Volume XLI Wednesday Province of Newfoundland FORTY- FIRST GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF NEWFOUNDLAND First Session VERBATIM REPORT {Hansard} Speaker: Honourable Thomas Lush [Preliminary Transcript] Number 48 6 December 1989

The House met at 2:00 p.m. MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please! Oral Questions MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank. MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Fisheries. I would like to ask the Minister, can he confirm reports that both National Sea and Fishery Products International have advised the Provincial Government of plant closures within the Province, and that we are going to see a minimum of four plants closed, one from National Sea and three from Fishery Products International? MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W.

CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I can tell the hon. Member and the House that no such advice has been yet given to the Provincial Government. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Member for Grand Bank. MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would just like to say to the Minister that word is out, and I think it is time for this Minister of Fisheries and this Government to come clean with the people in the communities around our shores. My supplementary to the Ll December 6, 1989 Vol XLI Minister of Fisheries then is, can he assure the people of Burgee, Ramea, Gaultois, Harbour Breton, Grand Bank, Fortune, Trepassey and St.

John's that their future is secure in the deep-sea fishery? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. Member knows, of course, we cannot make that assurance. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank. MR. MATTHEWS : Mr. Speaker, the Minister is playing a game with the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, as he has done for the last four to five weeks in this House. He is on record, and the Premier is on record, as saying there is going to be a minimum of 6, 000 people displaced from the fishery.

Everyone in Newfoundland and Labrador is hearing signals coming from particularly the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries, that there will be plant closures. Eventually, probably before another week is out, the people in communities where fish plants are going to be closed will be aware that this Minister has been sitting on this information now for a significant period of time.

So, once again I would ask the Minister of Fisheries will he set aside the fears in three or four communities of this Province, particularly three on the south coast of the Province and one right here in this very city, the employees of NatSea, and will he not come clean with the people and tell the people through this House exactly the plants that are up for . closure in agreement with, of course, and supported by this No. 48 Rl

Provincial Government, three plants on the south coast and one in st : John's? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, if telling the truth is a crime, I guess I am guilty. But we have not been advised by either company what, if any, plants will be closed. He attributes to us statements about a 6,000 person layoff. We said maybe and probably around that. We are talking probably two or three thousand man-years of employment, maybe, but certainly, Mr. Speaker, there is no definite information yet from either Company as to what their plans are.

I cannot be any more specific, and the han. Member will have to believe me. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Grand Bank. MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, a final supplementary to the Minister of Fisheries. Will he please stand in his place and tell us when the people in these south coast communities I referred to, in the community of Trepassey, and those right here who are employed at National Sea Products on the Southside of this City, can expect to hear the news? When? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, we expect that very shortly that information will be made available . Now I hope the L2 December 6. 1989 Vol XLI han. Member will understand that I am not in the habit of lying to this House. When I say we have not been advised, I would expect him to either accept that or provide proof that I am lying. MR. SPEAKER: The han . the Member for Grand Bank. MR. MATTHEWS: I can name the plants for you, if you want, that you . know about now. I can name them, if you want. MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Member for St. John's East Extern. MR . PARSONS: Mr.

Speaker, my question, too, is to the Minister of Fisheries. From the information I have received a deal has been struck by this Government with the Federal Government whereby in excess of 6,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will be forced to give up their livelihood, their historic right, the rights of their families to live in dignity and to be proud of their God-given right. Would the han. the Minister of Fisheries tell this House if there is such an agreement? I ask him to do it. MR . SP EAKER: The han. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: The question is ·hardly worth an answer .

I can tell him now there is no such deal struck. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Member for St. John's No. 48 R2

East Extern. MR. PARSONS: The President of the Fishermen's Union, I am told, said everything is a downside for the future of the fishery. Before this devastation takes place, would the Minister commit this Government to presenting to this bon. House a White Paper, and hold public hearings before the agreement is finalized? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what agreement he is talking about.

We are not involved in any agreement with anybody, and I certainly see no reason why we should present a White Paper or have special hearings to talk about an agreement we know nothing about. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. MR. PARSONS: It is common knowledge that there were meetings being held all last week, up until last night, and there are negotiations. As I have said, the information I have received said a deal is struck.

Is the Minister, then, prepared to make a commitment on behalf of this Government to protect the inshore fishery, which is of paramount importance in respect to the northern cod, as was done by every Provincial Government since 1949, when we joined Confederation? Are you prepared to make that commitment to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Fisheries. L3 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI MR. W. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, the bon. Member talks about meetings. Of course meetings are going on.

The Premier and I met in Montreal on Sunday night with Newfoundland's Federal Cabinet Minister, Mr. Crosbie. We have had numerous meetings, and I suspect we will be having a lot more meetings before this is all over. But I can only repeat what I said a moment ago, we have not been advised of any plant closures. We expect to be in the very near future, but certainly, up to this point, we have not been so advised. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, the bon. the Minister of Fisheries did not answer my question.

My question was, will he give an assurance that this Government will protect the inshore as it pertains to the northern cod stocks, as has been done by every Provincial Government since 1949? That is the question I want him to answer. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: The question is so ridiculous, I am surprised the bon. Member would even consider asking it. Of course we will give that assurance. We stand behind the inshore fishery. We stand behind it completely! Every meeting we have had, Mr.

Speaker, every paper, every memo we have sent to Ottawa, we have given that assurance, and made it known to them that we do support the inshore fishery, and we support the 115,000 ton No. 48 R3

allocation. We are insisting that that allocation remain intact. So what more can we do? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker. MR.. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: Mr.

Speaker, now that the Government has information as to which plants are closing in the Province, now that the Government knows that there are four plants going down in this Province, let me ask the Minister of Municipal Affairs is it the reason the capital works programs for his Department have not been released as of the date committed, because the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries, and probably other Cabinet Ministers, are aware that there are going to be communi ties in this Province that will not survive the drastic cut in their economy that the Premier and the Minister of Fisheries are going to permit and encourage to happen?

MR. . GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR. GULLAGE: I do not know what the Member bases his question on, Mr. Speaker, but capital works for 1990 is being prepared now in the regional offices. Within a couple of weeks, I expect, it will be ready and available for my staff and myself to peruse, and that capital works will be · announced L4 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI shortly, by the end of the year. It has a connection, in the sense that obviously we will be looking at communities and the condition of those communities, but we do that anyway.

I do not know how pertinent the question is. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. ·the Member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Minister has now admitted that the connection has something to do with the condition of the Municipalities involved. Mr. Speaker, he is a Member of cabinet, he made a committment that the capital works program would be brought down by the end of November, it is now December. I asked the Minister, does it have anything to do with the plant closures? That was my question.

Secondly, if it has nothing to do with the plant closures, is the Minister trying to hide behind the closing of the House of Assembly before he brings down the report? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR.. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, when I made the comment that we look at the condition of communities, obviously one of the factors we consider is the financial viability of the community, their ability to operate their financial capability, their revenue and expenses and so on, and that all contributes to a decision on capital works. Other than that, there is no connection. MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. No. 48 R4

•-' MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, will the Minister tell this House if he has had any discussion with the Minister of Fisheries regarding the closing of plants in certain communities in this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR. GULLAGE: No. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker.· MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation.

In view of the fact that the Federal Government and most Provincial Governments across Canada have restricted smoking in Provincial Government Buildings, some with a total ban, and in view of the fact that there is no scientist today who will dispute the link between smoking and lung cancer, does the Minister intend to institute a no smoking policy in Government Buildings and Offices? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. MR. GILBERT: Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for the question, and it is one I certainly agree with.

I understand that Social Policy are right now considering making the recommendation, and we hope to have it in place very shortly. We are quite happy to make this recommendation, as far as I am LS December 6, 1989 Vol XLI concerned. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister for his answer. I would just like to ask if he could give me some idea of how. I understand there is some cost involved in this.

There are some provinces, I should point out to the Minister, which have different types: some provinces absolutely ban smoking in public buildings totally; there are other provinces which have places set aside in public buildings for people, for smoking purposes. Could the Minister tell me what type of ban he is proposing? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. MR. GILBERT: Mr. Speaker, we are not proposing anything, we are considering. When I get all the recommendations that will be made, I would imagine we will then make a ·decision.

When we have all the information tabulated, we will be only too happy to tell the hon. Member how we are going to do it. So, really, we are considering, and I will be only too happy to provide the information once the decision is made. MS VERGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East . MS VERGE: I have a question for the Minister of Social Services. No. 48 RS

I would like to know whether the Minister of Social Services agrees with the proposal of his colleague, the Minister of Justice (Mr. Dicks), that social workers instead of Legal Aid lawyers represent applicants for maintenance and child support in court? MR. SPEAKER: The bon . the Minister of Social Services. MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my position on that is very clear. I have been out of the House of Assembly and out of my position as Minister of Social Services for the last month.

The question was asked of the Minister of Justice the other day, and the topic of social workers working with people seeking maintenance in the courts is one of the things I have on the agenda for discussion with the Minister of Justice. Once I have sat down with the Minister for a full discussion, I will be able to report back to the House. But I am not going to make a statement without being briefed fully and having discussions with my colleague, the Minister of Justice. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East. MS VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a supplementary for the Minister of Social Services. Would the Minister tell the House whether, in his opinion as Minister of Social Services, back in the saddle now, riding bareback, whether the social workers employed by his department L6 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI have enough work to do now, or whether, in his opinion, there is a need to add to the complement of social workers employed by his Department, and, finally, whether there is any other work not presently being addressed or addressed completely which, in his opinion, social services social workers should be assigned to? MR.

SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Social Services. MR. EFFORD: Thank you, Mr . Speaker. I am glad to be back in the saddle in the Department of Social Services. I am not sure what the bon. Member means by 'bareback' . But I am certainly glad to be back in the Office of Minister of Social Services. The hon. the Member for Humber East (Ms Verge) is quite right, that the social workers employed by the Department of Social Services have a very heavy caseload. Th~re is no question about that.

We are presently taking a look at the caseloads of social workers right across the Province, not only social workers, but child abuse workers, financial officers, and all people connected with the fifty-two District Offices across the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. We are presently looking and assessing to see where the workload can be eased off, to see where the need is for more child abuse workers, more social workers and more financial officers. We will be addressing that in the coming year, there is no question about it.

We have a responsibility to ensure that the caseloads are relieved somewhat, and that nobody in the Department of Social Services carries a workload which cannot deliver the No. 48 R6

service that is required of them by the people of the Province. AN HOM. MEMBER: And there will be no cover up, right? MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Opposition House Leader. MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Premier. In view of the fact that yesterday, for example, in debate on Bill No. 40, The Economic Recovery Conunission, I pointed out and argued that there had been many people who have asked for the Government to reinstate The Private Sector Employment Job Creation Program and for this Government to get moving and to create some jobs.

