May 26,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLI No.

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture.

MR. FLIGHT: ... (Inaudible) undertaken by Fire Chief

Roberts. In 1979 he walked from Badger to St. John's. In the following years he

extended his walk, and this year he not only walked from Port aux Basques to St.

John's, but took in the outlying areas of the Trans-Canada.

Mr. Roberts is a constituent of mine, and a personal friend.

He is also an employee of the Department of Works, Services and Transportation.

I regret that circumstances stopped me from meeting him personally at the end of

his walk. I understand that the Minister of Mines and Energy, the Minister of

Works, Services and Transportation, and the Leader of the Opposition met him.

What I want to do most of all by standing here is ask through

you, Sir, that the House of Assembly recognize Mr. Roberts' efforts; that we

would write him a letter of commendation, and that we would indicate the fact

that we appreciate his efforts towards this noble cause. By the same token, Mr.

Speaker, we appreciate the efforts of anybody symbolized by the kind of thing

that Mr. Roberts just undertook. He did it at his own time. He took his vacation

from the Department of Works, Services and Transportation and did the walk.

In 1969, I might say as a footnote, the proceeds from his

walk was $6,000. It peaked at $31,000 in 1990, and he is certainly hoping to

surpass that amount in this walk in 1992. I believe that kind of effort, and

that kind of commitment and dedication warrants a letter of congratulations from

the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to be associated with the words of my friend

from Windsor - Buchans. Indeed, I was at the Janeway on Saturday afternoon, and

along with the two ministers, had the privilege of extending a welcome to Joe

Roberts.

It struck me at the time that what he is doing is the type of

thing that makes us, as individuals, as people, feel good about ourselves. The

only problem is, not many of us would go to the extreme that Joe Roberts did to

show his thanks; to express his thanks to the Janeway Hospital and the

professional people who work there and cared for his own son, which is, I think,

what got Joe involved in this walk to begin with.

I would like to be associated with the comments, and I know I

speak on behalf of my colleagues when I say that he should be congratulated, and

he should be thanked.

Perhaps just as a little added gesture, it might be

appropriate if we did it in a more tangible way rather than just words, which I

know are appreciated and would be appreciated. Maybe I could suggest to my

friend, if he passed the hat among his colleagues over there I would be prepared

to pass the hat among my colleagues on this side, and let's see if we can

perhaps raise a few dollars to give him, as well, to go with his own gesture. I

would be prepared to do that, and I am sure he would too.

Thank you.

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to be associated

with the congratulations to Mr. Joe Roberts for his efforts on behalf of the

Janeway Hospital. I know the minister recognized that many others also make

contributions, and in congratulating Mr. Roberts, and through him, also

congratulating others who give of their own volunteer time to raise money for a

charitable cause, I think it is a very appropriate gesture on behalf of the

House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker.

Statements by Ministers

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

Labour Relations.

MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr, Speaker, I am pleased to announce that 484 projects have

been approved under the Student Employment Program. This year, the provincial

government will assist employers to provide employment for 553 post-secondary

students, representing a provincial government financial commitment of $598,104.

This will supplement and complement a much larger federally funded Student

Employment Program that is active in the Province.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to

reaffirm this government's support to the student population in this Province.

Financial assistance such as this will enable students to pursue their career

goals and further their education.

Officials from the department will be contacting project

sponsors whose applications will be funded under the program as soon as

possible. In any event, Mr. Speaker, everyone should be notified by early next

week and also, a district by district list of approvals will be provided to all

hon. members during today's proceedings.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for providing me with an advance copy. I

wish he had done it last week when he was over doing the same thing for his

colleagues on the other side. It was just like a wishing well, every member

going there all last Thursday, and again on Tuesday getting their lists of

applicants. I happen to know for a fact because a member told me he received his

last Thursday, so I wish the minister had done it last week instead of today.

The $600,000 that was allocated is not going to be nearly

enough to take care of the needs of this Province and I ask the minister if he

can go back to his department and find a few more dollars to help those and we

do not care if the minister plays politics as long as he finds the jobs.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, a while ago, I guess probably a

couple of weeks now, in response to a question I think from the Member for St.

John's East at the time, the Minister of Environment and Lands, said and I quote

from Hansard: 'We are exploring the full environment impact' of the proposal to

bring garbage from the United States for incineration at Long Harbour. That was

a little over two weeks ago - I can give her the precise date, I think. It was

May 6th Hansard.

May I ask the minister, since she said we are exploring the

full environment impact, can she tell us, the House and the people of the

Province, exactly how she is exploring the impact and what opportunities are

available for the public to have input into her exploration of this particular

project?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The project that we hear about for the Long Harbour area has

not yet been presented to government. So, as yet we have done no in-depth study

of that particular project.

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, can the minister tell the House,

then, what she meant by this quote in May 6th Hansard, page 990 when she says -

and I won't extrapolate, I will read the first paragraph: 'Put it in words the

hon. gentleman can understand, we are neither for nor against the project.' I

quote: "We are exploring the full environmental impact of this." What does she

mean by that?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope I am an hon.

gentlewoman, not an hon. gentleman. The tense of the word, I guess, is what is

throwing him. There will be no in-depth research done on the project until it is

registered. It is not registered yet. We are not looking into it. If I used the

wrong verb there I don't know, I don't recall my exact words at that time.

However, certainly any articles I see on it I am reading with great interest,

but I wasn't referring to that at that particular meeting. It is we will be

looking at it. Once it is registered, if it is registered, we don't even know if

it will be.

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry the minister

misunderstood what I said, I guess. I didn't refer to her as an hon. gentleman.

She referred to us as hon. gentlemen in her answer. I was reading her answer,

just so she understands that.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure if I understand what

the minister is saying. I am assuming - I think people in the public have

assumed since many public statements have been made by ministers and members on

that side of the House in particular that the government is very well informed

on the project and has a good understanding of what the project is all about.

She would also know, no doubt, being the Minister of Environment that in other

parts of Canada and in the United States, environmental reviews have resulted in

rejection of an incinerator.

Now assuming the minister is knowledgeable and knows a bit

about the project, can she give us some idea of what is new and different about

the design and technology of this particular incinerator proposed for Long

Harbour that might give her grounds to believe that it can be environmentally

safe?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There has been no

project registered. We do not know what is different about this project from any

other project that has been registered any place else in Canada. We do not know

it has not been registered.

Thank you.

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure it is acceptable

for the Minister of Environment and Lands to take that particular attitude.

Surely, she must have herself made fairly knowledgeable about the project. Is

she aware, for example, that the public have been told by the proponents that

all the toxic waste removed from that garbage before it leaves the United States

will be removed and to be doubly sure they are going to have a further screening

at the site in Long Harbour and if they find any toxic materials that will then

be sent back. Is she aware of that, for example? Everybody else in the Province

is aware of it. If she is aware of it can she tell us or explain why, if that

garbage is so environmentally safe when it comes into the Province, why would it

be necessary to seal the ash in concrete and bury it as the proponents have said

publicly?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, thank you. We have not had

opportunity to assess the proposal because it has not been registered. I have

heard many things about this proposal, both positive and negative, I cannot

respond to any of them until I have seen the proposal. It has not yet been

registered.

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

MR. SIMMS: I don't think the minister can continue to

stonewall. She knows the debate that is going on in the Province. Presumably she

saw in the Evening Telegram a few weeks ago the big two page diagram of the

project and in that, in the diagram, the proponents say that that incinerator

will produce 110 tons per day of toxic ash that will have to be secured in a

special vault. Does the minister know if that is accurate? And, if it is can she

tell us what on earth we would do with over 40,000 tons of toxic ash each year,

1,000,000 tons over a twenty year period?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, again we do not have the

information because the project has not been registered. Let me say, Mr.

Speaker, that I would suggest that it would be far more appropriate for the hon.

Leader of the Opposition to be addressing these questions to his buddies in

Ottawa who spent $1 million of the taxpayers money of this Province, including

mine and yours, to get this thing studied for its economic impact.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: I have heard it all now, Mr. Speaker. I will

say this to the Minister of Environment and Lands: if she can convince the

withdraw their $1 million for the project, I would be prepared to support it.

Now, would she be prepared to do that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. My question

is to the Minister of Health. On Thursday, May 14, I asked the Premier if he was

aware of negotiations between the government and American Refuel of Long Island,

New York, to set up a waste incinerator in St. John's. At that time the Premier

said he did not know. So I asked the same question to the Minister of Health,

who also claimed he did not know. However, on the next day, May 15, after the

minister had twenty-four hours to check my question, he came back and I quote.

He said: "...there is absolutely no basis for the member's question. I think we

see here another example of fearmongering that we have seen from the

Opposition...." Now that is what the minister said a few days ago.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in view of the announcement yesterday by

the Minister of Environment and Lands that government is negotiating with

American Refuel, the same company, to build an incinerator in St. John's, will

the minister explain why he gave misleading and inaccurate statements to the

House ten days ago?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I will stand by the question

which I brought to the House. Maybe one of us is misleading, but I can assure

the people of Newfoundland, it is not here. The question which the hon. member

put is not even vaguely related to the actual events.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, is the Minister of Health saying

to me, and saying to this House, that he and the Premier were not advised by the

Minister of Environment and Lands that her Department was carrying on

negotiations with American Refuel about an incinerator in the St. John's area?

Is that what the minister is saying?

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

MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is confused. The

first time the question came up, the insinuation was that there was one of the

hospitals in the City who was negotiating with a firm in New York somewhere to

come up and burn some waste. Now when we checked it out, there was no such thing

going on. There was a study by the St. John's Hospital Council which has

something to do with the destruction of biomedical waste, which has really

nothing to do with the question which the hon. member has asked. I think what he

has here is a little bit of knowledge, and a little bit of knowledge, Mr.

Speaker, has proven over the years to be a very dangerous thing, and I think it

is becoming more and more clear here now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have a

question for the Minister of Environment and Lands. Would the Minister of

Environment and Lands advise this House if she had advised the Minister of

Health and the Premier about negotiations that she had ongoing with American

Refuel with respect to an incinerator in St. John's? Yes or no?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, I am appalled. First of all, I

couldn't even follow the man, he has his facts so confused. We are not

negotiating with a soul about an incinerator for the St. John's area. I will

tell you, Mr. Speaker, that we have at least six enquiries a week at our office

about waste management and people who are interested in doing something about

waste management.

On January 22, this company, BFL, which is a part of the

group referred to by the hon. member, asked somebody in my department about the

environmental assessment process. My goodness! My goodness! Now somebody phones

up and asks a question in my department and, suddenly, on the scene will appear

a waste-to-energy incinerator for St. John's. I bet the Minister of Development

wishes that would happen every time somebody comes to talk to him about a new

project in the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WARREN: My goodness, Mr. Speaker! My goodness! Yes,

Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. minister, my goodness.

