a definite benefit. It is the sort of thing the Native peoples would like to be able to promote, to use their own skills to take these tourists into their area, to promote their skills as guides and fishermen. MR. KELLAND: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the member for Naskaupi. MR. KELLAND: Thank you, Mr. Minister, for that information. I am pleased to see that you are taking some positive steps to ensure that the aboriginal people will be able to be incorporated into whatever training programmes might be available. My final supplementary No. 71 R3843

to the minister deals with the approach to promoting or letting all views be known to our NATO allies. I know the Cold Lake trip incorporated members of government, municipal leaders and so on. But I also believe that the minister and the House are pretty well aware of what the Opposition's position is on the expanded use of the base and our concerns that the Innu and the other aboriginal people get a chance to express their concerns in whatever form is available to them.

Has the minister consider some form of a select group - I do not know if a Select Committee would be right which would represent both the government and the Opposition who have a similar position on the use of the airport, some sort of a group to either meet with the NATO countries which may be in a position to operate out of Goose Bay, and take an approach whereby both sides of this House, supplemented by people from the private sector and from the aboriginal people to mount a - MR. MARSHALL: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! A point of order, the hon. the President of the CoUncil. MR.

MARSHALL: The hon. gentleman is not asking a supplementary question, he is obviously making quite a long speech. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, I think the hon. member is taking a long time to get to his question. Maybe he could ask a short question now. L3844 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. KELLAND: I probably did, Mr. Speaker, but the minister was a long time getting through his second answer.

Anyway, have you or would you consider a joint approach to information getting out to the European countries, our NATO allies, which would include the government, the Opposition, the private sector and perhaps some of the Aboriginal people as a joint committee to express all views? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural, Northern Mr.

Speaker, I am sure the hon. member will recall that at one time this Fall there was an information group set up by the Armed Forces to visit the communi ties in Labrador, all the coastal communi ties, and they had opposition in one community. They provided a lot of information to the people of Labrador during these meetings. We have a delegation from the Province and from the federal Department of National Defense visiting the NATO countries right now, explaining the assets of Goose Bay area, selling that part of Canada so that the NATO allies can be aware of the facilities that we have to offer.

I hope that we will convince them to come and use Goose Bay for increased activity. MR. KELLAND: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary to clarify that last point. MR. SPEAKER: There are a number of members been getting up regularly wanting to ask questions;. A final supplementary, the hon. the member for Naskaupi. No. 71 R3844

MR. KELLAND: Would the minister consider including a member or members of the Opposition in the delegation he speaks of because we have a similar position? That was my final question and he did not address it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Agricultural Development. MR. R. AYLWARD: Minister and of Rural, Northern Mr. Speaker, I staff on this residents of the have informed my committee and area of the Opposition's view on this, that they are supportive of government's view. That position will be made known by the committee. I am not on this committee, nor is any member of this House it is a committee of officials. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Port de Grave. MR. EFFORD: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Consumer Affairs and Communications (Mr. Russell) • It was brought to my attention just this weekend that on top of the high costs of electricity bills there is another problem consumers are facing. Newfoundland Light and Power is now imposing a $120 advance charge on anybody who has had any problems with their light bills. In other words, if they had their lights cut off or they move into a new apartment, and have had problems in the past, they must pay $120 in advance before they can use the electricity.

I want to ask the Minister of Consumer Affairs is he aware of this? It has come about recently. _ L3845 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Consumer Affairs and Communications. MR. RUSSELL: Newfoundland Light and Power is a private enterprise operation and they have no reason to advise me as to what their policies _ and procedures might be. I am not aware of what the hon. member just mentioned. I shall certainly look into it. MR. EFFORD: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the member for Port de Grave. MR -.

EFFORD: I wonder is the minister aware that he is the Minister aware that he is the Minister of Consumer Affairs? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. EFFORD: My gracious, this must have had to go before the Public Utilities Board. MR. RUSSELL: Do you have a question? SOME BON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. EFFORD: The Department of Consumer Affairs has a representative on the Public Utilities Board. Is it possible that he has not notified the minister that this has been brought against the consumer? Is that what he is telling this House, that he has no knowledge of No. 71 R3845

this being brought to the consumer, the $120 advanced charge charged by the Newfoundland Light and Power? Surely goodness, the minister is not going to stand here and tell this House that he does not know anything about it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR. RUSSELL: Mr. Speaker, the last number of days the Opposition have been asking a number of questions to me of the rate changes and the new structure for rates in this Province.

I have contacted Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro to get an explanation from them and I also, during the course of that conversation, asked them if anybody in the Opposition had made any representation to them? I certainly was not surprised, however, to hear that nobody in the Opposition has had interest enough to contact Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro about the new rate structure. MR. EFFORD: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER : A final supplementary, the hon. member for Port de Grave. MR.

EFFORD: The Minister of Consumer Affairs is well aware of the Opposition's stand on electricity rates, and the people it he Province are well aware of it. If the Minister of Consumer Affairs did half the job that the critic is doing, it would be a lot better situation. MR.. SPEAKER: Order, please! Would the hon. member pose his question? L3846 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. EFFORD: I would ask the Minister of Consumer Affairs, seeing as how he cannot do anything about the high electricity cost, would he check into the fact that they are being charged $120 in advance? We all know that they cannot afford to pay it.

Will he check and report to this House on that situation? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Consumer Affairs. MR. RUSSE LL : Mr. Speaker, I said in response to the hon. member's question, first of all, that I was not aware of this, but I said then that I will look into. I will do that and I will get back with some information to the House. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Health (Dr. Twomey). It has to do with an

article in Saturday's Evening Telegram about the new cauterization laboratory that is needed at the General Hospital. The

article is quite extensive but basically it makes several points. One is that the cauterization laboratory is now six or seven years old and it is getting worn out. New procedures are being performed in it that require a lot of time, it has been down for several weeks over the last number of years, and it is holding up a lot of operations that should be performed. The

article indicates also that the Corporation is being asked to raise $500,000 on its own which would be matched by government. I have checked with the Corporation No. 71 R3846

and they have indicated this is the way it should go. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Would you question? MR. FENWICK: please pose your My question to the minister is this: Are we now looking at a new policy for the providing of capital equipment for our hospitals in which they are now asked to raise money which will be matched dollar for dollar by the provincial government? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. DR. TWOMEY: Many of the foundations and hospitals in Newfoundland have offered to contribute to the special technological advances in the health care fields.

One of these technological advances was written up on the weekend, I believe in The Evening Telegram. I understand that we are partially funding that. Last Spring I did tell you that .. the foundation of the Janeway had contributed a certain amount to a special X-ray machine and we were also adding our addition. We have not changed our plans or our policies in the meantime. MR. FENWICK: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, member for Menihek. MR.. FENWICK: the hon. the This raises a very interesting question now.

If the $1 million lab is going to be matched on a L3847 December 2, 1985 Vol XL dollar for dollar basis, my question to the minister is: What happens if they fall short? What happens if they only raise $100,000 or $200,000? They indicate this machinery is needed immediately. Will the provincial government pony up the money required for this essential piece of equipment if they fall short of their $500,000 goal? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. DR. TWOMEY: ~t this present time that is a purely hypothetical question. If the matter does arise, I will be able to answer it. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Twillingate. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Social Services. It concerns the case of Harvey Hawkins, the fishermen from the Summerford, Twillingate district, who, as we all know, is now a patient in the hospital in Toronto following a kidney transplant. Can the minister tell the House, Mr. Speaker, if the promise that was made to Mr.

Hawkins and his family by the federal Employment Minister, Flora MacDonald, to the effect that funds from the Canada Assistance Plan and from the welfare department of the provincial government of Newfoundland would equal the amount.that he would normally have received from Unemployment Insurance benefits - the amount, by the way, I think that he would receive was $620 - is the amount he is getting now from the Social No. 71 R3847

Services Department equal to that as promised? MR. SPEAKER : The hen. the Minister of Social Services. MR. BRETT: Mr. Speaker, first of all, I have no first hand knowledge of what the minister, Miss MacDonald, advised the gentleman in question. I do know that our involvement with the case seems to have hit the national media. It seems that it was an opportunity for some politicians to make the media. Our involvement in the case was that we paid transportation for Mr. Hawkins' wife to travel to Toronto with him.

