VOL. 2 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TR.fu'liSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 p.m. - 6:00p.m. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 1980 NO. 32

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1150 EL - 1 The Ho,lse met at 3 :00 P. H. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : ~~. SPEk~R(Simms) : Order, please! Pursuant to

Section 29, Subsection l,of the Parliamentary Comrnissioner(Ombudsman)Act, the fifth ~ual report of the parliamentary co~~ssioner was received in my office a short while ago. I will now table the report and copies will be distributed to all hen. ~e~bers very shortly. I would also like to ta~e this opportunity on behalf of all hen. rrembers to welcome to the .gal1eries today a delegation of Grade 10 and 11 students from D1~ne Memorial Hi~h­ school in St. Mary's from the district of St. Mary's-~e Capes, accompanied by teachers Mr. Dillon and Mr. Davis. I trust their visit will be enjoyable and informative.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : lo!R. L. BARRY: Hear, hear. STATEMENTS BY MINISTERS The hen. Minister of Mines and Energrf. Mr. Speaker, it is with regret I have to report that ~eliminary year end financial statements indicate a sign­ ificant deterioration in the financial position of the Marystown Shipyard in recent roonths. As of January, 1980 the loss being projected for the year was $1 million, w~ich would have been acceptable.

By the end of March, 1980, the preliminary year end figures - and I must stres that these are still prelimenary and are not finalized- they indicated a loss of $5.8 million dollars before depreciation and Government advances, which WOul.d be some improvement over last year but still unacceptably high. During the past year work has progressed in implementing internal management and accounting system$ 1obtaining a full order book and appointing a new Board of Directors.

Until March, it appeared that productivity had significantly improved but delays and problems have been encountered in completing Hull 26, the first of a 4 supply ship 3046 --..,.

April 30, 19€0 Tape No. 1150 EL - 2 HR. L. BARRY: contrac t. Some of these costs huve to be extrapolated for t.l";e ful l contract - in other words, we have to assume the projected costs for Hulls 27, 28 and 29 will also rise and re c­ o;nize the resulting losses in this year's statements. So that $5.8 million dollars includes projected losses on Hulls 27, 28 and 29.

The best available estimate now projects-a wo=s eninc; .. since .January, on the total contract of S4.8 million , made up of $2 million attributable to additional man ho urs over the contract, and $2 million attributable to materials increase and interest charc;es because of delays, and aqa.:.n we are all aware of the si'?'Jlificant i.ncrease in interest rates which has occured in recent tenths. And also $800,000 attributable to increased 3047

April 30 . 1980 Tape No. 1151 DW - l J: l.!i_ .___!:_ ._23~ ~ RY : overheads durin~ the period. The sudden deterioration in the financial projection supplied has caused me considerable concern. The new Board of Directors is working hard on the problem but the new members have been in office for only several months. After consultation with the Boar~ I have decided,with the Board's agreement,to immediately appoint a Task Force of senior public servants from Treasury Board and the Departments of Finane~. Industrial Development and Public Works. This Task Force will review the operations of the Marystown ghipyard and report to the Board of Directors on the following: (

a) the financial system (

b) the production costs system, (

c) the material management system, (

d) the planning, schedulinq and expediting of work, (

e) the overheads, (

f) the management structure and (

g) any other aspect of the Shipyard operations which might be relevant to solution of the problems facing the Yard. I have also decided to request my colleaques in Cabinet to appoint a Commissioner to conduct an enquiry into the operations of the Marystown Shipyard, the terms of reference to be worked out with the Department of Justice. And because of a question I was asked 1 I should make it clear that this is not to imply that th2re is any - I think the wording was 'hanky-panky: qoing on, but this has to do with an enquiry into the business operations of the Yard. MR. S. NEARY: Inquiries Act? MR. L.

BARRY: Inquiries Act. HR. SPEAKER (Simms) Placentia West. Will it be under the Public It will be under the Public The bon. member for Burin - 30~B

hp:il 30, 1980 Ta!:)e No. 1151 o~; - 2 l-!R. Z> . HC? LLETT: Nr. S;lcaker, 1 r.tight say ie i:; ~>il:h req:et chat residents of the Burin Pen in su la ,and 9u:in - Placenti a Wese in ~ar ticular, will receiv e this stat e;ne nt, alehouc;~ possi~ly it should be view ed as qood news. I remember lase year ~hen t ~e Minister ann ounced ~hat the 3oa re of Directors would be conducting an enquiryi ne o the ya:d's ope rati on .t he wisdom of that particular mo ve was questioned.And in no way am I diminishing the amou~t of work chat the ne w Boa rd of Di rectors and peop le at the yard ha ve done to date.

I can only say that I feel ,without talkino to a lot of people in my own rie ing 1 t~at by and laroe this investiga eion will be welcomed. ~here are a lot o! people in the area ~ho are very concerned about the :uture of the ya r ~, not in relation to an y downor ading but cereain ly a sound futu re for the rard so that the people who work ther~ the area ~n pa rticular,will hav e !u ll faith in its long-term operation.

And I can only say once agai~ that this type of in~stiaation ~as asked for some ti me ago ,a nd I am gl ad that the ~o•re r ~ment has seen fit ~o cond~ct it and I ho?e tha t the people ~ ho are direc ely involved will have o~cor t unity to hav e a~ple tr.put into the enquiry. Thank you . 3049

April 30, 1980 Tap.: No. 1152 NM - 1 HR. SPEAKER: (Simms ) I would like to welcome to the gallery today 1 on behalf of all han. members, Mr. Joyce and members of the senior management of Bowater Corporation. I trust that Lheir visit has been informative and I welcome them to the galleries today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! ORAL QUESTIONS: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The han. Leader of the Opposition. MR. JAMIESON: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. By way of

preamble,let me say that our caucus having met this morning and concluded that the issue of a new flag for Newfoundland is very much a non-partisan one, and one on which there are clearly going to be individual differences of opinion, we for our part would be intending to have a free vote on this matter. May I ask the han. the Premie~ first of all 1 what his intentions may be with regard to legislation on this question and also when we might expect it? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PR&~IER PECKFORD: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I intend to give notice of a bill today, of course the bill would not be introduced for a number of days from today, I give notice of it today, and I am contemplating the best way to proceed and we too had a caucus this morning in which one of many things discussed, of course,perhaps the most important one was the whole question of the flag, and what the procedure will be as it relates to the House of Assembly and I just sort of reserve further comment as to how I wish to proceed.

Suffice it to say right now I appreciate the question, I appreciate the comment of the Leader of the Opposition as it relates to how they are to proceed as a caucus on their side. I will give notice of a bill today and then infor~m the hon. House tomorrow on how we will proceed as it relates to that. But I appreciate the question and I appreciate the Leader of the Opposition informing the House as to results of their caucus. MR. SPEAKER: MR. HANCOCK: The hon. member for St . Mary's-The Capes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Minister of Health. Is the Minister of Health aware, or has 3050

April 30, 1980 Tape :-;o. U32 m1- 2 MR. li.l\.NCOCl<: a."1ybody in his deparone:>t been informed, of the serious health ?roblem that is zy;;curring in the commu ni ty of Branch ·.;here raw sewerage is running out into t."'e drains or. t.~e side or the road, in some insta.~ces in people's wells? ~IR . SPEAKER (Simms ) : The hon . ~!inister of Health . MR. EOUSE: Mr. Speaker, I have not been informed, I ha ve not been advis ed o: that. I am not saying that the deparcment has not made a.~y inspection of it but it is relat ed to - I think it is related to a disease that the hon . ga"1tleman taL~s about . F.e i~.

I gue ss , try~ng to relate it . I have checked on that particular disease and I ~ advised by depart.~ ent officials that the presence of sewer contamination does not influe:>ce that p~-eicular cond~tion of 3051

April 30,1980 Tape No .1153 AH-1 MR. HOUSE: meningococci meningitis which is the disease that one person died from last night. MR. HANCOCK: A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hen. member for St. Mary's- The Capes. M..".. HANCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The people in the area are very angry at the lack of action taken by the Department o~ Health.

Some time ago a lady had an inspector come into the area and she pointed out exactly what was happening and the inspector said to the lady,"What in the heck can I do about it?" I would just like to know who t..l;ose inspectors refer to when they come back and give in their report on such an incident and what action d~es tqe inspector recomnend to be taken ? If this was reported,why was not some action taken on it some time ago? MR. SPEAKER: The hen. Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr.

Speaker, when an inspector goes into a community for a health problem and they do d;tect that there is a serious problem with raw sewerage,the normal procedure for them is to make a report to the council,-if a council exists 1 and if there is no council in existance they will make the report to the Department of Municipal Affairs,and they do recommend that certain action be taken. They do not necessarily come back to the deputy minister or the minister with these, they go to the department concerned. With respect to this particular incident,there is a public health nurse in the area today.

There were two people-and this is of great concern and I think it should be aired-that it is not common for two people to have this particular condition. It is not related to tuberculosis , which the member asked me about yesterday. It is not related to the presence of any germ caused by effluent. It is usually a germ that is carried by healthy people. MR. THOMS: Is it contagious? MR. HOUSE: It is not highly contagious. AN HON.MEMBER: Not highly contagious (inaudible)? MR. HOUSE: Yes. And anybody in close contact is advised to take sulphur drugs. I understand there is a nurse in the area today and they are 3052

1\pnl 30,1980 Tape No. 1153 l!..!i-2 !o!P.. HOUSE' chec~ing it out .,,ith U1e medical people. t:o advise che people l.n close cont:act: 1:0 get to a doct:er and receive these sulphur drugs. MR . HANCOCK ' ~. SPEAXER (Simms)' for St. Y.ary's -The capes. :-ut. HANCOCK' A final supplementary . A final supplementary . The hon. membe~ can the minister give us some insurance chat the se•.,erage problem has no relationship to the two cases o! meningitis \\•hich have been detect:cd in recent days and that tller!! is no fear to the people of ~~t area through th~ se~erage sys~em? ~. SP£AICER' :1R. HOUSE' The hon.

Minister of aealth. Mr. Speaker, chat ~as the very speci~ic question that I asked today,and there is definitely no rela~o~ship according t:> the medical opinion chat r received it: from and that ••·as fror.~ t:!'le Dire:t:or c.f Public Health Servi:es, Dr. severs and I checked it out with other eoct:ors also. There is no relationship. ~tR . NEA."tY' ~IR-l:iOUSE' TB shots (inaudible). )lot T9 shots. Su).pbli.r dzu ns 3053

April 30, 1980, Tape 1154, Page 1 -- apb MR. SPEAKER(Sirnms): The hon. the member for Fogo. MR. TULK: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Social Services and it concerns the situation at the Paddon Memorial Hospital in Happy Valley - Goose Bay. Some weeks ago, I think, during Question Period the minister assured the House that the situation at Paddon Memorial was well in hand and was being taken care of.

Now we hear news reports and read in the media that the administrator of that home,apparently with help from the social worker from the International Grenfell Association, has made public a report saying that all is not well. I wonder if the minister would bring the House up to date on the latest situation and tell us what action has been taken. MR. SPEAKER: Social Services. .t-IR. HICKEY: The hon. the Minister of Mr.

Speaker, let me first of all say that the levels of care to residents of the Paddon Memorial Home are being provided to those residents in a manner which my department is happy with, notwithstanding the report of a social worker who was employed by the International Grenfell Association. The whole issue arose when the administrator- or former administrator of that home requested a social worker from IGA to do an assessment of care being provided to the residents.

That was done by this gentleman in isolation of n::.r officials in Happy Valley, the very competent, highly trained and professional officials that I have there. There was no consultation, there was no involvement with my officials, it was all done very independently, in total isolation of them. 3054

April 30, 1980, Tape 1154, Page 2 -- apb MR. HICKEY: The report as submitted to the Board of Directors of the home cited a number of areas of concern so far as care of the residents was concerned. One interesting aspect of that report said that when the assessment started the residents were quite happy in their surroundings and in their environment and with the care and services being provided. But toward the end of the report, the same gentleman reported that the residents were quite ~pset.