Now, Mr. Speaker, let me ask the Minister of Environment -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I haven't yet recognized the hon. member. If he will stand, I

will recognize him.

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, let me ask the Minister of

Environment: Have there been any negotiations with municipalities on the

northeast Avalon with respect to an incinerator for St. John's?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Certainly there have been no discussions

between my department and the municipalities about something that doesn't exist.

It is just an imaginary thing in somebody's mind. If that company, while it was

in this Province, went to speak to some of the mayors of the various

municipalities, that is their privilege, they can do it. But let me say that

there is, at present, Mr. Speaker, a study going on of waste management for the

northeast Avalon and, certainly, we are in close contact with the municipalities

as that study is being prepared.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. WARREN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I want to ask the minister another question. I am just

wondering if these are the future plans for this government, are we to become

the garbage dump for North America? Will our coastline be dotted with

incinerators burning North American garbage? Or is this the real economic plan

for this government? Is this what the Premier is going to announce next week,

that the economic plan for this government is to burn American garbage?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: I have no idea how he got American garbage

wound into this. There is nothing connected with American garbage, as far as I

know, from the discussions my officials had, as preliminary as they were. This

group was in St. John's in 1980 actually, looking at the same thing, and decided

that it was not economically viable, and went away. There was no question, as

far as I know, about American garbage at that time. If there were, it was not my

responsibility.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

Order, please!

MR. HODDER: I want to ask the minister: Has the

environmental damage to Flat Bay Brook been assessed? This was damage caused by

the collapse of a dam at Lookout Brook on the west coast last week. In light of

the fact that it is a salmon river, and that there was a lot of environmental

damage caused, has the minister done any assessment of that damage?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The department was certainly made aware of that as soon as it

happened. I have not heard of any follow-up at this stage, and I do not know how

severe the environmental damage was, but I will report back.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, it happened a week ago. It

happened last Wednesday, so I would think -

In light of the damage to the banks of the upper part of the

river where a channel fifty yards wide is now 1,000 yards wide, and the banks

have been scraped away, will the department be requiring that Newfoundland Light

and Power repair the damage that has been done to the river?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Once again, when the extent of the damage is done, and we do

not know at this stage whether the word that he used 'serious' is an accurate

word. Certainly we will take every step to return the site, as close as we can,

to what it was originally, but there may be some problems there, depending again

on the magnitude of the damage.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: I would suggest as well that she look at the

damage to perhaps the hatching salmon there as well. There has been some concern

expressed.

My next question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy. In

light of the fact that one of the dams was reconstructed, rebuilt, or

restrengthened, last year, and this was the upper dam which broke and then took

away the bottom part of the dam, will there be an investigation to find out what

happened in this particular case? Was the contractor at fault?

These dams have been there, this hydro electric station has

been there for as long as I can remember, certainly some thirty or forty years.

Will there be an investigation into the cause of this, because we were very

lucky. If this had happened during spring runoff, instead of after spring runoff

as it did, the whole of the Flat Bay river basin area would have been

devastated. There was millions of dollars worth of property damage, but there

would have been millions and millions and millions more, so it is a very serious

thing. I wonder if the minister plans to have an investigation into the work

that was done there?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, the five megawatt hydro station

on that brook is a private one owned by Newfoundland Light and Power. It is not

a Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro station, and I have had no discussions with

anybody on the subject.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

MR. HODDER: It is Newfoundland Light and Power, but I

would think that the minister would have some say over that.

I would ask the minister: Who looks after Newfoundland Light

and Power? Somebody in this Province must, and there was a considerable amount

of damage done to present property holders all the way down the Flat Bay area. I

would ask the minister: What will happen in terms of these property owners, if

the minister washes his hands of it because it is a private company? Surely

government, in some way or form, should be able to do something about that.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, I will check into the matter

and report back.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

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

Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

At the Estimates Committee Meeting last week, the minister

confirmed that the government employs two chauffeurs who chauffeur the Premier

around in government limousines. He also said they do additional work besides

chauffeuring the Premier around. That information is logged. I would ask the

Minister of Works, Services and Transportation if he will make that log public

and the information pertaining as to who uses the chauffeurs other than the

Premier?

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

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member seems to indicate

that he is making some great disclosure here. In fact, as I indicated to the

hon. member, on Page 48 of the Departmental Salary Details there are two

positions identified as chauffeurs that were identified in this year's details

and probably in all previous years' details. So there is no effort to conceal

the fact that these positions exist.

Mr. Speaker, if one looks at the services provided by these

two individuals, one will find that the great, great bulk of their time is taken

up with delivering packages and delivering mail to the various government

organizations in and about this city.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in order to demonstrate that to the hon.

member, to demonstrate to him that, in fact, the primary function of these

people is the delivery of goods and services around the city to government

agencies and not chauffeurs per se, and that, in fact, really what should be

done is the job description changed, I will be providing the hon. member, in due

course, with information relating to the activities of these two positions in

detail.

MR. TOBIN: What does that mean?

MR. GOVER: I will be providing information as to the

amount of time spent on various activities by these individuals to demonstrate

to him, in fact, that perhaps the time has come now to rename these two

positions and that, in fact, the primary responsibility of these individuals is

not driving people around but driving goods and services around.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, no one is saying it is a secret.

It is common to everyone that there are uniformed chauffeurs that drive up in

two different limousines and pick up the Premier and members of his political

staff every day. I am not trying to hide that. The minister and his officials

said the other night that that information could be provided and I am asking the

minister: Why is he sitting on it since last week? Why hasn't he tabled it in

the House and let the public decide if it is packages, goods and services or the

Premier and his flunkies?

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

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Mr. Speaker, I have not sat on this matter for

a week. In fact, I have instructed my officials to compile that information, to

make it available to the hon. gentleman for his information. In fact, Mr.

Speaker, what I think I will do is compile the information back to 1979 and we

will see the economies that this administration has put in place. These

chauffeurs are not getting $200-a-day tips, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries. A few days

ago I asked the Minister of Fisheries about the ownership of the crab processing

plant at Roddickton which was destroyed by fire nearly two years ago. I want to

ask the minister: Does he know if the plant was insured, for how much and who is

the beneficiary of the insurance, as a result of the fire at the Roddickton

Plant?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, yes, my information is the plant

was insured. It seems to me, given the fact that the building was owned by the

Town Council of St. Anthony dealing with a private company, that that question

probably would be better directed to the Town of St. Anthony or to the people

who leased the building from the town.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Obviously the minister meant the Town of

Roddickton, I would think, Mr. Speaker, not St. Anthony.

I asked the minister a couple of days ago about the ownership

question. I asked the minister could he get back and inform the House as to the

question of ownership of the plant, because there seems to be a whole problem up

there that is a fuzzy matter, I say to the minister, and there is quite a bit of

concern about the area.

Now, the plant has since been partially rebuilt. I want to

ask the minister again today: Who owns the plant, how much did the

reconstruction cost, and how was it financed? How was the reconstruction of that

particular facility financed, I ask the minister?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I told the hon. gentleman during

Question Period, and I have since told him privately, that, to the best of my

knowledge, the plant was leased by the Town of Roddickton to a company in which

Quinlan Brothers have an interest. In the lease, I think, there was a right of

first refusal which gave them the right to purchase the plant. Having discussed

the matter briefly with a director of the company in the past few days I

understand that they are going to exercise - or maybe they have already

exercised - that option, and are now in the process of finalizing it.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the

minister specifically then: how much government money, if any, in outright

grants or otherwise was used in the rebuilding of the plant? Secondly, was the

money paid out on the insurance policy used to finance the construction of the

new plant? So, two questions. Was the money for the insurance policy used for

reconstruction, and secondly, how much government money has gone into that

partially rebuilt plant now?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. gentleman

and the House that there is not one cent of provincial money which went into the

rebuilding of that facility. It seems to me that the hon. gentleman should be

asking these questions of maybe the Mayor of Roddickton, and one of the

principals of the company who operated the plant. Because we have no reason to

monitor what happened there in terms of: who got the insurance money, if in fact

it was insured, and for what amount it was insured. I can tell him now that the

building was insured. As to the disposition of the insurance money, I cannot

tell him. But I can tell him this, that the Province did not, in any way,

contribute to the rebuilding of that facility.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you again, Mr. Speaker. I have been

told - and I want the minister to either confirm or deny it - that last year the

Province put $250,000 into that facility by way of - through the special

assistance program, or whatever. Is that a fact? I have been told that as late

as yesterday, that there was $250,000 went in there last year from the Province.

Now, that information may be incorrect. The only way to get information is to

ask. So I am asking the question. Was there provincial money put into that

facility last year through one of the special response programs or something

like that?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I can only repeat what I said a

moment ago, that to the best of my knowledge, certainly the Department of

Fisheries did not put money into the rebuilding of the plant. To the best of my

knowledge, no other government department did. But certainly we will look into

it and maybe provide an answer later. But to the best of my knowledge there's no

funding whatever went into that building from the provincial government.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Opposition House Leader.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you. Final supplementary, Mr.

Speaker. Yes, maybe it was the Minister of Employment, maybe it was his

Department that there is some money involved. But the minister will get the

answers and come back.

I just want to revisit the ownership question again. Because

it seems that the whole issue of ownership and refinancing of the plant is

linked in some way to the refusal of Quinlan's to process crab in the plant this

year. Really what the people are asking, and want the minister to tell the House

and inform them, is why Quinlan's is not going to use that plant this year?

Because there is a supply of crab, there is a market price - it is a bit of a

bother - but there is a supply of crab and there are people to work there. So

can the minister answer that for the people in that area? Why will Quinlan's not

be operating, processing crab in Roddickton this year?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, again to the best of my

knowledge it was a corporate decision made by the company not to complete the

building. I am told that it would have required a sizable investment on the

company's part and they chose not to make that investment.

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the

Minister of Justice but, in his absence, to the Premier. The Royal Newfoundland

Constabulary ended their investigation into the complaints against the former

minister of the Crown and the Member for Naskaupi with a press release issued on

May 19. I want to ask the Premier whether or not the twenty-one month

investigation disclosed in that press release is in fact the proper way, or

disclosed the proper way, to handle a complaint of such a nature against a

minister of the Crown? In view of the fact that both the complainant and the

officer who took the initial complaint disagreed with how the initial complaint

was characterised in this press release.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I can only assume that they

found it necessary to deal with it in this way because of the fact that members

on the opposite side of the House made it a public issue in the House. I assume

that that is the reason why it was necessary, but I do not know. I have not

spoken to them about it. I can only draw that conclusion, which seems to me to

be logical, from those facts.

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

John's East.

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the Premier.

The specific problems that both the complainant and the officer accepting the

complaint have with the press release deal with the fact that the initial

complaint was in fact regarding the sexual misconduct allegations, which is not

disclosed by this, and secondly that the complainant was told that the file was

accidentally filed away and not for the reasons set out here.