All of his expenses were paid for by the Kidney Foundation, but we paid his wife's expenses to Toronto and we paid the board and lodgings for Mr. Hawkins and his wife. Also, the mother and father of the child who received the kidney, we paid their way to Toronto and that was a cost of $1,100 - plus. And, by the way, Mr. Hawkins' wife, the cost of her transportation was $500 or $600. So that was our involvement up to that point in time. The bill for board and lodging, I guess will all be sent back to us.

As I indicated to the press on a couple of occasions when I was called, he is eligible for any services that may be available while he is in Toronto and once he returns to this Province, then he is available for all the services that we have here. If he is able to work, if there are programmes in that area that are bring sponsored by the department I represent, then I am sure he will be hired on one of these. Whether he would be hired on some Canada Works programme or whatever, I do L3848 December 2, 1985 Vol XL not know, I really do not what Miss MacDonald told him. has not been in touch with me. MR. W.

CARTER: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: know She A supplementary, the han. the member for Twillingate. MR. W. CARTER: This is an extreme case, not a normal case of a person applying for assistance under the Social Services Department. In light of the commitment made to this man's family by a federal minister, can the minister tell the House if he has made any special representation to the Federal Employment Minister with respect to his rights to unemployment insurance benefits? Has he given some thought to giving special consideration or making a special allowance to the Hawkins family?

Like I said, this is a special case and I think it deserves special attention. MR. BRETT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Social Services. MR. BRETT: Mr. Speaker, I have not requested any special attention because it is my understanding that the federal minister has taken upon herself to consider this as a special case. I was advised secondhand - as I indicated, the minister has not contacted me that the minister's staff or the minister herself has been in touch with the Canada Manpower Office ~ here in St.

John's, or Mount Pearl, wherever it is, and it appears that the case will be No. 71 R3848

treated as a special case, as, of course, it will be again by the department which I represent. If there are some special needs or whatever in cases like this, then the family will be considered for it. Again I would like to say I think that this whole thing has been blown out of proportion, because actually everything that can be done for this gentleman has been and · is being done and will be done. I would like to assure the House and every single, solidary soul in Newfoundland that that is the case. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR.

BARRY: Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) • I have a copy of the case to table in the House indicating that the hon. minister's law firm is acting for the University. Now Section (34) of The Memorial University Act states that if any member of the board accepts any office or position,~ or performs any service for - which remuneration is received, the person must vacate the appointment as a member of the Board of Regents. I would like to ask the minister is he aware that his firm is acting for the University?

Is he accepting that he is a ; party, if that is the ase, to ~a breach of

Section ( 34) of the Memorial University Act? • SPEAKER: hon. President of the Council. L3849 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. MARSHALL: I am not getting into a debate with the hon. gentleman. This hon. gentleman does not act for the University, never -has acted for the University. I would suggest if he has any question as to who acts for the University he can direct it to the University officials who select whoever acts for the University. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: the I would like to direct a supplementary to the Minister of Justice (Ms.

Verge) since the minister responsible for the University has left for a moment. Would the Ministe .r of Justice indicate whether she would investigate whether there has been a breach of

Section ( 34) of Memorial University Act? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, matter as jurisdiction. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR.. SPEAKER: I do not see this being within my The hon. the Opposition. Leader of the MR. BARRY: What · we are talking about here is a Statute of the Province. We are asking the Minister of Justice as to whether or not there has been a breach of one of the laws of the Province. Mr. Speaker, would the No. 71 R3849

Minister of Justice indicate to us what laws of the Province must be breached in order for her department to investigate. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition originally indicated that he was going to direct his question to the minister responsible for the University, which I would have thought proper. If the Leader of the Opposition, the same as any other citizen in the Province, has reason to believe that there has been a violation of any of our statutes, then as a lawyer he knows the proper course of action.

It would be incumbent upon him to direct a formal complaint to the proper officials in the Department of Justice. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: I cannot believe what I am hearing here, that a member of this House, Mr. Speaker, raising a matter with the Minister of Justice is not sufficient. Well, we will follow that up later. I would like to ask the Minister • of Career Development and Advanced Studies (Mr. Power) would he indicate whether he would look into whether or not there has been a breach of

Section ( 34) of the Memorial University Act by virtue of the fact the Government House Leader's firm is acting for the University in a legal case? L3850 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Career Development and Advanced Studies. MR. POWER: Mr. Speaker, in all these cases where conflict of interest has been alleged, when the Premier and the House Leader have checked into them there has been no substance.

If the Leader of the Opposition has some information which he wants to make known to me, I will be glad to look at the evidence, glad to assess it, but I just hope it has more substance that the other allegations the Leader of the Opposition has made. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has now elapsed. I would like at this stage to welcome to the galleries Mayor Winsor, Deputy Mayor Woodward and Councillors Fudge, Budgell and Williams from the town of Triton, Green Bay district. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Prese .nting Reports by Standing and Special Committees MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to

Section 26 (1) of the Financial Administration Act I want to table a Minute of Council relating to pre-commitment of funds. The Minute of Council having been issued on November 27. No. 71 R3850

Notices of Motion MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: I give notive that I tomorrow ask leave to the following resolution. will on introduce

WHEREAS the attached letter is a copy of a letter from th~ member for Mount Scio to a relative of an Ocean Ranger disaster victim; and

WHEREAS this letter in addition to expressing sympathy makes certain statements on liability and compensation; and

WHEREAS the letter recipient to contact for Mount Scio; and invites the the member

WHEREAS the head of the letter in of question, reads, "House Assembly;" and

WHEREAS the telephone number given on the letter is that of the member for Mount Scio's law office; and

WHEREAS the April 1984 edition of the Canadian Lawyer attributes legal fees of $750,000 to -;the · member for Mount Scio' s law firm as a result of his acting for the families of the Ocean Ranger victims; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this hon. House go on record as condemning the member for Mount Scio for his inappropriate conciuct as a member of this House ! of Assembly. MR. BARRY: On a point of order, Mr. Speake~. L3851 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. SPEAKER: The hon the Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, I would submit that what we have here is the Premier trying to salvage the public rebuke that he received from Your Honour for his underhanded attempt last Tuesday. I would submit to Your Honour that the same thing is involved as was involved previously, namely that the Premier has had knowledge of this matter for some three years. The Premier, by the way, has misled this House, as did the Government House Leader (Mr.

Marshall) mislead the people of the Province . on television, when they both indicated that the Premier only the day before had become aware of and received knowledge of the letter because the Premier, by his own words in this House of Assembly several weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, hurled the reference to the letter across the floor. I challenged him to stand up, Mr. Speaker, and he would not do it at that time. It was only when he saw he had no choice. His only choice was to answer the questions that we are raising, and when he saw that he did not have the answers, Mr.

Speaker, to the questions we are raising, then he has tried to intimidate members on this side of the House. Let him know that this Leader of the Opposition and Member's of the Opposition will not be intimidated by these tactics by the Premier. Mr~ Speaker, the questions will continue until we get answers. Mr. Speaker, we know why they are trying to close the House so quickly! PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order, Mr. No. 71 R3851

Speaker. MR. SP EAKER : To that point of order, the hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker, I submit to you that there is no point of order whatsoever. I am just hitting a sensitive nerve about the behavior of the hon. member for Mount Scio-Bell Island. What I am trying to do, Mr. Speaker, is abide by your ruling of last week. I have a copy of Hansard in which your ruling says, "However, in my view of the resolution, I have concerns with two of the recitals," the two recitals I have removed from the resolution.

It is only those two recitals that Your Honour found were unparliamentary. I can only, therefore, conclude that the other parts of the resolution were in order. Otherwise Your Honour, would have obviously referred to those as well. What I am trying to do here, Mr. Speaker, is not intimidate the Leader or members of the Opposition.

I am trying to determine whether an action by a member of this House, like the action that was taken by the member for Mount Scio-Bell Island a number of years be condoned or going to live by members of this ago, is going to whether we are certain rules as House whereby we perfonn our functions as a member as one thing, and perform our functions in a private business as another and that the two cannot be mixed. Unless we establish that here then, of course, members in the House of Assembly in the future can do what they like in trying to intertwine their business with their politics.

L3852 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. TULK: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, what we see the Premier doing is again, trying to, as the Leader of the Opposition said, stop the Opposition from doing its job by doing through the back door what he could not do through the front.