So one could gather from that that his exposure to them, and indeed his questioning of them, led more to their upset than anything else. It is also interesting to note that the gentleman who completed the social report left Labrador, or left the employ of IGA,a day after that report was made public. All in all my department is satisfied that the levels of care provided the residents is in keeping with our standards. The Board of Directors are in control of that home and are administering it as best they can under the circumstances.

Also, my department has offered to provide temporary help in terms of an administrator pending the recruitment of one by the Board. Mr. Francis, the administrator, 3055

April 30, 1980 Tape 1155 EC - l MR. T. HICKEY: I understand his employment concluded ;a couple of days or a day ago. He had resigned his position to finish his contract in June: however, the board of directors had asked him to wind up his duties, I believe, yesterday or the day before, MR. B. TULK.: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : fQr Fogo, MR. B. TULK: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary.

A supplementary, the hon. the member Mr.Speaker, I understand that the board of directOrs received the report some ten days before it was made public and yet I also understand from the minister's statement that he made to the Social Services Committee yesterday morning that he was not advised until he heard it, I believe he said, on c.s.c. Television or somewhere. My question to the minister, Mr. Speaker, is there perhaps indeed some truth to that report that the senior citizens at that :W= are suffering hardships? And is there any need,- for perh;aps a future enquiry into the thing? MR. SPEAKER: MR.

T. .HICKEY: The hon. the Minister cf Social Services. Mr. Speaker, there is absolutely no need for an enquiry of any nature into conditions in that home. The issue arose in the b eginning with a clash of personalities between the administrator and the nursing staff. This gentleman, this social worker, comments on the health of residents, for example. He is not a doctor, he is not col!IPetent to delve into some of the areas in which he has involved himself.

While he has professional training and is a professional in terms of the emotional conditions of patients or residents, certainly he is not a co~tent person to assess the medical condition of residents, which in fact WaS one of the areas that he cited as being one of the concerns.

I have to say that in all of this 1 notwithstanding the publicity, notwithstanding some of the statements made in the report and statements which were made by the administrator of an earlier date, I am satisfied 1 having had consultation with a representative of the board of directors, and rey staff on ;a continuous basis of consultation with them, that everything is okay at that institution. And as I said earlier on the issue in which we, and myself especially, concern myself most of all, 3056

April 30, 1990 Tape 1155 EC- 2 MR. T. HICKEY: is that the levels cf care being provided are adequate and certainly meet with the standards that we have set down. MR.S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Sillll!lS) : LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does the hon, member wish to yield? A supplementary 1 the hon. the I:".en.ber for Mr.

Speaker, the question that I would like to put to the minister is a muc.'l broader one in connection with the dispute, the internal difficulties that arose in that home, The minister being interviewed on television when the problems arose, made a statement that shocked the whole medical world, the nursing profession and tne doctors, inasmuch as he said that as far as he, the minister, was concerned, the administrator of this home - and I presllllle he was applying it to all the senior citizens homes in Newfoundland - that administrators could administer drugs. 1 know it came as a complete shock to me, and as I say, I have discussed it with physicians and nurses who are in the Association of Registered Nurses.

I would like to know now if the minis~er has reviewed or revised his position on this particular matter, which seems to me to be of a very serious nature? You cannot have administrators 3057

April 30, lC\80 Tape !!o. 1156 SD - l t•!R. S • NEl'.RY: administering drugs to patients in these horc.es in any way, shape or form. '1/hat is the minister's positio:1 now on this particular matter of adrrinistrators and non-professional staff administering drugs to people who reside in these homes? MR. SPEl'Y-ER: (Simms) Services. !1R. T. I!:CKEY: The hon. the t~inister of Social Mr. Speaker, ~1 position is unchanged, it is just as firm now as it was then. I suggest to my han. friend from LaPoile (!lr. S.

Neary) that he must'have gotten ~art of rny state~ent on CEC at that tir.e or I do not think he would be expressing the concern he is. MR. S. NEARY: 1-lhat do you mean? MR. T. HICKEY: Well, just let me finish now and then he "ill see exactly what I mean. My statement illustrated our position with regard to institutions and licenced boarding homes and the dispe~sing or the administering of medication or drugs. And our position, which is twofold - two different positions on both types of facilities-is very clear. The dispensing of drugs is one thing.

Taking drugs from a drugstore, prescribing drugs - that is one thing. •mat we are talking about here is the administering of drugs, the taking of two pills or one capsule out of a container and giving it to a patient. And.my position as outlined in that interview is very simply ~~is, that professional people are not required in licenced boarding homes to do that.

We have licenced boarding homes, and I am sure my han. friend is very well aware both under our own programme in my department, under the Community Care Programme, under the Waterford Hospital, wherein lay people are administering drugs on a daily basis and in much larger quanties, I might add, Mr. Speaker, than we could ever think of in the senior citizens' home. Those drugs are prescribed by a medical doctor and the administering of them is simply the taking from a container a capsule and giving the resident,as opposed to anything like prescribing them or anything of that nature.

I indicated at the same time that 3058

Arril :;o, 1sso Tape No . 1156 so - 2 lolR . T. H!CK:::Y: cur positio.1 ,again crystal clear, '"'ith :::-egard to the adrniniste:::-ing of <!..rugs in ir.stit:utions and i~ is as follows : >."herever possible and where there are pro!essional people such as nurs es , that nu rs es i:le responsible for the administering or drugs . In tr.e abse nce of nurses, people with some training, and in t!'le absenc e of staf! of that caliber, ordinary Lay people could admini ste:::- those drugs . That is really all I said~ that is really nothing new, a.;'ld there is no danger there .

I di d sa y, ho wever , that anyone who aCJllinisters a ':!rug -::; a resident or ;;>atient has some responsibility goin<; ..,ith that particclar act . Anc tile Board of Oi:::ecoo rs in tilis ca se certainly have some respor.sibility for ho;., the drugs a.:::-e admi:listered in that institution . But that institution and the :nanne r in whlch the medicatio ns were applie<' is no di.fferent t.~an a."'y or all othe r senior citizens ' homes, L'lterfait.'t homes throughout the Provi nce . !" .. ~ . B • Tti!J(: Supp le~r.enta.ry , Mr . Speake r. 3059 ~

April 30, 1980 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : the member for Fogo. MR. B. TULK: Tape No. 1157 EL - 1 A final supplementary, the hon. Mr. Speaker, I would still like to come back to my second question. Apparently the minister did not know about the report until ten days after the Board of Directors had received it. I would like for the minister to tell the House who appoints the Board of Dizectors, what control he has over them and why he was not aware of that situation until ten days later? MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : The hon. the Minister of Social Services. MR. T. HICKEY: Mr.

Speaker, I cannot confirm or deny that the Board of Directors received the report for ten days.Obviously, there were a few days, a number of days - I am not sure if it was ten or eight or five or whatever. I do know and I confirm now that my senior staff and myself were aware of this only on the day before the information was made available to the committee,and that was the day before yesterday. My Regional Director in Happy Valley, my Regional Director for Labrador, is a member of that Board of Directors and the report came to his attention a few days before.

He had not been in a position up to that time to make us aware as the Board was dealin9 with the report and he was in the process of alerting us when the issue was made public. so far as the hon. gentleman's reference or question as to what control I have over that Board or who appoints them, I have to say tha1: the home is an .• interfaith home like many others J!Un in the Province • The Board of Directors get together as a group, cooperatively, under various churches and the Board of Directors is put together from that process. I have no authority to appc.>~i,i... ..., ... dismiss.

I have no authority in the administration of those homes unless and only 3060

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1157 EL - 2 MR. T. HICKEY: wherein there is a question of levels of ·care or qual .ity of care afforqed the residents. That is my chief responsibility. I have responsibility for licencing, the issuing of a licence,the cancelling of a licence, suspending of a licence,etc.

We fund ;all of those homes, We provide .oney to keep them going and so on, but to all intents and purposes they are an autonomous body operatiJlg on their own at azms lenqth fro~~~ government and for the 1110st part, and I cannot say really that there has been anything in this issue to change my mind, we are quite happy with that situation and for the IIDSt part, if not in all cases, a tremendous job is done by those people at cu:m.s length in qovermnent, and that is the way we would like ~ keep it. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : New question, the hon. •ember for 'l'orngat Mountains. 3061

Apr i 1 3 0 , 19 8 0 XR. G. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER (Simms) MR. L. S~IRLING: Tape No. 1158 DW - 1 A supplementary, Mr. Speaker . I indicated a final supplementary. The hon. member for Bonavista North. ~r. Speaker, I had a question for the Minister of Transportation an~ Communications (Mr. Brett), but since he is not here I would like to direct it to the Premier. I do not know if I have the Premier's attention on behalf of the Minister of Transportation and Communications. PREMIER PECKFORD: You have it. MR. L.

STIRLING: The council in Greenspond , after a meeting with the Minister of Transportation and Communications, was given the impression that 1 providing federal funds were available 1 the Provincial Government would be prepared to pro­ ceed with the start of the causeway to Greenspond. When they contacted the Federal Government 1the answer that the council got back was that there is $2 million available from the Federal Government but to this point the Province has not Pequested it. I am not sure that the Premier would be aware of it,but I would ask the question in the absenca of the minister.

Is it the intention of the Province- can he confirm whether or not they have made application and 1 if they have not made application 1 do they intend to do so? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: That whole area- I do not know if the hon. member knows; I guess every hen. member on the opposite side of the House and every hon. member on this side of the House could ask a similar question 1 and the problem is that you do not present to DREE one project as it relates to a causeway or a ferry system or road system; you do not present one road. you present a submission which contains a number of transportation projects.And I think over the last number ofyears the Greenspond causeway was a part of submissions that were submitted and only so many cf the projects got approved. 3062

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1158 DW - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Obviously we are eager to pursue the Greenspond causeway and it will be in the new roads agree­ ment that will be put forward. I think that one is one that everybody has sort of agreed upon as being a viable way to go _for a transportation system to that island.

The problem right now is,and I respond with some regret that we cannot ge~ as I said yesterda~ any new submissions to DREE unless and until the present submissions that are ready for signing, namely the forestry agreement, na~ely the coastal Labrador agreement,which contains roads, by the way, namely the Nordco agreement, namely the land mapping and survey agreemen~ are signed so that they are out of the way,and the then the next group takes precedence and are then examined by DREE. So it is not a matter of just thr~wing off a submission here or there and they clicked off and ticked off and get approved.

There are now four holding up the other ones,and one of the those that is being held up is the roads agreem~nt in which consideration is now being given to the Greenspond causeway. MR. L. STIRLING' MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : for Bonavista North. A supplementary, Mr . Speaker . A supplementary, ~~ hen. member 3063

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1159 NM - 1 MR. STIRLING: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I understand from what the Premier said that he was talking about ~~e DREE agreement. My impression was it was a separate agreement that had to do with the money that the federal government had already committed themselves to spend for the ferry terminals, or the wharf on each end , and that it was an agreement between the Province and the federal government to convert that money that they would normally spend for terry terminals into money to be used for the causeway. And my impression was that that has already been committed.

Is the Premier saying now that that is not the case or he is just not familiar with the case? Is there a possibility that that money has been allocated outside this DREE agreement and 1if that is the case 1 do I understand from what he has said that if the money is available from the federal gover~~ent in whatever area , that the Province is prepared to proceed with their share? MR. SPEAKER: The han. ~~e Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, the han. member's first question then was not, shall I say, directed in the right place. I think the han. member did refer to DREE in his original question. MR.

STIRLING: No, I did not. PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh, I am sorry. I thought I gained that. I was listening to two or three and I did not get it straight then; I thought the hon. member was referring to DP£E. The ferries agreement is a separate agreement and has nothing to do with DREE. So I will have to take the han. member's question under advisement and get further information from the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. Brett) because, as the bon. member says, there were allocations to ferry terminals that were a part of the agreement.

Now if there is going to be a causeway and this money can be transferred directly into causeway money, fine and dandy with us. I will pursue that 3064

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1159 N!>! - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: for the han. member and we will have an answer for him the next one to two days. MR. STIFLING: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): for Bonavista North. Mr. Speaker . A final supplementary, the hon. member MR. STIRLING: Yes, the second part of that question, Mr. Speaker was if that is the case,will the Province be prepared to go ahead with their share of it? PREMIER PECKFORD: Yes. Well 1I thought I answered that. I will have an answer for the hon. member in the next one to two days. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for St. Barbe. MR. BENNETT: A supplementary question, Mr.