Now, Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that we have the Royal

Newfoundland Constabulary investigating itself in this matter, and saying in the

end that the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary is satisfied with the impartiality

of this police investigation, won't the Premier consider having an independent

objective inquiry looking into the nature of the investigation and whether or

not it was properly conducted, and to determine whether or not proper police

procedures were followed or whether some changes ought to be made in the way

that the police conduct investigations of this nature. So they don't take

twenty-one months to have an investigation of this nature hanging over an

accused or an improper investigation being done. Isn't it time, Mr. Speaker,

that we had an objective look at this so that the public could be satisfied that

justice was done?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, it is vitally important that

every citizen of this Province have complete confidence in the impartiality and

the total absence of any unfairness in the justice system and in police

procedures and so on. That is vitally important, that there be no doubts about

the quality of the administration of justice in the Province.

Now if there is any real evidence, and if the hon. member has

one iota of real evidence, please make it public. Give it to me and I will see

that it is attended to, but if you want to, also make it public - if there is

any real evidence, other than the giggles of the Member for Humber East, which I

don't consider very cogent evidence by any standard. If you have any real

evidence, please make it available and I assure you that the government will

take whatever action is necessary to be absolutely confident that there is no

reason to have any doubt whatsoever about the impartiality of the administration

of justice. But members, bear in mind, inquiries cost a lot of taxpayers

dollars. Now if there is a real reason to do it, don't hesitate, spend the

dollars, but don't do it just to satisfy the bigoted claims of Opposition

members who want to create an idea that something is wrong for their own narrow

political motive. But if there is any real evidence make it available and we

will proceed with whatever level of inquiry is necessary to make sure that there

is no doubt about the total impartiality of the administration of justice.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has expired.

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

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

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table the report

of the Public Tender Act exceptions, for April, 1992.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy.

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker,

Section 3 of the Mineral Act,

requires that I table the annual report on Mineral Licences, so today I am

pleased to table the report on Mineral Licences and Mining Leases issued for the

period April 1, 1991 to March 31, 1992.

MR. SPEAKER: Sorry?

MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker, I don't know if I am out of

order or not, but I am wondering if it would be in order to have a motion to

have the motto under our Coat of Arms changed from its current status to, 'What,

My Goodness'. Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in answer to a

question from the Leader of the Opposition, I undertook that I would deliver the

details of the statistics for the unemployment situation to which he referred

and I am now tabling, Mr. Speaker, the graph - and I will explain to the members

of the House - which shows the growth in unemployment rate in each of the

provinces and in Canada as a whole, in 1991 over 1990 and the other figures, all

of which demonstrate quite clearly, Mr. Speaker, that there was no foundation to

the Leader's comments on the issue.

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

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to table answers

to questions that were asked by the Member for Humber East and the Member for

St. John's East during the Estimates Committee meetings, and also answers to

questions of the hon. Members for Burin - Placentia West and St. John's East,

which were asked on May 13th, while I was absent from the House attending

ministerial meetings.

Mr. Speaker, these questions deal with the numbers of cases

on single able-bodied assistance, as well as single parents receiving

assistance, and overall, numbers of cases in the Province of all people on

social assistance over the last three years. Mr. Speaker, it deals with the

numbers of refugees entering the Province in the last three years and some

considerable detail on how the refugees are dealt with when they are here in the

Province.

Mr. Speaker, there are questions concerning child welfare and

the numbers of children under care during the three-year period; also, Mr.

Speaker, children who are cared for under the six separate arrangements, foster

care, board and lodging, group homes, choices for youth and special living

arrangements and emergency placements and out-of-Province placements.

Mr. Speaker, because there were several questions asked,

average caseloads for child protection services over the last three years and,

Mr. Speaker, I want to answer one to the questions concerning The Child Welfare

legislation and the fact that this legislation is in process now, and deals with

the question asked in the estimates concerning a sixteen to eighteen year old

category of youth, and finally, in answer to a question concerning incidents at

the Whitbourne facility in April. So, I would like to table answers to all these

questions, Mr. Speaker, and if there is any further clarification needed, I

would be more than willing to provide it.

Orders of the Day

MR. BAKER: Motion 5, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill

entitled, "An Act To Abolish School Tax Authorities And To Provide For The

Collection Of Unpaid School Tax", (Bill No. 28).

On motion, Bill No. 28 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 6, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill,

"An Act To Amend Certain Taxation Statutes In Relation To The Payment Or

Imposition Of Interest," carried. (Bill No. 29)

On motion, Bill No. 29 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 7.

Motion, the hon. the President of the Council to introduce a

bill, "An Act Respecting The Application And Effect Of Certain Acts Passed In

the Present Session Of The Legislature Upon The Revised Statutes Of

Newfoundland, 1990," carried. (Bill No. 27)

On motion, Bill No. 27 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 8.

Motion, The hon. the Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Labour Standards Act,"

carried. (Bill No. 32)

On motion, Bill No. 32 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Order 2.

MR. SPEAKER: The concurrence motion.

The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Before the Chairman starts, I wonder if we could have

agreement as to the timing and so on. We really have to agree as to how many

minutes we speak to this concurrence motion. The Opposition House Leader

indicates that a ten-minute formula might be okay. I just want to let everybody

know.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fortune - Hermitage.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It gives me great pleasure to speak on the concurrence motion

of the Resource Committee of the Government Estimates. As I said earlier, the

members of the Committee did an excellent job in presenting themselves at the

Committee hearings. The ministers and their officials are also to be commended

for the way they dealt with questions up front and for the very professional

manner in which they answered questions pertinent to their departments. The four

departments we dealt with were Forestry and Agriculture, Fisheries, Mines and

Energy, and Development.

I would like to deal first of all, for a few moments, on the

Mines and Energy Committee. We met, and during the questions posed to the

minister and his officials, a particular part of the Estimates that was of

interest to me was a

section dealing with the dimensional stone. I understand

from the assistant deputy minister of the department, Mr. Dean, that this is a

new industry the Province is attempting to put into operation. And one of the

areas that has an abundance of this dimensional stone is the area I represent,

particularly on the Connaigre Peninsula. In a recent seminar in St. John's a

couple or three weeks ago, one of the representatives from the Connor

Development Association was in attendance and basically, I think the word came

back that the dimensional stone on the Connaigre Peninsula is really the bread

and butter stone of the industry. Now, we also understand that our area is only

one of three or four others that are involved with the particular industry. I

understand in Lumsden and in the Grand Falls area they will also be doing some

work there this year and these blocks of stone will be taken to Buchans for

refining, to be sent to market.

Now, the dimensional stone industry already in my area has

started in the sense that we have been able to work through the Connor

Development Association and Canada Manpower to put into process the training of

fifteen individuals from the area. That training is taking place in the local

area just outside the community of Seal Cove. That particular project, I

believe, has tremendous potential for the area. It seems to be very, very

encouraging, as I said.

The minister, by the way, on the weekend will be the guest

speaker to the Connor Development Association annual dinner. I guess it was the

association's concern and mine, as well, to make the minister familiar with the

area so that you could see first hand the amount of stone that is there to be

developed. There are massive amounts of it. I understand from someone that there

is enough stone in the area for 1,700 years of mining. So that is quite a bit. I

don't think any of us will be around at that time, but it does show great

promise for the area.

Because it is a new industry, it can and will be, I think, a

real shot in the arm for the Connaigre Peninsula, because up to this time the

emphasis has been on fishing. If we can create a number of jobs, even though a

small number, in this area, it will be a great benefit. That is why the Connor

Development Association works so closely with Enterprise Newfoundland and with

people in the minister's department to make this work, because they see that it

has relative merits. Merits that will pay great dividends for the people in the

area.

Through the Estimates Committees that we have talked about

and passed over the last number of nights, we were also encouraged - I was

encouraged, as well - with the fact that there is a fair amount of exploration

being done in the central area. Also, on the Connaigre Peninsula, there have

been good prospects for a mining area outside the area of Pool's Cove, nothing

substantive as yet. There has to be a tremendous amount of exploration to be

done before we can say if this thing will become a reality or not. We are

certainly encouraged by that, and that for me was very encouraging in that

meeting we had with the minister.

If I could also go to the Department of Development. We met

with the minister there, and again, the minister and his colleagues were up

front, answering in a very forthright and professional manner questions

delivered to them by the Opposition. I say to the minister, I don't think I said

to him that particular night, that his department, the Department of

Development, contributed substantially to a new building for the Connor

Development Association in the community of Hermitage. The Minister of Mines and

Energy will officially open that building on the weekend, as well, in his

capacity as minister, when visiting the area.

The building, itself, is a real monument, I think, to the

Connor Development Association that has worked so hard to make this project a

reality. Because, in addition to having the offices in this building for the

Development Association, the Connor Development Association has worked hard and

has attracted a credit union to set up office in their building, and that has

already been done. That is a great boost for the people in the area who had to

travel to the community of St. Alban's or Harbour Breton to have work done. Now,

it can be done in the Hermitage - Connaigre Peninsula area itself and comes as a

great benefit to the people there.

In addition to the offices for the Development Association

and the credit union there is a great craft shop that has been in operation now

for about a couple of months, and the floor space there is large and adequate.

The number of people who have contributed items to this area has been greater

than expected and has brought in revenue for the area in a way that it was not

possible before.

So, really, in a sense, by contributing the amount of money

toward the building, along with Canada Manpower supplying the labour to make it

a reality, this has become a real economic thrust for the area because the

Connor Development Association is one association that is cognizant of their

work and is trying to develop the area and, I believe, in this particular

instance, has gained a lot of respect from the people in the area for their

pursuit of having this become a reality.

I would also like to say that, because of the improvement in

the road infrastructure on the Connaigre Peninsula - I think it is in the last

four years, some ninety kilometers of improvement in road structure in the area

- we will see an influx of tourists to that particular part of the coast. Up to

this particular time we did not have a large number of tourists coming in

because we had very poor road transportation, gravel roads that were sixty-years

of age in some instances. It is because now the government has made a commitment

to the people in the area that we have been able to overcome that obstacle. I

believe that the area has some very, very enormous potential.

I was somewhat intrigued yesterday when I saw a poster that

dealt with Environment Week - the Department of Environment and Lands. I wasn't

intrigued by the inscription, the fact that it is their campaign, I guess, of

overfishing that says there are no fish to swim. But they used a very, very

beautiful picture from the community of Hermitage to display there. I think if

one were to look at the artistic quality of that particular picture, just

looking for the artistic quality itself, people would concur with me that it is

a very, very beautiful coast that has a tremendous amount of potential. I

believe that in the days to come this potential will be realized in the tourist

trade. That has all been made possible, as I said, by a number of factors

falling into place to make it a reality.