The other day he came into this House and tried to throw a bit of slime and dirt across this House and to motives where they were Your Honour consequently that out of order. impute none. ruled I am not so sure - and I would ask Your Honour to look at this - that in suggesting, even in his resolution, that the member for Mount Scio' s actions, as he calls them, were "inappropriate conduct," whether that is in order. Is that not, at the same time, imputing some sort of motive , some sort of inappropriateness? Should he not have said "his conduct" rather than his "inappropriate conduct"?

Is he not already bringing down a judgement on the member for Mount Scio by saying it was inappropriate rather than just saying conduct? Let me make one other point, Mr. Speaker. The Premier in his second "WHEREAS" refers to liability. Do you notice the squirmy way that he trying to get in something that has to do with a court case involving the Ocean Ranger? As a matter of fact, the letter from the member for Mount Scio refers to compensation which has to do with Worker's Compensation which the member for No. 71 R3852

--' Mount Scio did free of cost as a member of this House and for his const~tuency, which he was perfectly free to do and which he did do for no fee. Now, Mr. Speaker, keep the Premier down there. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. TULK: We know he is smarting. We know he is behaving in as unparliamentary a fashion last week as ever we have seen but, keep him down, keep him in his place.

Let me make one other point, and I made this point last week to Your Honour when he made the ruling, that is the Premier puts in that that the member for Mount Scio and his law firm "attributes legal fees of $750,000." Mr. Speaker, that is misleading information. The Premier is misleading this House again. He is trying to get down, Mr. Speaker, into the dirt and slime and to save his neck at any cost. His real problem is that he has a set of Conflict of Interest Guidelines in this Province which are of no use.

He wrote them and tore them up for the Government House Leader so that he could hold his political power base in St. John's. Mr. Speaker, the Premier should apologize to this House. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear! Hear! MR. TOBIN: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Burin-Placentia member West, to L3853 December 2, 1985 for that Vol XL point of order. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. I feel that I should respond to this. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr.

Barry) the other day· challenged us all to get up and respond to it and I would like to have the opportunity, particularly after what the member for Fogo (Mr. Tulk) said. The fact of _ the matter is, Mr. Speaker, democracy must not only be seen to be done, it must be done. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we, as members of this Legislature - MR. TULK: Speak about interest rights. MR. TOBIN: the conflict of Yes, and I am going to deal with you in a few days. Mr. Speaker, we as members of the House of Assembly, are elected here to represent the constituents who sent us here. Mr.

Speaker, I work as hard as any other member, probably no ha;rder than most, but as hard _as anyone, to represent the constituents of Burin-Placentia West, the same as everybody else, the same I am sure the Leader of the Opposition represents the constituents of Mount Scio-Bell Island. But the fact of the; matter · is, Mr. Speaker, the day that I use this position as a !member of the House of Assembly for Burin-Placentia West, to represent those constituents and charge them for that action, that is the day, Mr. Speaker, that• I believe I am No. 71 R3853

misusing the privileges and rights of the people who have sent me here. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. BARRY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: We are on a point of order at the moment. MR. BARRY: A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER : A point of privilege, the bon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: The member for Burin-Placentia West (Mr. Tobin) is making the allegation that I charged for services which I performed as a member of the House of Assembly. That is incorrect. I have stated in this House that it is incorrect.

The member knows that it is incorrect and I ask that that be withdrawn because it is a very serious accusation to make. It is a contravention of my privileges as a member and I ask him to withdraw it without qualification. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, on the matter of privilege brought up by the hon. the gentleman opposite, obviously the bon. gentleman says that the allegation of the $750,000 is wrong. I mean, if the amount is L3854 December 2, 1985 Vol XL incorrect then it is a difference of opinion.

SOME BON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. OTTENHEIMER: If the amount is incorrect, then the hon. gentleman can correct the amount and say what it is. Was there any remuneration or no remuneration at all? If there was no remuneration at all, that is a different matter. But if the amount is inaccurate, then that is not a matter of privilege. Let the bon. member set the record straight and say what the amount is. If there is a difference of opinion with respect to the amount, then there is a difference of opinion with respect to the amount. Let somebody clarify what the amount is.

If there was no remuneration, if this was performed as a service by a member of th House of Assembly, having written the people on House of Assembly stationery, then that is a different matter. Let the hon. gentleman say, "No, it was a service that I performed as a member of the House of Assembly. There was no charge." That way we will get the thing clarified.

Or if there was inadvertently a charge, maybe somebody inadvertently took in money or sent out bills or made deposits in the bank account, inadvertently, then perhaps there was a secretary or an office manager looking after the accounts who inadvertently took this money and put it in a bank account and they are now going to return it. These are the ways for handling it. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! No. 71 R3854

MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: It is rare in this House, as I said last week, that you will see the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, former Minister of Justice, and a former Speaker of this House (Mr. Ottenheimer) stoop so low. What the member for Burin-Placentia West (Mr. Tobin) said, and what was the point of privilege raised by the member for Mount Scio is that the member for Burin-Placentia West is stating that the member for Mount Scio received fees as a result of being a member of the House and received remuneration as a member of the House.

Now that is incorrect. That is false. We know why he is smarting. He is Executive Assistant to the Premier and he passed it up and now he is still trying to weasel his way out from under it as well, the biggest piece of dirt that ever came into this House last week. That is the real reason the member for Burin-Placentia West is so upset. MR. SPEAKER: I Order, please! To that point of privilege, I am going to check in Hansard and see exactly what the hon. member did say and I will have more j to say about that tomorrow.

On the pofnt of order, from listening to the resolution as it was read out, I did not hear anything that was incorrect in it. But again I am going to study that. And :if I feel that is correct it ~ill be on the paper tomorrow. r:: I feel it is not, it L3855 Dece-.mber 2, 1985 Vol XL will not be. Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given MR. BARRETT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Development. MR. BARRETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have the answer to Question No. 30 appearing on the Order Paper, November 28, from the hon. the member for Stephenville (Mr. K. Aylward) • 1.

Does the Harmon Corporation presently receive any funding from the Department of Development? 2. Has the Corporation received funding in either of the last five years and, if so, what amounts has the Corporation received? The answer to

part 1 is, the Harmon Corporation does not receive any funding from the Department of Development for tourism, and 2, the Corporation has not received funding in either of the last five years. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy. MR. DINN: Mr. Speaker, I have the answers to Questions Nos. 25 and 26, asked by the hon. the member for Stephenville. What are the percentage increases at other Newfoundland and Labrador Housing apartment units across No. 71 R3855

Newfoundland? The part with respect to Stephenville was answered in a previous question; Marystown 10 per cent; Goose Bay 14 per cent; St. John's various rate increases, ranging from 5 per cent to 14 per cent. And No. 26, Why are three employees being transferred? They are being transferred, Mr. Speaker, because of restructuring with respect to regional offices out on the West Coast.

In that the majority of calls for rural and remote housing etc. are now from Baie Verte and North of Gallants Hill, we have now restructured it so that North of Gal llants Hill would be handled by Corner Bro ok and South of Gall.ants Hill would be handled by Stephenville. That is why the three people are being transferred. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I have the answer to a question asked by the bon. the member for Port de Grave (Mr. Efford) on November 19. MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker. .MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Public Works and Services. MR. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I have the answer to Question No. 22 asked by the member for Port de Grave, and the answer to an Oral Question asked on November 27 by the bon. the member for Menihek (Mr. Fenwick). L3856 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Orders of the Day MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, this is the appropriate place to do it, before we come to Orders of the Day. I have a great deal of pleasure in moving that the hon. the member for St. John's East Extern (Mr.

Hickey) take the Chair of this House as Committees Speaker. Deputy Chairman of and Assistant Deputy SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: On motion, the hon. the member for St. John's East Extern was made Deputy Chairman of Committees and Assistant Deputy Speaker. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I might say that it is sad that the member for St. John's East Extern is not receiving a position where he can more fully make the contribution that we -have seen him make before.

But if that is all he is going to get from the Premier, we will gladly support that. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the No. 71 R3856

Council. MR. MARSHALL: The only thing I will say is that the people of Newfoundland will not be sad to see that the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) does not get the position that he had before. SOME BON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! A bill, nAn Act To The Department Of Finance Actn, (Bill No. 56). MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle adjourned the debate. MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I was fully prepared to speak to this bill · for a considerable length of time, but I am now going to make my comments very brief, indeed. I clearly cannot support this bill because it is an attack upon democracy.