I also said, in view of the fact that the Board of Trade, a respected group of businesses in this Province and in this conununity have asked the Minister of Employment and Labour Relations (Ms Cowan) to introduce that same program, and in view of the fa~t that the Chairman of the Economic Recovery Conunission has conunended publicly the previous Government, the previous Administration for initiating that Private Sector Employment Program which created 2,000 to 3,000 jobs, and in view of the fact that the Minister of Finance (Dr.

Kitchen), just a couple of days ago, admit ted that our economy is falling down around our ears and that our unemployment rate has, in fact, increased since this Government took office and that jobs desperately need to be created, I would like to ask the Premier is he aware or can he confirm that the Economic Recovery L7 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI Conunission, of which Dr. House is now the Chairman, has that Conunission itself, in fact, now asked the Minister of Employment to reinstate The Private Sector Employment Program? Is he aware of that? MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I have to correct some of the misstatements leading up to the question and then I will answer the. question. Mr. Speaker, we terminated what was called The Private Sector Employment Program which had, in fact, become an Employee Subsidy Program for employers who wanted subsidy for their employees. And there were employees, one in the District of Humber East spoke to me on it, the bon. Member's District, and said 'we did not apply for employee subsidy this year, we are hiring the workers anyway.

We do not think it is right to have employee subsidies.• This is, in fact, what was happening with that program. SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the policy the new Government implemented was a policy of dealing with the fund.amental problem and creating long-term jobs, not patchwork, not treating the symptoms. So we changed the policy of that along with other policies.

Now, I am aware that The Private Sector Employment Program was a program that the Royal Conunission on Employment and Unemployment reconunended be considered, and I have no doubt that they probably had good reasqn for recommending No. 48 R7

it at the time. Unfortunately, the way it was introduced it became an Employee Subsidy Program and simply masked the real unemployment problem and did not deal with the real problem. So, Mr. Speaker, we took a look at all of these problems. It is wrong to say that the Chairman of the Economic Recovery Commission has suggested that this be reinstated. I have no knowledge that he has, but I will certainly enquire and find out. I will make an enquiry and find out, but, Mr. Speaker, our objective is to deal with the problem, not to patch up the symptoms and fake the figures the way the former Government did. MR .

SPEAKER: The hon. Leader. MR. SIMMS: the Opposition House Mr. Speaker, it is unfortunate that the Premier will not take his blinkers off, and that somehow he wants to approach this in a partisan way, and that somehow, because it was introduced by the previous Administration, he has to scrap it so they can bring in their own program. That is what they have in their minds and eveybody in the Province can read it. I have said that the Chairman of the Royal Commission has, in fact, publicly commended the Government for bringing in that initiative. It is in the paper, May 7, 1989. Read it.

The Board of Trade has asked for it. Mr. Speaker, yes, it was a subsidy. Of course it was. The whole idea of the program, to provide an initiative, an incentive for businesses to hire people. My question to the Premier, then, is this: Can he not, for once, acknowledge that L8 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI the program was successful? Otherwise, why would all - these businesses, and why would the Royal Commission Chairman have commended us on the program? In fact, it did create jobs, the idea being that if we gave an incentive of a subsidy you would create some jobs for awhile.

But the fact of the matter is, fully a third of those jobs were full-time in end and the employers did, in fact, hire people permanently, such as the one he described from Humber East, probably. I do not know if they were involved in the program at the beginning. I am asking the Premier if he will not take his blinkers of and have a good hard look at it? Most importantly, I want to know if the Economic Recovery Commission, themselves, have, in fact, asked the Minister of Employment to reinstate the program. That is how important they find it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: If I may correct some misstatements again. Dr. House did not · commend the former Government for doing it. The comment in the paper was his response to comments that the Report of the Royal Commission had been put on the shelf and had not been acted upon. In response, he said, a number of things had been acted upon, and he noted that that was one of them that had been acted upon. MR. SIMMS: But it was their recommendation. PREMIER WELLS: That is right. that. That is the matter, not that • No. 48 I understand truth of the there was a R8

commendation for it. Of course businesses support it, because it pays them to incur an expense they would otherwise incur themselves. How can we justify paying Newfoundland Light and Power Company Limited 50 per cent of the cost of forty jobs - how can we justify that? - that they would have to hire anyway? We say the money can be spent for a better purpose and in the end create more jobs. How can we justify paying law firms to hire

article students? How can we justify doing that, when we could spend the money to other good use? How can we justify doing it? Of course, as long as the Government is going to subsidize one business, any business is entitled to take advantage of it. I understand that. If Governments are going to subsidize businesses, then any business can take advantage of it. We think it is the wrong approach. It is also wrong to say that that program caused the creation of full-time employment. There may have been some full-time employment continued, but not because of that job. It would have been there anyway, Mr. Speaker.

All Government did was waste money on that program. They could have put the money to better use elsewhere. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. Leader. the Opposition House MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, it is really, really ludicrous for the Premier to make that kind of a statement. He does not know if those jobs would have been there anyway. How does he know that? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! L9 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI I want to remind the bon. Member that he _cannot debate the Premier's answer. He is up for a question, and the Chair is expecting the bon. the Member to ask a question. All bon.

Members know we are not supposed to debate answers. MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier in view of the comments he just made in response to my question, would he not agree that the articles in the paper of May 7 that he said were not commendations, were in fact commendations? Would he not agree, if he reads them properly, that the former Chairman of the Royal Commission was, in commending the Government? is question number one. fact, That Question number two, would he not agree, as well, that with the letters of commendation for the program that carne forward - PREMIER WELLS: (Inaudible). MR.

SIMMS: I will taole it after Question Period. PREMIER WELLS: I would like to see it if I am going to answer (inaudible). SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMS: Would you ask the Premier to stop interrupting, Mr. Speaker? I am trying to ask my question. Would the Premier not agree, because of the letters and the support for reintroduction of that program by the Board of Trade, by the Chairman of the Royal No. 48 R9

Commission, by individual people who have been involved, by people who were employed under the program, would the Premier not agree that this whole program is worthy of reinstitution? And if they want to cut out some of the things like utilities getting it, that is fine; we do not care if you tighten it up. But the purpose of the program was positive and most people in this Province agree with it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER WELLS: I now have the

article in the paper and the article, as I see it, says: 'In a letter in today' s Telegram, Dr. House outlined some major areas where the former Government took action', and he refers to the implementation of the Newfoundland Stock savings Plan and the Private Sector Employment Program. But what the han. Member did not read was the last paragraph in the article. 'In his letter Dr.

House praised Premier Clyde Wells for accepting the Commission's philosophy regarding the balancing of urban industrial and rural development, adding he is optimistic the new Government will act on more of the Royal Commission's recommendations.' That is what Dr. House said in the article. Now, Mr. Speaker, let me say that if a private sector employment program properly implemented will improve employment opportunities, this Government will implement it gladly. That Private Sector Employment Program amounted to nothing more than some subsidy for the businesses involved.

That is basically what it was, and we disagree with that kind of approach. We want to create LlO December 6, 1989 Vol XLI long-term employment, and if we can find a means of implementing a so-called private sector employment program that will, in fact, serve the ends of creating long-term, stable employment in this Province, Mr. Speaker, we will gladly concede and implement such a program. But we were not prepared to continue with the way it was before. MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Fogo. MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. AN HON. MEMBER: You want another $2 million, do you? MR. WINSOR: Yes, and more than that. The Minister said in response to a question about three weeks ago that the programs for recreation complexes would soon be announced. I even think he want on to say that the Member must be psychic, because he was now ready to announce it. That w~s nearly three weeks ago. Can the Minister now tell this House what his plans are, since he promised last June that new guidelines would soon be announced? MR.

SPEAKER: The han. the Member for Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR. GULLAGE: What I said, Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, in answer to a similar question, was that we were, in No. 48 RlO

fact, reaching a decision as far as the regional recreation facilities were concerned, and that a reco~endation had been brought forward to Government. As soon as that recommendation is accepted or otherwise, I will bring it forward to the House and announce the proposed program. MR. WINSOR: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Member for Fogo. MR. WINSOR: Can the Minister now tell this House if it is true that he refuses to meet with recreation commissions because he has no new information to give them?

And, furthermore, is this not a further indication that the Minister's Department is so big that recreation is not given any priority? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! There are a couple of Members on both sides of the House talking back and forth, and His Honour is finding it difficult to hear the question. I ask han. Members, please, to give the courtesy of silence to the questioner _and to the Minister who is about to answer. The han. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR. GULLAGE: Mr.

Speaker, the direct opposite of that is true; in fact, I am meeting with recreation commissions quite frequently, discussing the fact that they Lll December 6, 1989 Vol XLI should get on with making plans for their facilities and revising plans they had presented to the previous Government. We are, in fact, going to bring in a recommended program, and that program will address the regional concerns, many applications of which we had presented to us in May. At that time, I think, three facilities were being considered for approval. .

I believe, under the new proposed program, if it becomes a reality and if it is accepted by Government, we will see the ability on the part of Government . to deliver more programs than were proposed under the previous Government. MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: One minute, the han. the Member for Kilbride. MR. R. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker . I have one short question for the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. I would ask the han.

Minister if he would explain to this House the Department's policy on the use of Department of Transportation equipment and staff on private property ·and municipal property throughout the Province. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Minister of Works, Services, and Transportation. MR. GILBERT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will take the Member's question No. 48 Rll

and table the answer. MR. SPEAKER: The time ·for Oral elapsed. Questions has Notices of Motion MR. DICKS : Mr . Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MR. DICKS : Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a Bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Human Rights Code, 1988 ." MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a Bill entitled, "An Act To Amend The Urban and Rural Planning Act." (Bill No. 51). Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given MR.

GILBERT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. MR. GILBERT: Mr. Speaker, on Monday, the Member for Port au Port asked me thequestion, what is happening to the Stephenville Airport issue regarding the First Air/Air Canada impasse . over a joint fare • L12 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI arrangement? At the time, gentleman I information. I I told the bon. would get the told him we had been in contact with them, but I told him I would give him further information. I would like, at this time, to table for bon. Members copies of numerous letters. MR.

HODDER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of the order, the hon. the Member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: I have no objection whatsoever to getting any extra information the hon. Minister might have on the Stephenville Airport. The only thing is, Mr. Speaker, I asked the question and the Minister answered the question. He did not say anywhere, because I read the questions on a couple of occasions, that he would be responding to the question. Now, Mr. Speaker, Question Period is Question Period; "I ask a question and the Minister's answers.

Now if he says I will endeavor to get extra information, then that is fine. My objection here, Mr. Speaker, is that what the Minister is doing is abusing this particular privilege, because there was no undertaking. Now, Mr. Speaker, if he wants to do it by leave, fine, but not get up on the pretext that he had told me before. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. MR. GILBERT: To the point of order, he asked me No. 48 R12

what co~~espondence I had concerning this and I told him I would endeavo~ to get it. So I will table fo~ his information the letters that I have w~itten, and I would point out that on December 5 the~e was an announcement concerning Stephenville Airport, giving it full international status. MR. HODDER: To the Point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I was about to rule on the point of order, but is the Member for Port au Port speaking on the same point of order? MR. HODDER: Yes, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port au Port. MR.

