March 9,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLI No. 2

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

Statements by Ministers. The hon. the Member for Port au

Port.

MR. SPEAKER: If the House will allow me to revert back

from Statements by Ministers - if the hon. Member for Port au Port would take

his place please.

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: This is a matter that I think ought to

have a level of priority. Then we can provide for the hon. Member for Port au

Port.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: It is with considerable sadness that I

rise to inform hon. members of the passing on Sunday, March 8 of a distinguished

Newfoundlander and a former member of this hon. House, Beaton J. Abbott.

He was first elected to the House of Assembly in 1956, and

from then until his resignation from cabinet in 1968 he held several portfolios,

including municipal affairs, supply and public welfare. Mr. Abbott was a

dedicated member of the House who was always concerned for the interests of the

people he served. He was a man of principle who believed very firmly in doing

what he felt was the correct thing to do. That led him at one point into a

disagreement with Mr. Smallwood, and ultimately to his resignation from the

cabinet. In fact, he sat on the opposite side of the House as an independent

liberal.

He was a man of great integrity, and I am grateful for having

had the opportunity to serve with him both in this House and in the cabinet.

He dedicated his life to public service as a school teacher

and as a principal, later as a magistrate, and ultimately of course as the

Member for Gander and a minister. In December he and his wife Pearl celebrated

their 63rd wedding anniversary, as clear an indication as there could be of his

devotion to his family and of the most important place which his family held in

his life.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that on behalf of hon. members on both

sides of the House that you convey our deepest condolences to Mrs. Abbott and

the members of her family in this time of sorrow.

Mr. Abbott made a tremendous contribution to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador throughout his life, and those of us who had the

pleasure of knowing him will always remember him with respect, fondness and

gratitude.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

this side would like to associate ourselves with the comments of the Premier in

paying respects and sending condolences to the Abbott family. He was a former

member of this Legislature, and a gentleman who contributed so significantly to

life in our Province, and no doubt has made this Province a better place for all

of us as a result of his contribution. So on this side I say to the Premier we

want to be associated with his comments in passing on our condolences to the

family.

It was interesting to note, Mr. Speaker, that the Premier

indicated that Mr. Abbott had a disagreement with former Premier Smallwood, and

it struck my mind that there were a number of people who had disagreements with

former Premier Smallwood, but that does not make any difference. I am sure it

was just reason as it would be with anyone who disagreed with the former Premier

and will disagree with the current Premier. That, I think, is a sign of the

independence and a sign of the type of people who are elected to this

Legislature. It is something of which I am proud, that we have that kind of

representation sent in here. So we would like to associate ourselves with the

Premier's comments.

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

MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave of the members

opposite to make this very short statement. It has to do with something that

happened over the weekend which I think should be mentioned in the House.

I want to point out to the members of the House of Assembly

that there was a fund raising event in the Bay St. George area which took place

on Saturday past, for Emile Benoit, who, as you know, is a well known musician

and a very favourite son of Newfoundland, especially of my district.

Mr. Speaker, members from both sides of this House

participated and helped to raise $6,000 to preserve Emile's music on compact

disc. I would like to take this time to thank the Minister of Development, whose

help was invaluable, and to thank the Member for Stephenville for his

participation and help. I might say that the three of us were on radio for a

number of hours on Saturday, and oddly enough, Mr. Speaker, the comments were

very favourable. It is not often that the members in this House act in a

nonpartisan manner, and certainly this time the co-operation had very favourable

results, and I again want to thank the hon. members opposite.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just want it to go

on record as associating myself with the remarks of the -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The Chair is under no obligation to recognize the Member for

St. John's East under those circumstances, unless it is by leave of the House.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave?

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The recognition of a former member of this House who has made

a substantial contribution to this Province as a teacher, school principal,

magistrate, and serving this House for fifteen years should not and did not go

unrecognized and I want, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my party to be on record as

associating myself with those remarks and join in the request that the Speaker,

on behalf of the House, pass on condolences to the family of the late Mr.

Abbott.

Statements by Ministers

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, as hon. members are aware, 1991

was a disastrous year for the inshore fishery in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Landings were down to such an extent that in many areas fishermen's incomes were

reduced by half. In Labrador, the situation was even worse.

In response to this, the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador contributed $2 million for programs to assist those engaged in the

fishery in areas hardest hit by the inshore fishery failure.

I am pleased to announce today a further measure to assist

fishermen - a special program for fishermen who are experiencing difficulty in

making their 1991 payments to the Fisheries Loan Board as a result of the very

poor inshore fishery last year.

One of the main elements of this program, Mr. Speaker, is

that 1991 interest charges will be forgiven for all Direct Loan Program clients,

subject to certain conditions, as follows:

First, forgiveness will apply only to normal interest

applicable in 1991, and not to interest associated with payments in arrears.

Second, a borrower whose loan was approved prior to April l,

1988, must have made payments on his account at least equal to the amount of

forgiveness during the April l, 1988 to the September 30, 1991 period. However,

borrowers with loans approved after April l, 1988, would be exempt from this

requirement if they can demonstrate to the Executive Board of the Fisheries Loan

Board that their delinquency was a result of a poor fishery or other extenuating

circumstances and not to a lack of intent to make payments.

Mr. Speaker, the board believes that help should be provided

to fishermen who are experiencing serious financial difficulties as a result of

the 1991 fishery failure. At the same time, however, it should also be

recognized that a significant number of borrowers have made no serious effort to

repay their debts to the Board.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to forgiveness of 1991 interest

charges, the special program I am announcing enables fishermen who have direct

loans to request a deferment of the 1991 principal payments due. Requests from

those who can demonstrate a significant reduction in earnings would not normally

be refused.

A third feature of the program is that Fisheries Loan Board

clients who purchased vessels through government-guaranteed chartered bank

loans, rather than from the Board, and who experienced a significant drop in

landings as the result of the 1991 catch failure, can also take advantage of

interest forgiveness and deferment of principal payments for 1991. I want to

point out, however, that these clients' requests will be assessed on an

individual basis depending on each borrower's circumstances. As well, the

forgiveness of interest for Bank Program clients will require the approval of

the Fisheries Loan Board Executive Board. Borrowers who purchased larger vessels

through the District Loan Program, prior to the introduction of the Bank Loan

Guarantee Program in 1981, will also be eligible for assistance, under the same

I also want to point out, Mr. Speaker, that fishermen who

have already made their 1991 interest payments through assignment of catch

arrangements and other means will be able to apply the amounts paid against

payments due for 1992.

Mr. Speaker, this special Loan Board program for fishermen

recognizes the special financial circumstances in which fishermen found

themselves in 1991 because of catch failure.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

I want to thank the minister for a copy of his statement. I received it a few

minutes before I came to the House today and basically I have to say that it is

a positive statement, there are some positive initiatives here to reduce the

financial burden which a lot of our fishermen find themselves in today.

But having said that I want to remind the minister that it

was months and months ago that I raised the issue here in this Legislature in

Question Period and debate and through the public media calling on the minister

to go to the Loan Board and get some of these initiatives undertaken, because it

did not take them until March of 1992 to know that we had a catch failure in

this Province in the 1991 fishery. It has taken the minister six to seven months

too long to bring in these initiatives because I am sure all members in this

House, who have fishermen in their districts, and that is just about every one

of us, know about the catch failure there has been, know about the pressure that

has been put on fishermen throughout this Province by officials of the Fisheries

Loan Board. Some of them have gone so far that you could classify it as

harassment, Mr. Speaker. I want to say to the minister that I hope this is just

again not another play on words, that he will direct officials of the Fisheries

Loan Board to go about this thing properly and to stop the repossession orders

and procedures that are going on all over this Province. I hope that he and the

Loan Board are sincere about carrying out this program that he has announced

today. There are some very positive things here that should help the plight of

our fishermen around this Province.

A question for the minister, however: I would like to know,

How many fishermen will fall outside of the program, will fall through the

cracks, and will consequently not be accommodated? Another question for the

minister that he can probably answer when he finds the appropriate time in the

House or through the public media is: Is the Loan Board going to pay the banks

the interest that is being charged on the loans? Is that what the minister is

indicating in his statement, particularly on page 2, paragraph 3, when he talks

now going to pay the interest to those chartered banks for the fishermen? Is

that what he is indicating here?

As well, Mr. Speaker, I think it is very positive in the

statement that fishermen who have paid interest in 1991 through assignment of

catches and other means reflected in the minister's statement -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MATTHEWS: - that they will now be able to apply the

amount against payments due for 1992, Mr. Speaker. It is a very positive day for

fishermen. But I want to say to the minister and the government that there are

other businesses out and about the Province that have loans and so on, and that

need help. I ask the government to consider that, as well.