Speaker . Bonne Bay-Woody Point ferry~ I understand about two and a half years ago an agre~ent was entered into with the ferry"operators, an ongoing five year agreement; the ferry ramp is in a deplorable condition. I understand from the operators that they doubt very much if they can go into the up-coming Winter with existing facilities as thev are, I am wondering if the Premier and/or the Minister of Transportation (Mr. Brett) will most certainly include in any ferry services or extensions as such, that (inaudible) agreement should certainly be looked upon and the Woody Point one be considered. MR.

SPEAKER: The han. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, if I am not mistaken, if my memory serves me correctly, and I will bow to any hon.member present who k.~ows differently, the Bonne Bay ferry service was not a federal ferry service and hence did not come under the agreement of ferries ' which was signed by - MR. ROBERTS: It has always been run by the Provincial Highways Department . 3065

April 30 , 1980 'l'ape No. 1159 NM - 3 PRE.'UER ?ECKFOP.D : )oly comment was if someboC.y had information to the contra..ry chen I would be willing co bow ,a nd I do not think that the hon. :nember for the St rai t of Belle Isle (Mr. Roberts ) has information to the contrary ; I thi~~ he is co nfirming wr.ac I have already said. !n other words , the Bonne Bay ferry service has always been a provincial service an .d therefore in the context of the way t.l-}e hon. member for Bon avista North (Mr.

Stirling) was talking, which was an agreement that was signed between the federal government and the provincial government in which t."tere was a transfer of jurisdiction for the operation and continued maintenance of the ferry services which hithertofore came under the aegis of the federal governmem:. now being passed over, there were scme monies as part of that agreement ·~ich would allow for the upgrading of ~xisting ferry 3066 ,,.

April 30, 1980, Tape 1160, Page 1 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: terminals before the Province actually took over the system. In other words, the federal government said, 'We do not want to be in the ferry business any more, we want the Province to take it over, and,if you will take it over, we will ensure that everything is brought up to scratch before you actually take it over.' Nm'l, the Bonne Bay one is different from that all together and has nothing to do with it. It has always been, as the member for the Strait of Belle Isle (Mr.

Roberts) pointed out, a ferry system that has been conducted exclusively by the provincial Department of Transportation and Communications, -number one. Number two, the han. member has a problem with that ferry service which deals with loading ramps and so on there. I will take the matter under advisement, and get on· to the Minister of Transportation and Communications {Mr. Brett} when he gets back. He is presently down on the Great Northern Peninsula and when he gets back I will bring it to his attention and have an answer for the hon. member. MR. SPEAKER(Simms): Eagle River. MR.

HISCOCK: The hon. the member for Wi .th regard to ferry terminals and that,in the Strait of Belle Isle and on the Labrador coast we have two new wharves installed there and they are entirely a fed~ral responsibility. But the Minister of Transportation will basically end up saying he has this committee on the go to look into it. Could the Premier advise this House is the Premier and the department recommending that the ferry on the Strait of Belle Isle be looked into, is kept open as long as possible and if necessary, if it needs to be replaced by a new ferry in the future, 3067

April 30, l980, Tape 1160, Page 2 -- apb MR. HISCOCK: of a new contract. Because what it is is the ice problem and basically experts themselves do not even agree. So if we can get the ferries coming across the Strait all the time,from Port aux Basques to Sydney, surely we should be able to keep them open until sometime in mid-January. Is the Premier going to be looking into that? MR. SPEANER(Simms): The han. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: ~x.Speaker, the committee to which the hon. the Minister of Transportation and Communications referred on a number of occasions now, is one to look into developing-seeing we will have the ferries all in our own jurisdiction, power and authority, then we must develop a ferry policy for the Province . dealing wi~1 all the ferries. Obviously, that will be one of the things, undoubtedly, that will be considered by that committee, as to just how long you can keep that service open. I do not know myself if talking about a ferry system from the St.

Barbe Coast to the Labrador coast involves the same kind of thing as going from North Sydney to Port aux Basques, as the hon. member just implied. But obviously that would be one of the things. They will be making recommendations on the nature of the ferry systems, the upgrading that is necessary, the kinds of facilities they have now, the kinds of boats they have now and so on and then proposing what whould be done for the foreseeable future over the next four or five years. MR.. SPEAKER: Order, please! The time for Oral Questions has expired.

I would like to welcome to the galleries on behalf of all han. members a delegation from the Burin Town Council, from the distri ,ct of 3068

April 30, 1980, Tape 1160, Page 3 -- apb MR. SPEAKER(Simms): Burin - P:acentia West, headed by councillor Mitchell. I trust their visit will be productive. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear: PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING k~D SPECIAL COMMITTEES MR. SPEAKER: Stephenville. MR. STAGG: The hon. the member for Mr. Speaker, this is in the form of an interim report, or an interim protest to some extent, from the Government Services Committee.

Last evening the Government Services Committee met at the Colonial Building to discuss the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing expenditures, some $68.5 million, and it was noted that there were no members of the press, either the electronic - MR. NEARY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order. The hon. the member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend was talking there. I am sure he wanted to raise a point of order. But what is the hon. gentleman up to, Sir? Your Honour is on Presenting Reports of Standing Committees.

Is the hon. member presenting a report or is he - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh: MR. NEARY: Well, is it debatable? Usually you table a report. Yesterday we had to give the member for St. John's North (Mr. Carter) leave to read a report. The han. gentleman is making an oral report. Are we going to debate it? Mr. Speaker, I would like to a ruling, some guidance from the Chair because this is the first time this has happened in this hon. House. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order. The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. 3069

April 30, 1980, Tape 1160, Page 4 -- apb MR . ROB .ERTS: To the point of order. First of all, let me say that we on this side are quite prepared to give leave to the gentleman from Stephenville . We understand he is to make a statement about some events that went on, or did not go on, I think, would be a more accurate report, but 1o1ent on in committee - I think there is an important point and we on th .is side would ask for a ruling. Our understanding is that under this heading , this part of Orders of the Day, ~~e routine proceedings, all that one may do is simply stand and say, ·~~.

Speaker, I have the honour to present the report of the standing committee ' and then lay it on the table of the House7 it may not be commented upon, debated or anything else . MR. JAHIESON: That is right. MR . ROBERTS : We have no objection at all, in this case, to the learned and hon. genUernan from Stephenville Ott . Stagg) making a state.'llent . We may ask that someone on this side be given a like co urtesy. I am not sure whether any of my colleagues, who were present at the Committee meetir.g last ni<;ht, wish 3070

April 30,1980 Tape No. 1161 AH-l MR. ROBERTS: to say that or not. Now yesterday I mentioned to Your Honour this question. There are some references in Beauchesne which I think are probably applicable. I am just trying to find them. It is in

Chapter 15 but - well 1 648 is the relevant one, I think, 648 ( 1), Your Honour, "When a Speaker has called for Reports from Committees, during the progress of routine business, " ~:ell here we are, "the Chairman, or in his absence," well,the Chairman is the gentleman from Stephenville (Mr. Stagg), "will rise in his place and say he has the honour topresent the report of the Committee. He hands t~e report to the Page, who delivers it to the Table.

The report is then printed in the Votes and Proceedings." We have no argument against making the reports, we have no argument against a statement being made by leave, but we wish to have it understood 1 if in fact the position is as we understand it to be, that it is being done by leave and we would ask equally that if one of my colleagues wished to speak we would be granted a like courtesy. MR. MARSHALL: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: To the point of order. To the point of order. The hon. President Mr.

Speaker, if it is done by leave there is no need of Your Honour now making a specific ruling on the matter because it then becomes a hypothetical situation. But the only thing tr~t I would point out is that I do believe it is probably not out of ~rder for somebody in tabling a report to make a few brief comments as to the overall nature of the report, not a speech as to its contents but 1you know 1 what it relates to. MR. ROBERTS: Your Honour. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order. The hon. member for the Strait of Belle Isle. MR.

ROBERTS: I do differ with the hon. gentleman.Perhaps we should make it a point for a ruling. We will grant leave if the ruling goes against us,but let us not make it hypothetical because I do not want to see, my colleagues and I do not want to see an

interpretation 3071

April 30,1980 MR. ROBERTS: Tape No. 1151 AH-2 accepted,unless Your Honour rules that that is what our practices are,about this point. Even a few comrnents 1 we know full well tend to - the line between a few corr~ents and a debate and one thing and another is a thin dividing line and a wavering one, So let us raise the point of order which says that the hen. gentleman from Stephenville (Mr. Stagg) has no right 1as Chairman of this Committee, to say anything accep~ 1 I have the honour to present a report' and he then lays it upon the table of the House.

The understanding would be we are not attempting to muzzle him at all. If he wishes to say a little more,let him go ahead and we will give leave. Maybe the way co solve it- Your Honour may wish to look into the matter- is to take it as an actual point under advisement and we will go ahead by leave on this instance and the hen. gentleman say whatever it is he wishes to say. M.'<..

SPEAKER (Simms): With respect to the point of order, it has always been my understanding that under this particular point in the routine business, I simply call for reports, the member would get up and make a report and I am sure there have been occasions where they have rr~de other comments. MR. ROBERTS: No,Sir. MR. SPEAKER: Well 1 that will be a matter that I will have to ~ake under advisement. But certainly the other traditional practice is that there are no allowances for comments after~2rds. on that part of it I am certain.

But in any event,with respect to the point of order 1 let me take the matter under advisement for some further comment at a later time. It is my understanding 1 then 1that there is leave for the hon. member for - MR. NEARY: Our spokesman can then respond. MR. SPEAKER: Is there leave both sides? Certainly there will be no debate on the matter,but there will be a comment, one from each side. By leave. The hen. member for Stephenville . 3072 ---- .. ·-····

April 30,1980 Tape No. 1161 AH-3 MR. STAGG: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well as I was saying before I was interrupted by the academics of the situation,we, the Government Services Committee,met last evening to discuss the estimates of the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing, some $68.5 million,and we found to our chagrin that there were no members of the press present,the electronic media or the printed media,who generally cover proceedings of the House and cover the estL~ates committees.

So I was asked,or directed,in effect, as Chairman of that committee to make contact with the press ~allery and indicate our displeasure and our concern about this matter 1 and to that end I have written a letter to the press gallery 1which I think might be appropriate if I read into the record.

The letter is to "The Chair Person, Press Gallery - Chair person or Madam President or whatever is the proper application - House of Assembly, Confederation Building, Re: Coverage of Estimates Committees: Dear Miss Pike; On Tuesday, April 29th the Government Services Committee meeting to discuss the estimates for the Department of Municipal Affairs and Housing voted to adjourn debate until Wednesday, 7.30 p.m. in the Collective Bargaining Room in the Confederation Building. The reason for this adjournment was the lack of attendance of any members of the press.

It is our view that the press is an integral part of the process whereby the estimates are debated and information conveyed to the general public. As Chairman of the Government Services Committee,I have been instructed to inform the House on the Reports by Standing and Special Committees that this situation exists. We view this rratter as most serious since it is quite possible that without the presence of the press and the members of the general public,we would in effect be conducting in camera sittings. Obviously this is the situation that we all strive to avoid. 3073

April 30, 1980 Tape 1162 EC - 1 M...~. F. STAGG: I trust that this matter will be given prompt consideration!' And in that connection, Mr. Speaker, 'as a further editorial comment - but I will not abuse the leave given by the House - that

section of the media which is funded publicly, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, has been notably absent from all of our proceedings, and I think it is appropriate that today when we are all being called upon to file our income tax returns, that attention be brought to them that they have the duty to inform and to convey information to the public as well as to convey entertainment. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : By leave, the hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR. T. LUSH: Mr .

Speaker, I just want to say for our part that I was part of the Committee that directed the Chairman to take the action that he took today 'because it was a very serious matter, in our estimation,that to meet and discuss one of the largest portfolios of government to find out that there was no press present and to find out, of course, th4lt,without the presence of the press, the people of this Province would have no way of knowing what was going on in the Committees.