HODDER: It is part of the rules of this House whether the Minister can get up. He gave no undertaking that he was going to. As I have said, I have no problem with it, but if the Minister wants to bring this back, he should do it under a Ministerial Statement. But certainly he is going under the guise of giving notice from Question Period. He did not do that. If Mr. Speaker will look at Hansard, he will see that is so. MR. SPEAKER: The Member's point is well taken. Our Standing Orde~s a~e clear that a Minister answers a question when notice has been given.

But it has happened in the past under this particular routine order, that Ministers have clarified an answer given the day previous, particularly with agreement by Members. L13 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI MR. HODDER: Not while I have been here. I have been here seventeen years and I have never seen it done like this. MR. SPEAKER: I would advise hon. Members, please, that we try to follow the Orders, and that answers ought to be given only when notice was given of the answers. Under other conditions, a Ministe~ ought to ask leave of the House. The hon. the Minister of Works, Services, and Transportation. MR.

GILBERT: Well, in that case, Mr. Speake~. I will table it. But the Member for To~ngat asked me the question, • Are there plans to downgrade o~ discontinue Canadian Airlines International's 737 service to Happy Valley - Goose Bay and Wabush? I told him I thought it was rumors, but my officials were investigating it and I would report back. Now I .have, and we have been assured by Canadian Airlines International that they have no plans to reduce the 737 service to Happy Valley - Goose Bay or Wabush. Again, a typical example of the Member's question.

Now, I will table that and the letters concerning Stephenville and First Air. I will table it fo~ the Kember, and he will be able to read it. If he needs anymore information, ask me and I will get it for him. MR. SPEAKER : Are there further Questions been Given? for which MR. GILBERT: Answers Notice They did not want to hear it. No. 48 to has Rl3

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I just want to make sure again that everybody understands this particular item under Orders of the Day, Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given. It is rather self-explanatory, that a Minister rises in his place to give an answer to a question for which notice has been given. This is rather self-exp·lanatory, and if in the future a Minister feels that the answer was not exactly the answer he would have liked to have given, the Minister may ask for leave, but not get up and say that it is for notice given. As I said, it can be done by leave of the House, ~f course.

And I think in most cases a Member would grant the leave, because the Member, in asking the question, obviously wanted to know the answer. But to make sure that Ministers know that, the item is self-explanatory, and in future we want to stick to that particular rule. Orders of the Day MR. CRANE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Grace. I am not sure where he is standing. MR. BAKER: It is Private Member's Day, Mr. Speaker, and I already announced the resolution of the Member for Harbour Grace. MR. SPEAKER: Oh, I am sorry.

It being Private Member• s Day, the hon. the Member Ll4 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI for Harbour Grace. SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CRANE: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have the opportunity to speak to this resolution, a resolution I brought into this House the first day of our first session, after the April 20th election. I thought it was very important then, and I feel today it is just as important. I will begin, Mr. Speaker, by reading the resolution. Before I go on with the resolution, I wish the Member for Burin - Placentia West would . put some tape on his mouth and keep quiet for at least one minute.

WHEREAS the Province . of Newfoundland and Labrador has had a high unemployment rate for a number of years; AND

WHEREAS the previous Government have done little to significantly change this; AND

WHEREAS the royal Commission on Employment and Unemployment put forward recommendations to help solve the problem; has help burden AND

WHEREAS this Government advocated policies to alleviate the unemployment in the Province;

BE IT RESOLVED that all Members of the House of Assembly combine their efforts and work to put in place the mechanisms to help alleviate our problem and steer our Province toward economic recovery; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we request the Federal Government to assist us in providing an opportunity for meaningful No. 48 Rl4

employment for the citizens of this Province instead of many of the make work projects that are of a temporary nature. Mr. Speaker, unemployment has been and still is the number one problem in Newfoundland, not only in the Harbour Grace District, but every other District around the Province. As the resolution states, the previous Government did very little significant, if anything, to change this.

It is a fact that during the past seventeen years, when Members opposite, or at least some of them, were here in Government, the gap between Newfoundland economically and the Canadian average, as well as the gap between Newfoundland and the Maritime Provinces, has widened. The former Government was unwilling to acknowledge that we had an unemployment problem, and if they were unwilling to acknowledge we had a problem, then they sure did not need a reason to look for a solution.

If some Members opposite, who seem to have all the answers. were as knowledgeable six or seven mon-ths ago as they are today, then we would not have inherited the mess we have inherited. And if they were not as intelligent six or seven months ago, I am glad they were not such fast learners previous to the election as they have been since, because if they had been, we would not have formed the Government and there would not have been a need for real change. It is sickening to sit day after day, Mr. Speaker, listening to the criticisms of the Opposition.

Some Members on the Opposition, certainly one or two of them, very certainly one or two of them, · are very constructive in their LlS December 6, 1989 Vol XLI criticisms. However, from the majority there is nothing but destructive criticism. How an hon. Member can get up and speak for an hour and say nothing but the worst kind of destructive criticism is beyond me. As I say, there are a couple of Members there who criticize constructively, and I feel they, like Members on this side of the House, have a genuine interest in coming up with programs to help alleviate our unemployment problem.

Even though they are in Opposition, I believe they would be delighted to see this Liberal Government improve employment opportunities in Newfoundland . Mr. Speaker, this Government acknowledges we have a great unemployment program, and this problem has been compouned with the closedown of ERCO Industries at Long Harbour, or Albright America, as it was latterly called; and now they have shut down one paper machine at Grand Falls, plus the fisheries crisis. However, the Premier and the Government will not bury their heads in the sand, Mr. Speaker, and hope for the problem to go away.

They will work diligently, along with The Economic Recovery Team, to create alternative jobs for our peo_ple. We have seen some very negative criticisms coming across the House, certainly from the Member for Grand Falls. Last week, when we got notification that a paper mill was going down in Grand Falls, he was very, very ruffled about it and he became very, very critical. But I do not think the Union President in Grand Falls thought he did such a job when No. 5 went down. He only reads papers that suit himself, Mr. Speaker, No. 48 RlS

something that pats him on the back. But when it pats him on the tail, he is not so fussy about reading it. So I will read it for him. Mr. Downey says here 'There does not appear to be much the Provincial Government can do about the shutdown.' But he was critical of the Grand Falls Conservative MHA, and his attacks upon the Government. He said, 'Six years ago, when we lost the No. 5 machine, we got absolutely no satisfaction from the PC Government.' SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. CRANE: 'Now he is saying the Liberals are not going to be strong enough, they are not doing enough.

He was our Member six years ago, and he did absolutely nothing.' SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Nothing. Not a thing! MR. CRANE: 'I think the Opposition Members and Mr. Simms' , he says,. 'should stay out of the news media. They were promoting free trade last September.' The Union official said, 'Mr. Simms was telling everybody free trade would be good for Abitibi, and what is good for Abitibi is good for the town. It hurts me to hear this man come out and criticize the Liberal Government when it is out of his hands completely. He is a good man, but he should butt out.' SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

CRANE: Sometimes it pays to read all of the papers, Mr. Speaker. L16 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI Members opposite knew before the last election, Mr. Speaker, that ERCO was on the way down. They knew the fishery had reached the crisis stage. And I would not be surprised if the han. the Member for Grand Falls had some idea of the Abitibi-Price problems as well. Yet, during the election on April 20, Mr. Speaker, the people of Newfoundland never heard a word about any of these problems.

Instead, the Opposition Leader and his team were going around the Province promising millions and millions of dollars, and everything from a stadium to a swimming pool in communities that did not even have a water supply. The audacity of Members opposite, having the gall to stand up and blame us for not being able to clean up in just seven months the mess they created in seventeen years. Members opposite keep talking about the Private Sector Program. It must have been their prize program, their golden egg, because we hear it every day.

I will not . say the program was no good, because I am not familiar with the program. But I would like to know how many permanent jobs were created under that program. What percentage of jobs were permanent? Or, as Government Members say, did the program create ten week jobs at the minimum wage, after which people were transferred to UI for approximately $120 a week? Referring to a statement made by the Minister of Social Services yesterday, last year, under the Tory Government, 13,000 jobs were created at the minimum wage and then the people were put on urc.

I would say the last state of those people was a lot worse than the first. No. 48 R16

MR. WARREN: (Inaudible). MR. CRANE: We will get a collar for you, the Member for Torngat Mountains, as soon as we are finished. Why do Members opposite criticize and I would go as far as to say dispise, Mr. Doug House, a person they thought was the Saviour, the best thing since sliced bread only three years ago. They had 'to go out and hire him to study the problems that affected Newfoundland three years ago, and they are still affecting Newfounldand. Now, because Mr.

House was hired by this Government, because he has studied the problems and this govenrment decided if he knew the problems he may be the best man to come up with solutions, he is no good anymore. It is becasue he was hired by the Liberal Government. That is the only thing I can see. I cannot see a better person to find solutions than a person who knows the problems. Mr. Speaker, this Government has faith in the ability of Mr. House and The Economic Recovery Team.

We feel that because they identified the problems and made numerous suggestions, many of which were not used, they are the most qualified to solve the problems. Mr. Speaker, every day we hear about the fisheries from both sides of the House, and I guess the reason for that is everybody is concerned. Everybody knows the fishery has reached a crisis, and it reached the crisis before April 20. Nobody on the other side of the House were willing to tackle the problem, they burried their heads in the sand and forgot we L17 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI had a problem. And we are still facing this problem.

But this Government and this Premier will not burried their heads in the sand, they will face the problem and tell the honest truth to the people of Newfoundland, something they are not familiar with hearing. I am very concerned about the fishery, because we only have one or two groups of people in the Harbour Grace District who hire many people. Harbour Grace Fisheries is about the biggest employer. we have, and Harbour Grace Fisheries is depending on 3,000 or 4,000 tons of northern cod from the resource-short plant program, and it concerns me that there is going to be a cut in the northern cod.

I am concerned about that, just as every other person is, because if that plant goes, we are in real tr-ouble economically. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) first in/first out. MR. CRANE: Well, I am certainly hoping that this Minister of Fisheries and this Premier would do things in a right and proper manner. Because the philosophy of this Government is fairness and balance, and when the chips are down, I think the Premier and his Government will put their philosophy into action. Mr.

Speaker, sometime ago the Member for Fortune - Hermitage, who, I must say, is one of the better Members on the other side, a man who - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. CRANE: - certainly has his head screwed on right, and is very concerned about his district, as well, No. 48 Rl7

brought in a resolution concerning the fisheries, which I think was a good resolution, the only thing was he had gotten poor advice from some of his long-term friends and made it a two-pronged resolution which this side could not go along with, could not support. And the reason we could not support it, Mr. Speaker, was because the Opposition wanted Committees to formulate policy for this Fisheries Department and this Government.