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

Provincial Affairs.

MR. HOGAN: Mr. Speaker, on Thursday last, I had the

privilege of participating in somewhat of an historic event, namely, the

unveiling of a new Newfoundland coin that was placed in general circulation as

part of the events leading up to the celebration on July 1 of Canada's 125th

birthday.

My purpose in rising today is for the House of Assembly to

give recognition to Mr. Christopher Newhook, a twenty-five year old resident of

Mount Pearl, who submitted the design for the new Newfoundland coin.

The coin program is comprised of twelve different twenty-five

cent pieces that are to be issued into general circulation, one to represent

each of the provinces and territories. As well, there will be a special one

dollar coin on Canada Day.

When the coin program was announced at the end of January,

the public was invited to submit designs on the theme, "The Beauty of Canada."

Six weeks later the Royal Mint had received more than 11,000 designs, including

almost 500 from the Province of Newfoundland.

The design submitted by Mr. Newhook, a free-lance artist,

depicts a lone fisherman in a dory. As the Premier indicated at the ceremonies,

it probably has more significance, at this particular time, than anything else,

and we should take advantage of Mr. Newhook's design to draw the attention of

the whole country and the whole of the world to the plight of the cod fishermen

of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, it is appropriate, I think, for the House of

Assembly to duly recognize this achievement and I move that a suitable

correspondence be forwarded to Mr. Newhook.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to respond to this statement on behalf of my

colleagues on this side of the House. First of all, let me congratulate the

minister on his appointment to that particular portfolio. I have to say that

municipalities in this Province are looking forward to some sanity being put

back into the Department of Municipal Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, we welcome this announcement. This is, indeed,

an appropriate, I think, recognition of the ten provinces and the two

territories of Canada by striking these twelve different twenty-five cent

pieces. We are particularly proud, of course, that the artist who submitted the

winning submission, selected from the 500 submissions made from within

Newfoundland, came from the great historic district of Mount Pearl. Mr. Newhook

is becoming well recognized as one of Newfoundland's foremost free-lance artists

and this particular work, no doubt, is one that we all now know well because it

has had such publicity. Mr. Newhook is an extremely good artist who has produced

some very good work, and I think it is very appropriate, indeed, that his

submission was selected.

We rise, Mr. Speaker, to associate ourselves with the

comments of the minister.

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

During the 1989 provincial general election campaign, the

Premier, at that time, pledged to attack and reduce the unacceptably high

unemployment rate in this Province. It is almost a quote, as a matter of fact.

Now, he repeated that pledge again in the government's first Throne Speech, he

repeated it again in his first Budget Speech and he repeated it again in the

legislation creating the Economic Recovery Commission. Mr. Speaker, he has

recently told us of their plan to introduce a long-term, like a twenty-year plan

of some sort, strategy for the future, and that is fine.

My question to the Premier is this, Mr. Speaker: When will

the Premier show the House his plan to address the urgent situation that faces

our people throughout this Province today?

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear! Good question.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, if Newfoundland and Labrador

had not been affected by two or three things, first, what has happened in the

fishery, the impact, over which we had no control - not even the former

government had any direct control. They could not cause this. The same

unemployment, the same increase in unemployment rates, would have resulted had

they been in power. If we had not encountered the national economic recession,

as we have done - over which we have had no control, nor did the former

government in 1982 - we would find, Mr. Speaker, that there had been some

improvement in the unemployment rate in this Province.

But, as a result of these things, over which this government

obviously has no control, the increase that has taken place in the unemployment

rate in Newfoundland - and there has been an increase - has not been as severe

as it has been in some other provinces. It has not been as severe as it has

been, really, on a broad base nationally. The situation would have been worse

had we not been successful in making some contribution toward dealing with it,

although it is not perfect. There is still a very long way to go.

We are going to continue this effort to resolve the problems.

I have to say to the Leader of the Opposition, as I said on opening day, jobs

pulled out of thin air one day usually disappear into thin air the next day.

Now, the former government has a number of examples of how that has occurred in

their effort to try and create job opportunities and it didn't work. We intend

to tackle the problem on a long-term, solid planning basis, Mr. Speaker.

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

supplementary.

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, the answer is exactly as I had

anticipated. I want to say to the Premier today, sincerely: the people of this

Province have been hearing all of the explanations, excuses, reasons and all of

the blame as to why the situation exists for the past three years. But they want

their government to do something, not just continue to explain why and what

happened and everything like that. Fifty per cent of the people able to work

above the age of fifteen in the Maritimes are working - 50 per cent! In

Newfoundland it is less than 40 per cent of the people over the age of fifteen

who are working and who are able to get a paycheck.

So I ask the Premier again to please answer my question.

Please answer the question. When are he and his government going to stop acting

as spectators to this serious crisis and this serious situation and actually

present a plan in this Legislature to create jobs? - a plan to create jobs.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, we will go back to the 1982

recession and look at what happened when the former government was in power, and

look at the disparity between this Province and the Atlantic provinces then. You

will find that the disparity was even greater than it is today. We have

diminished it somewhat. We have not solved the problem entirely, nor have we

claimed the ability to do so.

Now, we could go through all sorts of schemes. We could spend

$20 million on something like the former government did and achieve absolutely

nothing other than the loss of money.

AN HON. MEMBER: Marble Mountain.

We could spend $3 million or $4 million on something like

Marble Mountain and create permanent jobs.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: There are eighty-two people working at

Marble Mountain today. The member refers to Marble Mountain. There are dozens

and dozens more working in Corner Brook, at driving taxis, working in stores,

working at a variety of other things. Mr. Speaker, we have achieved some

significant improvement and we intend to continue along a sound line. But we are

not going to rush out and make irrational decisions as the former government did

and cost this government tens of millions of dollars with nothing to show for

it. We want to see results in the end.

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

MR. SIMMS: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The Premier has

just exhibited once again exactly what I have been trying to tell him. He

doesn't seem to be getting the message. The people in our Province today are not

interested anymore in hearing the excuses and the blame. The time for that is

over. Our people want some help. He says the unemployment rate that jumped from

15 per cent in early 1989 when he formed the government to now, nearly 19 per

cent, a 4 per cent increase, is not too much. It is extremely significant that

over the last three years the unemployment rate has increased dramatically.

Now, here is the question that the people want me to ask the

Premier. They are truly wondering if he understands the seriousness of the

situation. Does he understand the anguish of the people out there who are

concerned about losing their jobs? Does he fear for the people who are going to

lose their jobs, or is he simply too involved in other issues like

constitutional issues? That is what they want me to ask the Premier.

So answer the question directly. Never mind the blame. When

are you and your government going to bring a plan into this Legislature to

address the immediate situation that we face, a plan to create jobs, or are you

just simply going to continue to rise in the House and blame this one and blame

that one?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Let me say again, Mr. Speaker, jobs

dragged out of thin air today disappear into thin air tomorrow, just like the

200 Sprung jobs did.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: And we are not going to repeat that. We

are not going to follow their recipe. Now maybe they want us to follow their

recipe. We are not going to follow their recipe. It has been demonstrated to be

disastrous. We are not going to follow their recipe. Let me tell you instead,

Mr. Speaker, what we have done.

We know that there were 408 separate companies helped last

year through ENL and ERC - 408. We know that it made a contribution towards

generating some 1,400 new jobs and helped to sustain some 3,000 others. Now, we

know that, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

REMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, let me say to you that I also

have sufficient honesty to confess inability. The former government didn't. But

I will confess to the people of this Province that we, this government, cannot

protect them against the consequences of a national economic recession - we

cannot. The former government pretended they could and they created an utter

disaster. We cannot protect the fisheries - the loss of jobs in the fisheries,

against what has been done in terms of mismanagement of the fisheries by the

federal government. We cannot cause, suddenly, 8,000 jobs to be created to

produce jobs for the people who are displaced. It cannot be done. The difference

between us and them when they were there, Mr. Speaker, is that they didn't have

the honesty to admit it - we do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There is one sure to way to ensure that you do not create

mistakes like Sprung, and that is to do absolutely nothing; and that is the

approach that this government has been taking.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: 'Do-nothing Clyde'.