When you see a concentration of power given to one person, to me it is very dangerous. We have seen the same thing happen in u.s.S.R many times, where Premier Khrushcev held so many positions. This is indeed a very dangerous thing to see happening, Mr. Speaker. With bills such as Bill No. 56, where the concentration ofj power is made moreso, we are attacking democracy. It is ironic, Mr. Speaker, that at the same time as this bill is before us, the government side decides toj attack democracy in our hon.

House of Assembly; they are using a measure whereby the Opposition is 1 going to be stifled, is going toi be muzzled, intimidated. is Is going it for to be that reason, Mr. Speaker, realizing there are other bills on this j Order Paper, that I am unable to _ continue to the speech which I was· L3857 December 2, 1985 Vol XL · going to give on the attack on democracy. There was an attack on democracy with Bill No. 56, Mr. Speaker, and it is a sad day in this Province when we see an attack on democracy in this hon. House where I, as a member of this hon.

House, am not able to get up and speak as I would like, and as I thought I was entitled to do, to a bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, before I close debate and move second reading, I would like to say that the only points and the only questions of real substance which were raised were with respect to the nature of this bill and whether this bill was going too far in giving to the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Collins), of all people, unbridled power so that the hon. minister could sign anything he wished to at any give time. I reiterate that the purpose of this bill is to accord to the Minister of Finance exactly the same powers as were accorded to other ministers under the Departmental Act that was passed last year.

It would, in effect, only give the minister, under very particular, prescribed rules and regulations of the Cabinet, the Lieutenant-Governor in Council, the right to sign agreements of a routine nature so that we would not get, as has happened over a period of time, the agenda of Cabinet cluttered up with routine matters which do not need the No. 71 R3857

specific itself. attention of Cabinet With that, Mr. Speaker, I move second reading. On motion, Amend The a bill, "An Department Of Act n , read a second time, referred to a Committee Whole House on tomorrow. Act To Finance ordered of the Motion, second reading of a bill, nAn Act To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, 1973". (Bill No. 55). DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr.

Speaker, I have notes here with me on the particular changes in this, but I do not propose to go through them at the present time because this is a bill which brings in amendments to clear up certain things in the Act which are essentially now out of date, they are no longer current practice. The amendments get rid of those things which are no longer appropriate for the Act and also bring in certain changes of no substantial nature which will just allow the operation of the Corporation to go ahead in an efficient manner.

Now, I will be only too glad to go into any particular points which hon. members opposite, having studied the bill in great detail, I am sure, wish to go into. But rather than anticipating that and reading out all these points here, some of which, as I say, are quite inconsequential and, I think, would not be taking the time of the House to good advantage, so I introduce the bill for second reading. L3858 December 2, 1985 Vol XL MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER The hon. the member for Fogo. Mr. Speaker, in his usual fashion, the minister tries to gloss things over.

That is the way this minister acts, he glosses over budgets in the Spring and paints over the cracks on them in the Fall. He is like the weather forecaster with his budgets. He is in the same sort of mood this afternoon that you would find him in in the Spring of the year, about March or April. He is beaming! Spring has struck again. There is nothing to this bill, there . is nothing to his budgets, there is nothing to his forecasts. He tried to pull the best trick of all last Spring, Mr.

Speaker, when, instead of making the kinds of predictions that he used to make before, which were based upon what he thought was a good forecast, $28 million to $30 million, he said, 'No, I am going to $70 million or $75 Million, I am going to double it up so that I do not have to come in in the Fall and tell the House and tell the people of Newfoundland that I goofed again. ' He said, ' I will do it this way: I will up the ante, I will double it all up the amount of the deficit." So what do we see? Even with doubling it up, he proved to us that he cannot manage the affairs of this Province. Mr.

Speaker, I would suggest a couple of things to the Minister of Finance (Dr. Collins) about this little amendment that he has here. himself What he has done is given the ability - 'Old to say just before Scrooge' No. 71 R3858

Christmas that not only those things that have 3 per cent alcohol in them are to be considered alcoholic beverages but even anything with 1 per cent alcohol in them. Mr. Speaker, you will soon get to a point in this Province where you will not be able to drink a cup of tea without the minister having the ability to lay on a tax, as if it were an alcoholic beverage. Now, that is what he has done. No more spruce beer Speaker for Christmas. that mild stuff for for Mr. None of you, Mr. Spea~er. There will be no more of that for you.

You will have to pay the same for that as you have to pay for the hard stuff, although I know Mr. Speaker does not want to see the hard stuff. Old Scrooge is at it again. AN HON. MEMBER: He does not even drink wine. MR. EFFORD: He does speak once in a while. MR. TULK: Not standing up, though. Mr. Speaker, what we see here is an attempt by the Minister of Finance - of course, he is going to carry it with his large group of people over there - to try to get another few cents out of the people of Newfoundland. It has almost reached the po:i,nt with him where it is like trying to get blood out of turnip. AN BON.

MEMBER: Spruce beer. MR. TULK: Yes, spruce beer. I was just telling Mr. Speaker that even spruce beer and his cup of tea is likely to be taxed this Christmas L3859 December 2, 1985 Vol XL by the Minister of Finance the same as if it were the stuff, the same thing. Scrooge is with us again. just hard Old There is a question that we have been putting to the Minister of Finance all Fall in Committee on Supplementary Supply. We heard the Government House Leader this afternoon go on and on and on about the fact that we took twenty-one days on Supplementary Supply and it was a waste of the time of the House.

Indeed it was. If the Minister of Finance had given some answers to the questions, we could have had that all over with in two days. But we had to keep pushing and pushing him for answers. We have another question for him. I wonder is he listening? If he wants this bill to go through, he should attempt to stand up and answer some questions about it. We need to know just how much that deficit would have been this Fall if he had not had American beer being sold in the Province this Summer. How much money did he make on · that America·n beer? That is the question we are asking.

He is now predicting his deficit is going to be out by another $5 million. In other words, we are looking at $75 j million to $76 million. How much would it have been, I wonder, if he had not had the American beer to make a few bucks off the brewery workers in the Province an~ off the beer drinkers in this Province? MR. EFFORD: A few million. MR. TULK: Millions to this fellow over there is like bucks to you and me. Just how much did he make on that American beer thie Summer? No. 71 R3859

Those are the kinds of questions that we want the Minister of Finance to answer. If he gives us a commitment and assures us that when I get up tomorrow morning and have a cup of coffee in which there is a bit of alcohol that he is not going to put taxes on it, and my spruce beer and my blueberry wine is not going to be taxed, and that my mild stuff that I drink, Mr. Speaker, is not going to be taxed, if he will assure us ~ of that - MR. W. CARTER: And your Geritol. MR. TULK: I would say the minister probably takes Geritol. He is probably taxing himself.

I will tell you that the finances of this Province need some Geritol, or something like that. MR. BARRY: The economy could use a shot of Geritol. MR. TULK: It will not get it from him, though, not the kind of Geri tol this economy needs. We will have to replace him or do something with him, replace the whole government, as a matter of fact. MR. POWER: You did not do too well in April. MR. TULK: Look at the minister of everything. He used to be the minister of budworms, now they have made him minister of everything and something. He is not sure exactly what he is. MR. KELLAND: Education, level 2. MR.

TULK: L3860 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Grade X we used to call it. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we want those two questions answered: How much did he make on American beer this Summer? How much did he gouge the beer drinkers of Newfoundland and, indeed, the brewery workers? He kept them out. I think he intentionally did it, according to what he said, when the Minister of Labour (Mr. Blanchard) was trying to solve this problem. He put him in an awful position down there, a decent and good young fellow. We cannot support it, can we? SOME HON. MEMBERS : No, we cannot. MR. TULK: We need the answers to those questions.

We need to hear nold Care Bear" over there stand up and tell us that indeed he is not trying to take it out of the hides of Newfoundlanders again. MR. SPEAKER (Greening): The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I believe that in rising now I close debate on the bill, but I would be only too glad to answer the two questions that the bon. member brought up. His first question was with regard to the extension of the definition of alcoholic liquor to include what is now a fairly popular drink in the Province, that is the light beer, the beer with a lower alcoholic content, the 1 per cent beer. Mr.