And as the Chairman pointed out in the letter, it would have the same effect as doing them in camera or going to the minister's basement or going to the minister's rec room, almost in discussing the matters that we discuss. So we felt very strongly that the press should be present and there might be some problems which no doubt the Cha.inlan will find in response to his letter , but we consider it to be very serious , Mr.

Spealter, and if indeed the Committees &J:e to be successful, I believe that the press must be present because we are discussing the people's business and, hopefully 1 the matter can be resolved and the Committees can get down to doing the work that they have been doing very successfully up to this point and hope.fully 1 can continue to do. MR. S. NEARY: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! With respect to the same matter, I understand the hon. the member for St. John's North (Mr. J. Carter) 3074

April 30, 1980 Tape 1162 EC - 2 MR. SPEAKER: (Siiiiii!S) : h-.s a similar request from that Collllllittee. Do I understand there is the same leave? SOME HON. MEMBERS : By leave. MR. SPEAKER: By leave. The han. the member for St, John's North. MR, J, CARTER: Mr. Speaker, speaking by leave - ;md I thilllk the members of the House for giving me leave - I would just like to repeat very briefly what the member for Stephenville (Mr. F.

Stagg) has pointed out, and I would like to point out to the House that the Estimates of Health were passed last night to the tune of some ~300 million and they went through without any public knowledge, I suppose, any public scrutiny, any attendance by the press. And I would like to point out alst> that although in this House and in Collllllittee we do address either Mr. Speaker or the Chair or the Chai:r111an, in fact, we are addressing the press or the public.

I regard the press as an integral part of the legislative process ·as much as my hon. friend does, and I would just like to deplore the fact that the press vas not present at our meeting last night, MR. SPEAKER: MR, J, HODDER: The hon. the member for Port au Port. Mr. Speaker, I , as Vice-Chai:r111an of the Committee, would like to add support to the Chairman from St. John's North.

Not only did we not have any press in attencance last night, but we Also went through the Education Estimates for something like three and one-half hours on a previous night where there was no press present, and on another night we had just one member of the press present. Mr. Speaker, I feel that if these Coamittees are going to work properly and if we are doing the people's business in those Committees, then I feel that they should be covered in the same manner in which the House of Assembly is covered, and I t.'link perhaps, Mr.

Speaker, it may bring a lesson to us as well, in that I think we have to look at the scheduling as well of those Committees, But I do want to add rssy support to the Chainuan of the Committee from St. John's North. MR. SPEAKER: Any furthe.r reports? MR. s. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a point of privilege, I: guess you oould cAll it. 3075

April 30, 1980 MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : member for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: Tape 1162 EC - 3 A point of privilege, the hon. the My point of privilege , Hr. Speaker, is that the privileges of this House are being very seriously breached inasmuch as the Estimates of various government departments have been taken off the floor of this House, put out in the dungeons of Colonial Building and various other buildings and offices and board rooms around this city. The public business is not beinq properly attended to.

The Government House Leader last year when the changes were lllade in the Standing Orders, said that if they did not work - and they are not working, and I said at the time they would not work - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) • MR. S, NEARY: I am making a case, if the hon. gentleman will just restrain himself . MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! · MR. S. NEARY: if they did not work that the hon. gentleman - and the Premier verified this - would change the rules. Not because the press are not there that the people'• business cannot go on. 3076

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1163 so - 1 MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) The hen. rnember has a point of privilege, I believe. MR. S. NEARY: The point of privilege being, sir, that the ?rivileges of this House are being breached in as much as the government have manoeuvred the Estimates out of this House into the board rooms, over in Colonial Buildi~~ and God only knows where else they have scattered the CO!!llltit::;:,esand it is not working and it is time to change it and bring the Estimates back on the floor of this House where they should be debated. MR. SPEAI<ER: MR. W. MARSHALL: The han. the President of the Council. Mr.

Speaker, that is not a point of privilege. And with the greatest of respect, I submit that the hen. gentleman is not allowed under the guise to make a speech before this House. of a point of privilege SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. W. MARSHALL: If he wants to talk about the privileges of the House he ought not to himself - rlN HON. MEMBER: Leadership campaign. MR. W. MARSHALL: -breach them J:,y breaching the right to raise a point of privilege. Now, Mr. Speaker, this is a matter that was dealt with last year. It is ingrained in the Standing Orders.

It has been received by everybody in this House, it involves private members of this House all except the hen. member who chooses to boycott them and is beating his own drum in attempting to get his own publicity for his own particular bailiwick. But the fact of the matter is that the Estimates are ~ow being examined in a much more detailed fashion and a much more effective fashion than they have in the history of and in the anr.als of this House. And the han. member speaking to a point of privilege was not raising a point of privilege but was making an. unauthorized 11peech which,in effect 1 is a 3077

April 3C , 1990 MR. W . M.!IRS!l ~LL: memJ:?er of ~is House. SOME HON. ME.'U3ERS: MR. SPEAKER (Simms): Tape No . llS3 sn - 2 b.reach of the privileges of all Hear, hear. With respect to the point of privilege raised by the hen. member for LaPoile (Mr. s. Neary), first of all the Chair has to listen to the points made before he can make a ruling on it but obviously there was not a clear cut prima facie case of privilege established in this particular matter therefore I rule there i~ no point of privilege. MR. H. YOONG: MR. SPEAKER: Woxks and Services. Any further reports? Mr. Speaker.

The hen. the Minister of Public MR. H. YOUNG: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table the annual report for the year ending March 31, 1979, for the C.A. Pippy Park Commission. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Prem.ier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I want to table the report of the Roddickton - Main B:rook Task Force on Economic Potential and Development, at the same time the report ,is being made public in the town of Rcddickton by the Minister of Lands and Forests (Mr. C. Power) and I want to table it to hon. members in the Bouse right now. MR. SPEAKER: llnY further reports? 3078

1\pril 30, 1980 Tape No. 116 3 so - 3 }lOTICES OF MJTION MR. SPEk~R (Simms): The hon. the Premier. PRE~IIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to intruduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Adopt A Flag For The Province." SOME liON. MEMBERS: HR. SPEAKER: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. S • NEARY: MR. W. MARSHALL: Hear, hear. The hon. the President of the Council. (Inaudible) Haul down the Union Jack. Mr.

Speaker, as members of t.'le House are aware the compliment of the Public Accounts Committee consists - . because of the compliment of the House - of four members on the government side, three members of the Opposition side. The members of e1e Eouse are also aware the hon. member for Baie Verte - White Bay iMr. T. Rideout) , who before his courageous stand a while ago - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh. MR. w. MARSHALL: - sat with the Opposition and now sits on the government side, consequently he resigned at the time from the Public Accounts Committee. And also, ltr.

Speaker, the Opposition than nominates - and I will point o~t it is the Opposition's nomination to the Public Accounts Committe and under the Standing Orders it then behoo~s the government to present the nominee. So consequently, pursuant to the ·standing Orders, I move, on the request of the Opposition, that the hon. the membe:r for LaPoile (Mr. s. Neary) replace the hon. member for Baie Verte - White Bay on the Public Accounts Committee, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear. MR. SPEAKER: All those in favour "Aye, contrary .. Nay", carried. Any further notices. 3079

April 30, 1980 '!'ape No. U63 so - 4 ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WliiCH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN HR . SPEAKER: The hen. member :for LaPoile. HR . S. NEI\RY: Mr. Speaker, I have taken the trouble to put a total of eighteen qQestions on the Order Paper and I do not belie..-e I have received one written answer yet. Could ·the !ton. Prel!lier tell us whetr he is going to instruct the minister.; to answer some of these questions? MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

That question would be rore appropriately asked during Question Period and not at this point in time, The right of the ministe:JSnot to answer questions is outlined clearly in the Standing Orders and it is not particularly a matter to be raised at this time. ORDERS OF THE DAY MR . SPEAJG:R: Motion No. 9 3080

April 30, 1980 Tape No.ll64 EL - 1 M'?... SPEAKER (Simms): MR. L • THOMS : The hon. the member for Grand Bank. Mr. Speaker, when I finished speaking on this particular resolution on Friday_ and I would like to just give a very brief comment on what the resolution is all about. It was one that was introduced by my friend from Trinity-Bay de Verde {)tr. Rowel on a very serious matter. This resolution has to do with the fisheries and with the impact and the capability of oil and gas to form the basis of our economy.

It is a resolution asking that this House fully debate both de•relopments for the purpose of ensuring that the fishery will not be endangered by offshore oil and gas. I was disappointed really with the gove'rnment 's reaction to the discussion on this resolution. I did not anticipate, actually, that the government would not suppcrt this particular resolution.

In a certain sense, I guess, it reminds me of a meeting that I was at back, I think it was, in January, where there was some four or five thousand students from the university and I would say · probably certainly ninety-five per cent of those students were New­ foundlanders. And that was 1o1hen the then Leader of the oppcsi tinn of th~ Federal Liberal party was speaking on the fisheries in Newfoundland. And in the back of :·the auditorium there were a nwnber of students who wantecl the then Leader of the gpposition to get on to talking about oil and gas.

And there was a group of students in the back who were shouting out that man cannot live by cod alone. And as I have said in this House before, the people of the Burin Peninsula ane the people of my district, the district of Grand B~~~. live on cod alone. There are either directly or indirectly 100 per cent depeneent on the fisheries and although I hope we have commercial oil deposits in our offshore, I do nat think it is something we can take lightly and what effect it is going to have. Mr. Speaker, I thought I had five minutes to begin with,but I guess I did not. have a two minutes- 3081

April 30 , 1980 Tape No . 1164 EL -2 MR. L. THOMS : If I may, I would just like to quote from the Saskatoon paper of May"ll, 1979 dealing- with the oH s;pill - the

article is entitled "Oil spill clean-up Capacity Lacking-" and this is what scares me as a representative of a district that is 100 per cent depen~t on the fisheries, as is the district represented by my friend from Fortune-Hermitag-e (D. stewart) • And here they quotel '!'hey say that 'a team of scientists has examined the possibility of a major ~orth P.tlanttc oil! spill and they have come to the conclusion that the equipment is not available,' it just is not existing-, • for such a clean-up in the case of a spill.' 1 If an iceberg-,' which an ic:eberq can do; it is .big l;!nouqh to do, 'if it scrapes a seabed and unplugs a well, the oil flows out of that well at the rate of 15 ,000 ba.rrels a day,' 15,000 barrels a day, spewing- out onto ' • 3082

April 30, 1980, Tape 1165, Page 1 -- apb MR. THOMS: our fishing grounds. The plugging of that well would take nine months. So 1for nine months,oil, at the rate of 15,000 barrels a day, would flow into the - MR. SPEAKER(Sirnrns): Order, please! I do not wish to interrupt the hon. member, but his time has expired. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave? MR. SPEAKER: By leave? Agreed. MR. THOMS: Mr. Speaker, I just want to finish. I will not take very much time of the House. As I said, pluggin~ the well takes nine months because of the depth of the water and the rough weather.

Meantime it says, "Seven per cent of the oil reaches shore,fouling the Labrador and Eastern Newfoundland sea coast." And it goes on to say that there is not enough knowledge or equipment available now to handle such a situation in storm tossed, ice infested waters. "The spawning area for caplin, which lay their eggs at the tideline along beaches, would be ruined." And then they go on to say that the smelt-like fish are a main food source for cod. And one of the scientists goes on to say that the actual oil pollution, or fear of damage to the fishery, could bring the industry to a standstill.

It is articles like this, from people who should know, that frighten me and it should frighten every member of this House, and others, whether you represent St. John's Centre or not. The fishing industry is as important,really, to St. John's Centre as it is to Grand Bank. But it should frighten every member of this House. And basically, this is what my friend's resolution is calling for, it is calling for a select committee of this House to look into the impact that oil and gas is going to have on the fishery. 3083

April 30, 1980, Tape 1165, Page 2 -- apb MR. THOMS: It was not very long ago that I was reading where Gus Etchegary was speaking to a group of people and it said that the fishing industry had not been consulted when it comes to the effect of offshore oil, and the possible effect of offshore oil. Now, the Minister of Hines and Energy {Mr. Barry) last year told me that it is impossible to make sure that we do not have an oil spill, but maybe it is.