MR. SIMMS: The Premier flags out all of the things that

ENL is doing. One thing he didn't mention about Enterprise Newfoundland and

Labrador, Mr. Speaker, is that they have just spent in January and February -

two months - $25,000 on television advertising. Now, is that a priority, or is

it not a priority?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, the Premier need not try to

camouflage the question. What he should do is give an answer to the people. I

ask the Premier one final time to try to come to his senses, to avoid the blame

and the excuses - we have all heard them. Tell the people what you are going to

do for them now.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I say again, in case the hon.

we cannot - we cannot - put a shield around this Province and prevent and

protect the Province against the ravages of the national economic recession. The

former government couldn't do it either. The unemployment rate more than doubled

in the 1982 recession.

MR. SIMMS: It did not.

PREMIER WELLS: Well, it came very close to it.

MR. SIMMS: That is incorrect, it didn't double.

PREMIER WELLS: It went over 20 per cent - 22 per cent.

AN HON. MEMBER: It hurts, doesn't it?

MR. SIMMS: It did not double.

PREMIER WELLS: It went over 22 per cent, that is right.

So it didn't double, it only went over 22 per cent.

AN HON. MEMBER: Yes, and again that is (inaudible).

PREMIER WELLS: That is right. It did not double -

MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I remind the Leader of the Opposition and other members to my

right that Question Period is for asking questions. It is not for debate. It is

to get information, and I want, please, to cut down on the interruptions.

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Let me say, Mr. Speaker, I was in error.

It didn't double, it went to over 22 per cent. It did not double. I was in

error. It went to over 22 per cent. Now, Mr. Speaker, they couldn't do anything

about it. They couldn't protect the Province against the ravages of a national

economic recession. The difference is that the Liberal party understood. We

understood the situation at the time.

Mr. Speaker, we also cannot protect this Province, or shield

it completely against the consequences of the loss of several thousands of jobs

because of what has happened with the fisheries, because of the mismanagement of

the fisheries by the federal government, because of the effects of foreign

overfishing - because of what has happened. We cannot stop the loss of jobs

because of that. And, Mr. Speaker, we are not prepared to waste public funds and

put the Province in a still worse position by spending $25 million or $30

million on harebrained schemes to create phantom jobs one day, only to see them

disappear in the mist the next. We are not going to operate on that basis, we

are going to take a different approach to rebuild the economy of this Province

on a sound and reliable basis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

MR. DOYLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a follow-up

question for the Premier, as well. I want to ask the Premier about jobs lost

since he took office back in 1989. The unemployment rate, as the Leader of the

Opposition mentioned a moment ago, was 15 per cent when he took office and it is

now 19 per cent. The difference between 15 per cent and 19 per cent in the work

force of 238,000 people is 10,000 jobs. Now, in addition, about 7,000 people

dropped out of the work force over the last year, so that is 17,000 jobs lost

since the government took office.

We are going to continue to ask the Premier the question if

it takes all day, all week, all month or all next year, we are going to continue

to ask him the question: What is his immediate plan to correct these horrendous

numbers? We have people out there who are feeling that the government is not

concerned about job creation, we have people who are losing their homes, banks

are foreclosing on these people. What does the Premier intend to do for those

people who are losing homes in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, I expect every single member

of this House has the same kinds of concerns that the hon. members opposite are

now standing up and expressing. The difference is that we, on this side, have

the honesty and integrity to explain to people what the real facts are. We don't

pretend. We are not prepared to fake things. We want to do everything we can

within our power, within our ability, to try to help people deal with these

problems, but I remind hon. members that there are only so much taxes we can

raise. There is only so much money we can borrow, and if the hon. members

opposite hadn't borrowed us silly in the fifteen years they were there, we might

have some more manoeuvring room here today.

The people of this Province understand that it is wrong to

put them further into debt and see nothing for it - it is wrong to do that, to

wreck our chance at a reasonable future. They support this government, Mr.

Speaker, in their efforts to make sure that we govern in a way that will not put

this Province into that position, and we intend to continue on that line.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

supplementary.

MR. DOYLE: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Let me remind

the Premier, as well, that he was passed a surplus budget on current account

back in 1989 when he took office.

Let us talk about the St. John's Metropolitan area for a

minute, Mr. Speaker. In Metropolitan St. John's, the unemployment rate went up 4

per cent since last February. That is nearly 3,500 jobs or half of the jobs that

were lost in Newfoundland over the last year, and it was caused by government

layoffs in the last Budget.

Now, are these people being helped who were directly affected

by the budget that the Premier brought down last year? Are these people going to

be helped, and does the Premier feel any responsibility toward these 3,500

people who were laid off as a result of his Budget last spring?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, we didn't create the mess. We

have taken on the responsibility of trying to find solutions to it. We are doing

it in an orderly sensible way. Last year they were saying we were destroying the

health care in the Province. It is better now than ever it was before.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we intend to put this Province back on a

sound management and financial footing, because we are concerned about the

people of the Province, concerned that they have a means of earning a livelihood

here, concerned that they not be burdened with an inordinate level of taxation.

The former government has put us in a position where they

have everything in jeopardy. The teachers' pension plan is in severe jeopardy.

We have to cope with that mess that they made. The workers' compensation fund is

in severe jeopardy. We have to cope with that mess that they made. We owe $4.8

billion because of their approach to government. Mr. Speaker, we have a massive

job ahead of us to try to restore financial sense to this Province, to put us

back on a sound and proper road and, in the process, rebuild the economy of this

Province.

Now, I know the hon. members opposite don't like the degree

of success we are having with that. It bothers them greatly. It is a source of

immense embarrassment to them. So, I understand the subterfuge that they have to

create with these fake concerns about doing something for people now. You do

something within the limits of your ability, you do not pretend you can act

beyond your ability. That is not an honest thing to do, and we are not prepared

to do it.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I recognize the hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

MR. DOYLE: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker.

If the Premier won't do anything to help those people who are

unemployed right now, will he make a promise that he won't add to it this year?

Will he promise that there will be no more public sector layoffs this year?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Absolutely not, Mr. Speaker. I will make

no such promise. The Minister of Finance, when he delivers his Budget, will

state what the government's position is. Now, we have a difficult position

facing us again this year, and I say to you, so far, we are getting no help from

the unions. They are taking a head-in-the-sand approach. I have to say to them,

that we must - we have given them every opportunity, and if they spurn it and

set it aside in this way, then the government must and will do that which is

necessary. It may involve more layoffs. We must do that which is necessary to

manage this Province in a sound and proper way, and we are not about to run from

it because of these kinds of questions in the House today.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Premier, as well. While this government

has failed to address employment problems, in general, it's biggest failure has

been its inability to find employment opportunities for the youth of this

Province. Presently some 32 per cent of the population between the ages of

fifteen and twenty-four are unemployed. What has the Premier done, then, to live

up to his 1989 election promise of providing jobs for the youth of this Province

so they will not have to leave home to find work?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, we are endeavouring to do

just that. That remains the commitment of the government, to provide

opportunities for our people within the Province. It isn't easy when you are

faced with three major factors: the utter mess that we inherited, the national

economic recession, and what has happened in the fishery. Now, it isn't an easy

solution.

The difference between the people opposite and the people on

this side is we are prepared to tell it to the people exactly as it is, tell

them honestly what the situation is, what we are doing about it, and how we

intend to approach it.

Now, I think the people have had an ample opportunity to

express their views. They have been asked by a variety of pollsters. We haven't

done it, we just read what we see in the newspapers and report it on television.

I can only say to you, Mr. Speaker, that I can confess to the people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, I don't think we are perfect - I think we have even

made some mistakes, but I think we are going in the right direction. And I

express my sincere appreciation to the people of this Province for their

recognition of that fact, when they have expressed their opinions as they have,

and say to them, give them every assurance, Mr. Speaker, that we are going to

continue along that vein and not along the lines that the Opposition proposes,

which the people of this Province have clearly denounced.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

supplementary.

MR. WINSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier knows that the youth unemployment situation in

this Province has gotten worse each year since 1989. Added to that, in a couple

of months, thousands of students will graduate from the colleges, schools and

universities throughout this Province. What is the Premier going to do to give

them a chance to get a job here in this Province so that we can prevent the mass

exodus of thousands of the brightest young people in this Province to the

mainland? What is the Premier going to do to prevent that?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, maybe they have their

questions preset, they don't listen to the answers and they figure they just

must continue and ask them, but let me say again what we say to people honestly,

we cannot create jobs out of thin air. We cannot create jobs out of thin air. We

say it again in case they missed the point. We also say we are not prepared to

put this Province in debt beyond its ability. We are not prepared to add another

two or three points to the retail sales tax to try and create more Sprungs that

do not work anyway. We are bound and determined to correct the problems of the

economy of this Province so that on a long-term basis we can generate a stable

economy and provide for an opportunity for people to seek employment here as

they graduate from school and graduate from university and technical colleges

and so on.