Speaker, I think hon. members will remember that we extended the vending of beer to other than the Corporation and retail outlets a little while ago and beer can now be bought in certain No. 71 R3860

establishments. But, in doing that, we put in the provision that those establishments should not be such where children and minors are likely to be making purchases, not for beer, obviously, but for other things like, you know, soft drinks and candies and so on and so forth. So the beer vending in private establishments now is limited to those where children and minors are not likely to h_ave to go.

And that is the intention here, that by bringing in this change, we bring these light beers in under that same provision, that they can only be sold in stores other than, say, the corner store where candies are sold and supermarkets and that type of thing. It is not the intention of the Corporation to in any way get further revenues under this particular amendment; it is purely to extend the same protection we now extend to the slightly higher alcoholic beers to this type beer.

The answer to the questions the hon. member raised with regard to the beer strike is contained in an answer that I tabled in the House today. That was in response to a question asked a short while ago by the hon. the member for Port de Grave (Mr. Efford). So it is there for the hon. member to see and it is avail~ble to the public. One of the questions the hon. the member for Port de Grave asked was how much did the revenues of the Province increase as a result of the importatioh of beer from outside the Province.

In my answer, I said that the precise figure cannot <be determined at this time, it can only be determined at the end of the fiscal year. we get Corporation remittance I pointed out that revenues from the on a regular monthly basis and those 1 L3861 December 2, 1985 Vol XL remittances from the Corporation, up to the end of October - I just do not have the figures for November - were exactly as were projected in the May budget. So, at this point in time, the Public Treasury has no increase in revenues, no increase in remittances from the Corporation over and above what were predicted in the budget.

And what was predicted in the budget, of course, did not have anything to do with the beer dispute at the breweries. Mr. Speaker, I really do not know if there is any other information to be given on those two points at this stage. I close the debate and move second reading. On motion, a bill, "An Act ·To Amend The Liquor Corporation Act, 1973", read a second time, ordered referred to a committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. (Bill No. 55). Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Financial Corporations Capital Tax Act," (Bill No. 37). MR. SPEAKER (Greening): The hon. the Minister of Finance. DR.

COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, this is "An Act To Amend The Financial Corporations Capital Tax Act". Hon. members will recall that this particular levy was brought in and first went into effect in the 1982-1983 fiscal year. The present amendments are necessary. It is now three to four years later, there have been certain difficulties arising out of this new type of taxation approach, and we are now bringing in certain clarifications to the original act. The original act was No. 71 R3861

essentially based on similar types of taxation measures in other Provinces, particularly in Saskatchewan. As time has gone on, those other provinces found that they had difficulties. We found somewhat similar difficulties, and that is what the clarification is all about. Again, Mr. Speaker, I will only be too glad to go through these one by one if required. Perhaps I could just point out that one of the things we are now prescribing is that the interest rates can be based on part of a month as well as on a full month. That is one of the changes there.

We are changing the date of installment payments just to make the thing more easily administered, and we are clarifying the formula with respect to the allocations of paid-up capital tax where a company will be paying capital tax to various jurisdictions and not just to one. Mr. Speaker, those are examples of the types of clarifying amendments. I move second reading. MR. SPEAKER: The hen. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I think we can support this bill, Bill No. 37.

This is not directly related to this bill, but would the minister indicate whether the Province is keeping an eye on the state of financial corporations in this Province? We have seen an amazing situation develop in Canada where a number of the smaller banks, banks that evolved from trust companies, have gone under.

And when one asks why this has occurred, while there are, I am sure, a goodly number of reasons L3862 December 2, 1985 Vol XL that have been debated in the House of Commons, one of the things that strikes me as perhaps the most outrageous thing that has been done by the Prime Minister of this country is that statement by him that the country is now bankrupt. Then we see subsequent to that statement, a run on certain banks and financial institutions. The Prime Minister is wondering why that occurs when he has gotten up and said that the country is bankrupt. Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the Minister of Finance would indicate whether he agrees with that approach to providing a sense of confidence in our financial institutions? Is he prepared to get up and say that the Province is bankrupt as well as the county? Is that sort of statement designed to instill confidence in those people who have funds in not just the smaller financial institutions but some of the larger ones? MR. J. CARTER: He was being rhetorical, you know darn well. MR. BARRY: He was being rhetorical?

He was being mischievous, maybe mischievously rhetorical, but it was a statement that I know that Prime Minister will rue the day that it came out of his mouth. We have seen where the Bank of Canada has had to step in since that statement and provide a cash flow to permit certain financial institutions to survive the withdrawal of deposits by depositors who lost confidence in the particular institution. Now, the minister's bill here is designed not to bolster up the financial institutions of this No. 71 R3862 . 'I

Province but to permit him to more clearly get his pound of flesh, if I understand correctly what the purpose of this bill is about, that there are certain problems of definition and so forth, problems in collecting a tax which has already been in existence. I think this is correct. Can the minister confirm that there is nothing new in the way of taxes?

It is to make it easier to collect the tax that has been imposed and to clarify, presumably, certain inadequacies in previous legislation which has . led to certain institutions being able to fight off the minister, keep him from getting his shovel into their stores. They have been able to fight him off, Mr. Speaker, and keep their assets away from the Provincial tax man. We assume this is not retroactive. It is deemed to have on April 1 - oh, This Subsection 1 come into force it is! - 1984. is deemed to have come into force on April 1, 1984. No, we cannot support that section, Mr. Speaker.

Was this bill tabled on April 1, 1984, or before? DR. COLLINS: This got on the Order Paper. MR. BARRY: Well, if the minister would check. The only way we could support this clause, and we have gone into it with Bill 37 and we will go into it again - AN HON. MEMBER: This is Bill No. 37. MR. BARRY: Yes, it is another Bill 37 with another retroactive provision.

But if this Bill was tabled on or prior to April 1 1984, or if the minister had given notice of this L3863 December 2, 1985 Vol XL provision coming into effect, then we would be prepared to support the Bill coming into effect as of April 1 if the Parties had been given notice at the time. AN HON. MEMBER: Prior notice. MR. BARRY: Yes, at the time or prior. Otherwise, h~s the minister considered the effect this might have on the confidence of investors in this Province? This retroactive legislation is now taken so cavalierly, so casually.

The minis .ter has supported the Prime Minister of this country who has said, 'We will take away that backing from Petro-Canada because it changed the rules of the game - according to the Prime Minister, and we will have something to say on that - after the game started. We will . have something to say about that. What is the minister doing here? He is trying to change the rules of the game after the game has started. Now, we do not want to blow this up into an impediment to the minister getting a good change to legislation, a change that may be needed, but we ask the minister to look seriously at this clause.

It is retroactive and we cannot support retroactive legislation unless there was notice given, on or before April 1, 1984, to those who would be affected by it. MR. TULK: That is right up their alley, retroactive legislation. MR. BARRY: No, now, as I say, we do not want to build this up to an issue that is going to impede the passage of this Bill but I would ask the minister to take a look at it and when it comes to the Committee No. 71 R3863

stage, would the minister have a look at dealing with the aspect of whether or not this is retroactive legislation'? Mr . Speaker, that is all we would like to say on this Bill, other than that we would like to ask that the minister give us some indication that the financial institutions operating in this Province are in good shape, that any taxation is not going to help put them under. We do not think that is the case. As far as we can see they are in reasonably good shape, but maybe the minister would tell us.

I do not think it is the minister who has primary responsibility for supervising these bodies in the Province, I think it is the Minister of Consumer Affairs and Communications (Mr. Russell). But the minister is obviously part of Cabinet and as Minister of Finance would have an interest there, as well. We would ask the minister to make sure that there is a close eye kept so that investors in this Province are not left holding the stick if these financial institutions go under, realizing that there is a government guarantee of deposit up to $60,000. With that, Mr.

Speaker, we say we can support this bill subject to that retroactive clause being either explained or modified. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Gree ni ng): The hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Actually there are quite a few retroactive clauses if the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Barry) would care to look at it. I think L3864 December 2, 1985 Vol XL there is one at the top of page five, nthat retroactive to June 1, 1982. n I think there is another one in the middle of page six, nretroactive to June 1, 1982n, and so on. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to address another aspect of it and that is that this particular piece of legislation is amending the Financial Corporations Capital Tax Act. I believe the minister said that was in 1982 or 1983. What was the initial year'? DR. COLLINS: 1982-83. MR. FENWICK: 1982-83 it was passed. It is becoming apparent that we are proposing pieces of legislation with major flaws in them in that we are having to come back within two or three years and patch them up, so to speak.