But I think we should take every possible aspect of it and go over it to make sure that at least we have studied every angle, every possibility an~,hopefully, that way we can keep it down to a miniiDurn. Because there is one thing that we all have to realize in this Province, that in thirty or forty years time, long after the last drop of oil comes out of Hibernia or Ben Nevis, that the people of this Province, the people of Grand Bank, Fortune - Hermitage, all the other fishing districts of this Province, long after the oil and gas is gone, they are going to be depending on the fisheries.

And if we have a major oil spill, I hate to think of what it is going to do to that industry. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER(Butt): The han. the Minister of Fisheries. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, before I commence my comments on the resolution, again I have to say, when we talk about fisheries, which is ~o important to the economy of our Province, one of the most important resources, it is obvious to see the concern in the press gallery.

Unless it is a partisan speech and we are involved in partisan debate, it seems they are not too concerned about what takes place in the House of Assembly, if the present sitting in the press gallery is an indication of that. 3084

April 30 , 1980 , Tape 1165, Page 3 -- apb MR. MORGAN: Because the fisheries are i.ndeed important and I conunend the spokesman on fisheries matters in the Opposition in putting forth the resolution. I underst<;ind, I was not here at the tiJne, when he made this speech l.ast week, :Out I understand it was strictly a non-partisan speech, it was put forward in a very sincere way and its points put forward, and ideas and suggestions accordingly. lind I certainly hope that the apathy shown by the med.ia in dealing with the estimates a few nights ago, when three hundred-and-something million dollars went through, Educatior. ,without anybody being there , 3085

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1166 NM - l MR. MORGAN: and last night 1apparently, or the last couple of nights, Health went through in the committees with again substantial expenditure and nobody from the press media cared to come, or cared to be there to comment on what was being said by the minister or being said by the Opposition spokesman, or 1 in fact 1members of the House of Assembly. I sincerely hope that apathy is also not here in this matter, because it is indeed a very important matter.

It is important to me as the Minister of Fisheries, and I am sure it is important to every single member who has fishermen in his district, that is the possible adverse effect, a potential adverse effect on fisheries and fishery development by the offshore oil and gas development. Now the resolution, Mr. Speaker, is pointing out of course that the fishery is of paramount importance to the economy, that is very true.

Take,for example,that right now we have in the Province 15,000 bona fide fishermen, according to the figures supplied to me by the Fishermen's Union, what they call bona fide fishermen, who fish strictly for a living and for no other income. Then we have approximately 14,000 plant workers who are working in the seasonal plants and in some cases the year-round plants throughout the Province.

Combining these two figures, and with the fact that we have many other fishermen who are - well, listed by the Fishermen's Union as moon­ lighters but they still earn part of their income from the fishery- that twenty-five per cent of the total population of our Province is being sustained from the fishing industry. And that is the reason why this motion is important, the first part of the motion. The resolution part of it is a question I will come to later on but it is a very important motion.

It is important for the media to be passing along to the fishermen throughout the Province what both parties are saying in the Legislature. In fact,we are almost saying the same thing. 3086

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1166 NM - 2 MR. MORGAN: We are concerned. We are concerned over the possible effect it is going to have on the fishing industry, the fishery of course being a renewable resource, For example,this year we are anticipating that the total catch in the Province will be around the figure of 600,000 metric tons, a record, and the total value around - in fact the figure is, our estimates right now, $540 million, the export value of the fish product. I mentioned the employment figure.

No question, no question at all, as pointed out in the resolution, the fishing industry is of paramount importance to the economy of our Province.

And that is being recognized clearly by this administration, recognized by the Premier in his statements in the past and the action he has taken as the head of the government, in doing everything possible, In other words,the objective of the Premier in this administration is to make sure there is no stone left unturned that is going to put together the plans, and possible regulations, 1 say possible regulations,to ertsure that there is no adverse effect or at least a minimum effect on the fishery by the development which we think, as the motion also points, that we think it is now very obvious that we are all hoping and it looks very confident that it will take place, the development of the offshore oil and gas.

Mr. Speaker, approxiately a month and a half ago the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Barry) and myself recognizing that there have been some adverse effects, some, and I will go into that later on, and other areas of the world where there have been oil and gas developments like in the North Sea, in particular, and also some parts of the US, where there is also a viable fishing industry, and there were some effects on the fishing industry.

Recognizing that,the Minister of Mines and Energy and myself convened a meeting in March, a meeting consisting of the Offshore Petroleum Operators Association, which included Petrocan, Petro-Canada, and Mobil Oil and others, the Fish Trades Association, the Fishermen's Union, the Saltfish Producers Association, the College of Fisheries, and others, in fact all concerned. We convened a 3087

Ap ril 30, 1980 Tape No. 1167 DW - l MR. J. MORGAN: meeting and at that meeting the sole purpose, the initial action was to indicate government's concern and govern- ment's intent to take action to prevent what we saw occuring in places like Scotland and Norway, in these two coun~ries in particular.

As a result of that first meeting, as it pretains to fisheries, shortly after that the Premier put in place a system which I think is of the utmost import­ ance because it could very well mean coming to the House of Assembly,the end result of that system 1with regulations to protect the possible effects En the fishery. For example, a ~tructure or mechanism-you can call it what you want as it pretains to fishery is the establishment of a Fisheries and Environment Committee appointed by the P=emier and his government. It is chaired by the Deputy Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Gordon Slade .

On that committee there is also the Deputy Minister of my colleague's department, the Department of Consumer Affairs and Environment, and also the Deputy Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation. Now that committee will report to the government through the ministers concerned 1 and to the Premier. structure.

That is the top level of the Now underneath that it is import­ ant to have participation and input from the parties concerned, and the parties concerned 1 as I mentioned: the Fish Trades Association, the Fishermen's Union on the behalf of the fisher­ men, the Saltfish Producer's Association, the Independent Processor's Association and the people like the university and the College of Trades and Technology and the College of Fisheries. So that committee is now established as an advisory committee to the official committee , as I men­ tioned, chaired by the Deputy Minister of Fisheries. 3088

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1167 DW - 2 MR. J. MORGAN: And, of course, the mandate of the Committee on Fisheries and Environment is to make sure that there will be no negative impact of the offshore development on fisheries, number one. And number two, that the development of the offshor~or the production of the offshore· oil and gas, will be done in co-ordination with the fishing industry in the Province.

And number three, which is an important one,as I mentioned 1 the committee will make recommendations and these recommendations may very well be 1 in the end result 1 the regu­ lations, recommendations becoming regulations of government which will eventually come to this House of Assembly. So the Committee and the Advisory Committee involving the private sector and all concerned in the fishing industry will provide advice and recommendations to government. Not only that 1 it will research and investigate what has been happening in other countries.

That committee, in my view, has got a very, very important role and I told them so at my last meeting with them. have to make sure that there They have a big task because we is not a situation as we see now in Scotland. I saw a film a little while ago on Scotland and Norway which was done by the Extensions Services of the University and also by the CBC and it was strictly on the topic of what is happening in the fishing industry in Scotland and Norway as a result of the development of the offshore oil and gas.

These films, at least, are an indica- tion of what is happening but they do not give me, at least as Minister of Fisheries, all the answers and do not give sufficient evidence to enable us to make sure we put the proper plans in place. The concerns of the f~shermen now, for example, primarily in scotland and Norway, end us being compensation~ they are demanding compensation from the oil companies for lost fishing time, they are demanding com­ pensation for lost fishing gear and lost fishing grounds. 3089

April 30 . 1980 Tape No. 1167 0~1 - 3 ~R. J. MORGAN: 9ut it:. is cio·wn to the point now of demanding compensation,and a compensatiort fund has been established. But our ultimate aim, Mr. Speaker, and l want emphasize that, our ~ltimBte aim as a government right now is to mak e sure we put in place and we take every possible step and action to pre vent getting down to the stage of having to compensate fishermen for l ost gear or compensate 3090 "'

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1168 EL - l MR. J. MORGAN: fishermen for lost fishing grounds in particular or lost fishing time. That is the ultimate aim. And looking at, again as I mentioned, the films I saw of the fishing industry in Scotland, in · particular, there was substantial damage to fishing gear as a result of the debris on the ocean bottom. Debris from what source? It is being dumped . some­ times lost, I w~uld say,accidently, but more times intentionally dumped from the rigs, the oil rigs, And in other cases from the support vessels or supply vessels.

This is causing damage to fishermen's gear because it is on the actual fishing grounds it is occuring. There is a loss of fishing grounds and at the first meeting I had with the Fish Trades Association, they put forward their views then and their concerns ,that, for example,on the Grand Banks, the best known fishing areas of the Province, And really important to the fishing industry on the Southern part of the Province, where most of the offshore supply of raw material comes from .that area, the Grand Banks. Mr.

Etchegary of Fishery Products indicated that he felt that 25 per cent of the fish they caught the last couple of years came from the general area where the oil rigs are now working. That is of concern, concern to me and the government and the trade. ~here is a loss of fishing grounds. The loss of fishing time is another matter which the fishermen are now being compensated for, as I mentioned, in Scotland and in Norway. And then there is the interference with the trawler fleets themselves in the general fishing grounds and surrounding areas.

Another important possible effect is the loss of trained personnel from the fishing industry to go into the 1110re lucrative, in their view, industry of oil and gas. And that is happening to some extent already from my questioning of the offshore or 3091

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1168 EL - 2 MR. J • MORGliN : the companies operating in offshore fleets, that there has been some activity but not too much yet of people_ who, are teaving the fishing vessels, the trawler fleets and going over to work on cthe supply vessels, and even on the oil rigs, because it is more lucrative for them. And then there is the competition or potential competition for onshore facilities, port facilities, develop­ ment of new facilities for the offshore oil and gas. And the obvious potential competition in developing landing facilities for landing of fish in the fishing ports.

These are the concerns that are the concerns of government, the concerns of the trade and the fishermen and rightly so. And as I mentioned, all these things are now ending up in compensation being paid in other places. We do not want to see that. We want to take steps now and put a plan of action in place that will prevent us from getting to that stage of paying out compensation, at least taking .very possible step.

I mentioned the films -re not sufficient in my view 1and I have viewed them all now so I am convinced there is a definite need for this advisory committee, appointed by government,to travel to places like Scotland, to travel to Norway-and maybe even parts of the u.s. , but more so in Scot1and and Norway and to thoroughly investigate and research what has been happening over there. We could learn~ , I guess, from their experie~ces and maybe from their mistakes. We could learn from these.

That is the reason why, Mr; Speaker, a decision has been made that myself, as the Minister of Fisheries, will lead a delegation to Scotland sometime in June, a delegation consisting of the industry, the union and government. And today I am goinq to make a recommendation to the legislature which will hopefully zeet with the approval of my Premier and my colleaques in government. I think it 3092

April 30, 1980 Tape No. ll6a EL -3 MR. J. MORGAN: would be very worthwhile for that delegation we will .be taking over to scotland in this Spring, and early Fall to Norway ,to have members of this legislature go with delegation. And in this case, this is a non­ partisan matter, I de not think there is a need for a se.lect cc;mm~ittee but I am making this suggestion - and I woul.d welcome it in fact, to have one or twO or possibly three members of this legislature 3093

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1169 NM - l MR. MORGAN: travel with the delegation. They will be digging into, be searching out and investigating what is happening over there to make the Legislature here knowledgeable as well as to what is happening. So I am hoping that, with the concurrence of the Premier here,that this will take place. And there will be arrangements made for a delegation from this House of Assembly to travel with me and the other delegation to first of all Scotland and then to Norway. MR. W!iiTE: If I am going to go over 1 I am going to pay for it at my own expense. MR.

MORGA.~: Well 1 I commend the hon. gentleman for Lewisporte (Mr. White) if that is the case because fisheries is very important to the Lewisporte district as well. So that is the plan right no~, Mr. Speaker. I notice my time is up. T.here is not too much time to speak. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave. By leave. MR.

MORGAN: These are the things that concern the fisheries and of course it was mentioned,I think 1 by the last speaker from the Opposition that looking at the possible effects from these things I mentioned, lost fishing time, the destruction of fishermen's gear with the debris in the ocean, competition for trained personnel, competition for onshore facilities, there is still one major concern as well in the back of my mind, and that is the reason why the committee is now doing an analysis and gathering all information with regard to updating, I guess I could use, the knowledge on marine environment, the marine environment itself, in case of, just in case of the very worst happening and the very worst,of course 1we know what we are talking about, a major spill.