So I am pleased about that and I am also pleased with the

Department of Development which has spearheaded along with E&L a number of

projects in the area. As I said, they have been spearheaded primarily by the

Development Association and interested citizens. It has been an economic

success. I would like to go on record as congratulating the Minister of

Development, his staff and his people and E&L, who have been so ably involved

and have made the economic situation a much improved situation on the Connaigre

Peninsula.

When it comes to fisheries which was another one of the

resource areas that we had to deal with, as I have said before to people, I

guess the area I represent has been fortunate in that it has seen a fair amount

of inshore fishing over the winter months and into the spring. Over the last

couple of weeks the amount of inshore cod species has dropped off considerably

but, nevertheless, there is approximately, from the whole area, the number of

people involved, the number of fishermen, probably around 10,000 pounds a day

going into the inshore plant at Hermitage which is generating some work there

for these people as well.

In checking out the facts from the area, I was informed

today, as well, that the lump roe - and I found that out on the weekend - in the

district is relatively good. The catches are not as great as they were in 1991

up until now but, because the price of lump roe has doubled, then the financial

return to the fishermen has been greater. So I guess that is the bottom line to

it, the fact that it is a good price and these people are able to do well.

That also augers or spills over into the lobster fishery. I

know from the district that the lobster fishery so far this year has been on par

with, and probably even a little better, than last year in terms of catch.

Because of the large increases we have seen in the price of lobster, some

fishermen have doubled their last year's financial returns so far, from last

year up to this particular time. That is very, very encouraging. I am sure that

the fishermen are delighted that the catch of lobster is still holding and that

the price is still relatively good, so that these people can at least have a

half decent lobster fishery this year.

I would also like to comment on, from the fisheries

portfolio, the success that the deep sea fish plant at Harbour Breton has had.

Last year it was converted into a redfish plant. From last fall up to now it has

been operating at capacity and has been a real boost to the town itself, and the

some 500 people who have been working there.

I think to put into perspective, Mr. Speaker, how well the

people have done in the area. That is, in August 1990, when a delegation from

the area met with the Premier in his office and expressed an interest in getting

an arena for the community, the words to the effect were - and if I have a

minute to finish up, just a minute.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. LANGDON: To finish up what I am saying here. In 1990

the people from the community started a fund-raising drive. From August 1990 up

to now they have been able to realise, from that town primarily, with very

little help from outside, $180,000. Not pledges, but cash. I think that is a

real tribute to that community which has expressed to the Premier their

willingness to have that particular arena in place.

What they plan to do, and I think it will be realised - I

know it will - that by the time the thing is officially open, they will be able

to say to the Premier and to the Province: we have the structure, we have put in

our full complement and from the long-term capital cost, this thing is debt

free. I think that is just tremendous. From the area we have been able to put

into place the proper documents saying that the communities in the area would

fund the thing once it has been constructed.

So I have been really pleased with what has happened in that

area. I am sure the success would not have been this way had not we had a good

fishing season and the people were able to contribute through payroll deductions

in the plant, and from the hospital and the teachers and the clerks and what

have you.

So considering that, I could talk about the relative success

of the plant in Gaultois. The government contributed some money to keep it open.

It was opened by Conpak Seafoods. To ensure the viability of the particular

plant, the government called tenders for a new ferry for the community. The new

ferry will go into service on June 5. It has on it as well a three-ton crane

that will be able to hoist aboard the fish for the plant and to help make the

plant more viable.

So it is with these particular comments, Mr. Speaker, that I

contribute to the concurrence debate. I would like to thank the members Opposite

for their giving me a few extra minutes to conclude. Thank you very much.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the member wants

another few minutes he can certainly have it, or else he can come back to it.

But if you want another few minutes -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WOODFORD: Okay. Mr. Speaker, I would like to have a

few words on the concurrence debates, and more specifically I guess as it

pertains to the resource sector. I vice-chaired that Committee, along with the

Member for Fortune - Hermitage. I must say, it was a real pleasure to serve on

the Committee and have the opportunity to question the ministers in Committee. I

found that in the Estimates I always had a chance to just take it easy, take

your time, and ask ministers questions that you don't - it's not like in the

House of Assembly, where you get up and you are not allowed too much of a

preamble. In committee you can

preamble all you like and you can address the

question whichever way you like. You have all the time in the world to get some

answers.

I must say that all the ministers we had - Fisheries,

Forestry, Development, and Mines and Energy - were very forthcoming. Up front.

As far as I am concerned, honest with their answers. That is what it is all

about. We are here to watch over the Legislature and legislation and policies on

behalf of our constituents, and I think we should be afforded that right to be

given the answers when they are asked in a constructive sense.

I would like to refer specifically to some of the questions

and answers that were brought up in the Committee. The member just mentioned the

dimensional stone aspect of the Department of Mines and Energy. I too took great

pleasure in questioning the Minister of Mines and Energy, especially as it

pertains to dimensional stone. This is an industry, I think, that will be of

great consequence to the Province, especially as it pertains today to some new

economic development. It is an industry that, if we get the right markets, we

get the right people, the right export markets, can be taken advantage of pretty

well all over the Province.

As the member noted, he has a find of dimensional stone in

his particular area, and there are others in the Lumsden area and also in the

Goose Arm area of Humber Valley district.

In the Humber Valley district we have a very, very large find

of dimensional stone in the Goose Arm area. It is a find that consists of many

colours and many grades of dimensional stone, and this is what is going to make

it very attractive to outside people and processors and producers in other parts

of the world, especially in the United States and Italy. The Italians are the

people now who are very interested in this particular find. They are about to

extract more samples this summer and send them away for further processing to

determine whether this particular grade of dimensional stone is going to be

worthwhile, and therefore make it into a viable and productive industry.

That augurs well for the area, especially now. At least it

creates and provides some hope, especially now when everything else is down.

People are looking for something, if not to lift them up immediately, to at

least give them some psychological lift, especially in those hard times and

times of high unemployment.

I suggest, as I said to the Minister of Mines and Energy that

night, that he be very cognisant of what is going on in this particular

industry, and any permits, or requests for permits pertaining to anything today

to do with development, whether it be dimensional stone or anything else, that

those requests for permits be looked after rather quickly.

Also on that particular committee we discussed the general

mining industry of the Province, and questioned them on, for instance in the

Buchans area, the Tally Pond find. That was pretty prominent there just a little

over a year ago, and there was supposed to be some further developments. To this

date there has not been much new in that regard. That primarily consists of base

metals. As you know, the Buchans area for years has seen a tremendous amount of

base metals come out of the Buchans area, especially as it pertains to ASARCO.

ASARCO mined Buchans for years under the names of the Rothemere Mine, McLean

Shaft, and Oriental. Granted, I always said that they high-graded the ore in the

Buchans area for their own good, and as far as I am concerned there was more ore

buried in the mines of Buchans than was ever taken out of it.

I caution the minister to make sure that if any mines that

are created or developed today, any new mines, that they be inspected, that they

thoroughly be policed, and to make sure that any company coming into the

Province, whether it is dimensional stone, whether it is base metals, whether it

is for gold or anything like that, that they be policed, and forced to keep up

to their permits and the conditions of their permits, and make sure that they do

not high-grade any operation in the Province today.

We also questioned the minister, I did in particular, with

regard to the Glover Island properties on Grand Lake. That is in the Humber

Valley district as well. That particular find was a find that showed up fairly

large quantities of gold, with a very high grade, just in the past year. I

understand now there are another two or three samples to be analyzed over the

next few months and this would determine whether any further development would

take place on Glover Island in Grand Lake.

Mr. Speaker, there were a number of other issues pertaining

to the minister's department and some of the more interesting issues that I

found dealt with not only the offshore development of oil but also onshore. At

that particular time there were, I think, two companies with three different

permits issued for the Northern Peninsula area of the Province, whereby

companies would have to do some development over the next five years. I don't

have the figures but one particular company would have to spend over $1 million

in five years. That's what is contained in the conditions of the permit, and

that, in itself, would generate some economy in the area, thereby probably

resulting in the development of something to do with regard to oil extraction on

the Northern Peninsula especially in the Parson's Pond area. There were two

other companies in that particular area that came in at $10,000. I questioned

that.

AN HON. MEMBER: Two blocks?

MR. WOODFORD: Two blocks. I was rather sceptical about

one block coming in for over $1.2 million and two blocks just up the road coming

in for $10,000 over a five-year period. That led me to some scepticism with

regard to those particular companies. I still think those permits were given, or

were requested on the basis of tying up property in the area so that it would

not be accessible to other companies. If that is the case, then I think the

minister, over the next couple of years, should take a long, hard look at that

area and make sure that companies that do receive permits do something with them

and keep up the conditions under which they were given.

We questions the minister on other aspects of his department,

as well, especially with regard to the mini-hydro sites. I said it here in the

House before, Mr. Speaker, and I say it again today. We have a government

opposite who are supposedly looking for opportunities to create some economic

development in the Province. The Minister of Development has an office in Hong

Kong to try to attract some development to this Province. I don't know what the

figure is but I would say that possibly it is a good thing. If we can only get

one a year, or one every two years, we will probably be able to attract someone

to the Province to create economic activity.

But, in saying that, Mr. Speaker, I must draw an analogy to

what is going on with regard to mini-hydro sites in the Province and

Newfoundland Hydro. Two years ago, government called for requests saying they

were going to institute a policy whereby Newfoundland Hydro would waive the

rights on any mini-hydro site in the Province up to fifty megawatts. The

legislation in place then, and in place until a couple of weeks ago, was that

anything over one megawatt had to go to the Public Utilities Board. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I said to the minister that if you bring in some new legislation

dealing with raising the one megawatt condition to ten or fifteen, or fifty,

that we, as an Opposition party, would make sure that that legislation would go

through smoothly, and would go through this House rather quickly, so that

Newfoundland Hydro could take advantage of that legislation.

The minister kept his word and brought it to the floor of the

House and that piece of legislation was passed. I think it was raised to ten, if

not fifteen megawatts, thereby giving private entrepreneurs, not only in the

Province, but anywhere in the country, the right to apply through Newfoundland

Hydro for the right to generate electricity under what they call a mini-hydro

site.

Mr. Speaker, what was done by Newfoundland Hydro after, I do

not agree with, I do not agree with - Newfoundland Hydro did call for proposals,

they called for proposals alright, but as far as I am concerned they called for

proposals rather quickly to try to take the Minister of Energy and the Premier,

or the government as a whole, off their backs and that, to me, is where the

minister and his colleagues are going to have to step in.

Mr. Speaker, I understand my time is up.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is reminding people, because the Chair's

understanding was that we agreed to ten minutes, so I don't interrupt members,

we just send them a note to tell them, so they could finish up shortly after.

The hon. the Member for Humber Valley.