I think that is the only conclusion you can come to looking at all these retroactive provisions, that obviously the wording was faulty or poor at the beginning, and that raises a serious question about the way in which legislation is handled in the House in general.

I am not going back to 1982-83 and criticize the members who were here, but I know, from the experience I have had in the last year in the House, that there is a tendency for putting through legislation without, in my opinion, putting it through the kind of screening that is necessary in order to make sure that these kinds of flaws and poor wording, and so on, allowed to exist. are not It leads me to a suggestion that I would like to make to the House, which I have made before but I would like to repeat now, and that is unlike other legislatures, unlike the House of Commons, we No. 71 R3864

very rarely use the Committee system in order to examine this kind of legislation and I would like to suggest that perhaps maybe we should start looking into it.

Because, quite rightly, a committee of, say, six or seven members who had some degree of expertise and long-time experience in this particular area would have detected the kinds of flaws and wording that exist here and would have been able to correct it ahead of time so that we would not have to go back and take the legislation - it is like a leaky boat, we keep on plugging one hole and then another one comes up, then it keeps on sailing a bit farther and we notice another board that is sprung in the ship of this particular legislation and so on.

And I seriously recommend to, I guess, the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall), the Premier and the Cabinet as a whole, that there may be a better way of dealing with this kind of legislation if you wou~d allow these kinds of committees to examine it. Having said that, there is only one other comment I would like to make. I would like to pick up on a comment that the Minister for Consumer Affairs and Communications (Mr. Russell) made last week in this House.

We are talking about · financial corporations here and he, in the course of debate on a previous particular piece of legislation, indicated that we have an inspection function being performed in his department on trust companies and other financial institutions which are provincially chartered. I believe that is what he was talking about. Yet, we only have one, single individual responsible for that and the minister indicated, L3865 December 2, 1985 Vol XL at the time, that he felt that additional staff were necessary.

I think it is a very important thing to realize at this point because we have had a number of federally chartered banks and trust companies in trouble over the last four or five years, and I would hate to think that the provincially chartered institutions we have in our Province are being so lightly inspected, as well, and as a result may end up in trouble.

I would like to suggest that maybe the Minister of Consumer Affa~rs and Communications would like to elaborate further on the particular point he made about the thinness of his inspection staff with regard to these institutions, during debate on second reading, because I think the people of the Province deserve to know how secure their savings and their investments are in these particular institutions. Mr. Speaker, I dislike retroactive legislation. In some very rare instances I can see the need for it but, to 'me, sloppy drafting initially has made it necessary to do this kind of thing retroactively.

The Minister of Consumer Affairs and Communications is going. I was hoping he would at least give us his comments on the comment I made about whether or not he will get additional staff to make sure that we can have the kind 1 of inspection we need. I would also like the Minister of Finance to comment on whether, if we had had a properly constituted Committee system in the past, it would have been pos~ible to fix these anomalies prior to that time. Thank you, Mr. 1speaker. No. 71 R3865

DR. CO LLIN S: Mr. Speaker. MR. SP EAKER : If the han. minister speaks now, he closes the debate. The han. the Minister of Finance. DR. COLLINS: On the retroactivity concerns that were expressed, the first concern related to Clause 1. Clause 1 is merely a clarifying clause, really. The companies which are taxed under this Act are those, essentially, which are licenced under the Trust and Loan Companies Licencing Act, but a strict reading of the definition in the

preamble of the Capital Tax Act .would require that these companies fulfill all three criteria~ that they be a trust company, that they be a loan corporation and that they be registered under the act. That is what a strict

interpretation is. Now, most of the companies of this nature in the Province are not all three, they are either a trust company or they are a loan corporation, although they are all licensed under the Trust and Loan Companies Licencing Act. So this is not spreading the net any wider, it is just bringing the wording of the act into place so that it is now the same as current practice. These particular companies are the ones which are being taxed because they are licenced under that particular act, but it is now an either/or situation, it is not an and situation.

In regard to the other concern about retroactivity, that referred to Sub-section (2) of Clause 4. All that does there is we were finding that certain companies L3866 December 2, 1985 Vol XL were remitting the tax that was due but they were not giving us sufficient information as to which month - they have to remit on a monthly basis - the tax was related to and on what basis. In other words, their estimated total capital tax for the year.

We just had insufficient information to correctly assign the tax that was sent in to the proper month and to make sure that the estimated amount was consistent with other information that we needed. So the retroactivity was really just related to information flow, it was not related in any way to increasing tax. Now, the point that the han. the Leader of the Opposition brought up was about financial institutions. Of course, I do not think I have to point out to han. members that we do not have, in this Province, the headquarters of banks.

All the banking institutions and, indeed, most of the other financial institutions in this Province are branches of mainland banks. These institutions are really controlled through their head offices and those are situated in other provinces. I do not think that we here could have a great surveillance activity in place that would really give a true picture of whether a financial institution was getting into trouble or not, we would only be able to look at a very small part of its total operation.

And even if we had a very detailed surveillance mechanism in place, or monitoring mechanism, I do not really think it would throw up much useful information in terms of deciding whether a bank was viable and its operations were legitimate and so on and so forth. No. 71 R3866

I do have to _make this point though, Mr. Speaker, that the two banks which failed were those which were headquartered in Alberta. Now, we all know what happened in Alberta. Alberta was hit with a sledge hammer and that sledge hammer was called the National Energy Programme. Alberta, up to the time the NEP was brought into effect, was one of the underlying strengths of Canada. It was giving tremendous employment, particularly in the Western provinces but, indeed, in the Central provinces, too, because the energy industry in Alberta was going ahead very, very sharply and very, very smartly.

Now, the NEP was brought in and it really undermined the economy in Alberta, and it brought the energy industry in this Province to its knees, in many respects. There were some good aspects to it, I suppose; it started some exploration up in the Arctic. Now, the explorations up there have been very disappointing in their results but, I suppose, no one could foretell that. But it did start some activity up there. But it really did great damage to the economy in Alberta and it was for that reason that those banks out there failed.

Now, in retrospect everyone realizes the NEP was a mistake, it was a very unfortunate policy thrust by the federal government at that stage and, of course, hon. members know which _ complexion of federal government ·I am referring to. It was an error in judgment, it was a bad policy, and it was a most unfortunate act that was brought in which directly - and few people will question this - to a number of bankruptcies in Alberta and, of course, that ultimately brought those two banks into great difficulties. L3867 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Mr. Speaker, with those comments I would move second reading.

On motion, Amend The a bill, Financial "An Act To Corporations Capital Tax Act", read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. (Bill No. 37). Motion, second reading of a bill, "An Act To Amend The Youth Advisory Council Act". (Bill No. 8) MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forest Resources and Lands. MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Culture, Recreation and Youth (Mr. Matthews) who is on Her Majesty's service today, it is my pleasure to introduce this particular bill. It is a bill that is pretty straightforward, I think.

It is something that the members of the Youth Advisory Council themselves have requested. The explantory notes on the inside of the bill pretty well explain what the bill is all about. It amends The Youth Advisory Councir" Act by doing four things: First of all, it provides that the age range of the membership of the Council would be changed from ages fourteen to twenty-one, which it is presently, to ages fourteen to twenty-four. This was a request of the Council itself to encompass a broader sector of the youth group. The second thing it does, Mr.

Speaker, is increase the number of members on the Council itself to No. 71 R3867

thirteen, nine of whom will be elected by the youth themselves on a regional basis, at regional meetings throughout the Province. Thirdly, it provides that the three appointed council members must be over the age of twenty-four. Those three appointed councillors, of course, are appointed by the Lieutenant-Governor in Council but are recommended by the Youth Advisory Council members, the remaining nine members, themselves. The additional amendment, Mr. Speaker, provides that the immediate Past Chairman of the Council become a member of the Youth Advisory Council, itself. So that is pretty straightforward, I think.