We gave no undertaking to anybody that we could turn the mess

around in two or three years. We told people honestly how long it would take to

correct this mess. On top of that we were then saddled with the burden of trying

to cope, Mr. Speaker, with the consequences of what has happened in the fishery,

with the consequences of a national economic recession, and with the

consequences of substantial cutbacks by the Federal Government in their

transfers to the Province. We have had to cope with these difficult situations,

and I say to you, Mr. Speaker, anybody who is prepared to look at the record

objectively will see a remarkable record of achievement and commend this

Government, as do the people when they are asked their opinions. They give full

marks and full commendation to this Government, and I prefer to accept their

judgement, Mr. Speaker, as opposed to the prejudiced judgement of the members

opposite.

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Member for Fogo on a

supplementary.

MR. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, with a youth unemployment rate

of 32 per cent, thousands of students coming out of school in a couple of months

time seeking Summer work so they can return to school next year: can the Premier

tell them that job opportunities will exist for them this Summer, and has the

Government considered a strategy to find temporary Summer employment for the

thousands of students who will soon join the workforce? That is not long-term,

that is short-term because they are going back to school in September. What is

the Government going to do about short-term jobs for the Summer?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I have no doubt that the Minister of

Finance, when he delivers his Budget, will announce programs, generally

speaking, of the nature that the Government has had before, and I believe of a

nature not dissimilar to the kinds of programs the former government put in

place - not at all dissimilar to the kinds of programs the former government put

in place. It is quite similar. Will it be adequate to deal with the entire

problem? I doubt it, Mr. Speaker, because I am frankly prepared to honestly

admit to the people of this Province that we do not have the resources to deal

with a problem of the magnitude that we have in a perfect way. We struggle to

try and do our best to provide for good sound Government, and to provide for the

fair treatment of people, as we intend to continue to do, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

In the absence of the Minister of Justice I have a question

for the Premier. On February 14, Valentine's Day, the community of Davis Inlet

was shocked by a tragic fire which took the lives of six small children. Is the

Premier considering the appointment of a judicial inquiry into the cause and

circumstances surrounding this tragic fire?

MR. CHAIRMAN: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, whenever death occurs in an

unexplained way, or there is no obvious and clear explanation for it, a judicial

inquiry is normally conducted by a provincial court judge. It happens as a

matter of routine. I think in fact Government generally just goes through the

pro forma form of issuing the Order in Council directing it but it is a matter

pretty much of routine that we have it. I do not know what the Minister of

Justice has done but I will undertake to inquire and inform the House as to

whether or not there is anything in process that will cause a judicial inquiry

to be held in the Davis Inlet fire.

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

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

I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries as a result

of the recent announcements on the reductions in the northern cod quotas, and

layoffs in the fishing industry because of the closure of the trawler industry

for northern cod. I must say, Mr.

Speaker, that these laid off people are not reflected in the

most recent unemployment statistics, so once all these are compounded and added

in we are going to see a much larger unemployment rate for this Province in the

March statistics.

I just want to ask the Minister of Fisheries, what is his

Government planning to do and how are they prepared to help the fishermen and

fish plant workers and others, who have already lost work and income because of

the closure of the fishery, and for those who will be losing work and income

because of this devastating news to our fishery?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, we propose to work with the

Federal Government, and we indicated to the federal Minister of Fisheries and

Oceans on several occasions, the latest being of course on Friday past, that the

Province is quite willing to work with his government to put together a response

package to accommodate the fishermen whose livelihood is being at least,

temporarily interrupted by the plant closures. I have written the minister, Mr.

Speaker, a letter to that effect and I am quite prepared today to table that

letter.

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

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

the minister: is the Provincial Government planning to have an aid package ready

for trawlermen and fish plant workers in this Province, if plants remain closed

for an extended period of time. We all know there is going to be a further

review this fall, the federal Minister of Fisheries has told us that. The chief

executive officer of Fishery Products International says he is going to fully

assess his company later this fall, and there may possibly be a restructuring of

the company. Will the Provincial Government have a package in place to assist

those people when they fall out off the work force?

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

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

moment ago, that we have had meetings with the Federal Minister of Fisheries and

Oceans and will be meeting with him again shortly to discuss that very problem,

given the fact, Mr. Speaker, that the problems we are now experiencing in the

fishing industry are the responsibility of the Federal Government. I think it is

totally irresponsible to expect the Province to shoulder the full burden of

responding to that program, and I think any member who would recommend that is

being totally irresponsible, given the circumstances surrounding the crisis, and

I question their motive, Mr. Speaker. Is it to score a cheap political point or

are they sincerely interested in helping the people who are severely affected.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The real question,

Mr. Speaker, when you talk about irresponsibility is, when is this Minister of

Fisheries going to wake up to the realities of Newfoundland and Labrador?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: When are you going to wake up? Anybody

could write a letter to John Crosbie or Brian Mulroney. When are you going to do

something yourself, you are the Minister of Fisheries in Newfoundland and

Labrador? If you spent as much time working as you spend writing letters and

spending time in the air, by the way, not pulling jobs out of thin air -

MR. SIMMS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. MATTHEWS: -we would be a lot better off in this

Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that he is on a supplementary and

ought to ask a question. I remind all hon. members that Question Period is not a

time for debate, but to solicit information from Government.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Question Period is

not a time for a minister to impugn motives on another member of this House,

either, without being taken to task.

MR. SIMMS: He should have been taken to task.

MR. MATTHEWS: He should have been taken to task, Mr.

Speaker. If we are going to talk Parliamentary rules here, let us talk them.

I want to ask the minister: The Provincial Government has

advocated a much deeper cut in the Total Allowable Catch for northern cod, how

big a cut has the Provincial Government proposed, how many jobs would have been

lost if the Province's proposal had been accepted and what action is the

Government prepared to take to help affected fishermen and plant workers, if the

proposed TAC that his Government has recommended to the Federal Minister is

implemented this fall when a further review is undertaken? Has the minister

assessed those questions and does he have answers?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, let me deal with the first part

of his question, when he asked me if we had been asleep since these crises

started. Let me tell the hon. gentlemen that this Government, Mr. Speaker, was

very much awake in 1989, in providing assistance. Let me give you a few numbers.

Since 1989, Mr. Speaker, the fisheries -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CARTER: You want to know what we have done. The

Fisheries Loan Board has made more than $70 million available to fishermen

through loans, bounties, and interest forgiveness. Since 1989, since we took

office, Mr. Speaker, this Government has assisted the sealing industry to the

tune of approximately $5 million in direct grants and loans. As a result of

quota cuts and the closure of three offshore plants - Grand Bank, Trepassey and

Gaultois - this Government has made $13 million available to extend the layoff

notices. That's being asleep alright, isn't it? As a result of these closures

the Government has engaged in a 70-30 cost-sharing basis for a plant workers

retirement program.

AN HON. MEMBER: What an abuse of Question Period.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. CARTER: Last summer we made $100,000 available -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible)!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I would also remind the hon. minister that answers should be

as brief as possible, and tell him now that Question Period is over.

AN HON. MEMBER: Saved by the bell.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

For the purpose of maintaining order and decorum in the

House, and for maintaining the respect and dignity of the Chair, I want to ask

the hon. the Opposition House Leader to clarify a position. I can go to Hansard,

but I am wondering if the hon. the Opposition House Leader was making an

inference that the Chair had not called the hon. the Minister of Fisheries,

because when I told the hon. member that he ought not to take

part in debate, I

think he came back suggesting that maybe the Chair should also call the rules

fairly. I just want the hon. the Opposition House Leader to clarify it, please.

The hon. the Opposition House Leader.

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Speaker, I was inferring in my remarks

that this Legislature is supposed to operate in a fair and equitable manner, and

that is basically all I was saying. The Minister of Fisheries impugned motives

on me in my question. I was told I was not supposed to take

part in debate when

asking questions. I just thought that if it was brought to my attention about my

debating the issue that the Minister should have it brought to his attention

that he was impugning motives on another member, which I think is

unparliamentary. That is the only reason. If I have caused Your Honour any

embarrassment by doing that I withdraw, and I am sorry.

MR. SPEAKER: I accept the hon. member's explanation.

Before moving on to the next item of business, on behalf of

hon. members, I would like to extend a cordial welcome to seven students in

Level II and Level III, accompanied by their teacher, Mr. Reg Hutchings, from

Jens Haven Memorial High School, Nain Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Presenting Reports by

Standing and Special Committees

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Eagle River.