If 'I remember correctly, although I was not a Member at the time as everybody knows, but I do read the papers occasionally, when the former Government was in office, the only Committee they had was the Public Accounts Committee, and when Opposition Members . said anything they did not like, all their Members got up and walked out. Now, all of a sudden, they are not in the driver's seat, they want to formulate policy for this Government. Well, I say, too bad! Mr. Speaker, for years and years now Newfoundlanders relied, and relied heavily on, make-work projects.

And I am afraid, with the economy as it is right now, we are still going to have to rely on some make-work projects. AN HON. MEMBER: Short-term. MR. CRANE: Short-term is right. However, I think this Government have plans, and I hope they can formulate policies that will do away with many of the short-term programs and jobs and bring in something more concrete. Because, Mr. Speaker, certainly nobody takes pride in watching a program on television, like the one last Ll8 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI year, where people were paid for bringing rocks from one place to the other. MR. WARREN: And bringing them back again. MR.

CRANE: And bringing them back again. You are right. The Member for Torngat Mountains (Mr. Warren) says, 'and bringing them back again. AN HON. MEMBER: The first time he was right in sev.en months. MR. CRANE: The first time seven months. this time. he was But he right in is right But certainly nobody can take pride in projects like that. I think, Mr. Speaker, it is about time this Government got down and really tried to formulate some policies to get some long-term jobs. And I think this Government will create long-term jobs.

But we do not expect either the Government or the House Royal Commission to make recommendations that will solve all the problems you created in seventeen years in six or seven months. I certainly - look forward to the Government initiating policies and creating long-term employment. But they are certainly not going to do it overnight, and I do not think anybody expects that, unless it is the Opposition. I believe this Government has a different vision for Newfoundland, a totally different vision than either of the previous Administrations. We are hoping and we are optimistic that with No. 48 R18

the help of the Economic Recovery Team, and help from the Federal Government I might add, we can create some long-term, meaningful jobs. Because the Federal Government, and the Opposition certainly helped get them in there, are responsible for a lot of our problems, espeeially in the fishery. We think the Federal Government, if the right approach is made, will assist us in creating long-term jobs that will make Newfoundlanders proud to go to work every day, and not be ashamed to be seen going to or leaving their place of employment. MR. WARREN: People on the island (inaudible). MR. CRANE: People on the island.

Getting back to the fisheries, there is one comment I would like to make. Sometime ago, my good friend over there from St. John's East Extern, in a spiel one afternoon on the fisheries, said this Government was intent on destroying the part-time fishery. You know, I did not mind that from the Member for St. John's East Extern. I am sure this Government has no intentions of destroying jobs in the part-time fishery, where people are making seven or eight thousand dollars a year. What rea~ly fascinated me was that a man as wealthy and as prosperous as the Member for St.

John's East Extern would stand up and say he was a part-time fisherman. MR. PARSONS: At one time. MR. CRANE: That is not what is in Hansard. That he was a part-time f isherinan I think really flabbergasted me, and I said to myself, I am sure Ll9 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI this _ Government, or any other Government which has a feeling for the poor fishermen, will have no objections at all to scuttling part-time fishermen with his kind of income. MR. PARSONS: I gave it up in 1974. MR. CRANE: Again, Mr. Speaker, . I am very happy to have the opportunity to speak on this, and I will be closing the debate.

I will listen to the contributions from the· Opposition now, and I am sure there are going to be some constructive contributions, because there are always. Thank you very much. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Member for Humber Valley. MR. WOODFORD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a few personal comments to the Member opposite, the Member for Harbour Grace. I can remember back sometime ago, when I gave my first speech in the House, I almost needed a towel to keep the sweat off my brow.

So I have to commend the Member for getting up and giving his maiden speech - I would say it was his maiden speech. But just a little word of caution, a little word of advice from a person who served as a backbencher for some four years: you do not have to be negative to be good in the House, you do not have to be negative at all to be a good Member. So do not take all the advice of your colleagues, some might be good, some might No. 48 Rl9

be bad. But, in any case, most of it is not conducive to the gentleman's character, I know, because I have known him now for the last few months and some of the comments he made are certainly not applicable to him. But, nevertheless, that is the give-and-take in the thrust of politics, and we accept that. Getting back to the resolution, Mr. Speaker, in the WHEREASES, firstly, ' ... the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador has a high unemployment rate. ' That is no secret. We do, and have had for some time. We have now and I suppose we will for some time, until there are some remedies.

The second one, the previous Government have done little to significantly change this high unemployment rate, I disagree with. Barring all politics, barring all partisan politics, and I am sure if you asked any Member of this House if anybody, now or in the past, did not act in a genuine manner and a constructive manner in trying to create jobs in this Province, in making an attempt to create jobs in this Province, I would venture to bet that you would not come up with one no. Everybody tried.

I do not care what Party you are in or what Administration you serve under, it is not an easy job, as Members opposite are soon going to find out. They have been in for six months and, as I said before, the jury is out. But the jury is out, and I am one Member here, and I am . sure everybody else is with me, who will say I hope whatever you do works. But I can tell you this, also, that we have had for some time in L20 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI ·this Province and other Provinces, but more specifically in this one, a real cancer in our society.

And the cancer we had and have today and will have tomorrow in the short-term : speaking of the short-term when I speak of tomorrow - is one that is not going to be easily addressed. You are not going to treat it with band-aid treatment or anything else. I do not have to tell Members opposite what I mean by the word cancer. Everybody has been trying for years, not only in the Province or in Canada, but all over this globe, to try and find a remedy and a cure for it. It cannot be done. It has not been done. We have stopped some of it. We have eliminated some of the problems.

We have addressed some of it, and certain sectors and certain parts of the human anatomy have been treated and treated successfully. But the real underlying cancer, we have not found a cure for it. Someday, someone will. The new Government, and rightly so, is trying something new. When people in past Administrations tried something new, what did they get? They got nothing but a black eye, you cannot do this and you cannot do that. We are no different. But, at the same time, in saying cannot we are hoping that you will.

Deep down in everybody • s heart here we are hoping that you will succeed, but we must not lose sight of all, for instance, in this resolution. Forget,_ and I said it before, the element of blame. Every Member on the other side of this House, on the Government side, can get up and talk constructively, and they can be partisan, but forget this seventeen years, and the six months, and the twenty years, and the past administrations and get No. 48 R20

on with the work . You are going to be judged on what you do. Not the length of time you are in office, on performance. Get on with it and forget about this seventeen years thing. Yes, we have tried many things. We have tried all kinds of things. I was part of the Administration for four years, and I have no apologies for it. The only thing I apologize for is the fact that we did not make it work. We did not bring the unemployment rate down . comparable with other provinces in Canada. There are reasons for it, all kinds. We have made mistakes. Every member here has stood up and admitted that.

We made all kinds of mistakes, but by mistakes you learn. We are not too big. Just because we are the so ~called elected representatives in this Province; we are big boys now, we know it all. That MHA after your name stands for nothing else but 'might happen again'. SOME HON. MEMBERS : H_ear, hear! MR. WOODFORD: And if members opposite and members here think they are going to go around this Province and around Canada with their heads held high and think they have all the answers, I· am telling you, you have not. We did not. You have not today and we will not tomorrow. We are not infallible, Ladies and Gentlemen.

We are here for a very short term, and there is going to be somebody come along and· take our place, I will tell you that. So let us get our act together and let us co-operate. Get up and debate the issues and debate them constructively. Tear the hide of each other when it comes to policies, but let us get L21 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI down to it. The bon. member is a new member. He just got up. He has been watching the House for the last number of months, and by observing and looking around you think you automatically have to do what the other fellow does, but sometimes you get in trouble by doing that.

In trying to be constructive today, in trying to draw up a resolution that zeroed in on the Economic Recovery Team, and in trying to find answers to the many problems we have in this Province, he had, at the same time, in every

whereas to be negative in each and every one. The

be it resolved part of his resolution, no problem, except for the fact that, again, in the very first words, ' ... we request the Federal Government to assist.' There is no problem with assistance, but that is not the answer to each and every one of our problems. One of the things I challenge members opposite on, anywhere in this Province today, and the Premier just touched on it a little .while ago, I challenge any member opposite to come to my district and find a Private Sector Program that did not work over the last couple of years - that did not work. It was a good program.

The Premier mentioned that it was an employee subsidization thing. Yes, it was short-term in some cases, but in other cases they are still there, a very high percentage are still there. I heard members opposite mention the fact that, 'I know of five or six cases that did n·ot work.' No matter what program this Administration brings in, whether it is a social program or policy with regard to the resource sector, they are not all going to work. But do not throw out the No. 48 R21

babe with the bathwater just because the program was not a total 100 per cent success, just because it was brought in by a PC administration, just because there was nothing else at the time to put in there. Do not do away with it, fix it. If it has holes in it, plug them. If there is something wrong with it, if it is broken, fix it. But do not throw it out.

If bon. members do that just because it was a program brought in by the previous Administration, or just because it was not 100 per cent successful, I can assure you today that you are going to be wiping out each and every program you ever institute from this day on. Because you will not have 100 per cent success, there is no way. After only six or seven months in office, what are some of the ideas? What are some of the new policies that are going to be instituted? We are waiting.

And, as I said before, hopefully some good policies will be brought in and hopefully some of them will work - hopefully they will all work. But when we make excuses and keep on making excuses , as I said in a speech a couple of weeks ago, after awhile it becomes a convenient crutch to lean on when we should be doing some of the things we should have done, and instituting some of the policies we should institute. So get off that crutch and get on with the work, and not do without the program because, as I said before, it was the previous Administration's program.

Be constructive, look at the good parts in it and keep them, and do away with some of the mistakes that were made. The very nature and geography of our Province is one that dictates L22 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI that certain work projects and parts of the resource sector in the Province are only going to work for X number of months. Mining is an example of an industry that could work year-round, depending on whether it is open pit or depending on whether it is a shaft type operation.

And it is obvious from the records and from the income from the mining sector in the Province, some of the highest, if I am not mistaken this year, and no downtime or downturns in that part of the resource sector. It is working successfully and really well. There are all kinds of revenues. It is year-round. The more of that we can bring on, the more exploration that is done the better chance to bring on a new mining operation in the Province, and that is permanent work. It is going to be year-round, it is good for the economy, we are · getting everything that is in it and it is here. Some other areas, forestry.