Even members opposite should not have much difficulty in understanding . and comprehending that. I know the Opposition's critic for the Department of Culture, Recreation and Youth will have a few comments to make on it. He and I have had indepth discussions on this particular piece of legislation, something which we both support. As a former minister of that department, Mr. Speaker, let me just say, if I may, that I had several occasions to meet with the members of the Youth Advisory Council. The then membership of the Youth Advisory Council has changed, obviously, over the years.

I also had occasion to attend a number of their functions and meetings throughout the Province and had occasion to meet with them and discuss matters of great interest and concern to the young people of today, and of yesterday, when I was there several years ago. L3868 December 2, 1985 Vol XL Mr. Speaker, I want to also take the opportunity to mention some of the things that are done, not only by the Youth Advisory Council, because they do a lot of their work in consultation and in cohert, I guess, with the Youth Services Division of the Department of Culture, Recreation and Youth.

It is important to realize that that Youth Services Division is a division of the department and of government which provides services to a number of Provincial youth organizations throughout the Province. It has a specific mandate, if you wish, to provide whatever assistance it can financially but, even just as importantly, they provide a considerable amount of expertise from within that department and from among those who work in the department.

The other types of things, of course, that the Youth Services Division deals with and that the Youth Advisory Council are interested in ·are projects like the Katimavik projects which, by the way, I am sure most members opposite would be familiar with. SOME BON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. SIMMS: It is an excellent programme and for the information of hon. members, I understand that the deadline for volunteers for the upcoming Katimavik projects are February 5 and April 2, respectively.

It is a programme that sends volunteers from the age of seve .nteen to twenty-one to one or more nonprofit organizations to undertake a nine-month programme. Projects are geared towards all kinds of different things of course, very general, if you wish. The volunteers who work No. 71 R3868

under the Katimavik project work for little money but, they gain a great deal of experience. Mr. Speaker, I want to make a suggestion, if I may, for the considertion of the House. It is something that I thought about in preparing for the introduction of this particular Bill and actually it is something that I have comtemplated for a long period of time. It reflects the opinion of a number of people. It is another programme that the Youth Services Division of the Department of Culture, Recreation and Youth may consider but, I think more appropriately, it would be a programme that this House should consider.

Perhaps . through Your Honour 1 s office, the Speaker 1 s office, or the Internal Economy Commission and it is one that dear to all of our hearts now being members of this legislature. I refer to some type of - AN BON. MEMBER: What is that internal commission? MR. SIMMS: The Internal Economy Commission is the body that administers the House of Assembly aand which the Speaker chairs. Perhaps this kind of an operation could be considered by the IEC or by the House itself. I am referring to a Parliamentary Internship Programme.

There are various degrees of internship programmes throughout the country but, in Newfoundland there is no Parliamentary Internship Programme. I think that it is something that we in this House could probably consider. AN BON. MEMBER: It has already been recommended by the Select on Committee on Accomodations and Benefits of L3869 December 2, 1985 Vol XL .Members. MR. SIMMS: I am not sure what the details were. Were there any details to it or just that there would be one? AN BON. MEMBER: Is was based on other programmes (inaudible). MR. SIMMS: I know that in some jurisdictions there are programmes.

The Federal programme is a nine-month programme, I think, and so is the Ontario programme. That may be a bit too rich for us, I do not know because I think the students that participate in the Ottawa programme get paid a stipend of $9,000 and they spend half of their time with a Government member and then the other half with an Opposition member. SOME BON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible). MR. SIMMS: Yes, there is a foundation or something that handles it. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, it is just an idea that I wanted to toss out to you.

I was not aware that the Select Committee had made the recommendation but, I am glad to hear that they have. Mr. Speaker, I want to make one more point if I may. I know the House Leader is anxious to move on but, there is an important point since we are dealing with a Bill of this importance and we are talking about the Youth Advisory Council specifically but, youth in general. There was a letter in The Evening Telegram over the weekend that struck me with a great deal of interest. I do not know how many No. 71 R3869

members may have read the letter. It was written by a young teenager who lives here in the city of St. John's. This teenager wrote that she was sixteen years of age and, like a lot of other people her age, she works hard in school and at home from Sunday to Friday, and Friday and Saturday evenings are the evenings that she relaxes and socializes with her friends.

She says, "Contrary to popular belief, we, as teenagers, are also human beings and therefore, social beings." The young lady goes on to describe an incident that occurs frequently in a particular business establishment in the community, well, in fact, it is the Village Mall. She says young people up there are harassed, if you want, by security people who work in the Mall. I do not know how much fact there is to it, but I certainly know that she makes a great point in her letter to the paper. Those who have not read it, I would really urge you to read it.

She says if you are over nineteen years of age, you can lean on the rail at the Village Mall, but if you are under nineteen years of age, you can be harassed and asked to leave. I really thought that that was quite a letter from a young girl sixteen years of age. I have been anxious to bring it up in the House because I agree with her. There obviously discrimination there is that age should be eliminated. What hit me mostly was that she says, "I know I am ' just a teenager' and what I say may not matter to some adults ••• We are not all that bad.

When I read The Telegram, I read about adults being charged with child abuse, rape, murder, robbery, and drug trafficking. But I do not jump to the conclusion that all L3870 December 2, 1985 Vol XL adults are bad. So people in authority, of course, should not think the same of us • " Well , Mr. Speaker, I could not agree more with that young lady. I think it was a superbly written letter. She made some excellent points. That is the kind of thing that the Youth Advisory Council, I think, could deal with on a regional basis - and they do in their meetings around the Province.

They have meetings and they encourage young people to put forth their concerns and their ideas and suggestions such as this, and to express themselves. And that is what it is all about. It is an excellent forum for all of them to do that. The only damper I have on this whole debate, Mr. Speaker, is that I keep reflecting back to what my friend from Windsor - Buchans {Mr. Flight) said on Thursday. He, too, was talking about young people and he was alluding to the recent general election in Grand Falls. Mr. Speaker, he made the statement on Thursday, which I predict will haunt him forever and a day.

I am certainly not finished with it because I have had all kinds of people make representations to me about it. AN HON. MEMBER: ( Inaudible ) • MR. SIMMS: I have so! I had a copy of a Hansard given to me by a university student. When he said there are 130 kids out there who wo:r;ked on the campaign in April, 1985 in Grand Falls, "who do not know what is what," I think that that is an awful slur on the university students in this Province. No. 71 R3870

MR. BARRY: Who said that? MR. SIMMS: The member for Windsor - Buchans said it. I say to the Leader of . the Opposition that I trust that that kind of an attitude and comment is not reflective of the members in the Opposition who share seats with the member for Windsor - Buchans, because I really do think that it was a dangerous and inexcusable comment for the member for Windsor Buchans to make. Nothing short of an apology will be satisfactory. I will be writing him to that effect to make sure that it becomes a public issue. Anyway, Mr. Speaker, those are just a few asides.

Essentially, as I said, with respect to the bill, these are amendments that the Youth Advisory Council themselves have asked for. They do good work, and I think we should support them and support the bill. I move second reading. MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The hon. the member for Stephenville. MR. K. AYLWARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is a pleasure to speak to a bill related to the Youth Advisory Council and any bill that will help make the Youth Advisory Council a more effective body to serve the youth of this Province. I was interested in the comments by the hon.

Minister of Forest Resources and Lands (Mr. Simms) as L3871 December 2, 1985 Vol XL he spoke about the letter that was in The Evening Telegram this past weekend. I must say, I was struck by the letter also. I think it indicates that youth in this Province are going to forge ahead. They have a good future and will hopefully create one because it seems as if they are going to have to create it on their own. The way this provincial government is operating, they are going to have no choice in the matter.

When it comes to the Youth Advisory Council, I have been attending a ton of meetings relating to their councils, their elections, talking with their officials and so on. After doing a lot of research I have come to the opinion that they can have a very effective purpose but in order to be effective you have to be listened to. From my conversations and from what I have read and seen, I do not think they have been listened to at close to an effective manner.

They have applied for a new budget for this coming year and I am sure that the minister responsible is going to make sure that this Advisory Council for Youth is properly funded. They need the funding to do the job. They are very limited at the present time and they are serving a very effective purpose, but in order to be more effective, they need the proper resources, the major one being funding. I have talked with a number of their members, very good, well qualified individuals and they are promoting the cause of youth in this Province very strongly, but again I do not think they have been given the resources.