MR. DUMARESQUE: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Select

Committee appointed to draft a reply to the speech of His Honour, the

Lieutenant-Governor, I present the report of the Select Committee as follows:

To his Honour, the Lieutenant-Governor, the Honourable

Frederick W. Russell: May it please Your Honour. We, the Commons of Newfoundland

and Labrador in legislative session assembled, beg to thank Your Honour for the

Gracious Speech which Your Honour has addressed to this House.

Signed by the Member for Eagle River, the Member for

Carbonear, and the Member for Fogo.

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

DR. KITCHEN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In accordance with the Financial Adminstration Act, I am

pleased to table the Public Accounts of the Province for the year ending March

31, 1991.

MR. SPEAKER: In accordance with

section 13 of the Auditor

General Act, as Speaker, I am required to table the annual report of the Auditor

General before this Assembly. Therefore,I now table the annual report of the

Auditor General for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1991.

The hon. the Minister of Finance.

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to present

the department's observations on the report of the Auditor General for the

fiscal year ending March 31, 1991.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution:

WHEREAS the economy of Newfoundland and Labrador has declined

and unemployment increased dramatically since this government took office almost

three years ago; and

WHEREAS the government has failed to keep its much repeated

promise to stimulate economic growth and to significantly reduce the

unacceptably high unemployment rate that face our people today; and

WHEREAS the government has failed to produce the economic

recovery plan promised in the Throne Speech and Budget Speech 3 years ago;

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly insist that this

government honour its promises to the people of Newfoundland and Labrador and to

this House of Assembly; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in addition to the government's

announced intention to introduce a 20 year-long term economic plan, the House of

Assembly call on the government to present immediately to this Legislature its

own plan to create jobs and to address the situation that faces our people today

and in the immediate future.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

MR. OLDFORD: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution:

WHEREAS Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are suffering

because of the recent cuts to the total allowable catch of Northern Cod made by

the Federal Government; and

WHEREAS the quota reductions have effectively eliminated the

directed cod fishery by the Canadian offshore fishing fleet; and

WHEREAS the Federal Government has responsibility for the

management of our fish stocks and must take responsibility for the consequences

of its management decisions; and

WHEREAS the Federal Government has recognized foreign

overfishing is partly responsible for the depletion of fish stocks; and

WHEREAS the foreign fleets continue to fish the Northern Cod

stocks on the Canadian continental shelf; and

WHEREAS there is a need for diversification of production

efforts within the fishery and a need for an economic diversification plan to

assist the individuals and communities affected;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call on the

Federal Government to take immediate action to prevent foreign overfishing of

our coast, and implement a response program that includes measures to help

affected individuals and also encourage economic diversification in the affected

communities in order to ensure their long term viability.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that I will

on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution:

WHEREAS the lack of representation by women in the House of

Assembly reflects the inequality of women in society and political parties have

to date been unable to provide a means or mechanism to resolve the gross

inequality of representation, and

WHEREAS gender balance achieved by having an equal number of

men and women would provide greater democracy and lead to policies and laws

which would remove barriers to equality of men and women in society; and

WHEREAS Newfoundland and Labrador has experienced

representation by more than one member per district as part of its political

history, which form of representation can be adapted to achieve gender equality,

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly support the

principle of representation by two members per district, one woman and one man,

without increasing the number of legislative seats;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a Committee of the House be

established to report to the House on the methods and timetable to be adopted to

implement the new form of representation.

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

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

I move the following resolution:

WHEREAS the House of Assembly has decided that the official

name of the Government of this province shall be the Government of Newfoundland

and Labrador; and

WHEREAS that decision of the Legislature acknowledges that

Labrador, while an integral part of this Province, retains a distinctive

identity from the Island part of the Province; and

WHEREAS the Federal Electoral Boundaries Commission has

recommended that Labrador should lose its status as a separate federal electoral

district;

BE IT RESOLVED that the House of Assembly recognize the

Province as the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador;

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the House of Assembly

petition the Parliament of Canada to reject the recommendation of the Federal

Electoral Boundaries Commission and that Labrador retain its own seat in the

Parliament of Canada.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. NOEL: Mr. Speaker, I hereby give notice that I will

on tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution:

WHEREAS the standard of living in Newfoundland and Labrador

can be improved by reducing our cost of living as well as by increasing incomes;

and

WHEREAS certain domestically produced dairy, poultry and

other food items presently cost up to twice as much, and sometimes more, than if

they were imported; and

WHEREAS Canadian trade policies, in addition to burdening

taxpayers with the cost of subsidies amounting to billions of dollars every

year, probably impose through unnecessarily high prices what is essentially a

consumption tax in excess of $100 million a year on residents of our Province

alone; and

WHEREAS Newfoundland farmers have demonstrated that we have

the ability to supply many products at competitive prices without excessive

subsidies or supply management;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House urge our federal and

provincial governments to pursue all reasonable means of ensuring food is made

available to Newfoundlanders and Labradorians at the best possible prices.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Baie Verte - White

Bay.

MR. SMALL: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow ask leave to introduce the following resolution:

WHEREAS the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is fully

committed to revitalizing the sealing industry for the benefit of the landsman

based sealers; and

WHEREAS it appears that the rapidly growing seal herds are

having an adverse effect on the fish stocks off Newfoundland and Labrador;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Government of Newfoundland and

Labrador continue to explore every avenue to develop the industry through a

program aimed at the full utilization of the resource, including the skins,

meat, and by-products of the animal and that scientific, technological and

market research be directed to this end; and

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT this hon. House call upon the

Federal Government to join with the Province in developing and implementing a

comprehensive programme to expand the market opportunities for seal products to

the extent necessary to harvest sufficient numbers of seals to restore the

ecological balance in our marine environment.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

DR. KITCHEN: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will on

tomorrow move that the House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole on

Supply to consider Certain Resolutions for the Granting of Supplementary Supply

to Her Majesty. (Bill No. 39)

I give notice that I will on tomorrow move that the House

resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Certain Resolutions

relating to the Advancing or Guaranteeing of Certain Loans made under The Loan

Guarantee Act, 1957. (Bill No. 56)

I also give notice that I will on tomorrow move that this

House resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider Certain

Resolutions relating to the Guaranteeing of Certain Loans under The Local

Authority Guarantee Act, 1957 (No. 2). (Bill No. 54)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Before moving on to Orders of the Day, when

the Member for Eagle River submitted his report on the Address in Reply I ought

to have asked: When shall the report be received?

If hon. members will allow me to go back and say those lines

When shall the report be received, now or presently by leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Now.

MR. SPEAKER: Now.

Orders of the Day

MR. BAKER: Order 1, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order 1. The Address in Reply.

The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. To listen to it all

I am somewhat reminded of that whimsical song from the 'sixties: Where have all

the such-and-suches gone?/Long time passing. Well, where have all the Liberals

gone, short term passing? Three years passing. Where have all the Liberals gone?

AN HON. MEMBER: You haven't read the polls, boy! You need

to have a look at the polls!

MR. HEWLETT: I have seen some polls and the people know

where the Liberals are gone and are going.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. HEWLETT: I have never seen such a do-nothing

ineffectual government in our Province's history. When the hon. the Premier was

responding to questions in Question Period earlier you used words like shield

and protect. Well the people of this Province require that their Premier fight

on something other than the Constitution in this Province. Shield, protect - all

defensive terms. He was on the defensive the entire time during Question Period

because the record of this Government is abysmal. All they could do was point

out one project where we tried and failed - Sprung. We forget about all the

other things that were done - the mines that were opened; the paper mill that

was saved. We forget about what previous Liberal governments wasted; how the

Churchill Falls agreement is probably twenty or thirty Sprungs a year for

sixty-five years. We forget about all that. All we remember is just one project

where we tried and we failed; but, Mr. Speaker, we tried. We worked hard. We

tried. But we have a Government here led by a Premier who does not want to

interfere in the economy. Newfoundlanders expect their Premier to interfere in

the economy. Newfoundlanders expect their Premier to wade face and eyes right

into the problems facing the economy of this Province - not sit back and do

nothing and say: I cannot shield you from national or international factors.

The hon. the Premier said in response to a question that the

hospital situation is improved immensely. In Grand Falls right now, which is the

new county hospital for my district, Grand Falls - Windsor being the county seat

under the new system of government that has been invented here, patients are

waiting on stretchers in the corridors looking for beds. This is the new

improved hospital system, Mr. Speaker.