AN HOH. MEMBER: (I .naudible) (inaudible). MR. WOODFORD: That is right. million dollars In the forestry part of it, the mills, yes, can work year-round. The people who supply the mills, the loggers, themselves, who are out there tramping around in three and four and five and six feet of snow with a power saw in their hands, they cannot work in the wintertime ·in the woods, especially now with the eight foot wood in. Four foot wood was not so bad. At least they could take it with one hand and chop it, and keep their saw in the other. They can do it. The eight foot wood No. 48 R22

to~ay is treacherous, it is dangerous to be in there. It is an injustice. I will go so far as to say it is an injustice for them to be in there, and I was one who went to bat with Kruger a couple of years ago in ·trying to get them to cut the majority of their wood, even if they had to hire extra help to do it, in the spring, summer and fall so that they would be out of the woods in the wintertime. It cannot be done. So those people automatically, by our very nature and by our very geographic nature, cannot work ·in the wintertime, or should not to a certain extent. Agriculture, the same thing.

We have sections of the agriculture industry, I mention one, the dairy, which could work year-round except for the actual feed content ar.d forage and everything that has to be harvested and cultivated in the summer months. Tourism can be year-round. We have the infrastructure. We have the scenery. We have the capacity in this Province to say and have, and money to put into the tourism sector that can work year-round in this Province. A prime example is Marble Mountain, a prime example is the - what is one in Clarenville? AN HON. MEMBER: White Hills. MR. WOODFORD : The White Hills Ski Resort in Clarenville.

Look at Labrador. MR. SIMMS: Cape Ray. MR. WOODFORD: And Cape Ray. There are all kinds of L23 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI opportunities to expand in the tourism industry in the wintertime as well as summer. It means new dollars. These are dollars to be brought into the Province and dollars that are kept here. And people in the service sector, 65 per cent of all jobs are created in the service sector. That, you know, bodes well , because we have it there. It is just a matter of getting our people out to do it. There is one thing Newfoundlanders were always afraid of, and that is taking a risk.

It is one thing to take a calculated risk, but it is another thing to take a foolish risk, but the sad thing in this Province today, it has been for some time, it was back in 1971 when I started business, and it is to this day, still there by the people who received the application from the sawmiller down in White Bay, or the farmer out in Cormack, or the entrepreneurs in the service sector down here in St.

John's, it is brought in, it is put on his desk, he looks at it and says, 'no way, that cannot work. ' He makes the decision for the person who is out there scraping and scratching every day of the week, and willing to go into the woods or go out on the land or go out into a fishing boat to make a living. Some guy sitting behind a desk. Whether it is Confederation Building, or whether it is in Ottawa, or whether it is down in some other off our DRIEs, and DREEs and DRONEs, and NIPs and everything else we got in this Province. That is who makes the decision, Mr.

Speaker, on whether that person is successful or is a success or a failure, and that is sad. I have seen it in the past, I see it today, and I guess I will see it for some time. Getting back to the agricultural No. 48 R23

sector, I only got a short time, and there was one thing that I would like to mention in going back to the report on employment and unemployment. One thing that always struck me, and that is the secondary processing, the primary produces in the Province is one thing, the secondary produces are another. It takes something like $63 thousand, that is something for Members to just take note, $63 thousand of output to create one person year of employment in the primary sector. It takes $63 thousand of output to create one person year of employment in the primary sector.

It takes just $16 thousand of output to create one person year of employment in the secondary sector. That is where we are going to make or break this Province. That is where we are going to make gains. We have -to. The prime example was in Burin the other year when they put, I think it was broccoli, and something else in with some of the fish dishes, but for years bringing it in. Now we are starting to grow some of the very vegetables to put in with that dish and make it something condusive to one another so that it can be sold here, all local . And it can be done with others.

Chinese vegetables, who would ever think that we could come to the Province of Newfoundland and grow Chinese vegetables to be sold in the Chinese restaurant. Everybody figured it had to come in from China, Taiwan, or somewhere else. It can be done right here. I am sure · there are Members in the House that have went in and ordered Chinese food and said, 'My God, how did they get this all the way from China?

How did they get it, and keep it so fresh?' But as an example of our ignorance, and I do not mean ignorance in the sense L24 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI of educational directly, but ignorance of the potential that we can and should have. But it has to be identified, and it is going to have to be done by the identified by our people. We have had all kinds of programs identified, but when it got to someone where they say, 'Okay, you can have $5 000 or you can have 50 or whatever, then they say no. I guess my time is just about, Mr.

Speaker, and before I do, I would like to go back to an approach that was taken just about a week and a half ago, or a week or so ago, on the Meech Lake resolution. And I would like at this time to move an amendment to the resolution based on a ruling by the Speaker, on a previous resolution introduced by a Member on this side of the House in saying that eliminating all of the

WHEREAS's in the resolution, and the recitals, and keeping the resolution itself. That was the gist of the resolution. The basic thing in any resolution is always the

BE IT RESOLVED. And because of the blame for the Speaker, because of all the retoric that are in. the four

WHEREAS's, specifically that I would move, Mr. Speaker, that the

WHEREAS's in the amendment to the resolution eliminating all - moved by myself and seconded by the Member for Kilbride that all the

WHEREAS's in the resolution be deleted, and we go with the

BE IT RESOLVED alone. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: You have all heard the amendment to the resolution. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) it is in order. No. 48 R24

MR. K. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Member for Stephenville. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. K. AYLWARD: The Member for Humber East speaks highly of me, and that is okay. I do not mind that at all. I really appreciate her comments. Mr. Speaker, I want. to welcome the Minister of Social Services (Mr. Efford) back into the Cabinet. I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Social Services is going to show the House of Assembly and the people of the Province what kind of job can be done when somebody who is committed to the job gets in there and goes at it.

I think there are a number of changes going to take place in that Department and I think he is going to be very much responsible for the positive changes that are going to occur. Mr. Speaker, I speak to the resolution ,today about the economy and about the things that are going to have to happen for this Province to turn it around, to get the economy moving. It is a difficult job. It has always been difficult for any Government, no matter what stripe, to get the economy moving in this Province, because once you get it going, something happens to give you a little knock back.

You can get something rolling and then something else happens, so it is always a balancing and a juggling act, basically. There has to be a long-term plan put in place. That is what we are about. That is what we are trying to do. L25 December ·6, 1989 Vol XLI I appreciate the comments of the Member for Humber Valley (Mr. Woodford) today. I have known the Member when he was in Government, and I know he has worked hard for the District while he was in Government and his comments today were quite well taken. When you look at it, Mr.

Speaker, we are not anymore in just a Canadian economy or U.S . economy, North American economy, we are in a global economy; we are into a world-wide market. Coming in today, I was reading an

article about the Fax machine and what it has done in the world. It has made the world a lot smaller when it comes to doing business, business activities. And we, as a Province, in trying to get the economy going, have to recognize that this is a global market and that we are located, as a matter of fact, I think, in a very good geographic position for the future if we do it right.

With the changes that are happening in Europe right now and in Russia, and so on, we being located closest to Europe and having access to the North American market and to the U.S. market, I think Newfoundland is in a strategic position over the next number of years, to develop our economy. But we need a plan of action with which to do that. Basically, that is what we have to do, and, as a Government, you are juggling all the time trying to fix this problem and that problem, but you also have to have some long-term plans in place.

That is what we are about, and that is why the Premier and the Government are trying to get the Economic Recovery Commission to look at a major overhaul of programs and to help set some direction, and help give some advice. And, Mr. No. 48 R25

Speaker, you can never have too much advice when you are talking about economic recovery and where we go from here. It is extremely important that we have the right advice and that we have everybody involved in the process. I think we are moving in that direction and this Governmen~ operates by concensus and with advice from everybody. I am supportive of that concept and I think it is going to pay off in the long run. Mr .

Speaker, I. want to speak today also about the - I was in Stephenville yesterday and, talking about the economy and economic recovery, we had a very positive announcement by the Ministry of Transport officials concerning the status on the airport. As many people know, it has been a very hard lobby. The Member for Port au Port (Mr . Hodder) has been involved with that lobby, as have the Member for St. George's (Mr. Short), the Member for Gander (Mr. Baker), and the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation (Mr.

Gilbert) whom I would like to commend today'· along with the officials of his Department, for their good job and what they have done with the Stephenville Airport, their efforts to get Ottawa and the Federal Minister to understand the importance of transportation in this Province to the economy, and to understand the importance of the Stephenville airport, and our Minister, the bon. Minister of Works, Services and Transportation met with · the bon.

Federal Minister, Benoit Bouchard only a few weeks ago and I think that that was one of the stimulants that got the MOT officials into Stephenville yesterday, to announce their very postive L26 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI announcement on the status change for the airport which will now allow us to market the airport and will list us in the airline publications and the air publications for all international airlines and so on, so we will be working with Gander as a help to Gander.

Gander and Stephenville airports are directly related, and very similar and Stephenville has always been the alternate to Gander and served that role well, now we will be recol?nized in serving that role and will serve a bigger one in the future, and it. was a positive announcement and it also ·shows that if you lobby, you can be successful, and I think that is the very important thing · and that it is important for all the communities out there, Mr.

Speaker, right now that are in difficult straits or having difficult times, because it is never easy, but you can, if you put together a good organization of local people and do it right and go out and get the expertise that you need, you can be successful, and I think that announcement yesterday is a positive signal to other communities in the Province that you can do it on your own too, and if people are there to help you, but you have to sit down, you have to organize and you have to plan, and basically, that is what we, as a Province have to do.

It is not over yet, our job is just · beginning out in Stephenville, we have to promote that airport to the hilt now, and get into the marketing aspect, but now we have a second lease on life, basically, and we are very pleased about that, and we think it is a very positive indication for southwest coast, Newfoundland, and that it will pay off dividends for the Province. Hr. Speaker, there is a lot of work ahead of us, and when No. ,48 R26

I heard the Member for Humber Valley speaking, as he did, very well, talked about not reminding the opposition about they have been in power seventeen years, well, the only problem that I have is that some of the colleagues of the Opposition used to remind me, when I was in opposition, a short period of time ago, that we were to blame for a number of problems that occurred, and when we were in power, which was 1972, I believe or 1971 was the last time.

So, I am just hoping that we will not continue to do that, mind you, but we are trying to fix the problems as we see them and it will take some time, but the thing is , it does take some time to plan and to do it right, and we are in the process of doing that, very much so, and I think there are some positive things to come.

We have got major problems, there is no doubt about that and when it comes to the fishery, and it comes to the forest industry, getting those, you are up and running but there are always bumps in the way and we have a major crisis now as everybody is aware in the fishery and hopefully with the work that is being !}one by the Federal Government and all the people concerned that we can see some positive news in the future, but it is a hard reality to face and it is very difficult when you have a new Government coming in and you are trying to get the reins of power, you know, you wake up the next day and you have a very difficult task on your hands, but, I think, our group here, this Government is very equal to that task, and I think that they will prove that over the next number of years.

The labour force flash sheet that is put out every morith by a Newfoundland statistics agency points out, Mr.