It is more than frightening to even think of the possi~le effects that a major spill could have on the marine environment. And that is one of the major reasons why this administration is so concerned over it. And I am saying that we have got to make sure that the proper hard­ ware is there, the proper trained personnel is there, and all the necessary 3094

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1169 NM- 2 MR. MORGAN: equipment is in place to deal with a possible spill. And I am not convinced in my own mind today that it is adequate. I am not. I am not convinced it is adequate, that is the reason why the advisory committee is now, as I mentioned, updating all possible knowledge it can possible gather on the marine environment and what plan of action can be put in place to deal with the worst of all situations, an oil spill.

Again we can look at this committee I am talking about 1and members from this House could look at what is in place in other areas so we can come back and say, "We want at least what is in place over there now. We want at least that and nothing less to deal with the worst situation, a potential worst situation." MR. WHITE: (Inaudible) federal department. MR. MORGAN: There is no - I was going to mention that, Mr. Speaker, alt~ough I on~yhave one minute, but maybe by leave I can continue a few minutes more, that - SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Butt): MR. MORGAN: By leave. By leave.

I do not think, although there is a somewhat obvious confrontation today between this administration, this Province, and the federal administration in connection with the ownership of the offshore, but I do not believe at all, I do not think it is necessary, and I think the Premier and others will agree that any matters pertaining to the environment should ever be a means of confrontation with the two levels of government. Environmental matters SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

MORGAN: - I think there is no question, and that has been said many times before, but > ·tn.ini< it is important to stress the fact that despite all their confrontation on issues of ownership, there should not be any confrontation which would effect or delay the putting in place of measures to deal with potential damage to the environment. MR. STIRLING: Regardless of the ownership. 3095

April 30 , 1980 Tape t>:o . 1169 N~ - 3 MR . ~ORGAN: Rega:d~ess of the ownership . When I say regardless of ownership of course we al l know our posicion on ownership, buc regardless of chac matcer 'beinc; deale wich, still every step should be ' caken by both levels of government , in this case che federal government's jurisdiction of responsibility for environment I do noc think is even quescioned . Eiut if it is there should be no confrontation . We should work in co-ordination to make sure that every possible seep is taken to protect ~~e enviror~ en t . HR . STIRL.i\'G: They should be ~oving on it now .

MR . !10RG.W: So, M.r. Speaker, this mini!iter l.S very concerned , concerned that I will repeat it again , Chat I will endeavour to turn every possible stone, try every 3096

April 30, 1980 Tape 1170 EC - l MR. J. MORGA.~: possible means to make sure that when the oil and gas is being developed, will it be tanked from the area or piped in to shore? And the big oil ~mpanies who are so powerful, and I mean, so powerful today,' they are lilte an administration on their own and we have to stand firm, and I mean stand firm, in dealing with them and there is no way we will ever let them put in place plans which we will recognize as being potentially hazardous to the fisheries of our Province. SOME HON • MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. J. MORGAN: Because the oil and gas will be here and gone.

It is a non-renewable resource. It means that the oil companies come in, take what they can and leave very little unless we have the regulations and the guidelines and law to enforce the situation where they will abide by the rules of our Province and our Legislature here. Mr. Speaker, I ltnow that the oil and gas will D!an revenues. It means approximately 40 per cent of the total coming out of the wellhead out there if we maintain our position of ownership. And I say that , as I thinl§ was mentioned by one of the Opposition speakers, we have to take the revenue where we can get it.

It may last fifteen years, it may only last ten, it may go on for thirty-five or forty, who knows? But we know it is going to come to an end as it will come to an end in Alberta one of these days 1 so. we cannot depend and put our future economy on oil and gas.

We have to take the revenue! from oil and gas and channel it into the resources which are so important to this Province, and I cannot think of any more important resource than the fisheries - channel it in and make sure that the funds are taken from that source of revenue but spent in the right way, spent on things that we know can leave a viable fishery, lilte, for example, improving our catching sector 1 improving our processing sector 1 better quality control, new ice making facilities 1 proper handling facilities, paving of roads to fish plants around the Province.

All these kinds of things tie in to develop a better fishery, And the revenue from oil and gas, in my vie.w, has to be used for that purpose. But we must never blindfold ourselves and say, 'Yes, give us the revenue with no controls. Give us the revenue right now 1< -we really 3097

April 30, 1980 Tape 1170 EC - 2 MR. J. MORGAN: want it because our Province - and nobody here can argue that we need the money for paved roads and water and sewer and new schools and everything else - but it is important that we only get the revenue by means of production with the proper controls in place before it takes place - before any development takes place proper controls are in place to protect what we have for the future of our Province. Again, I will say that,in closing,! want to emphasize again the structure that is in place now.

My own personal view right now, I feel that it does not need a Select Committee, but I want the Legislature to be involved in that process, both sides of the House, a Committee established of industry, because a Select Committee would not necessarily involve - and it would not, in fact, having on that Committee representation from the Fish Trades and the Fishermen's Union, from the Salt Fish Corporation or salt fish producers. But right now that is in place. That Committee is in place now.

They have representation from the Fishermen's Union, in fact, two members, they have two members from the Fish Trades Association, they have a member from the Independent Processors Association and they have members from the University and from, I think, the Fisheries College. I eo not. have all the nues off-hand, but these are the ones who are involved. A CO~ttee is in place. MR. STIRLDIG: Are you going to ask members from this side to thil,t or just :tl!lke them on one trip? MR. J. MORGAN: No, Mr. Speaker.

A COmmittee is in place now and that COmmittee will be reporting to government, !Uking recoamendationa - giving advice, sure, but making rec011111endations.

What I am saying is, when that COIIIIIIittee, which is now going to be involved in the first stage of doing research and investigative work as to what has happened and what is happening now in other countries, while that research work is being done, so that members of this Legislature can become knowledgeable of what is happening,,fully knowledgeable as I a111 not right now, that that mechanism or structure of the ezisting committees already formed could have with it representation 3098

April 30, 1980 Tape 1170 EC - 3 MR. J. MORGAN: from both sides of this hon. House. And they could qo alono:J with t.'le Committee, and myself, the minister, and the c;ieputy minister, to travel to Scotlaad and thorouqhly investigate what is happeninq over there 1 also to travel to Noxway ~d thoroughly inwstiqate so that we can CODie back and learn from their Dlistakes 1 learn -· - ·- frOIII their experience, and hopefully 1 lllake sure that what has happened in Scotl.and - I do not like what I have seen by filDI; what has happened in Noxway 1 also 1 I do not like what I have seen by film - 3099

April 30,1980 Tape No. 1171 AH-1 MR. MORGAN: that we can take the necessary steps to prevent that from occuring in our Province to protect our long-term economy in the fisheries for the future. Thank you. SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: (Butt): The hon. member for Eagle River. MR. HISCOCK: I must offer my congratulations to the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) on the speech that he made. I am sure listening to it that basically he must have read Hansard of last Wednesday like I did with regard to the motion that was brought in by the member from Trinity-Bay de Verde (Mr. F.

Rowe) because last Wednesday this motion was brought in and when it was brought in this House it was brought in out of genuine concern forthe impact that the oil will have upon our fisheries. And what did the government do with it? They turned it into a very, very partisan debate - MR. WARREN: Typical. Typical. MR. HISCOCK: - a very partisan debate and basically ended up saying that they could not support it and that the Select Committee would be redundant and X number of things. MR. WARREN: I think the Minister of Fisheries wants to support it though. Ma.

HISCOCK: Now 1the Minister of Fisheries (Mr.Morgan) himself has basically taken verbatim the speech that was given by the member for Trinity-Bay de Verde (Mr. Rowe) andis supporting the thing. MR. WARREN: Yes, he is pretty well supporting it. MR. HISCOCK: I am also very pleased with this committe of trade,union and government personnel. And now the minister says that some members of the House will be on it- I hope it will not be one, two or three people, I would like to see half a dozen people on it at least so that they could report to this House. AN HON.MEMBER: Everybody. MR. HISCOCX: Everybody.

It would be quite pleasing for ··everybody to go, yes, but I would like to bring up a few questions that the 3100 -----

April 30,1980 Tape No.ll7l AH-2 MR. HISCOCK: member from Trinity - Bay de Verde (Mr.F. Rowe) brought up. _ The question was asked,"How can the fisheries be protected from the enviror~ent with the economic and social hazards of oil?" was one of the questions. This MR. NEARY: Did you know tha minister went against his own fishermen? MR. WARREN: Yes. MR. NEARY: He went against his own fishermen. MR. HISCOCK: If the minister went against his own fishermen today I can say that in the speech he just gave, he went against his own party and government also. MR. NEARY: Right on! Right on! SOME HON.MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

HISCOCK: But basically you protect the fishery from an oil disaster. I find it rather amazing - MR. MORGAN: A point of order. MR. SPEAKER: (Butt) The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. M.~. MORGAN: (Inaudible) that I stood against my own fishermen t?day. I am assuming 1therefore,~n my point of order to say that is totally incorrect because the matters he referred to are in connection with herring quotas, etc., and it should be clarified that my position is that I defend the position taken by the federal minister on this issue and I will stand by that. MR. NEARY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: To the point of order. The hon.member for LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, first of all I want to apologize to the ladies and gentlemen who came in today because we were in meetings up until the House met at 3p.m. and therefore none of us could go down and meet the fishermen. But the hon. gentleman did go against - I made a statement and I stand by it-the han. gentleman did go against his own fishermen, the very fishermen that he is supposed to be protecting. Now he is coming out on the side of the Government of Canada.

These fishermen do have a point and the han. gentleman should listen to their grievance, process their grievance and not just shut the door and slam the door in their faces as he did today. He went against his own fishermen. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! 3101

April 30,1980 Tape No . 1171 AH-3 1>1R. SPEAKER (Sutc ) : Order, please! ! :nust remind people in the galleries thac they are not allo~o-ed to participate in debate i.n any way,that is the clapping of hands, scamping of feet or vocally . And if you continue to do t.hat 1 will have to clea r the gallery. M~ . MORGAN: 1-fR. SPEA!<ER : point of order. MR . MORGl'.N: Mr. Speaker , on the point of orcier . The hon. Minister o= Fisheries. To that !olr .

Speaker, I was sitting down for an hour and a half before the House opened with the full executive of the Fishermen 's Onion for th is Province including the - every fishermen oh the board was there f~om around the Province - full Fishermen • s Union Executive Board,includL~g the President and all the business agents 1 discussing the fishery. And I can assure you that the topics were of the utmost importance to all fishermen throughout the Province. On the matter of the people who are protesting the herring fishery,which I am assuming is being re£erred to by the hon . gent .leman from LaPoile (Mr .

Neary) , I had no knowledge with regard to any invitation 3102

April 30, 1980 '!'ape No. 1172 DW - l MR. J. MORGAN: to meet with any fishermen concerninq the herrinq fishermen and the herring fishery. I have met wi~h at least four differ- ent groups of fishermen from around the Province over the past months and a half and I took their concerns, Mr. Speaker, to the federal minister as of Monday's meeting with them. so today, there was nobody shutting doors on fishermen from my office, I know that from talking to the staff of the Department of Fis~eries.And, Mr.

Speaker, I want to ~ake it quite clear that the point of order is that it is giving the House of Assembly misleading information and therefore there should be a correction on it. MR. S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Butt): Mr. Speaker. Order, please: I think I have heard P.nough to rule on" the point of order and I would rule that there is no point of order but the hon. the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) took the opportunity to clarify remarks that were attributed to him. MR. S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

A point of order, the hon. member In the process of the hon. gentle- man just making a few remarks in this House, Sir, the hon. gentleman made a false and misleading statement. The bon. gentleman,two days before these people came to St. John's,said they did not have a case, he was not going to tolerate them, he was not going to have anything to do with them, he was coming out on the side of Ottawa. That is true, the hon. gentleman was quoted in the Evening Telegram as saying that he was not going to take sides 3103

Apr i 1 3 0, 19 8 0 MR. W. MARSHALL: privilege. MR. S. NEARY: MR. W. MARSHALL: supersedes a point of order. ~IR. SPEAKER (Butt): Council. MR. W. MARSHALL: Tape No. 1172 DW - 2 Mr. Speaker, on a point of No, there is a point of order. On a point of privilege which Order, please! The hon. the President of the A point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. Look, this does involve the privileges o= the House. Your Honour made a ruling with respect to the disposition of a matter that arose when the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) rose on a point of order, the substance of it.