MR. WOODFORD: Mr. Speaker, I think this is where the

Cabinet ministers and members as a whole, on the other side of the House are

going to have to take the bull by the horns, and go and tell Newfoundland Hydro

that not only are they going to accept power by 1996, but when the deadline for

proposals comes in in August, that whatever companies put in, whether it is for

five, ten, fifteen, twenty or fifty, tell them right away that those companies

should be allowed to proceed.

Now, Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that what I am saying is

falling on deaf ears, there is only one person to get to with regard to this,

and that is the Premier, and I say here this evening, Mr. Speaker, that if

something is not done after August - a few weeks after August the proposals come

in, I, for one, am going to make sure if the minister does not, and the

ministers do not, that the Premier himself is going to know about it. Because,

as far as I am concerned, this is an opportunity in this Province today to put

people to work. It is an opportunity to get work and capital funding and capital

projects started without one red cent of government money.

Members opposite are always saying that we can't do this and

we can't do that because we don't have the money. This is a prime opportunity,

Mr. Speaker, and a prime example of putting - there is $300 million worth of

mini-hydro sites in the Province today that can be started pretty well within

six to twelve months, $300 million! Newfoundland Hydro is calling for just fifty

megawatts, that is all they are calling for now, fifty megawatts and the

deadline for proposals for those fifty megawatts is in August of 1992.

Mr. Speaker, what they want after that is, to wait another

twelve months before they even do anything about it. They are not accepting any

power until 1996. We saw an example yesterday, or last week in Lookout Brook on

the West Coast of the Province, whereby Newfoundland Hydro, five megawatts were

wiped out overnight. I just do not know why Newfoundland Hydro is waiting until

1996, I mean, wouldn't it be nice just a couple of months ago to have had some

extra power to hook up to the lines and put into the grid?

So members opposite should take note that Newfoundland Hydro

should be told in no uncertain terms, that once those proposals come in for the

fifty megawatts of power in August, that those companies be given the right to

proceed with construction as soon as possible.

One particular company, Mr. Speaker, in my area, doesn't even

have to go to the environmental assessment. The environmental assessment has

been waived; there is a $13 million project and it is going to take construction

anywhere from twelve to twenty months employing anywhere from twenty-five to

forty-five people, and they are willing, by the way, to start work come fall.

Even though Newfoundland Hydro is not willing to accept the power until 1996,

they are willing to go to work. So, Mr. Speaker, the minister is aware of it,

the minister will be reminded of it, and I think this is an opportunity whereby

some capital funding can be put in place and capital projects proceed without

one penny, one copper of government money, whether municipal, provincial or

federal.

Now, this was just the Mines and Energy Committee we had. I

must say, the minister, as I said, was upfront with his answers with regard to

mines and energy problems in the Province. I notice in the hydro report - I will

probably get into that a little later, get into more specifics with regard to

the hydro report. I will give other members a chance to have a few words and I

will have a few words on the other three departments a little later on in the

evening, Mr. Speaker.

So I thank the members for giving me a few minutes leave to

continue on with the Mines and Energy Department. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question?

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thought the Member for Stephenville was standing in his

place, that is why I was hesitant to stand.

I want to take

part in this debate on Concurrence, especially

since the resource sector is being discussed. The district that I represent is

obviously heavily involved in the resource area in terms of the economy.

I listened to the Member for Fortune - Hermitage talking

about the fishery, and he indicated there were some areas that were fairly

positive in his district. I wish I could say the same thing with respect to my

district. I wish I could say the same thing about lobster prices. The member

indicated the lobster prices were holding firm. That is certainly not the

indication I got from fishermen as to the projected price of lobster this week.

It was going to be reduced substantially from last week. To date, Mr. Speaker,

that has been the only area of the fishery that has had any measure of success

at all, the lobster fishery. The lump fishery has started up, and catches in

certain area have been fair, but certainly nothing to indicate that the fishery

for this summer will be very prosperous.

So, Mr. Speaker, in that particular area of fisheries and

fisheries development, I think that this budget fails to address what will, in

September, prove to be another unmitigated disaster in the fishery. At this

point in time, the boats have already been out. They have been out 150 to 180

miles off and catches have been negligible, nothing at all, Mr. Speaker. One

boat last week did have a moderate catch off the Avalon area, but off the Funk

Island Banks, where boats traditionally have done well with turbot, there has

been little if any activity because there are absolutely no fish there.

Mr. Speaker, I suppose to add insult to injury for the

fishery this year: It has been the market situation with the crab fishery in my

area that at this point in time last year it was open, but I think today they

are trying to resolve the question as to whether or not it is going to open.

Unfortunately, for fishermen, the prices are considerably weaker than last year,

almost reduced by half from what they were last year. Mr. Speaker, the prospects

are not very good at all for any kind of development in that area. So I am kind

of disappointed that the minister, in his budget, failed to take into account

the impending disaster in the fishery and little is being done.

Mr. Speaker, in the district that I represent a fair number

of fishermen have now lost a major source of income, that being in the salmon

fishery. At least fifteen salmon fishermen in the Gander Bay area derived half

of their income from the salmon fishery and now, with the buy-out of the

commercial salmon fishery, that has come to an end. Of course, Mr. Speaker,

there is a recognition on the part of everyone that it was probably right and

proper that this would occur. That doesn't make it any easier for the fishermen

of the Province, though, who were relying so heavily on that sector of the

fishery as a support mechanism for getting them through very difficult times.

Mr. Speaker, we have some troubled times in the fishery -

MR. FLIGHT: (Inaudible) not one person here from the

caucus, not one.

MR. WINSOR: The Minister of Forestry and Agriculture

doesn't have to worry about there being no one here. The minister should be more

concerned about the condition of the forests in the Province than he is about

the number of people on this side. If he were half as concerned about that - Mr.

Speaker, he can count as much as he wants, and he can count the number of people

who are being employed in the forestry sector in this Province since he has been

the minister. All I see him do is cut, lay off, and reduce numbers. He has not

done anything to substantially improve the -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker....

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: The press is probably watching the Minister

of Forestry count. Since the Minister of Forestry now wants to take

part in the

debate, he can get back in his seat in a minute, and perhaps he can respond to

his Department's lack of a plan for the forests of this Province.

The forest, perhaps one of our greatest potential resources,

has been constantly neglected throughout Newfoundland's forestry industry. This

administration has done nothing to improve it, in our area of the country. The

minister knows because he has visited once or twice. One occasion I know for

sure he visited. Recently. More than once. The minister has some relatives who

live there, so he has occasionally come to visit. I think he even came one time

to pick some bakeapples in our area. The minister has visited the area, I'll

give him that. He did not do much to help the forest industry there in recent

years. He did have one project but that was closer to Gander than my district.

Much closer to Gander and Kindon's Ridge. I will give the minister that.

What I would like to see the minister do is to take some

initiative. As a matter of fact, let me tell the minister that in the last three

years the federal government has undertaken a fairly extensive program to do

some silviculture in the Gander Bay area. I think the minister's Department

flicked in a few dollars.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. WINSOR: No, a few dollars, no, the minister does not

know what he is talking about. It is all federal money now, the minister knows,

under the federal-provincial forestry agreement, there was -

MR. FLIGHT: (Inaudible)!

MR. WINSOR: Yes, and the minister has spent some money in

the Gander Bay area. In the Carmanville area specifically. Now what he has done

is he has trained a number of forestry workers. Over the last two or three

years, there has been an ongoing program where they have trained a number of

workers. Now unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, the people who they have now trained

find themselves with no work. Yet the forest is still in almost as bad a shape

as when they started. Because it was so big an area that had to be done.

MR. FLIGHT: (Inaudible) Fogo Ferry.

MR. WINSOR: The minister has just got to learn, the

minister has three - the Fogo ferry? You took the Fogo ferry.

MR. FLIGHT: Well, we'll take another one (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Took another ferry.

MR. FLIGHT: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Yes, you'll take another ferry.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Fogo.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, the minister has lost leave of

his senses. He does not know what he is talking about. Talking about taking

another ferry. What kind of foresight and planning does the minister have in

mind when he suggests that he take another ferry from the people of Fogo? The

problem is, this administration has got a $3 billion Budget. In excess of $3

billion.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. WINSOR: The Budget is, for the Province! In excess of

$3 billion. The minister and his other Cabinet colleagues do not know how to

spend it. The minister would prefer to spend it on social services. That is what

the minister wants to do. Because he is driving them to the social services

rolls every day. So if the minister wants to take some money he can channel it

into meaningful activities in the forest sector.

The minister has not done it. He has now had two years and

the minister just said: we were involved in that initiative, in silviculture.

Now he has trained all the workers to take them and ship them off to BC

somewhere. Is that what he has done, and neglect our own forests? Perhaps when

the minister takes

part in this debate in a few minutes he will tell us how many

silviculture projects will be taking place throughout the northeast coast, in

Fogo district specifically. An area, Mr. Speaker, that in 1961 was devastated by

a fire, a major fire.

The minister initially started to do some things and his

Cabinet colleagues got to him and said: you can't have any more money, Graham,

you've had enough money. He had no clout around the Cabinet table, none at all,

and the minister lost the little bit of funding that he had in Forestry for

silviculture, and good money. Money that was well spent. Because we saw last

year, when the Minister of Labour, after we constantly browbeat him and everyone

in the Province was telling the minister to get some projects moving, some, as

we called them, make-work projects. There was a number of good projects that

were started in this Province in the forestry sector, in the fishery sector, and

other areas that could have helped the economy of this Province significantly.

The onus is on government, particularly through its

resources. The area - it is interesting to note over the last number of years

how the Budget has constantly reduced the amount of money that is available for

resource development. Each year we see it dwindle.

Mr. Speaker, this year the Department of Fishery, when I

looked at it first I was delighted. I thought that there was a big increase in

the amount of money that was going to be available for the Department of

Fisheries. It is, Mr. Speaker, except that I think about $7 million of it goes

towards the buy out of the commercial salmon licences. That is where $7 million

of it goes. That is money well spent. No question about that, except then when

we subtract that, that is not going to do anything. That is not doing one thing

for the fishery, Mr. Speaker. That results in a downturn in the fishery. That

means there are less new dollars being created. Over $7 million has been taken

from that budget and given to the fishermen throughout the Province. The fact of

the matter is it deprives them, though, of the opportunity to fish and turn new

dollars in. So the minister put it in his budget, and we welcome it.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Are you against it.

MR. WINSOR: No, the Member for Eagle River knows that I

am not against it, Mr. Speaker. How can anyone be against conservation?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Eagle River wants

to know if I was against the buy out of the commercial salmon fishery licences.

I regret that it happened. I regret very much because a large number of people

who live in my district have had a considerable part of their income from the

commercial salmon fishery. I also recognize, and so do they, that it had become

necessary, that dwindling stocks dictated that we do something.