Speaker, that the work force has gone up L27 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI since last year, up to two hundred and forty thousand, and I think that, at least, is an indicator that there are more people in the Province in the work· force, and, hopefully that will mean more stimulation in the economy and we hope to see more of those people getting employed, and hopefully in the next three or four years the record of the unemployment for this Government will be a positive one and we will see the unemployment rate drop, . and I think that is a measure of any Government, Mr.

Speaker, in seeing something happen positively, you want to see your people working, you want to see them doing something with themselves in a positive manner and that solves a lot of other problems. Employment can solve a lot of the· problems socially, that occur, Mr. Speaker, and I think, that this Government is committed to seeing major improvements and as the Economic Recovery Commission gets in gear and the Ministers and the Governments look at what actions can be taken, I think the 1990's, I hope, and I think will be a turnaround for this Province.

We have a small population ·but we have a lot of energy and the best · entrepreneurs I believe in Canada. We have the small boat fishermen, we have had the people in the forest industry and all the individual people in the pulp and paper industry, all of these people who are involved in all these types of industries in agriculture et cetera, tourism. We have an entreprenurial spirit in this Province and we have to make sure that that is awakened more, and that we give support to that spirit, because basically we have to do it ourselves and that is what this is all about.

So, I w~lcome the resolution put forward today and it gives us a chance to No. 48 R27

discuss where .it is going. I talked earlier, Hr. Speaker, about a global market, and we are into that, and I think that as a Province, we are an exporter of a lot of raw material. We have to look at doing some manufacturing here of different types of products, of any type of product that is needed not in Canada or just North America, but in the world. There are markets that are available, there are markets out there for different types of products that this Province can manufacture, can process and I think it is important for us not to have a limited scope. We have to have a wide scope, Mr. Speaker.

If we have that wide scope, and we have the entreprenurial spirit, I think we will see positive changes over the next four or five years and into the 1990s as we go to the year 2, 000. But it has been taking an overhaul of what we have been doing and of the direction that we have been going in when it comes to Economic Development. I think that with the new Economic Recovery Commission and the Gove~ent, I think they are doing it the right wayo We are going to do it right, we are going to organize it right, and we are going to get the best advice that we can get.

So I support those efforts and we have to look at it in a bigger spectrum. It is extremely important that we do because the Province is not going to survive, it should not survive like it has the way it has been going. It has to get better. We have to make it bettero We have been just struggling along and never have been able to get to the level of even coming close to being an equal to the other Provinces even L28 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI Atlantic Canada employment wise, and especially so in the last ten or fifteen years.

So we have to reach up and do it ourselves, and have . the plan action in place before you go, and jump all over the place you have to know and be organized. I think it is important that we are getting organized and the plans are going to be there, they are being put in place. I think it is a long time since a full review has been done of all the different government programs and there are a maze of them out there, when it · comes to a small business man or person trying to start a business, it is very difficult to understand what the programs are there for. How do you apply for them? It is crazy.

I spend half of my time just reading the applications and getting the applications and trying to interpret them and so on, and wondering whether or not it fits this criteria or that criteria. So I think it ls important that we get that straightened away and be sure that there is a one system in place that allows for the development of people to go and open businesses and so on. I think that is one of the things that the Economic Recovery Commission is looking at. Hopefully, that will happen.

As that happens it will be a good help to the person out there, the individual who is trying to get involved in the economy and trying to contribute. I support the resolution, Mr. Speaker, as it is written. I think it is extremely important that we are going to be facing a number of problems over the next number of months as a Government and we take that responsibility very seriously. I think that we No. 48 R28

have the capability as a Government to perform and I think that we will do. I look forward to seeing the Opposition being constructive in their criticism. I think that is important. When I was in Opposition I used to try and be that way, sometimes it was difficult, Mr. Speaker, you get out of line, but the Opposition should be constructive in their critic ism of this Government. It is important that all Members be involved in the process. I think that one of the things that this Government has done right off the bat, when it went into power, was to recognize that every MHA should have the service and so on.

And we now see every MHA having a secretary and an office and so on, those little things were made, those things were major though for the recognition of the role of the Member to be involved and I know for myself, and a lot of us in rural Newfoundland, in the smaller municipalities, we become economic development officers so we can become very involved in ~he process of getting the economy moving in this Province.

If you are working full-time at this you are dealing with businesses all the time, you are dealing with owners of companies, you are looking at business plans all the time, so we are an important part of this process, every Member is, whether you are Government or Opposition, and, I think, that is the way it should be looked at. If you do that you can be a very active person in the process of what is happening. I do now know how my time is doing, Mr. Speaker. L29 Qecember 6, 1989 Vol XLI AN HON. MEMBER: By leave. MR. K. AYLWARD: I am giving a very nice speech, I know. AN HON. MEMBER: I am listening. MR.

K. ·AYLWARD: You are listening. Alright, good. I am trying to let the Opposition know that they can be constructive in their criticism and we will seriously consider all their suggestions in our work as we go along and try to get this economy moving. I think the 1990s are going to be exciting times for this Province with the Government we have, and with the ideas we have in this Province, I think, it is going to be very exciting.

The business school down here at Memorial University, a product of which I am, with a Bachelor of Conunerce degree, has put in me an entrepreneural spirit and has put, I think, a lot of business graduates out there who are now in this Province and are starting to come through the system who are trying, and I know a lot of them personally, who are in the system now and trying to get businesses going and the economy going. I think it is important that we promote the entrepreneural spirit through programs, and through education.

That is happening more and more but we still have to put a major emphasis on it , because that is the way it will happen. Like I said this world is a lot smaller now with the technology that is available and we just cannot become, and keep continuing to be, an exporter of raw materials. We have to look at secondary industry, look seriously at it, but be professional about it. Get business plans done up No. 48 R29

and know how to do them, learn how to do them, and teach our people to be business managers as much as we can. I think if we can do that, and we try and learn that, it goes a long way. No Government is going to solve these problems overnight. You can hope to put the environment there for our people to do something and create the opportunity for themselves. We can be, I suppose, the catalyst to do that and that is what we should be. I think that this Government is going to be that, but it also takes the energy of every individual and their own entrepreneural spirit.

I think that Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have the best and probably the biggest entrepreneural spirit in Canada . We have been survivors for hundreds of years but we have to look at the changing technologies that are occuring in this world right now and become part of the process and be involved in the process. I think that is the important thing. I again say to you, Mr. Speaker, today, and I give you an example of the lobbying that we are doing in Stephenville. Everybody has gotten together, using all their energy and going out and getting expertise.

The Provincial Government is helping, the Federal Government is trying to help, so that is an example and there are many more examples of that. That is what has to happen, and if that can happen, then things can be a lot more positive. While we have a high unemployment rate and many other problems we have to deal with it, deal with it seriously and we have to put the plan in place. We do not go off half knowing what you are going to do, you do it right. We are going to make mistakes. There is no doubt about that. You are going to L,30 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI move.

If you are going to make change you are going to make mistakes, but the serious intent of this Government to deal with the problem is what has to be recognized, and I think it is recognized by people in this Province very much so and they are going to give us that opportunity. And I expect, Mr. Speaker, that they are going to give us the opportunity in the next election and the next one after that and the next one after that and the next one after that, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. K. AYLWARD: I expect we are here for a long time, Mr.

Speaker, as we get our long term plans in place to try to make sure - I remember getting these idle threats, Mr. Speaker, when I was in Opposition telling me they were going to send in, Mr. Speaker, ten Ministers to come in and clean me out in Stephenville. Ten Ministers they were going to send in, Mr. Speaker, into Stephenville and clean me right . out. And I used to say well, there is no job security in this job. I mean, that is all you can do. You know, you just work your heart out and leave it at that. But anyways ·some of those hon.

Members who used to give me those idle words now they know the tables can switch, Mr. Speaker, and you always treat every MHA as an equal and we are all part of the process like I said earlier and that it is extremely important, Mr. Speaker, that we as Members be involved in the process. So I know some people in the Opposition are not used to that, but I am sure that they will get used to the roles over the next No. 48 R30

few months. But I hope they will be constructive to this Government, like we were in Opposition. We were a constructive Opp ·osition. We suggested many good things to them and very constructive. The Minister of Social Services (Mr. Efford) was very constructive and a number of us who used to be in those days of those little offices and one secretary to two KHAs and water coming down in our offices and all that kind of. stuff. I remember those days, but we - AN HOM. MEMBER: What has changed? KR. K. AYLWARD: Well what has changed? Well what has changed, Kr.

Speaker, I can say we believe in treating Members equally and having an environment with which to work, Mr. Speaker. SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! KR. K. AYLWARD: I think the fairness and balance of this Government is being proven and as we get into trying to develop the economy of this Province with the expertise that we have and the nice way we are going about it, getting people involved in the process, Mr. Speaker, as we do that I think that the Opposition is going to have very little to really say to us except praise, Mr. Speaker, basically.

Praise because of the good efforts that have been put forward by this Government and the many more efforts that are going to come forward. But the thing is Rome was not built in a day and it is going to take some time. But as we get into it I am very confident that things will happen. And I look L31 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI forward to seeing the positive change that this Government will bring. And the entrepreneurial spirit, Mr. Speaker, will rise above and will see us in the 1990s not being just a Canadian economy, but we are going to be a competitor, I believe, in the world economy and a good one.

All we have to do is just develop ourselves and if we do that we will be all right. I thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your consideration and your patience and"I will rest my case, thank you. SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (L. Snow): The bon. the Kember for Port au Port. SOME HOM. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I should first say that I can agree with some of the things that the Member for Stephenville (Mr. K. Aylward) was saying.

I guess there are many things in this debate that we can all agree on, but certainly I cannot agree with - what happened to the Kember for Stephenville is that he ran out of steam and he then gave part of his speech that he gave last session where everything is sweetness and light on that side. But, Mr. Speaker, to refer to the announcement which the bon. Member referred to before I start my comments, as far as Stephenville is concern, I would just like to say that is a positive announcement. It is positive in No. 48 R31

this light that as the Member mentioned the Stephenville airport will now be in the books . The American flights or any International · flights coming to this area will have that airport and will be able to land at that particular airport. But the other point, Mr. Speaker, is that one of the big fears once we lost the jet service in Stephenville was the fact that - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. HODDER: I am just referring to some comments that were made and - MR. HOGAN: (Inaudible). MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, the Member for Placentia (Mr. Hogan) is always interrupting. (Inaudible). MR. HODDER: Mr.

Speaker, if the han. Member wants to - look, the Member for Stephenville spoke - if the han. Member wants to, maybe we can all sit down and he can get up and speak. But, Mr. Speaker, the important thing about it is that the airport will be able to remain open in the state that it is now. AN HON. MEMBER: Oh, oh! MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, if the Member for Placentia wants to continue on, I mean the Member for Placentia can get up and speak. Are you ready to get up to speak? Because if not, I will wait until after you are finished . L32 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI But, Mr.