The minister should take heed that he has this Youth Advisory Council and he should No. 71 R3871

-- make them as effective as possible. I think he has not been doing that. They put a report together in 1982 on the problem of youth unemployment. It was very good, well done and well researched. They travelled around the Province. A number of individuals responded to it and a number of individuals gave input to it, but the report is still sitting there. The responses that were made were minimal.

They were not carried forth, and, to this day, those recommendations still sit there and very, very few things have been done to help alleviate what is the biggest problem on this Island and in Labrador today, youth unemployment. It is the biggest, most gigantic catastrophe that we have faced in many, many years. If something is not soon done about it, we are probably in for a very, very difficult time down the road. They made some excellent recommendations just three years ago and they have been just sitting on the desks of whoever and not responded to in the proper manner.

When the minister brings in a new bill on the Youth Advisory Council, while I agree with everything that is going through here, I think it is just adding a few things that are not going to make them as effective as they could be. I think what could make them more effective is by giving them more power and also putting some acknowledgement of their resources so that they are going to be listened to. In the Act it states that they are advising the provincial government on concerns of youth, but it is one thing to advise, and another thing to listen and do something about it.

L3872 December 2, 1985 Vol XL This provincial government has been very, very lax in that response as can be seen, firstly, by the unemployment rate that exists, which is a shocking figure. There is no other word for it. There are a lot of words, I suppose, that are related to shocking but they would either have to be more of an extreme. The unemployment rate in this Province for youth is wicked in that we do not have a proper programme or even an attempt to try to answer that problem by arranging specific programmes for youth in this Province. It is beyond me and it has totally amazed me.

I have had many conversations with university people, with people in · youth agencies across this Province and youth themselves. There have been attempts made by other provinces in other provincial jurisdictions to handle the problem of youth unemployment. Manitoba just brought in a programme which is very good promoting youth entrepreneurs, a very good programme, something that certainly could be done down here, but it does not seem that we have the foresight in the provincial government to try and attempt something like that.

They were concerned with the youth unemployment rate, they were really shocked with the youth unemployment rate of about 13 per cent. They were overcome by that. They thought that was a catastrophe. I do not know what they would think if they could read and see what we have down here today. So, when we talk about the Youth Advisory Council and amendments to the act, we should bring amendments in that would give them No. 71 R3872

more authority, give them a say in what goes on in developing policy, anything along those lines so that they will be listened to. They have not been listened to effectively. That is definitely seen by the unemployment rate we have today with youth,

whereas they have made recommendations, good ones, very good ones as far as I am concerned, that could have been acted upon, but have not been acted upon, and it does not look like in the future they will even get presented. It is too bad the minister is not here because I would have a chance to get his reaction to that, but I am hoping that he will react down the road. I keep saying down the road.

Down the road for this administration, I do not know when the date is going to be, but this unemployment rate that is existing here is gone crazy and the effects of it on the student population and the young people in this Province, under sight of what they can do in the future, is wicked. They have to try to get up every morning and go out in this world and on this Island and try to create a better life for themselves, but they are finding it increasingly and more increasingly difficult. We see these hunger strikes going on all over the Island, a scattered place here and there.

They are desperate people out that way. I think that the youth of this Provin~e want to see some action. They are kind of waiting and waiting and waiting and they have been waiting for so long. I hope that they see some action by the provincial government because right now they are in a state of submission or they have been beaten. Their energies are going to waste.

They are not working L3873 December 2, 1985 Vol XL and I think it is time the provincial government started to address this problem by giving provincial policy and directives to that instead of waiting for it to go away because it is not going to go away. Again, as I said, other provincial jurisdictions have tried to handle the problem and have made attempts. As a matter of fact, they have been successful in certain areas. We have not done that and unless we start doing that we are in for a hard, hard time in the future. The future of this Province depends on these people.

First off, they have got to stay here so we can help solve the problem. The biggest problem they have now is they are leaving and they are not going to come back. If they do not stick around, well, there is not much of a future for any of us, as a matter of fact. They have got to stay here and work on this Province and create a better economy. But the way it is right now, there is no way in the world they are going to stick around here and do nothing because young people have a certain spirit and they want to go to work.

I hear a lot of times this attitude that they do not want to work, that they do not want to do this, that they are lazy and this and that. If you could get into a school and see them or if you could see them working for a week, I think everybody could understand in this House of Assembly. Everybody knows, everybody out there should realize it, that these young people just wanted an opportunity. Years ago there were opportunities. There many regulations. No. 71 a were The lot of not so world R3873

economy was in better shape, etc. These days we have to face many more difficult problems, more complex jobs and a more complex society. It is time that we addressed those problems instead of waiting for them to go away. You cannot wait for these things to go away. They are not going to go away and we are in jeopardy down the road. We are in jeopardy now. We are- in a state of jeopardy. We are in a state of wicked confusion and of a desperate situation. These young people need, at least, some sense of direction. If they do not get that, then she is going to be all over.

This amendment, like I said, I cannot disagree with anything in it. It is just going to expand the number of members and so on in the age group. But I just want to make sure that when the amendment goes through that the Youth Advisory Council, in its role, is taken more seriously by the provincial government and by the minister respectively and that he takes the Youth Advisory Council a lot more seriously because they have not been taken as seriously as they should. They have a great contribution to make.

The young people of this Province who are trying desperately to make a contribution, have not been given the avenue to do that. I would ask the minister responsible, and the provincial government, to take the Youth Advisory Council and its good recommendations that it has on many issues concerning youth in this Province, and listen to them very, very, very closely because they are based on good research. I must say I am very impressed with the ladies and gentlemen who are on the council. They are L3874 December 2, 1985 Vol XL doing a good job, but doing a good job with very limited resources.

I am sure that the minister is going to approve everything that they have applied for in their budget to make them more effective. As a matter of fact, they should be getting more than that. I want to see that this advisory council is given a proper respect because they are trying to help solve the problem of youth on this Island. Any attempts made by any group should be definitely welcomed by the provincial government because we cannot let this situation go on anymore. It has come to the point now where people are not even bothering, they are just getting up and going. I think we are in a bad situation.

Related to that, there is now, I believe on Thursday night, going to be a Youth of the Year Award given in this International Year of the Youth. There were twelve nominees for that and I am sure that these twelve people will be honoured in a respective fashion. I would like to see more of that. Make it an annual event to honour these twelve young people who have made big contributions to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. But, again it is like, "We will shove it off maybe this year, because it is International Year of the Youth." We should continue the practice and keep it going.

I go along with the amendments, like I said, but the Youth Advisory Council is being followed. They are not being listened to. They made good suggestions and it is about time that the Province decided to say, "We are going to do something about this wicked situation," No. 71 R3874

because there is no other term for it. Unemployment is any respect and for any age group is probably the wickedest thing that you can go through in your lifetime, but for that age group to face what they are facing out there today, the lack of opportunity and the lack of effort being put into provincial policy right now, results in hopelessness. They want to have some type of hope and come out and take their initiative and build a better economy, but they are not going to get the opportunity unless the Province decides to tackle the problem head on with some actions.

On that amendment. that have been put note, I support the It ~s just four things been changed. It has forth by the Youth Advisory Council. It is good to see that they are being listened to in that sense, but on the major recommendations that they have made, and that they are going to make, the provincial government should listen to them very seriously. They are making a contribution and they are trying to change things around.

They are making a very positive contribution and it is time for the Province to move forward and try to solve the problem because it is gone way, way, way too far, it is gone to ridiculousness, and it is time that we addressed that problem and get it solved because you cannot have a 40 per cent youth unemployment rate in this Province. It is a wicket- catastrophe to go through. I end my comments on that note. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: L3875 December 2, 1985 Vol XL The hon. the member for Menihek. MR. FENWICK: Mr. Speaker, just a few comments on it.

I understand these are amendments that have been recommended by the advisory board itself and, on that basis, I see nothing particularly onerous about them. One of the clauses seeks to change the age of membership on the council from fourteen to twenty-one, to fourteen to twenty-four, broadening it out by three years, is a curious change.

I know it is in correspondence with I think the federal definition of what a youth is now, at least I have seen it done that way, but it is almost like we have started to say, "Well, let us expand our definition of youth. n To me I think it is a recognition that young people have a harder