What they do at the clinic in Springdale now is if someone is

rushed in to be stabilized and then needs to be sent to either Corner Brook or

Grand Falls, depending on the ailment, they do not call over to Corner Brook or

Grand Falls ahead of time and say: we have someone here, do you have a bed? They

found out that does not work. What they do now is they stabilize the person, put

him in the ambulance, make sure they are outside the Springdale town boundaries,

then they call the hospital concerned and say: he is on the way; and all that

guarantees them is a stretcher in the corridor. So there is the vast improvement

in your hospital system.

Jobs out of thin air... Jobs out of thin air are better than

welfare. Short-term job creation measures are no panacea. They are not the

long-term answer to our economic problems, but isn't it better to put someone to

work on a short-term basis so at least he or she can qualify for unemployment

insurance rather than send them to the welfare office?

Now the Development Association in Green Bay did a study

there a little while ago as to how many stamps or insurable weeks would be

needed for ordinary working breadwinners, let's call them, in given families, in

order to qualify for UI this winter. Not counting kids coming out of school, who

need twenty to start off, we needed 2,000 weeks for Green Bay. Between the hon.

Minister of Labour's Provincial program and the federal emergency program, Green

Bay got 500 insurable weeks. That is 1,500 families left in utter desperation.

GMAC Financing Corporation is going to come and take their truck. Cohens is

going to come and take their furniture. The bank is going to foreclose the

mortgage on their house, because on welfare $500 or $600 a month versus $600 or

$700 every two weeks on UI, you cannot have instalment plans. You cannot have a

credit system. The only people who can survive on welfare are people who have

been used to living on it, because people who are used to working seasonally and

drawing UI cannot survive on welfare - and welfare is what this Government is

offering people because it does not believe in pulling jobs out of thin air.

Well those jobs out of thin air that keep you out of the welfare office are a

heck of a lot better than no jobs at all; and no jobs at all is what this

Government has brought forward.

Hibernia, a very important project in terms of a construction

project, a big slowdown on the go, a lot of uncertainty. What has this

Government done? Acknowledged the fact that the companies have a problem on

their hands, that extra money, investment capital needs to be found to fill the

gap left by Gulf. What has this Government done in practical terms, I wonder, to

bring about some immediate results there? Who have they pushed? Who have they

prodded? Who have they bugged? Who have they phoned? What committees have they

formed? What task force have they sent out scouring God's green earth looking

for your $1 billion? How many people do they have in Hong Kong talking to those

multimillionaires who do not want to become communists, who are willing to trade

their fortunes for a Canadian passport if they will invest it in Hibernia?

They have done nothing, Mr. Speaker, except to leave it to

market forces, leave it to the Feds, leave it to the whims of the world. Well,

Mr. Speaker, no one is going to look out for Newfoundland and Labrador but the

people and Government of Newfoundland and Labrador. We cannot leave that to

Mainlanders to look after. We cannot leave it for foreigners to look after. We

have to do it, and the people of this Province expect their Premier to get

involved. The people of this Province expect their Premier to hang up his skis,

tie up his yacht and actually go to work dealing with the ordinary every day

problems of putting bread and butter on the table, now, not ten years down the

road. There will not be anybody left here ten years down the road.

We hear about the crisis in the fishery because you have

large numbers of people being laid off in a very short period of time. In the

logging industry we have a steady erosion. Hundreds of jobs are disappearing

every year due to lack of wood and through mechanization. Attention is not being

brought to the logging industry as it should be. My district was the capital of

the mineral exploration industry for all of Newfoundland and Labrador and it is

barely alive today because it needs a stimulation program. The Feds cancelled

theirs and I think there should be a new one. This Province should be

approaching the Feds to come in with a new one, if necessary cost share it, but

we are not going to open any mines if we do not prospect, and prospect in

serious ways, like diamond drilling, line cutting, and soil sampling.

There were well over 100 jobs in Green Bay a few years ago in

that regard but right now there are barely a dozen or more. This Government has

done absolutely nothing except sit back and watch the economy, and the social

and economic fabric of this Province slowly unravel, and throw up its arms and

say: we cannot do anything about it. It is bigger than us.

If you want to be Premier of this Province the first thing

you have to realize is that you have to take on, probably, the hardest job in

the world. You have to fight with, you have to deal with, and you have to win

with people who are bigger than us. You have to be ten times as good as your

average Mainlander or European. Instead we have a Premier fresh out of the

corporate boardroom who would seem to let Mother Nature, let economic forces

take their course and as a result very little, if anything, has happened, except

that natural market forces are downgrading our economy and increasing our

unemployment rate.

Hope Brook Gold closed down during the tenure. Opened during

the tenure of the PC administration and closed down during the tenure of this

administration. I understand there are negotiations on the go right now with a

possible reopener, but I also understand that the problem with regard to

reopening is that the Government is being just a touch too tight fisted in

assisting with the reopening. It is not a Sprung, it is Hope Brook. Take a

chance, spend $1 million. I gather that is all that is keeping the two sides

apart, $1 million. Take a chance. If you do nothing you will never fail but you

will never accomplish anything. Now, this party in Government, Mr. Speaker, got

elected as a liberal party, small 'l', this Government got elected promising

jobs, jobs, jobs, like Joey used to say, this Government was going to bring home

every mother's son and the mothers were going to kiss the Premier's feet for

bringing home their sons. Well, their sons are all home, because they have been

laid off in the factories and mines of Ontario, and the mothers are not kissing

the Premier's feet.

At home the social welfare office is absolutely blocked.

Social workers are going off on stress-related leave and their caseload is just

being split up among the remainder of the people working in the office. We

almost had a wildcat strike out there a month ago, just because of the way that

this particular Government is handling the economy. It would rather see people

on welfare than give them short-term make-work projects to tide them over until

this great economic miracle that the Premier talks about, this turnaround in the

Newfoundland, Canadian and North American economies, comes about. He would

rather see them on welfare than on unemployment during that interim period.

Well, Mr. Speaker, my constituents, and I would say the vast

majority of the constituents of people in this Assembly, would rather be on UI

working seasonally than not working at all and being on welfare. Instead we have

a premier who puts a theory first, not people first. Is it any wonder that our

Party has chosen a new slogan, "Putting People First"?

If we made mistakes we learned our lessons. We are listening

to the people. We continue to do it. We are going around the Province having

meetings, we are talking to people, we are listening to people, and we are going

to put people first. We need a government that cares about people, not concepts,

not economic philosophies.

Most of you people over there are real Liberals, and yet you

are led by a guy who is to the right of Attila the Hun! You sit quietly by like

sheep and put up with it. The only guy over there so far who has had the nerve

to speak his mind was at the same church service with me last night in Port de

Grave. Mr. Efford. I do not think he is probably well beloved within that

Cabinet right now.

So this Government has a record of failure. Because this

economy is 50 per cent government. You downsize government in the economy of

Newfoundland and Labrador, you play macro-economics with a micro-economy, and

you just might destroy it. This Government, under this Premier, is going well

along the road to doing just that. People who are going on welfare who have

never been inside a welfare office before in their life - the hon. minister

knows it, his caseload is up. His officers are swamped. They are not doing

social work, they are tied to their desks doing paper work, processing people.

They are not out investigating family situations, dealing with child abuse

problems, in a way that a person with a university degree in social work would

normally do. They are tied to their desks writing out emergency food orders,

processing people, filling out forms.

That is what this Government is offering people. Instead of

jobs out of thin air you fill out forms and you get $500 or $600 a month. Like I

said: where have all the Liberals gone?/A very, very short time passing.

The difference in this Party and the Party opposite is quite

simple. We would try -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)!

MR. HEWLETT: In Sprung we tried and failed. Hope Brook we

put back together, St. Lawrence mine we put back together. If Clyde Wells had

been premier of this Province when Bowaters pulled out of Corner Brook that city

would be a ghost town today. That is the God's truth. Because the man does not

believe in getting involved and shaking people up and hunting down the world

till you get yourself a new investor. That is the reason I worry about Hibernia.

He left Corner Brook, he gave up on Corner Brook. Brian

Peckford and a team of top bureaucrats moved into Corner Brook and we saved the

city.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. HEWLETT: Now listen here. We have a project out there

that could be the genesis of an offshore oil industry and you are sitting back

and you are just watching it all happen. Letting the companies do their thing.