The hon. gentleman, now, after Your Honour making his ruling, gets up and attempts to talk about the same subject again. This is a breach of the privileges of the House, Mr. Speaker, because 1 in "effect 1 after Your Honour saying the matter had been resolved and there will be no more debat~, he now gets on his feet and under the guise of a point of order attempts to do the same thing. I~ is a way in which the whole decorum of the House will come down if it is allowed. MR. S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: hon. member for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker.

To the point of privilege, the That is not a point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. The hon. gentleman has not established a prima facie case that I have breached the privileges of this House. I rose on a point of orde~ the hon. gentleman did not gi•e me a chance to finish my point of order. He does not know yet what it is I intended to say. He was trying to protect the Minister of Fisheries who has gotten himself in' hot water with the fishermen in this Province and he tried to do it under a point of privilege. And I would submit that 3104

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1172 DW - 3 MR. S. NEARY: if anybody breached the privileges of this House it was the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) in trying to protect the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan). MR. SPEAKER (Butt): MR. J. MORGAN: he is qoinq to carry on - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! A point 6f order, Mr. Spea ker, if Order, please! I have a point of privilege right now that I have to deal with and a point of order. I would like to deal with those now if I may.

To the point of privilege I would rule that there is no point of privilege and there is no breach of the privileges of the House in this particular case. To the point of order I would rule once again that the hon. the Minister of Fisheries took an opoortunity to rise to clarify remarks that were attributed to him. I would also like to point out that I think it is grossly unfair to the hon. member for Eagle Rive (Mr. Hiscock) to be constantly interrupted when he is speaking to the motion put forward by the hon. member for Trinity - Bay de Verde (Mr. Rowe). The hen. member for Eagle River. MR. S.

NEARY: We will have an opportunity to deal with this matter in the future, Mr. Speaker. MR. E. HISCOCK: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to continue. MR . J . MORGAN: I have to apologize, Mr. Speaker, because on a point of order again - MR. SPEAKER: of Fisheries . MR. J. MORGAN: A point of order, the hon. Minister - because the House has been misled bya statement from the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) who is attempting to leave the impression that I refused to meet with fishermen today which is totally untrue. And number two, Mr.

Speaker, that I had said I would not meet with fishermen, that is also not true, Mr. Speaker. And thirdly, is that the matter which the fishermen have problems with is not under my 3105

April 30, 19 80 Tape No. 1172 ow - 4 MR. J. MORGAN: ;urtsdiction. It is as simple as that. MR. SPEAKER (Butt): Order, please! I t hink we have a l.ready dealt with that point of order and I would now ask the non. ~ember for Eagl e River to continue. MR. 'E. R!S .COCK: heard in silence. MR. WARREN: !-!R. SPEAKER: The b o n . member for Eaqle River. Again, Mr. Speaker, I wish to be It is impo ssi ble to hear . Order, please! The hon. member for Eagle River wishes to be heard in silence. MR. E.

HISCOCK: With rega.rd to the inpact oil is having on our fishery,! think the speeches and the points of order that were given today only point out the importance of the fisher~es in our Provihce ,A nd basically I would go so rar as to say that the Opposition itself feels that the govern­ ment is n.ot really prep ared do not have the necessary - MR. WARREN: Tools . MR. E. HISCOC K: - tools in motion to prepare for an oil spill 3106

April 30, 1980 Tape No. ll 7 3 SD - l l".R. E. HISCOCK: or a blowout in any way. I find it rat.':ler ludicrous and amazing that here the Premier of our Province makes claim to total jurisdiction, to total regulations and total control and yet when it comes to environmental impact of Hibernia and Ben Nevis, do we have anybody out there from the Department of the Environment? Basically it is being monitored by the federal government. And what is happening is duplicate copies each day are being sent to the provincial government and well as the federal government.

We want all the rooney, we want all the oil, we want a!l the jurisdiction but when it comes to the responsibility of lookin9 after the enviro~~nt and the irr~act it will have upon our fisheries if an oil spill takes place, we say "no, that is the federal government :• HR. G. NARREN: Right on, right on. MR. E. HISCOCK: The federal government can look after environment. And I find that myself - HR. W. MARSHALL: In co-ordination. MR. E.

HISCOCK: In co-ordination, but when it comes to paying because of environment and because of jurisdiction and because of constitutional jurisdiction,it falls under the jurisdiction of the federal government. As the minister just said about the herring, and about the fisheries and the quotas, it is the federal government. But it is also the responsibility of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. J. Morgan) and the various other government departments to make representation to the federal government for co-operation. MR. G. WARREN: Right on. MR. E.

HISCOCK: If the Minister of Fisheries felt, after hearing the case from the federal minister,that basically there should not be any increase in quotas,then fine. sut basically, again, it is up to the government of this House and the Opposition not to agree with the federal government at all times. The Premier in manv cases has tried to say that our stand on oil and gas is being mocked. One of the federal government piped out what the federal gove~~nt is saying 1that we are lackeys of the federal government, that we are mouthpieces of the administration. And here we have a perfect example 3107

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1173 SD - 2 MR. E. HISCOCK: today of co-operation and I am very pleased to see it. I de not necessarily agree or support it but the ~ti.nister of Fisheries (Hr. J. !-!organ), after having a meeting with his federal counterpart,has seen fit to agree with the federal government. Now, when we agre~ '·•i th the federal government, what happens? we are called traitors~ it is said that we are unpatriotic, that somehow or other we are not Newfoundlanders or Labradorians, that we are letting our birthright down. But yet, as I said, w!,en the minister wants to agree or disagree it is okay.

So, I am rather concerned about the impact that ~~is oil is going to have,particularly with regard to last week when the questions were brought up on Ben Nevis ar.d Hibernia and the finding of some tools down in the wellhead and basically a possibility of a blowout. What backup support does the Canadian Coastguard have, to what extent are we ready for that?

I would much prefer this provincial government to have greater co-operation with the federal government on jurisdiction of oil and gas and the regulations and the ownership, to have one of co-operation as Canadians and use part of this money and revenue to have the most modern, ultra-modern, even in research, sophisticated equipment and having, not the Coastguard itself in St. John's stationed with this equipment on the Southside or whatever but have this equipment and have these boats, and I mean boats, have them out stationed by these oil wells. Instead, what are we doing?

It is the federal jurisdiction and I find that a little bit hard to palate. And particularly with regard to the North where experts, scientists and government al.ike all agree that it is extremely hard and dangerous to drill for oil and gas in the Labrador Sea, off Hopedale and off Cartwright and particularly in my district. What happens there? Where is the equipment there? Where is the Coastguard there? MR. G. WARREN: MR. E. HISCOCK: Ice dcwn there eight m:mths of the year. Exactly, icebound eight months of the year. And when it is not icebound it will probably be in Botwood. 3108

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1173 SD - 3 MR. E. HISCOCK: So, I am saying as a Newfoundlander now and as a citizen of this Province that I am getting a little bit sick when it comes to this political football going back and forth 11R. G. WARREN: Pussyfooting. MR. E. HISCOCK: - about oil and regulations and 3109

April 30, 1980, Tape 1174, Page 1 -- apb MR. HISCOCK: jurisdiction. And when it comes down to the concrete matters of dealing with matters that are going to affect us more, even before it is brought on stream, four or five years, we do not have the equipment to safeguard our fisheries that we should have. We do not have it! And for any member, federal, provincial, Opposition or government to stand up and say that we have the necessary equipment to look after a blowout as was in Mexico, or down in Louisiana or in any other area, we do not have it. And that is my concern.

And here we are, bantering back and forth and basically letting our culture, our lifeline, by way of fisheries, go down the drain. MR. WARREN: Right on! Right on! MR. HISCOCK: If we did have an oil spill, and we cleaned it up, what would happen to the people with the jobs that are related to the industry? Would we pay them? Would we put them on unemployment? What would we do with them? And I am rather concerned with that matter. So I think we need to identify how this oil and gas revenue can be used to ensure the best interests and a way of life for this Province.

Again, a statement made by the member for Baie Verte - White Bay (Mr. Rideout) • Again, Mr. Speaker, five minutes and I have probably not even spoken five minutes because of the Minister of Fisheries and the member for LaPoile, the disagreement they had. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave. MR. HISCOCK: I am rather concerned about how this money is going to be spent. The Minister of Fisheries himself pointed out that this money from the revenue should be spent and related to the fisheries. We should identify the problems of the fisheries, ways of 3110

April 30, 1980, Tape 1174, Page 2 -- apb MR. HISCOCK: improving the fisheries and some problems of them. We should get into productivity of the fisheries, into the processing sector and also the need for quality control. We need better marketing techniques. That is one of the things that, again, not only in fishing, but in farming and agricultural products here in this Province, we have to get into better marketing facilities. We cannot continue to depend upon the Boston market, or the New York market, or the American market. Why?

We have the 200 mile limit and with the 200 mile limit you have India, Argentina, Japan, Peru and various other countries that were not considered fishing countries, that have now got in - Korea, for example - have now got into the fisheries in a large way and due to cheap labour can turn around and put out a product at a much cheaper cost of production and put it on the American market, therefore, undermining and undercutting our own product that we have, traditional.

And with the high cost of living, when an American can go out to the supermarket and buy fish products from India cheaper than he can buy them from Newfoundland, what is he going to do? MR. WARREN: There is something wrong. MR. HISCOCK: We do not even buy our own products here in Newfoundland let alone expecting people in foreign countries to give preferential treatment to them. MR. WARREN: Niagara Falls. MR. HISCOCK: Marinated herring from Again, Mr.

Speaker, another area that I want to get into, and it is of particular concern, is that when it comes to our fisheries here, as many things, you can basically say we depend on the federal government in most cases. 3111

April 30 , 1980, Tape 1174, Page 3 -- apb .t-1R. HISCOCK: I hear there is a new experiment in a steel boat that is going to be built. The federal government, 90 per cent . Most of the things in the Department of Fisheries are carri ed out by the federal gover~~ent and yet - MR. MORGAN : Including h.erring quotas. MR. HISCOCK : MR . NEARY: member bought off . MR . HISCOCK: Herring quotas or whatever. They must have the hon . They have him bought off . Basically I, myself, am ra~~er pleased by the co -operation.

As I said, I do not necessarily support the stand, I leave that up to the scientists and that, and I leave it up to the Minister of Fisheries to fight on behalf of the Newfoundland fishermen . MR. WARREN : MR . HISCOCK: Right on ~ Righ-t on~ But, again, I do not particularly want to wander into that realm of debate . But I am concerned ~~at so much money from the federal government is spent under the Department of Fisheries 3112

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1175 EL - 1 MR. E.

HISCOCK: and when it comes to revenue the provincial government themselves spent a fair bit, but the question I . am asking ·now, particularly with relationship to Northern Newfoundland and Northern Labrador and Labrador itself,- the minister, himself, be pointed to one of the areas that was going to be a p~oblem in the future and that is competition, ccmpetition for money to turn around and decide whether we will build a fort in Bay Bulls or in St.John's, to enlarge i~,or take that aoney and build better .wharf facilities, improve fishplants, improve slipways, improve other aspects of the fishing industry.

In my area , as I pointed out, we are now on coastal Labrador, in the district of Eagle River, only now getting into the fishing industry in any major way. And, again, in the area of Torngat district also, the last couple of years.And now so much money, massive amounts of money need to be put into having the impact of oil and gas -t a111 afraid that that money that basically should be going to the fisheries in Northern Labrador and Northern Newfoundland will be taken and redirected to offshore capacities because 1aqain, it has to come in the next three or four or five years.

We only have so much money, !0 many dollars. We will again depend so heavily on Ottawa unless we are going to have that arrangement.,And I back that up by sayi11g the coastal Labrador DREE Agreement , for the put three or four yeilre, everything is going ~ be done there on Labrador because of the DREE: Agreement'; ,.the DREE Agreement_, ninety per cent paid by the Federal Government, ten per cent paid by the Provincial Government.