Speaker, the airport itself under the present arrangement is being used only by prop aircraft, now there was a great danger that the runways would not be maintained in their normal way, since these flights do not need the same length of runway and especially equipment in the area has already been downgraded. And · what is great about this announcement is the fact that the airport now will be maintained as an International airport at International status. Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased about this.

I took this particular proposal that it would be a general aviation airport and that it would be a full international airport to the Federal Minister of International Trade, John Crosbie, back, I believe it was almost one year ago last January, and at that time he agreed to look into it. I did have that involvement in it, I do know that the Member for stephenville did I also wrote him a covering letter which I will get for the Minister which was much more comprehensive than any of the letters that I had saw that he had written, but I sent a covering letter afterwards .

We can all claim results, but I will say to the Minister that I would say, as the Member for stephenville said, that it was a joint effort. But I will say to the hon. Minister and to the Premier, that the problem between First-Air, and Air canada has not been lesolved, and I detect that the Government has relaxed at the oars. Now, I do not say that in as far as the Member fLom Stephenville is concerned, but as far as the Premier is concerned and as far as the Minister is concerned, he has met with the hon. Benoit Bouchard on a number of occasions. He met with him about the CN Ferries, and when I No. 48 R32

asked him the question yesterday, he did not respond, and I asked him directly whether he had spoken on that particular subject. The only thing that I fear, I think that pressure must come from everywhere, certainly the Stephenville people have been doing their job. I am asking the Premier and I am asking the Minister to do his job. You just cannot sit back and let the Member for Stephenville carry the ball for you. The issue is a Government to Government issue and it is one that the Government should be persuing.

It is one of the, as I said yesterday, one of the top issues, one of the top 5 or 6 issues that are facing the Government today, and it is more important then people realize. But, Mr. Speaker, having said that, the resolution states to put into place mechanisms to help alleviate our problem and steer our Province towards economic recovery. Now, Mr. Speaker, that was one of the lines in the first

BE IT RESOLVED. Mr . Speaker, I can certainly agree with that, but if it means the Recovery Commission, then I feel that the Government has gone the wrong way. The Recovery Commission is nothing but

an act of desperation because the Government, after being in Opposition for some 15 years was obviously bankrupt of ideas. And, Mr. Speaker, the Government had the access to groups like this Economic Recovery Commission, they had the Economic Council of Newfoundland, they had a number of ways in which they could solicit opinion from bureaucrats. But, Mr. Speaker, we have a situation in this Province now where bureaucrats are going around the Province representing themselves as Government Members.

I mean there was a case weekend L33 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI before last where a Member of the Recovery Commission attended a banquet and brought greetings on behalf of the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Mr. Speaker, which makes me wonder, there was no Government representative there, but it makes me wonder what is this Economic commis~ion. I mean the Minister for Development, he has a role. What I would like to know, and what I would like for the Premier· to say if he speaks in this debate is just where the Recovery Commission fits in. Now, Mr. Speaker, this is Government by bureaucrats.

I have never seen anything like this before, if you look back through Newfoundland history, even back to 1949 since we came into Confederation, there has often been Royal Commissions, Commissions of Enquiry, but never before have we had a Recovery Commission that works with Government that works through the Premiers office. And then they go to a Development Association meeting in the Province and bring greetings on behalf of the Minister. It has not been ful~y said in this Province yet exactly what that Economic commission is doing. Mr.

Speaker, I would not suggest that the Minister for Development, as Minister of Development, would think he has to develop a philosophy, he has to plan for the future. But how does he fit in with the Economic Recovery Commission. Mr. Speaker, I suggest that in a very short time that the Economic Recovery Commission will be a dead issue and a albatross around Members' necks. Now, the other thing I wanted to talk about _ was the private sector program. I am sorry that the Minister of Labour is not hear, but in her Estimates Committees No. 48 R33

back before Christmas in the last session of the House, the Minister was questioned by a number of the Opposition Members in that Committee. And since she did not know the details of the committee, and this is on record, and I think the Hansards have been published for that committee, and for the first time, even with new Ministers, which she was, and I have seen other new Ministers, she had her officials answer all of the questions on the public Sector Program. Mr.

Speaker, it would seem to me that if a Minister had axed the program, and that is what she did, she axed the program and then afterwards the program had been· axed could not tell Committee Members and had to have one of her officials explain the program and explain what they thought of the program. And actually the objections came from the officials. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that what happened on the Private Sector Program was that han. Members felt there had to be something wrong because they were over here and they were over there, and, Mr. Speaker, there was nothing wrong.

Now I heard the Premier come in and say something different today. He came in and said it was an Employment Subsidy Program and that one person he had spoken to said that something had led him to believe that it was a subsidy to businessmen. Well I tell you, Mr. Speaker, that - I will give you an example of two initiatives that were undertaken through the Private Sector Program, both of them were in my District.

One was when the Port · au Port Seafoods decided that because of this program, because the money was being made available by this program, they thought there might be a market, and do not laugh, but L34 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI for canners tails, okay, we call them canners, I think they are - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) . MR. HODDER: Yes, but there is another name of some sort of perch or something like that, for canners tails. MR. W. CARTER: Ocean perch. MR. HODDER: Ocean perch. Yes, but the people in Newfoundland know it locally as canners.

And they hired under the Private Sector Program a group of students to use those tails, because the fishermen bring them in, the fishermen usually throw them away as a by-catch, the fishermen brought them in and marketed them. Now, Mr. Speaker, they had good sales for them, the problem was that they got in trouble in Brig Bay in the Minister of Development's District (Mr. Furey) and went bankrupt, but it . was a good initiative. Now it failed, but it was a good initiative and it was the sort of thing that that the Private Sector Program was suppose to address.

Another one which happened in the District, which I think was successful, a local take-out restaurant grocery store decided to put a little restaurant there, they decided they would put a mini-golf course in on the basis, and I had mentioned it to them and they had come to me and asked me if there was some funding from rural development for a mini-golf course. We went t.o rural development and found out there was not time to get it ready for the summer, so they decided to go No. 48 R34

ahead themselves and build a mini-golf course under other arrangements and hired a student to operate it for that summer and for the following summer. Now there is no longer the Private Sector, but that was the spark that got that mini-golf course there and that golf course is still there. AN HON. MEMBER: What did they do this year? MR. HODDER: This year, Mr. Speaker, they did not have anybody there. It was not open for most of the time. AN HON. MEMBER: Why? MR. HODDER: Because - I do not want to get into a debate with the han. Member but I can give him names.

Because what happened in this particular case, it is a very small store, a very small little restaurant with about ten tables sort of thing, I think they had it open for about one month during July, it was not open for the period of time it was before. What I am saying is that that particular facility was put there because of the initiative of the Private Sector Program. AN HON. MEMBER: Did it work? MR. HODDER: It worked. Yes, the people who were there earned all summer, they earned a certain amount of money from the mini-golf course. They brought tourists into the area.

It is the first mini-golf course in the area, God knows that in the area of Port au Port we want as many people, but it was a spark initiated, the thing to be built, and it was used for part of the L35 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI summer and this summer. just cannot look at it that there is nothing to that is it. But you and say this and Now, Mr. Speaker, speaking of the District of Port au Port, it happens to be one of the most highest unemployment areas in this Province. And it is not unique in the Province, although some of the people in the Province feel that it is unique.

There are many areas in the Province that have high unemployment. There is high ~nemployment in Labrador. There is high unemployment down in Bay d' Espoir. There is high unemployment, and who wants to take the record for being the highest unemployment area. Nobody takes credit for that. But there are areas from time to time with higher unemployment. · But, Mr. Speaker, if we can cure the problem of high unemployment in only just one of those areas, then we have made some sort of a move that we have done something good in this Province. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I feel that each area of the Province - we have always accused the Federal Government of cutting the man to fit the cloth. I think Joe Smallwood used to call it the procrustean bed policy where if. the bed is not long enough you chop of the guys feet. AN HON. MEMBER: That is not (inaudible). MR. HODDER: No. Because, Mr. Speaker, we do the same thing here in the Province. Every program that this Government puts out is the same for every other area of the Province. No. 48 R35

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, if I am a Liberal I have never seen so many Tories in my life as I see on the other side in particular the Premier. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. HODDER: As a matter of fact, I tell the bon. gentlemen that when I joined the Tory Party I was at a caucus meeting one time and I looked at · my fellow seatmate and I said, there are more Liberals over here than there are over there. I have always felt that way, and certainly since this Government is in power it has been proved in spades. Mr.

Speaker, each area of the Province has different problems, . but I think if the Government is smart what it will do is look at every area of the Province in different ways. In other words unemployment in Port au Port cannot be solved in the same way as unemployment in Eagle River can be solved. There are different problems and different approaches that must be taken. Mr. Speaker, I feel that we have to develop entrepreneurship in many areas, not only in the schools but everywhere else we have to develop entrepreneurship. We have to put special funds into education. I think, Mr.

Speaker, that we have to look at the local businesses .in the area, we have to try to animate local business, and we have to particularly promote whatever opportunities are in the area. There are some opportunities in some areas of L36 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI this Province which are not in other areas of the Province. I think particularly of tourism in some areas of the Province. There are some areas of the Province where you cannot promote tourism, but there are other areas of the Province where you can.

There are some areas of the Province where you cannot go and promote the minerals that are there but there are other areas in which you can. I think you have to identify new resources and you have to identify business opportunities where they are. One thing we do not have in many areas of this Province is a data base. There is no data base in a lot of the areas of the Province for anybody coming in who want to set up a business. The Economic Council of Canada at one time said that there were actually seven areas of this Province which are growth areas and very many of them are bays.

I think in terms of my own area it is Bay St. George. Bay St. George sort of hangs together and they said that we should develop industry in the central part of those bays and that we should develop all weather roads going back and forth. In an area such as Bay St. George we do not have an adequate data base just to promote people in. We also have to improve the infrastructure where needed . Mr. . Speaker, I was sorry to see the Premier leaving because I wanted to talk about fuzzy thinking on behalf of the Premier. I asked a question of the Premier here in the House back about two or three weeks ago, and in the

preamble to the question which was a Tourism question concerning the road from Cape St. George to the mainland which, by the way, would be of great benefit to the Member for St. George's (Mr. Short) District and would be No. 48 R36

of great benefit to the Member for Stephenville (Mr. Furey) District, even though it is in my District. I asked a question about it and I did mention that it would open the whole Port au Port Peninsula for limestone development and when the Premier got up to speak he said, no, that is not true. It will not open. the Port au Port Peninsula for limestone development. Mr. Speaker, the Premier, obviously, does not know, or he has been badly advised, as the Port au Port Peninsula is the largest block of limestone on the Eastern Seaboard of Canada or the United States. The Minister of Energy is here.

There are three concessions there and I should speak to the Minister about this now. First, there is Lower Cove, and Lower Cove is now going into a joint arrangement with a German company and they are promoting their limestone. His Department also looks after Aguathuna and when this Government was in power we went out and called proposals across Canada for Aguathuna and we were successful in getting a company to come in who now want a lease . on Aguathuna. Aguathuna belongs to the Province. It reverted from DOSCO. Lower Cove belongs to Lower Cove.