You are monitoring, monitoring, you cannot eat monitors unless you live in a

tropical climate where you get monitor lizards and they do not taste that well I

am told. And you know the ultimate irony, Mr. Speaker, is that I received a

newspaper in the mail the other day and in it was an insert of a mail order

catalogue, and for sale in this newspaper was a print by a Canadian artist

entitled, 'Canadian Heroes', and there were two portraits on the one print, Mr.

Wells and Elijah Harper. Canadian heroes, thirty dollars a print, unframed. How

many unemployed loggers and fishermen and miners I wonder, would like to buy

that print to hang over their tables, the tables on which they cannot afford to

put bread and butter, one wonders?

AN HON. MEMBER: They will hang that before they will hang

your picture.

MR. HEWLETT: They will not hang that any more, sir.

MR. TOBIN: Not as quickly as they would hang you if you

are going back to your district again.

MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker -

MR. TOBIN: The man is jealous of you that is why he is

always bad mouthing you.

MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker, we have a Government opposite

that does not care about the immediate, short-term pain that the people of this

Province will have to go through in order to carry through an economic

philosophy that the Premier and probably only the Premier and a few right wing

extremists in that particular party agree with, but you are all scared to death

of him. Nobody speaks up, no one is allowed to open his mouth, so you are all

right wingers, whether you like it or not, you are not Liberals. You are not

Liberals, I am a bigger Liberal than any of you. You do not care about people.

Remember Joey Smallwood used to talk about liberalism and

reform and all of that, but what are you guys doing?... you are sitting back and

just watching her fall apart and saying: we cannot do anything, it is in the

hands of the international economy, it is in the hands of the national economy,

it is in the hands of the Gods. It is in the hands of everybody but Clyde,

except the Constitution! Oh, then hands off, that is my exclusive territory

altogether.

Well, you cannot eat Meech. I said it a couple of years ago

and I am still saying it and people who would buy that portrait to hang over

their tables would be reminded when they do not have any food to put on those

tables that you cannot eat Meech. You cannot eat Meech, you cannot eat the

Constitution. This Government has to come up with a short-term action plan to

alleviate the suffering being felt by ordinary Newfoundlanders out there now and

keep them out of the welfare offices.

Give the hon. member for Placentia a break and let him get

his department re-organized and restaffed, so that it could better deal with the

growing case load -

MR. WINSOR: Waterford - Kenmount. He has moved up

(inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member to resume his seat just for a short

time.

MR. HEWLETT: Oh, excuse me.

MR. SPEAKER: I think this is the appropriate time to

remind hon. members about the importance of parliamentary language, and I know

the hon. member would not want to use anything but parliamentary language and I

refer hon. members to Beauchesne, page 142,

section 484. This is very important,

it is there so that we bring in a moderation to debate and it says: 'It is the

custom in the House that no Member should refer to another member by name.

Members should be referred to in the third person as "the Honourable Member". A

Minister is normally designated by the portfolio held: "The Honourable Minister

of such and such", and other office holders are similarly identified by their

offices', so, I want hon. members please, to keep that in mind because it is a

very important procedure in the House of Assembly.

The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Mr. Speaker, I do apologize. My passion for

seeing the people of my district not have to visit the welfare office as often

as they have to these days may have caused me to slip somewhat with regard to my

parliamentary language and procedure. For that, I do apologize to the Chair.

However, Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is, quite simply, that

whether I refer to the hon. persons opposite correctly or not, the fact of the

matter is they are a do-nothing government, they are a stand-pat government,

they are a let-economic-forces-take-their-course government, and they are a

let-Mother-Nature-take-its-course government. They do not put people first and

people are suffering. People need help now, and it is about time they got off

their rear ends and did something, Mr. Speaker.

I thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: It gives me great pleasure today to stand

and participate in the 1992 Throne Speech Debate. The Throne Speech, on page 1,

says, "However, as Canadians and as Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, we are

facing unprecedented new challenges at the present time. Indeed, as a nation and

as a province, we are truly at a critical crossroad in our history in a

constitutional sense, in an economic sense, and with respect to the state of our

public finances." Mr. Speaker, that is true, but not only do Newfoundlanders and

Canadians find themselves in unprecedented challenges, it is happening

worldwide.

For example, who would have thought that in 1991 we would

have seen the profound and unthinkable events happen in the world, where we

would have seen the largest nation on earth, the U.S.S.R., disintegrate and

become independent sovereign nations, all looking after their own affairs? It

has meant social and economic problems for the world community that are not even

imaginable. We have witnessed this through the advent of t.v. We are, indeed,

part of a global village.

We are, as I suggest, a fiber-optic society. At any one time,

one-third of the world's people in 150 countries, approximately 1 billion

people, are watching t.v., even at this present time. As I thought about that, I

thought about the clip that we saw on t.v. a few years ago that caught the

imagination of the world, I guess, a Newfoundland sealer towing a white pup

across the ice with a streak of blood emanating from behind it. I am not sure if

we could have done anything, in a sense, to change that event in history, but it

happened. So these pictures on t.v. speak of our feelings. In a sense that t.v.

picture bonds emotions to people whom we have never met. What it is doing, Mr.

Speaker, is changing the social values of society.

In the 1950s the standard of living was measured by the

prestige of the individual, how much wealth he had accumulated, how many cars he

had, how many houses he had. But in 1990 that individual prestige has been

replaced, and it has been replaced by the quality of life for all of us or

standard of society for the 1990s. The individual is no longer the prestigious

thing, it is the quality life for all of us. There is a global

intercommunication, and what others do affect us whether we like it or not.

In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we are also entering a

decade of individual responsibility where we are reassessing our values, our

morals, our ethics, and philosophical codes of conduct. We are seeing that there

is now responsibility to others, and there seems to be a new balance between the

physical and the spiritual. We have to learn to learn. I must repeat that again:

We have to learn to learn. We cannot always expect to teach others and that they

always listen. We have to unlearn, in so many instances, what we have learned.

The government has, in its Throne Speech, outlined its agenda

for the Province for 1992 and beyond. It has included the priority of the

fisheries, the importance of the Hibernia project, the about to be released

strategic economic plan for the Province, the tremendous potential for tourism,

the concern for the environment, concern for education, the social network

programs, and the Constitution issue. It is very impressive. It, indeed, shows

very precisely in which direction the government wishes the Province to go.

I would like, Mr. Speaker, to address in the time allocated

to the fisheries issue first, and other aspects of the Throne Speech, if time

permits.

I would like first of all to comment on my own district. It

has two distinct parts: that of the Connaigre Peninsula, and the Burin

Peninsula. On the Connaigre side of my district, believe it or not, the majority

of people have done very well during the winter fishery. There are two deep-sea

plants in my district, one at Harbour Breton and the other at Gaultis, and I

guess it was with some luck that the plant in Harbour Breton was converted to a

red fish plant.

Since the time that it has been designated as a redfish

plant, the FPI has done modernization of the plant, and because of the

modernization, it saw, in the first instance, some of the casual workers being

laid off. However, all of these casual workers were recalled and put to work

because of the new techniques that the plant, itself, and the company has for

redfish, like deboning and skinning to make it more presentable to the market,

thus creating more jobs. So that, in a sense, has been good. In fact, there have

been probably over 500 people working in that particular plant in two shifts

during the winter.

I was talking to the plant manager this morning, and the only

difficulty they have now is the ice, which is interfering with their catch. They

should have been in on the weekend with the boats full of redfish. It hasn't

happened, but they are still out there fishing.

Another bright spot in my district is Gaultois, the plant

that also was re-opened with redfish allocation to Conpak. Like any plant when

it opens first, it has bugs and so on to be ironed out, but the plant over the

last number of weeks has done very well, and the people there have been able to

work for five weeks for full employment. That, in itself, is a very, very

healthy sign for the community of Gaultois. I suppose, as I just said, if there

is a bight spot in FPI, it would be at Gaultois, but there is no way that FPI

can carry the company, itself, or that we even suggest that.

The inshore fishery at Grand Le Pierre, Rencontre East and

Belleoram has been better this season than it has in the last decade. When I say

that, I realize the problems that other people have, that other members have in

their districts, but certainly, at this time and point on the Connaigre side,

there is not a big problem. Whether the resource will be there next year,

however, remains to be seen. But there have been high winds and difficult

weather conditions that have prevented many of the longliners from fishing as

much as they would like, and therefore, the catch has been down. Generally

speaking, the catch has been average. In the Terrenceville/Bay L'Argent/St.

Bernard's area they are not winter fishing, and how the 1992 summer fishing will

come along, no one knows right now.

There is another potential bright spot in my district, Mr.