The question I am asking, if it was not for the Federal Government 1down in Northern Labrador and Labrador generally 1 and Northern Newfoundland and Newfoundland generally, if it was not for the Federal Government itself we would not have this standard of living that we have and we would not_,basica1ly 1be able to enjQy a lot of 3113

April 30 , 1980 Tape No. ll 75 EL - 2 MR. E. HISCOCK: the facilities that we have - MR. BENNETT: Keep it going, keep it going. MR. E. HISCOCK: And another point I want to bring out, and I think it is a major point and I am glad,again,the minister touched on it and that was taking labour from the fishing sector of our industry and taking those people and giling into other jobs by ,, way of supply ships, by way of oil rigs because of larger 110ney·.

I was talking to a friend of mine last night, for example, who got a job as an operator to go to Sarnia, Ontario to travel and train and then go to Calgary and then go to Houston. And by the time he is finished he will be making $50,000 a year. So when you have got that type of money, are you going to work as a person on a supply ship? Are you going to go out in your herring boat? Are you going to look after your longliner? What is going to happen? The temptation is going to be there to go and make the fast money. And that is,again,only human - MR. WARliEN I (Inaudible). l'ri- Minister (ina~dibla) -- -----· MR.

E. HISCOCK: Go and make the fast money and there- fore the impact that is going to have on our trawler fleets, the impact that is going to have upon our research here in Newfoundland in the --.. fisheries 7 the impact that is going to have on all ilectors of our environment and what are we doing about it? What are we doing? I asked the Minister of Labour (J.

Dinn) Manpower in co~ittee meetings how much money was the Provincial Government taking from the Federal Government to get into programs of training and development for the foreseeable impact of oil and gas that is going to be daYeloped.And basically the minister, if I am correct, took great pleasure in saying not one sou, not one cent is the Federal Government paying to help develop these programs. The Federal Government is paying X number 311 4

April 30, 1980 Tape NO. 1175 EL - 3 MR. E. HISCOCK: of dollars under !o' .. <mpower - under Manpower for various related jobs but when it comes to designing a program for the impact of oil and gas, no, we are not taking a cent because it might probably-what?-rnterfere with our negotiations en oil and ga.,on our regulations, on our j~isdiction? And who is going to suffer because we do not have that program and we do not have that cooperation? It is going to be the Newfoundlanders themselves. MR. BENNE'l"r: The fishermen. MR. E.

HISCOCK: Last year on the oil rigs and supply ships we had 750 people only, 750 people only and over 5,000 people applied for those jobs. Where are the other ones? Where are the other people? What are they doing? They are looking for jobs. MR. WARREN: They are not on the list. MR. E. HISCOCK: They are looking for jobs, Mr. Speaker.

If I may, a letter I ended up getting from Cartwright - here I am still sitting around eating my fingers off as I got my nails chopped off and I still have no work and no sign of any wo~k according to ManpoWer here. 5,000 letters 'fr0111 around the Province and other ones and we are into this problem of oil and gas and ownership,And Ottawa was there for nL~e months with a con•ervative Government, nine months 1 and what was done? And the Federal qovernment now, under Mr.

Trudeau, has been there for three months and it is a ·football going back and fort~, back and forth • And the Premier talks about a package, a package that he is going to present to the Federal Government. I will say here now, that that package •ill not be presented to the Federal Government until sometime late next Fall and then when it is, the negotiations will go on until another year and then the Premier will basically go to the people and say "Look, Ottawa is doing this , we are doing this, 311 5

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 11 i6 GH-1 MR. HISCOCK: go to the people and use that as an excuse. This problem of juris- diction and control - MR. SPEAKER: (Baird) MR. HISCOCK: MR. SPEAKER: I understand there was leave? MR. JAMIESON: MR. HISCOCK: MR. SPEAKER: MR. HISCOCK: Order, please! - as far as I am concerned is being - Order, please! The member's time is up. Do By leave. By leave. By leave. This problem of jurisdiction of oil and gas, as far as I am concerned, is out of control and that it is not being done in the best in~erests of our people, and I say our people.

That basically what we need, we need co-operation and not confrontation, and basically the attitude that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan) is, again, a perfect example. Before he had a me~ting with the federal minister, Mr. Romeo LeBlanc, what was he d?ing? Criticizing him left, right and centre; left, right and centre, and yet here was the Premier, under Mr. Clark at the time, he started basically praising Mr. Romeo LeBlanc as the best federal minister that Canada ever had. Yet, as soon as the minister becomes the minister in this government, he starts taking shots at his federal counterpart. MR.

MORGAN: MR. HISCOCK: and Labrador. MR. WARREN: MR. MORGAN: MR. SPEAKER: MR. MORGAH: Who? The Minister of Fisheries for Newfoundland And now he came back right rosy. Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Point of order, the hen. Minister of Fisheries. The hen. gentleman cannot find one sentence, one scrap of evidence that I ever criticized Mr. LeBlanc since he became Minister of Fisheries, I never did. In fact, I called for him to be reappointed Minister of Fisheries and look forward to working with him because he stood for the inshore and midshore fishery development. So, Mr.

Speaker, it is misleading to the House to say that I was criticizing 3116

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1176 GH-2 MR. MORGAN: the Minister of Fisheries. That is totally untrue. MR. JAMIESON: -A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: (Baird) Point of order, the Leader of the Opposition. MR. JAMIESON: Yes, I apologize to my colleague from Eagle River (Mr. Hiscock) but, seriously, if in debate in this House, surely if it is going to go smoothly, we cannot on every point on which there is some form of disagreement get up on what is not, I suggest to Your Honour, in any sense a point of order.

I have no problem with the Minister of Fisheries making his case clear, and he had a good opportunity during the discussion earlier this afternoon, but if we start interrupting on every conceivable point on which there is a difference of opinion, surely it not only is unfair to the speaker who has the floor but surely there would be other opportunities for the minister or others to make their point. I suggest there is no point of order. MR: MORGAN: Mr. Spe~er, on that point of order. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. Minister of Fisheries. MR. MORGAN: Mr.

Speaker, surely when a member of the House stands in his place and openly lies about something, that the person he is lying about - _. MR. JAMIESON: On a point of order. MR. MORGAN: -Mr. Speaker, has the right - MR. SPEAKER: Point of order. MR. MORGAN: - has the right to correct the situation. MR. SPEAKER: Point of order. MR. MORGAN: I am on the point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I am on a point of order. MR. JAMIESON: (Inau6.ible). MR. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I am on the point of order. MR.

JAMIESON: A point of privilege then, it is a question of privilege. I suggest that no one in this House, no one in this House can possibly - perhaps the han. member was carried away, but surely he would want to withdraw the words which he used 'openly 3117

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1176 GH-3 MR. JAMIESON: lies' to this House. I suggest that that is completely unparliamentary, that there is not a single rule he can find anywhere that, under any circumstances, would defend the use of those words. He can make his point of order, but I suggest that he is under an unquestionable obligation to withdraw those particular words. Surely that is a standard rule of the House that the Government House Leader (Mr. Marshall) cannot possibly argue against. MR. MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, on that point of privilege. MR. SPEAKER: (Baird) To the point of order, the hon. House Leader. MR.

MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, we are talking on a point of privilege now. I would just suggest to Your Honour, you know, points of order and points of privilege come up from time to time, points of privilege supersede a point of order. The hen. gentleman was getting up on his point of order to explain something. The han. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Jamieson) got up about some word that was stated at the particular time, and I would suggest that, perhaps, that might more properly be done after the first point of order is attended to.

In any event, I did not hear what the hon. gentleman said, but I am sure if there was anything unparliamentary, and I say I did not hear what he said, but I know that the hen. gentleman, if anything was said unparliamentary, he would be the first one to withdraw it anyway. MR. JAMIESON: With respect, and since the hon. Leader - MR. SPEAKER: To the point of Frivilege, the hen. Leader of the Opposition. MR. JAMIESON: - has said so, I think he would agree with two things.

Number one, that a point of privilege takes preference over a point of order and that it is the privileges of the House which are infringed upon by the use of an expression 'openly lied'. An accusation that a member openly lied is surely, by any, I repeat, any precedent it is a usage of words which, at the very instant they are uttered, becomes the predominant issue before the House at that particular time. I do not think anybody would quarrel with that.

I think if the situation were reversed, I am ready to give the hen. minister the benefit of the doubt and say that he did it, perhaps, in the heat of the moment, but 3118

April 30, 1980 Tape No. 1176 GH-4 MR. JAMIESON: at the same tL~e I have no hesitation in saying that it must be withdrawn. 311 9

April 30, 1980 Tape 1177 EC - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Baird) : To the point of privilege, the hen. the Minister cf Fisheries. MR. J. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, on the point of privilege, if the hon. maw mouth from LaPoile (Mr. s. Neary) can keep quiet a second over there. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. J. MORGAN: What I said was that there were lies be.ing told in the House. Now, if the word 'lies' is unparliamentary, there is no question. If it is, I will retract that word 'lies'.

But what I am saying is, I stood in my place on a point of order to point out -· . ··-- - -.. that the hon. gentleman in his debate was outrightly deceiving the House of Assembly in giving information totally incorrect, totally untrue, about me as Minister of Fisheries, that is what I am saying. The point of order, Mr. Speaker, is that the gentleman stood in his place and deceived the House and made statements totally untrue about me. MR. S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: member for LaPoile. To that point of privilege, Mr. Speaker. To the point of privilege, the hon. the MR. s. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, the hon. gentleman seems to be beside himself for some reason. He is awfully nervous and jittery for some reason or other. But the han. gentleman, in speaking to the point of privilege, ma.de another unparliamentary remark, that somebody was deliberately deceiving this House. That is unparliar.entaey. The hon. gentleman is being contemptible to the Chair - nothing but utter contempt for the Chair. Your Honour should direct the hon. minister to retract these two unparliaJileJltary statements or name the hon. gentleman and have him flung out of the House. SOME HON. MEMBERS : Right on! Right on! MR.

SPEAKER: To the point of privilege. The Minister of Fisheries has withdrawn the word 'lie' • To the point of order, there is no point of order. The hon. member took the opportunity to clarify words that were stated. SOME HON • MEMBERS : Oh, oh! 3120

April 30, 1980 Tape 1177 EC - 2 MR. SPEAKER (Baird): The word 'deceive' is also an unparliamentary word. I wou1d ask. the hon. member if he wou1d withdraw. MR. J. MORGAN: Mr. Speaker, I was of the impression that I carefully said my words. I did not say'intentionally deceived,' I said 'deceived', and I was always of the impression, fram listening to debates in the past 1that you can say you can deceive the House but you cannot deliberately, intentionally deceive the House. If you say that you are out of order. so, Mr. Speaker, any words that I said - 1~R. S. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR. J. MORGAN: Mr.

Speaker, if the hon. maw mouth fram LaPoile could only keep quiet a second. Mr. Speaker, I was saying that any words that I use in the Assembly, like all members of this House, we have to abide by the rules of the Chair and I withdraw any words that were used which are unparliamentary. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: as was requested. MR. E. HISCOCk: Oh, oh! The bon. member has withdrawn the word The hon. the member for Eagle River. Again, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think., as the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. J. Morgan) pointed out, when you are talk.ing sometimes, one can use words that come out rather quickly.

When basically the statement is said criticizing the federal minister, the member for Torngat Mountains (Mr. G. Warren) basically informs me that he does not necessarily take that as the case. Again, maybe it was a correction of words and words that I used. All that I wou1d say, there was a lot of sabra rattling before one went to Ottawa and particu1arly with regard to the Northern cod stocks.

Not only did the minister but basically the full Provincial government ended up saying that we want total control and if that is not disagreeing with the minister of Fisheries and Oceans for Canada then I do not really see·wh .at · is. The point I wanted to Jllake -.a with regard to job training,that here we have the impact of oil and gas coming and not only are we not ready for the environmental impact of a spill-out but we also are not ready by way of environment and also training programmes. And if this qover~t itself do not qet into those areas then basically we 3121

April 30, 1980 M;R. E. HISCOCK: Tape 1177 MB - 3 are going to have a great social