They . have the land but the minerals on the top of the Port au Port Peninsula, and I thought I saw the Minister shake his head, used to be the BRINEX which are the most pure of all and they now belong to Canadian Mining, Western Canadian Mining. Not very long ago they decided to get a local contractor to crush some limestone and send it around to various people who might use it and they had to use a woods road to get to it and they did not get to the best of stuff then, but it seems to me, Mr.

Speaker, if a road goes across the top of the Port au Port Peninsula and there L37 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI are minerals on the top of the peninsula that · belong to a specific company, I do not know how' the Premier can say that the road would not open the Port au Port Peninsula and the limestone development. Certainly, they would be able to access their deposits. Anyhow, the Premier is not here. Perhaps one of his Members will tell him I am disappointed in him. Mr. Speaker, to get back to the limestone at Aguathuna.

I have not seen - and I am sort of off the topic here now - but I have not seen any movement or any real effort by this Government to actively promote it. It is near the water, it has a great strip ratio. There was a wharf there before, belonging to DOSCO. It is very easy to ship by water. We, for the past two years, were actively promoting it. We had some success with it. I called the Department and was told by a very senior official that he knew nothing about it. I will not say who this very senior official was, but he knew nothing about it. He put me on to somebody else who did know something about it.

But I certainly got the impression that was not being carried out. Mr. Speaker, I have had my five-minute warning. I think I have gone over that. I had a whole lot of other things to say about the fishery and about tourism and all that sort of thing, but I will save it for another day. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear; hear! MR. DUMARESQUE: Mr. Speaker. No. 48 R37

MR. SPEAKER: The bon. the Member for Eagle River. MR. DUMARESQUE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is a pleasure for me again to rise in this House, and particularly, to support the resolution put forward by my colleague from Harbour Grace. I want to spend a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, to speak on the general issues alluded to in the resolution and also, of course, to pay specific attention to some of the problems in Labrador. And, I must say, Mr.

Speaker, it is getting to be an onerous job to be speaking for the Coast of Labrador all the time, since the Member for Torngat Mountains never seems to have the consideration for his District to stand up and be counted on issues. But, Mr. Speaker, as time goes by and he realizes the great direction in which this party is taking the Province, and, in particular, the Coast of Labrador, I am sure he will get up and commend us for our actions. Mr . Speaker, I would like to indicate the thrust of my introduction on this resolution.

But, again, I would like to take just one second to touch on the innovative way the Opposition have found to deal with the resolutions that are put forward, particularly the way they are dealing with this resolution today, by cutting out the 'Whereases' in the clauses before the resolution is put to the floor. Now, Mr . Speaker, I am not a constitutional expert and I have paid close attention to hon. Members of this House who have L38 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI indicated expertise · in the Standing Orders and Beauchesne. But, Mr.

Speaker, as I understand it, again, with my limited understanding of the rules, it would only be proper that 'Whereases' in a resolution be dropped if, indeed, they were wrong. And, I must say, by looking at the • Whereases' as the hon. Member puts them forward, I have a lot of trouble coming to accept that they are wrong. For instance, the first one says,

Whereas the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador has had a . high unemployment rate for a number of years, now, Mr. Speaker, you do not need to be any economist or any great insightful individual to acknowledge that certainly the unemployment rate in this Province has been double the national average and in the double digit figure for years and years and years, so nothing wrong about that particular

whereas, and you know, the second one, Mr. Speaker,

Whereas the previous Government has done little to significantly change this, I mean, with all due respect to Members of the Opposition who have indicated that we cannot go on blaming the seventeen years of Tory rule and with all due respect to the individuals who indicate that as Members of this han. House, we have to be constructive and we have to ascertain our presence in this House, but I think that as Members of a Government, Mr. Speaker, there has to be a day, there has to be a time come, when we have to reckon with reality, and, as I know every Member of this hon.

House is sincere, and that everybody here is putting forward their best effort, Mr. Speaker, but there has to come a time, obviously the time came for the people of Newfoundland and Labrador to pass judgement on the No. 48 R38

policies and the initiatives of the previous Government and indeed, the statistics, all the statistics that you want to look at, point to the exact statement that the hon. Member makes, that if indeed there has been significant change, it certainly has not happened in per capita income, it certainly has not happened in unemployment rates, it certainly has not happened into growth in our economy, Mr. Speaker. Now the third one,

Whereas the Royal Commission of Employment and Unemployment put forward recommendation to help solve the problem, nobody can dispute that, Mr . Speaker, there is a great document that I read the report on Building on our Strengths, and I believe there is no doubt there are very, very good recommendations put · forward on this particular issue, and finally:

Whereas the Liberal Party has advocated policies to help alleviate the unemployment burden in this Province, Mr.

Speaker, there is absolutely no doubt that the Liberal Party has been advocating policies to have an effect on the unemployment rate in this Province, and I do not think there is any Member on this side, and indeed, if the truth had to be revealed by Members opposite, there is no doubt that everybody is confident, that once the policies are instituted and the programs take shape in this Province, that indeed the unemployment rate will be different, and indeed it will be lower in four years time than it was when we took over this Administration. Now, saying that, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to get on to the gist of my argument today, and to focus my debate. What I want to deal with, and what I want to bring Members attention to, is one of the old adages, Mr.

L39 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI Speaker, about, where there is a will, there is a way, and I just want to deal with the big player in our Federal system and indeed a big player in Newfoundland and Labrador, and that is the presence of the Federal Government, and how they impact upon our economy and how their policies have such a dramatic effect upon our employment rate, and I mean, there is absolutely no doubt that the will has always got to be there, if in fact you are going to get any kind of meaningful change. Now what will has been shown, Mr.

Speaker, by the Prime Minister of this country and by the Progressive Conservative Government of this country. In 1987, the Prime Minister came down here and signed the Hibernia Agreement, 12d, Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the profound statement that was made that day by the Prime Minister of this country for all of Newfoundland and Labrador to hear, I am not afraid to inflict prosperity on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador, that was the great sense of political will that was given to the people of this Province. He said, that is what I am not afraid, to do, Mr. Speaker. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

KR. DUMARESQUE: He said then a couple of weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, at the First Ministers Conference he said, 'The people of Newfoundland and Labrador should be grateful that Canada brought you into Confederation.' Now, that is another example of that particular attitude. How patronizing, how condescending, how absolutely immature, and how dramatic, the Prime Minister, the first Minister of the day can be to another part No. 48 R39

of his own Country. You should be grateful. Let there be no misunderstanding, Mr. Speaker, that we came into this great Country with things that that Prime Minister will never, ever live up to. We came in here with the determination and the courage and the will to make changes in this great Country, and we have done exactly that through our Premiers over the years. Now, Mr. Speaker, the attitudes have got to change, but also the policies have got to change. If we are going to have any effect on regional development and on Newfoundlands unemployment rate, the policies have got to change.

I just want to touch on a number of the policies that have been coming forward over the last four years, and in particular a couple of the latest ones, Mr. Speaker. When they decided to cut out the railway, when that famous rails and roads deal was signed, that was a real dramatic policy statement for the Federal Government to have implanted on the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. And what did it do to Port aux Basques, and Bishop Falls, and all those places that were so critically dependent upon this. And what exactly did we give, without belabouring the particular issue, Mr.

Speaker, I think that there is no doubt that that particular policy was detrimental, and that indeed we sold out the Government of the day, we sold out on that particular issue. And there is no doubt that it will have long lasting effects on our economy. Now, what did the Federal Government do not to long ago in regional development programs? What did it do to the ACOA program? It slashed that program L40 December 6, 1989 Vol XLI time, and time, and time again until now you are down to a situation where the most you could ever ask for as a private entrepreneur is $200 thousand.

They have cut, and cut substantially in the initiative of that particular program, and at the present time it makes it virtually impotent. Mr. Speaker, as the Premier of our Province has enunciated over the past number of days, and particularly at the First Ministers Conference, we have seen regional development money in this country go to the central Canada triangle through the southern Ontario, and the Quebec metropolis, and I believe, Mr. Speaker, that is not a matter of undue criticism, that is a matter of fact.

That is a matter of exactly what commitment the Federal Government is paying to the needs of the areas that are most blatantly hurt by particular regional development policies. There is absolutely no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that this particular move by the Federal Government has stymied economic growth, has stymied in particular the small and medium size businesses that usually takes up the greatest share of economic growth. And I think that that has to be acknowledged. We have to indicate to the Federal Government that they were wrong in doing that.

They were also wrong that they cut out the development of the tourism industry in this Province. They were also wrong by saying no to Newfoundland and Labrador, and we will not sign the $21 million tourism agreement. One of the opportunities, and one of the lights that we have in our Province that will give us an opportunity to find jobs and develop our economy, but the Federal Government said, 'No, we cannot see that in our budget to No. 48 R40

be able to do. ' They could not see that because obviously, Mr. Speaker, they did not have the will to persue that particular direction. Now one of the latest gimicks, of course, Mr. Speaker, ·that comes to the floor of the House of Conunons and to the people of Canada is the great G.S.T., Mr. Speaker, that great suction tax that the Federal Government has put in place. That $20 billion suction tax that is now put in place and going to be instituted on January 1991.

That is the latest initiative that that Federal Government has come out saying to people of Newfoundland and Labrador that there is another 9 per cent for you. There is another 9 per cent on all your goods and services, your haircuts, and every other service that you might get, but also they are comtemplating and it has been reconunended that the groceries be also taxed, Mr. Speaker. That is the latest initiative that the Federal Government have to be putting in place now, to stimulate the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I am not going to stand in this House on all occasions, and certainly not this one, to enunciate policies and to enunciate criticisms of all policies that are put forward without, of course, being responsible and advocating things that will be of real essential benefit to our Province, to ·offer good advice to the Federal Government of the day and ask them if they would really consider some of the things that the Premier of this Province and the Government of this Province are saying time and time again. Of course, Mr.

Speaker, there is L41 December . 6, 1989 Vol XLI no way that we will ever encounter the real problems of the day without exploring and coming to grips with the cause of this. And one of the things that obviously we have to keep advocating and keep pursuing is reforming of the Federal structure that we presently operate under.

And in particular the refQrming of the senate to an equal and effective Legislature or an effective institution within the Federal state, because that senate will offer us, as a have-not-province, an opportunity to effectively encounter some of the political reality that obviously rises to the floor in the House of Conunons . And we see it now and the political influence is seen through the regional development spending, it was seen through the larger provinces, Ontario and Quebec have garnered their benefit from it. So, Mr.

Speaker, we have to keep pushing, and I am sure that the Opposition will continue to support us, to get that essential senate reform and to get that kind of impetus that I think is at a watershed time in our evolution, Mr. Speaker. Now, of course, there is other particu