Mr. Speaker, the area that we had to focus on first was the

commercial salmon fishery. That is not the only source of problem in that

industry, we have some problems in the rivers as well. We have big problems that

we have to address. Here is an opportunity in salmon enhancement and protection

that this administration could do something in. If you want to do some

meaningful work, I don't think the federal Department of Fisheries will stop you

from doing some work in the salmon rivers to prevent stream erosion, from

cleaning up some of the bark and the car wrecks, and the tons and tons of debris

that is in the salmon rivers of the Province. I don't think the federal

Department of Fisheries would stop the provincial minister if he said: I will

take some money now and we will see if we can create a healthy environment for

salmon to reproduce. I don't think that the federal minister would prevent them.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Do I support what?

AN HON. MEMBER: Community quotas.

MR. WINSOR: Community quotas on what?

AN HON. MEMBER: Salmon.

MR. WINSOR: On salmon? There is no such thing on the

island as community quotas on salmon.

The member keeps twisting around from one place to the other.

Now he wants to talk about community quotas for ground fish, Mr. Speaker. He can

talk about community quotas as much as he wants to if there is neither fish

there you can give them a million pounds for each community, and there is

neither fish out there. It doesn't matter a row of beans if you are going to

talk community quotas.

AN HON. MEMBER: There are lots of fish out there.

MR. WINSOR: There are lots of fish out there? Well I wish

you would tell the Minister of Fisheries where the fish are because I am sure

the Minister of Fisheries would like to know. He would be delighted if his

colleague for Eagle River is right in saying that there are millions of fish out

there. I am sure he would be delighted.

MR. DUMARESQUE: There are more fish in the water than

cod.

MR. WINSOR: There are more fish in the water than cod. We

know that too. We are well aware of it. My friend from Baie Verte - White Bay

will tell you that up until a few years ago you could catch turbot just about

off the wharf.

AN HON. MEMBER: Where?

MR. WINSOR: All across the northeast coast, Mr. Speaker.

Just go out in the deep water anywhere at all and there was any amount of

turbot, 10, 12, 15 miles off the shore. Now, Mr. Speaker, boats are going 180

miles to fish in 600 and 700 fathoms of water.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: Whose fault was that? Probably the Minister

of Finance. He taxed everything else to death. His taxes have been so

restrictive they even prevented fish from swimming in. He has driven everyone

else out, and he has driven fish out of this Province too. The Minister of

Finance. He wanted to know. The Minister of Finance. A good one to talk about

fish, Mr. Speaker. Whose fault was that? I suppose you are going to blame that

now on Ottawa too. Ottawa caught all the turbot too did they?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: What was that? What did he say then?

AN HON. MEMBER: He don't know what he said.

AN HON. MEMBER: He muttered.

MR. WINSOR: He muttered some kind of remark. But, Mr.

Speaker, the Member for Eagle River is right that there are other species of

fish out in the water. There is turbot, Mr. Speaker. There is also what we call

flounder, and their numbers are becoming increasingly scarce. For two years we

had a very successful fishery in what we call the black back, a small flat fish

as we called them. We always called them flat fish at home, twelve inches and

under, and it was a lucrative fishery until we fished it too hard and the

inevitable happened. We cannot even get enough for lobster bait now. We have to

go all around the northeast coast from Valleyfield to Fogo trying to get enough

bait to bait a few lobster traps with flatties, as we referred to them, because

we had caught all of the fish in the years before.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINSOR: My colleague from Grand Bank wondered if we

could use night worms. We might have to resort to that too, Mr. Speaker, in

order to sustain the fishery.

The other areas that we have had, we had a successful caplin

fishery. It was not successful last year, and the indications are that the

biomass is not very big again this year. We could have trouble there.

We had a good herring fishery. That has all but disappeared

too, for a number of reasons. Apparently we could have a good area in sea

urchins, except in my area they happen to spawn in March and we cannot get a

boat out in the water. We cannot get down through the ice in March, so we cannot

harvest that. We have a few (inaudible) that we could catch. I suppose we could

catch a few of these, but that is pretty limited, too.

Mr. Speaker, with these few remarks on the fishery I will

conclude and pick it up later on, since I am at leave of the House.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Member for Eagle River is giving great speeches today

from his seat, as usual. He does not get up. The Government House Leader has him

tied to the chair. They are not allowed to speak.

AN HON. MEMBER: When he does get up, he does not say

anything anyhow.

MR. MATTHEWS: No. He rants and he roars, very partisan,

turns white in the face. When he got up yesterday I said: Well here goes the old

spite cat again, because when we were boys growing up and a fellow got a good

kick in the shins and he got mad, you commonly referred to him as 'spite cat'.

That is like the hon. member. His colour drains and he gets white - really,

really white.

I want to carry on with what my colleague was talking about,

the fishery, our most important resource - outside of our young people, I say to

the Member for Eagle River.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Pardon?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: I cannot hear the member. Perhaps he will

get up after I finish and give some ideas about our resource industries, and

maybe ask some questions of what we think of this. Then when we get up again we

can react to him; but it is kind of hard to listen to him because there is too

much - they are having a mini caucus meeting over in the rowdy corner.

I want to talk about the fishery, to follow on what my

colleague was talking about when he talked about the varied species of fish that

are out and about our oceans, and the trouble most of them are in. The Member

for Eagle River is right, there is more in the ocean than cod, but a lot of the

other species as well are in serious trouble. I was saying it across the House

to the Member for Fortune - Hermitage that last year, in part of my district,

from Point May down to Lord's Cove particularly, we had a very good lump roe

fishery, a very lucrative lump roe fishery. As a matter of fact, if it was not

for that fishery last year, the inshore fishermen in that area would have been

in real trouble. This year even that fishery is not going very well. I

understand from the Member for Fortune - Hermitage that it seems to be going

better in his area of the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Half decent. Well, if a fisherman tells you

that they are doing half decent, they are not having a bad year.

AN HON. MEMBER: How would (inaudible)?

MR. MATTHEWS: How would I change the lump roe fishery?

AN HON. MEMBER: No. How would you change the whole

fishery?

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, God. How would I change the whole

fishery? Now that is a big question. That is a big question. How would you

change the whole fishery? What a question. That is something like you would ask

in junior Red Cross: Teacher, how would you change the world? Something like the

hon. member asked: How would you change the whole fishery?

I want to go back to what my colleague was saying about the

salmon, our salmon resources, and to talk about the buy out program. I want to

say again to the Member for Eagle River, he knows anyway but he tries to be

naive and play ignorant about this stuff, that the greatest proponents, the

strongest proponents of the commercial salmon buy out program was the Premier

and the Minister of Development, I say to the Member for Eagle River, in case he

does not know. This program, even though most of the money is from the federal

government, the Province I think is putting in $7.6 million, the strongest

supporters, the people who really pushed this, were the Minister of Development

and Tourism and the Premier. The Minister of Fisheries was not as strong on it I

might say.

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible) John Crosbie

MR. MATTHEWS: See, the Member for Eagle River does not

like to hear the truth. He does not want to deal with the truth, that the

Premier of this Province and the Minister of Development and Tourism pushed and

pushed to get the commercial salmon buy out program in place, I say to the

Member for Eagle River. The Minister of Fisheries was not all that strong about

it. In fact I am told he had some problems with it. He had to be forced to go to

the press conference, I am told. They almost had to push him into the press

conference. He did not want to have anything to do with it. But as Minister of

Fisheries what choice did he have? If he did not go to the press conference he

would have had to pack his things and leave the office of Minister of Fisheries.

He did not want to go along with it so the Member for Eagle River must

understand that. He should understand that the government, of which he is a

member, was the strongest proponent of that buy out. You have not put much money

into anything since you have been the government but you put $7.6 million into

this program and that should tell you something about the priority your

government has attached to it.

MR. DUMARESQUE: I am not a member of government.

MR. MATTHEWS: You are not a member of the government? You

are a member of the caucus.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. MATTHEWS: I am glad. Now, if I could get half a dozen

over there to leave at least I might hear myself I say to the Chairman.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) there are two gone already.

MR. MATTHEWS: Two gone already I say to the member but

there is no one else leaving I say to him. Speaking over his sources there is no

one else leaving I say to the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. I have very

good eyesight but I cannot read what the Minister of Development has from that

far away. If he wants me to read it he can pass it over.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. MATTHEWS: What is that? No, I cannot read that. If I

could read it I probably would not.

I want to go on and talk about a few other things in the

fishery, Mr. Speaker. Most of our stocks are in trouble and in my own district

of Grand Bank the deep sea plant was closed down by Fishery Products

International with the concurrence of the provincial government who put out a

statement concurring with it, agreeing with it. Then we happened to attract the

Clearwater Group of Companies to go into scallop and surf clam. We went into

that. I know all about that I say to the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture.

What he is shouting across the House now is no new news.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, 20 per cent, and 53 per cent undecided

I say to the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. It must be cold comfort to

the minister, too, to know that 53 per cent of 400 people do not feel very happy

with the government, Mr. Chairman. He is not too happy with that, Mr. Chairman,

that 33 per cent of decided voters would support the government.

We will see. Like I told you yesterday watch the couple of

by-elections, come back, and we will match our fortunes with yours.

DR. KITCHEN: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: No, I do not smile about that stuff I say

to the Minister of Finance. I have been through all this before. I can

understand why, because he is like a new commodity, Mr. Chairman. Speaking of

resources he is like a new commodity that the people of the Province do not see

often enough. The novelty is not wore off because he spends most of his time in

Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver. He is still new. He is never here long enough

for the people to get used to him.

AN HON. MEMBER: He is an old timer.

MR. MATTHEWS: He's doing well. Five or six months, he is

doing well, he will do much better, I say to the Member for Harbour Grace. He

will do well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Now. Mr. Speaker, how ironic that the

Member for Harbour Grace is talking about old commodities. Can you imagine the

Member for Harbour Grace talking about old commodities?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: No, I know you're not. You have other

problems, there are other problems. I still have my own teeth, I say to the

Member for Harbour Grace.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) should be leader.

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, I certainly should. I certainly should.

Speaking of resources. I say to the Member for Harbour Grace, he probably feels

very comfortable today.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes.

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes. Well, we will wait and see. You might

run again yet.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) I will.

MR. MATTHEWS: You may run again yet. Now whether you will

be back is the big question.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh my God. If I could only tell it all. You

cannot tell everything in this House, Mr. Speaker. If you could only tell it

all. We are going to have to beat them off with sticks out there, I say to the

member. Beat them off with sticks.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. MATTHEWS: Pardon? Never you mind. They are already

lining up to take out the Member for Harbour Grace.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

this opportunity to have a little discussion with the Minister of Development.

Since a week ago in Estimates Committee we discovered there were -

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: Yes, but it is too bad the minister did not

give us the information he promised us a week ago. Maybe the minister would like

to indicate -

MR. FUREY: If I'd given it to you, you would have nothing

to talk about.

MR. WINDSOR: Well, we would like to talk about that. We

have waited for a week, we still do not have any answers, Mr. Speaker.

MR. FUREY: Okay, I'll tell you what - lecture me.

MR. WINDSOR: Lecture you. I will lecture the minister.

The minister deserves to be lectured. He promised in the Estimates Committee a

week ago that we would have it in a few days, certainly by the end of the week.

This is Tuesday, a week later, no sign yet of any information from the minister.

How long does it take to get that type of information?

MR. FUREY: As soon as I get it you will get it.

MR. WINDSOR: How long does the minister take? There are

enough computers funded, Mr. Speaker, in this list that he could have turned out

that information a thousand times over with any one of the computers that are

financed here.

Maybe that is an interesting one to start off with. The

minister was on the radio the other morning, debating with me on CBC radio, that

this was: well, this is loans, that is all it is, straightforward, conventional

loans. One of the first ones we see is a $250,000 equity injection into a

computer company. Two hundred and fifty thousand dollars equity into a computer

company.

MR. FUREY: Are you against that?

MR. WINDSOR: I would like to know why the minister feels

that is justified. How does the minister justify it? I would like to know what

it is for, alright? If the minister had given us the information we would have a

better basis on which to debate the issue. The minister has not yet given us the

information.

That is $250,000 equity, okay? Debt retirement and working

capital. That is what it says. That is hardly a conventional loan. The minister

cannot say that getting a $250,000 equity injection - which means on that

$250,000, that company is not repaying any of the principle. They are only

paying perhaps dividends or interest, one or the other, on it. If it was a

conventional loan and they were paying principle and interest back at

conventional rates, well that's one thing. You can have some sympathy for that.

As I have already said, as I said to the minister in Estimate Committees, and I

have said in this House, and I have said on the public airwaves, that I have

some sympathy for the government providing assistance to a company to try to

save a company from going into bankruptcy, to protect jobs. I have some sympathy

for that. Provided it does not give that company unfair advantage over other

companies.

But an equity injection of $250,000 into a computer company

is clearly a competitive situation. Unless this is some special research and

development project, something aimed at high technology, technology transfer,

something aimed at putting some technology into the fishing or forestry

industry. If this is a special project, why is it not a special fund? Why is it

not a grant to that company? Why is it equity injection? On the surface of it,

Mr. Speaker, and in the absence of detailed information from the minister, I see

no reason why this government should own part of a computer company.

AN HON. MEMBER: Do you think we want to own a computer

company?

MR. WINDSOR: I know you do not want to own a computer

company. Then why are you part owner of a computer company when there are dozens

of other computer companies out there competing with their own money? Why are

you putting in $250,000 to help this company compete with others?

I could look back a little farther. One that I just saw, just

in the last two or three moments, in fact, as I looked a little more carefully

here at some of the ones that are here. It is Newlab Engineering Limited. Now

that is an interesting one, Mr. Speaker, Newlab Engineering Limited of Clarke's

Beach; now that name rings a little bell and that is used to purchase

computer-aided drafting system. A good piece of technology, almost every

engineering company in the Province now has one, so why are we giving this

company $31,000 to purchase that? It is a term loan, but why can they not get a

loan from the bank or somewhere else the same as any other engineering company,

why can they not?

MR. FUREY: I will give you three guesses.

MR. WINDSOR: Pardon?

MR. FUREY: I will give you three guesses.

MR. WINDSOR: Give me three. Give me an answer will be

better.

MR. FUREY: Have you been to the banks lately?

MR. WINDSOR: Pardon?

MR. FUREY: Have you been to the banks lately?

MR. WINDSOR: Yes, I have been to the banks lately, and so

have other engineering companies, but why are we assisting one engineering

company against the other, and yes, this is a term loan. I do not know the

interest rates, the minister I hope, will give us that information but are these

favourable interest rates or are these at the same rates as the bank? Is this

prime minus 3 per cent, because if it is, they cannot get it at the bank -

AN HON. MEMBER: What are you talking about?

MR. WINDSOR: We are talking about Newlab Engineering

Limited, is it term loan?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: It is a term loan, but what are the terms

and conditions of that loan?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: It is a small enterprise loan, no?

AN HON. MEMBER: It won't be a small enterprise loan

(inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: Small enterprise loans are at 5 per cent ?

MR. FUREY: Three points below prime.

MR. WINDSOR: But some of them are at five?

MR. FUREY: Well, depending on what the prime is.

MR. WINDSOR: Some of your other loans are at prime less

three.

MR. FUREY: A regular term loan, that particular one. I

think it is at 12 per cent, I am not sure of it, I will check.

MR. WINDSOR: Okay, but is that more favourable than what

that company could get at the bank or any other company could get at the bank?

MR. FUREY: I do not think so.

MR. WINDSOR: I think it is, I think we will find it is.

If the minister will in due course, I do not know when, maybe he will tell us

now. When will we get that information? I mean, how long does it take, Mr.

Speaker, you have the list of projects, how long does it take to write out a

(inaudible), to pull it out of the files, to haul it out of the computer? I

cannot believe it would take anymore than one day for one individual to do it,

so what are they trying to do, Mr. Speaker? What are we doing with the

information?

MR. FUREY: (Inaudible), the information and I will tell

you when I get it.

MR. WINDSOR: When will we get it?

MR. FUREY: When I get it, you get it.

MR. WINDSOR: When will we get it?

MR. FUREY: Who knows? Maybe it is on my desk this

afternoon, I have asked for it.

MR. WINDSOR: I am surprised the minister does not know

when he is going to get it.

MR. FUREY: My God, I mean when we asked for information

when you guys were over here, we could not get it.

MR. WINDSOR: Ah, you got lots of information. Can the

minister tell me this, Mr. Speaker? Newfoundland Armature Works Limited,

$300,000 of equity of Newfoundland Armature Works Limited, to stabilize the firm

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: Attempted to stabilize it. How much did we

lose on Newfoundland Armature Works Ltd? On Generator Exchange, which again,

competing with many other businesses, $74,000 equity. I believe that they have

gone bankrupt since then and have actually been liquidated. Generator Exchange,

I believe, Mr. Speaker, is in receivership. If I am wrong I apologise to the

company, but I believe I am right. How many more companies in here have gone

into receivership, I ask the minister, since money was funded to them in 1991?

MR. FUREY: We do not pretend that they are all winners.

We (inaudible).

MR. WINDSOR: No, they are not all winners, but when you

look at two like that, that there were equity injections, how much has the

minister lost, how much has government lost in the last year? $300,000 is one of

the biggest ones that went into Generator Exchange, not Generator Exchange, into

the other one, Newfoundland Armature Works Ltd. in October of 1991, October of

1991 - when did Newfoundland Armature Works Ltd. go into receivership? Three

months later? $300,000 has been lost in three months on Newfoundland Armature

Works Ltd.? I have to ask, Mr. Speaker, how well was that project assessed by

Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador? $300,000 equity injection and they have

gone into receivership in three months.

Are you telling me that the people up there are not qualified

enough to assess the financial situation of that company, and know that they

were going to be in receivership in three months time, even though we put

$300,000 equity into it? I would like the minister to explain that. I know they

are not all going to go. You are into a risk business here. The success ratio is

relatively good for all of these. I am not questioning that. When you look at

some of the conventional ones that are there, the small enterprise loans and

things of that nature, you know you are not going to get them all back. If you

were going to get them all back, government would not need to be in the

business. Banks would be crawling over themselves to give it to you, but banks

only give it to you if you do not need it. So I know where the minister is

coming from when he says: Have you tried it lately?

The banks are another story.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. WINDSOR: I will have another opportunity; but I want

to have a crack at the banks the next time I get on my feet, on another issue,

and how they are gouging people.

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

MR. FUREY: I will sit down if you want to attack the

banks for awhile.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: If you would like to attack the conventional

banks, and lay off our bank -

The hon. member, I think, raises some good points concerning

Enterprise Newfoundland. I just thank God that at the Estimates the other night

I tabled the list so that the opposition would have something to talk about,

because they really did not seem to have that much to talk about, and that

generated a little bit of excitement.

I will repeat again that one of the things we did at

Enterprise Newfoundland and Labrador, we want to be open, honest, and frank with

the people of the Province who put up this capital that we use in an independent

board, and that independent board makes its assessment based upon the

specialists and the experts advice. I think they are doing a reasonable job

under very difficult circumstances, because as my hon. friend said, and is about

to say when he rises again, money is tight out there. Banks are tough. We see

what is happening in the Province with the fishery and these other matters, and

that reflects on the decisions that some of these banks make.

I was interested in seeing, from my quick bit of research,

when the hon. member was the Minister of Development, and a member of the

Cabinet, the decision was made for NLDC to shift from resource based industries

to service based industries. It was a good and proper decision to make, and

perhaps it should have been made earlier. So he would agree that we are on the

right track, trying to help companies. I think that he would agree with the

premise that we are trying to be open and we are trying to make this money,

which is owned by all the people, available to all businesses.

Now there is a little code that we put on the end of the loan

list that my hon. friend saw. It says: Either to establish a business, to expand

a business, to modernize a business, for a straight buy out, or to stabilize a

business. Those are the principles upon which we operate, to pass out this money

in the form of loans.

He is quite right when he says the closest we come in terms

of grants is by way of equity. That is the closest we come to giving grants, but

we take the position that if we come in with equity, at the first reasonable

opportunity we try to back out of that and move our money back out of the

company and let it move back 100 per cent.

My hon. friend can point to some failures. There is no

question about that. This is high risk capital. Nobody is pretending that every

single company that comes through the doors of Enterprise Newfoundland is going

to be successful. All we can do is examine the company's record, its financial

statements, its other sources of capital, whether it be ACOA, private lending

institutions, these kinds of things - whether it is the private banks, ACOA, or

these other institutions. Now what Enterprise does then is they will assess each

company on its own merit. The company will apply for a particular type of loan.

In the regions we have given authority for the first time to approve these loans

under $100,000, right in the regions.

Now my hon. friend points to some failures. He calls them

failures. We call them attempts to stabilise businesses. Whether it is Armature

Works from St. John's - who could be against looking at their balance sheet as

an old historic Newfoundland company, as I understand. The Member for St. John's

Centre could probably correct me. Armature Works is an old, historic company,

been around a long time. I do not know if they are in direct competition with

too many people. So we tried our best to help them out.

But one of the issues my hon. friend raised in Estimates the

other night was the so-called chicken and ribs story. I was intrigued by that

one myself, so I asked about it right away.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: So I asked about that myself. My hon. friend

will be happy to know that there was market research done in the Gander area. It

was analyzed by the experts. They recognised that there was room for an extra

franchise. This particular person put his own family capital on the table. They

came into it with $100,000 of their own private investment. We matched it.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: Pardon?

MR. WINDSOR: So what?

MR. FUREY: That's not bad, that's pretty good. To share

half the risk.

MR. WINDSOR: (Inaudible) would you give me $100,000

(Inaudible)?

MR. FUREY: I could talk about a lot of companies that

went through NLDC that did not -

MR. WINDSOR: Not to put chicken and rib franchises up

(inaudible).

MR. FUREY: - put up very much.

MR. WINDSOR: Not to compete with others! Not to take

business away from other businesses, and that is all it does.

MR. FUREY: But I will not get involved in that.

MR. WINDSOR: What? (Inaudible) yes, you will!

MR. FUREY: A hundred thousand dollars, Mr. Speaker, at

12.25 per cent interest. They projected nine full-time jobs and three permanent

part-time jobs. In fact, what happened is they created -

MR. WINDSOR: How many were lost in McDonalds, Kentucky

Fried and Mary Brown?

MR. FUREY: In fact, Mr. Speaker, they created six

permanent jobs, nine part-time jobs. They are on a sixty-month repayment at

12.25 per cent. Their loan is up to date, and our experts in the field tell us

there has been no displacement of jobs.

MR. WINDSOR: Nonsense!

MR. FUREY: I'll sit down if you can tell me that's

nonsense. Prove it.

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

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker, will the minister tell me how

you can sell all of that fast food in Gander and not take the market away from

others? That is the principle we are talking about here. People don't eat more

just because there is a chicken and rib franchise! You have added nothing to the

economy. There are no more chicken and ribs sold because you add another

franchise and put $100,000 of taxpayers' money into it. That means there is less

Kentucky Fried Chicken, less Mary Brown's, less pizza, less something else. So

there are jobs lost. What nonsense!

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) that's not how the business

works!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. WINDSOR: Mr. Speaker -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

MR. WINDSOR: The hon. gentleman over there doesn't know

how the business works either, Mr. Speaker, or he wouldn't be here!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

AN HON. MEMBER: He's retired in here, you ought to retire

outside.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Development.

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Member for Mount

Pearl presumes that all of Gander are on some kind of collective diet. The

reality is - let me say something to the hon. member. A proper business plan was

done by this company. A proper market survey was done by this company.

MR. WINDSOR: Therefore it should be financed by the

banks, not by (inaudible)!

MR. FUREY: The best expert advice - well, see, you can't

win. You concoct a double-edge sword. Either they are not eating enough chicken

and ribs, and if they are we shouldn't be giving it to them. So you concoct a

double-edge sword. Just imagine, Mr. Speaker, if a proper market study had been

done on Sprung. Just imagine if a proper market analysis -

MR. WINDSOR: It was done, and analyzed by the same people

(inaudible).

MR. FUREY: - had been done. Just imagine, Mr. Speaker,

had it been analyzed properly, how much money we would - the hon. member says it

was done. Tell us, what did the market survey say? What was your analysis? And

what did the experts tell you, as a Cabinet minister, on this issue?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: Well, what did they say? Did they say: do it?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. FUREY: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, that is the chicken and

ribs story that my hon. friend keeps referring to. He is going to love this one.

There was a worm factory, just imagine.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: No no, this was in Burnside. Now, Mr. Speaker,

this fellow Crocker moved back from away. He saw, as did ACOA, that if ACOA put

up $27,000 and Enterprise put up $10,000 -

AN HON. MEMBER: Put all the people of St. Jude's out of

business!

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: - they would provide, Mr. Speaker -

- displace imports. Now, my hon. friend from Mount Pearl

always talks about displacing imports. Just imagine, in this Province, importing

worms. How ridiculous!

So he provides thirty-eight outlets in the Bonavista area.

Now ,it is a small, family business, and we only kicked in a very small loan of

$10,000 - well worth doing.

Let me try this one on you. The fellow from Cormack who came

to us and said, 'We would like a very small loan to create a business to shave

hooves of cattle.'

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) question that one.

MR. FUREY: Would you like to question that one?

AN HON. MEMBER: No. Tell us about the ones (inaudible),

not about the ones we don't (inaudible).

MR. FUREY: Oh, you do not want to hear about them?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: An excellent project.

Then we have a Christmas tree firm with another group out in

Garden Cove, a small loan to displace the importation of Christmas trees.

AN HON. MEMBER: We should be exporting Christmas trees.

MR. FUREY: Absolutely. We should be.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time has elapsed.

MR. FUREY: By leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. FUREY: Gulf Seafoods at Port aux Basques, we helped

them out a little bit. I didn't hear too many complaints coming from out there,

and it was a term loan.

By the way, the fellow from Cormack who was, I guess you

would call it hoof trimming, so that the nails don't go into the animal's feet.

They cripple the animals enough, they go to the slaughter house. By the way, my

friend from Humber Valley, the member will confirm this, that we used to import

somebody to do that every year. Now, the fellow from Cormack does the whole West

Coast.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is not only the West Coast. He does

the whole Island.

MR. FUREY: He does the whole Island. And that was a small

loan to get him up and running and get started.

Diamond Industries in Flower's Cove; Steelcore out in

Buchans, they just landed another million dollar contract, but we kickstarted

that and helped them get under way.

Valley Char, Deer Lake. You know about that business, a good

little business. I think we helped the little fellow on the highway with the

museum at the beginning of the Viking Trail - Tucker. Yes, we helped them get

rolling too, and that is a fantastic little museum. It is a tourist stop-off

point.

Deer Lake Woodworks, a good one. I have one in Port au Choix,

right in my own district. We helped a small business there. It was a small

bakery, and it has expanded now. They are doing a terrific job. A little

restaurant we helped in Gunners Cove, on the Northern Peninsula, Mrs. Smith.

High Point Peat in Bishop's Falls, we helped that little company stabilize.

We helped an egg producers co-op get an important piece of

computer equipment for egg production, believe it or not, and it has helped him

in the grading. We put $65,000 into an egg grading machine.

Members on all sides can giggle and laugh at these projects,

but I tell you, they are important. They are small projects, but they are really

important out there.

The little scallop operation in Trinity Bay that we helped,

Highland Homes, Sunset Lodge, we helped out for this. Wabana Inn on Bell Island.

Now, if there is ever an area we should help, it is Bell Island.

We talk about being isolated on this Island portion of our

Province. Just imagine how people on Bell Island feel ever since they lost their

mine?

We put $5,000 into a mural project on Bell Island, which ACOA

came in with their grant, and I tell you, it is just fantastic. I commend it to

people from all sides of the House to go to Bell Island to see that. Another

thing we did, a local person bought the convent over there, the old convent

house. We helped provide the seed money to help transform that into a bed and

breakfast. They call it the Wabana Inn Bed and Breakfast - fantastic, phenomenal

- on Bell Island. These are good little projects, right from the ground up.

Hal Barrett's Harbour Pond Development in Brigus, my

predecessor, has a terrific little business out there. Enterprise has helped

him.

AN HON. MEMBER: What is he doing?

MR. FUREY: He is doing a bed and breakfast. Has my

colleague been out to it? It is very good. He is doing a terrific job, the

former Minister of Tourism. I talked to him the other day - delighted to help

him get the thing going and moving. He is expanding a little bit now. He is hung

up on ACOA.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: He is hung up. Everything he told me the other

day jived. Everything was fine.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: Would be glad to do it.

A small dressmaker in Labrador West; a tour bus operator in

Labrador West. L'Anse-au-Clair - we helped a little garage in L'Anse-au-Clair

stabilize. They were hurting and couldn't get the funding. We put some money in

it to stabilize them. A millwright shop in Bonavista, a trucking outfit, a boat

building outfit, a party supplies store in Clarenville. We helped them out.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: Yes, but we are not embarrassed by small

enterprise you see. We recognize that we shouldn't be embarrassed by little

business people out there trying their best in a difficult economy to create

jobs one by one - not a hundred by a hundred at $24 million per pop for six

months - one by one, and we think that is the right philosophy, Mr. Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) to everybody.

MR. FUREY: It is open to everybody.

AN HON. MEMBER: It is not.

MR. FUREY: Who is it closed to?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FUREY: Every single person has an opportunity to come

in through our doors. Now, there are going to be some off-the-wall projects,

make no mistake about it, and the hon. member would be familiar with that. But,

you know, we have to deal in reality. We have to deal with them one by one, each

one by each one.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. FUREY: I wasn't finished, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member was speaking on leave of the

House, right?

MR. FUREY: May I finish? I will only be a minute or so.

MR. WINDSOR: You were going to tell us something about

the projects we are interested in.

MR. FUREY: I was going to get to that.

MR. WINDSOR: You were going to get that. When I am

finished you can tell me more about it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. WINDSOR: All the Minister has done, Mr. Speaker, is

stand up -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! The Chair has not recognized

the hon. member.

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl.

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, all the minister tried to do is deflect

attention away from the projects that are a problem for him here by talking

about the many good projects that are here. We are not questioning those

projects. There are many very, very good projects there, and that is the purpose

of the program. That is the purpose of the funding. and the objective is to

create employment in resource-based industries to help those businesses that

need help, but not at the expense of others. That is all we are trying to get at

here.

We welcome their bed and breakfasts, and their worm

factories. You know, that is an innovative little idea. There are 1,000 little

ideas like worm factories in this Province if we could get out there and

encourage Newfoundlanders to take a bit of a risk. Newfoundlanders are sometimes

reticent to take a chance, but they need a little bit of support and they need a

little bit of encouragement and they need a little bit of financial assistance,

Mr. Speaker, to do those sorts of things.

I don't have a problem in the world with those sorts of

things. I have a real problem with some of these other ones that are here that

the minister avoids. Why are we funding somebody to upgrade an asphalt plant?

Will the minister tell me how he is going to convince us that by financing one

construction company to upgrade their facilities to the detriment of other

construction companies that they are going to bid on? I assume they are going to

have to bid on contracts unless they are going to be (inaudible) without public

tenders. I hope the minister is not proposing to start that.

How does he justify? There are two paving contractors here,

and several other construction companies, electrical companies, plumbing

contractors, that have received funding. That doesn't add anything to the

economy that another plumbing contractor or another electrical contractor, or

another paving contractor wouldn't have done. If there are ten miles of road to

be paved, it doesn't matter to this Province which paving contractor paves it as

long as it's a Newfoundland contractor. If he were the only Newfoundland

contractor, I wouldn't have an argument. If we were funding him to make it more

competitive with a contractor coming in from out-of-Province,I wouldn't have a

problem with it. If he were saying, we are giving him local preference, which

this government seems to have done away with, I wouldn't have a problem with it.

But when I see one paving contractor being given money to upgrade his facilities

so that he can bid against other paving contractors unfairly. Now, the minister

is going to be standing there a long time before he can justify that to me.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).