Speaker, and it helps, in a sense, with the diversification of the economy of

the Province. It has to do with dimensional stone, or granite. The government

has given its go-ahead to that area as one of the sites for development in the

Province. Sometime during this week, I think it is tomorrow, there are going to

be some people here from Italy, who are going to meet some local investors, and

we are hoping that that particular project will begin operation this summer. I

understand that they are going to be taking 1,500 blocks out of it and taking it

to market. But we are hoping that this product can be refined and finished here.

There has also been some talk that that might be done in the town of Buchans.

Nevertheless, it is a bright spot, and we are looking forward to seeing that

quarry being used and providing some jobs for the people of that particular part

of my district.

Back to the larger issue of the fishery. I attended a

national forest congress last week in Ottawa, and while there, representing the

Minister of Forestry,who was ill and unable to attend, the federal government

and the provinces signed what could be called, I guess, an historic document,

because it was the first forest accord ever signed in Canada. As I sat there, I

thought: How can we be world leaders in the preservation of our forests and be

so far behind in our fishery? There are a number of reasons.

The forestry is a provincial resource, managed jointly with

the Province. The financial return to the country is more than agriculture,

mining and fishing combined; the practice of the forest cutting was publicly

challenged so that the companies would have to establish standards of practice;

and finally, the public would not trust the industry to police the forest

themselves.

But how, then, with the fishery? In Canada, while we are here

in the House, we have foreign countries within our Two Hundred Mile management

zone and within Canada's Two Hundred Mile boundary, harvesting more fish than we

are ourselves. They are there legally. It might have been legitimate at the time

but times have changed and they should not be there any longer. We should be

able to take that resource for ourselves. We have the rape of the resource

outside the Two Hundred Mile zone on the Nose and Tail of the Grand Banks. We

see the failure of the federal government scientists to adequately research the

problem, and yet they do not want to have joint management of the fishery.

I would suggest, Mr. Speaker, that foremost,there has to be

joint management with the federal government. If we look at the enemy in all of

this we look at ourselves. It is in all of us. There is no one lily-white in

this situation. The feds, the Province, the industry, the fisherpersons and all

of us - that is, the public - we have to work together to solve the problems for

the common good.

I am convinced that a lot of the problems we are encountering

in the fishery in this Province and in Eastern Canada, and Canada as a whole, is

because of fragmentation. We have user groups in the industry who are at odds

with each other, at loggerheads, and who are willing to take each other on. We

have to go as a united, cohesive force and convince the federal government that,

indeed, we need to have this common stock for all of us. If we don't do that,

then I am afraid that in our pleadings to the federal government, it is going to

be a lot more difficult to achieve action.

I believe also that we have to educate our own people -

Newfoundlanders, Canadians and the world - as to the dire catastrophe facing

this eco-system. I believe that the government, and the Department of Fisheries

- and the Premier said so in the House a couple of days ago - that the

government has started on the right course through their advertising campaign.

We have to bring our message to the world. I am afraid that the world does not

understand. Not only does the world not understand, but Canadians as a whole,

Newfoundlanders included, fail to understand what is happening. All of us have

to be participants together. There has to be a conservation of the resource.

Now, we talked about the forest industry - I did, a few

moments ago. One of the things that the environmentalists in Canada have really

got after the companies for is clear-cutting - cutting everything that stands in

their way. The environmentalists have now challenged that, and obviously, with

the new forestry accord they have in place, they have been able to make it work.

A lot of the blame, and as I said earlier all of us

participate in this - we blame the foreign fishing for a lot of the problems we

have in the industry. Mr. Speaker, I can remember, even as a boy growing up and

talking to some of the trawlermen on the South Coast long before there was any

problem with the resource, that a lot of the problems came from our own people.

A lot of the problems came from our own people, and they still do. When, for

example, you are out fishing and out of a total of 20,000 pounds, you put 10,000

of it down the hole and you flush 10,000 overboard and let it drift aimlessly on

the ocean, that is wrong.

AN HON. MEMBER: That doesn't happen.

MR. LANGDON: It does happen, and I will tell you what we

need to do. We need to bring into effect a boat quota - a boat quota - and that

is, whatever fish comes into the net should be brought in. Now, we might not be

able to market it all, but rather than let it float across the ocean dead, at

least we can make it into some type of meal. In Marystown, we have one of the

world's first-class operations.

It could be done, but we are not willing to do it. It is like

going to the gold nugget in the mine. We want to make all of the profits, but we

can't do that. We have to understand our global role in society. There has to be

changes in our perception of how we catch fish. We have had no feeling

whatsoever for conservation.

I would suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, that unless there is

conservation, we will, indeed, see the dire consequences of the failure of the

whole eco-system of the fishery on Canada's East Coast, and we cannot allow that

to happen.

I would also suggest that no one has done so much that we

could not do more - and there are problems, obviously.

MR. TOBIN: Do you support a moratorium on the deep-sea

fishery? - that is the question.

MR. LANGDON: A dire consequence is if the eco-system in

the specific geographic area is not addressed immediately. The resource cannot

continue. It is sustainable development, and if it cannot sustain its present

sustainable development, our using it, then there is no way we are going to have

it there for generations to come.

Also, Mr. Speaker, what a lot of people don't realize is that

technology has gone beyond what we need to harvest the resource. In bygone years

when the trawlers and boats left port, in many instances, it was hit-and-run, or

hit-and-miss. There were times that the trawlers came in half-loaded, or

probably quarter-loaded, but that is not possible anymore under the present

technological schemes that we have, because what happens is that they have all

the instrumentation that is needed, and if there is a school of fish, they can

put down the net and they can just ravage the resource that is there. Probably

we even have need to put some limit on the type of technology we are using.

Mr. Speaker, we have not addressed the biodiversity in the

industry, either. We need to be able to sell every part of the fish. I believe

that with the education and the technology we have, we should be able to do

that, but up to this time, we have not fully utilized the species that we have.

We need also to evaluate our economic goals in the industry.

What do we need? What are we expecting of the industry? Obviously, that is very

important for all of us to remember. The federal government has not listened,

and is not willing to help solve the problem up to this point. I think, though,

that if we can exert more pressure, something could be done to conserve the

stock that is there. I wonder is it because less than 1 per cent of the gross

national product is fisheries revenue? Is that the problem? Is it the fact that,

as I said earlier, the forest industry is greater than the mining, agriculture

and fishing combined that they have the ear of the federal government?

Whatever the situation, obviously, we have to take a very,

very serious look at our fishing industry, if not, we will find ourselves in a

situation where the people of this Province will not be able to avail of the

opportunities facing them.

I also think of the economic situation the Province finds

itself in. I read with interest the fact that over the last couple of years,

there has been $500 million less in transfer payments because of a cap of the

federal transfers. No one is blaming the federal government, but that is the

economic reality, and we see the same in the global situation. Our friends to

the South are finding that. I believe, also, that the Americans are a people

looking for an identity right now. Probably, some people will not believe that.

They have to re-evaluate their role in the world, as such, and the fact that

they were the world's number one military power, and because of the breakdown,

of the problems between smaller independent countries, they are no longer

needed, and therefore, we find them putting protection on many of the products

we have. I believe we are innovative enough. I believe we have the education,

the technology, the know-how, that in time we can look after our own affairs

and, indeed, master the things we set out to do. It is not short-term,

obviously, but I believe that we, as a people in this Province, can look high,

and hopefully, do things that will benefit the Province as a whole. I believe we

have been loquacious too long. We have tried to be all things to all people, and

I suppose we could also say we are tautologists, and that is, we have become the

order of the day, we have become repetitious.

AN HON. MEMBER: What?

MR. LANGDON: Tautologists. I suppose, also, that we have,

in addition to that, become philologists. We have studied our records for so

long, I believe, that we are really, in a sense, ready to make things on our

own. I wonder also, probably, in closing, if we have become logophiles?

AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR. LANGDON: Logophiles, that is, lover of words. If we

have become lover of words rather than taking the action to really cure our

problems, obviously, that is not going to work. So I believe we have to act, and

I believe government is doing just that.

I hope that the epilogue of this eco-system disaster can be

averted and our people will be able to avail of a resource that can be

sustainable and allow us to continue our way of life as it has been for the past

400 years. I believe that we can, Mr. Speaker, and I believe that the government

has embarked on a program that will enable us to do that. I believe, with the

policies they have outlined, we will be able to go into the 21st century as one

of Canada's leading provinces, because of the ideas that have been expounded and

put forth by this government.

Thank you very much.

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

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Sit down, 'John'. Sit down, boy!

MR. TOBIN: If you want to be recognized after a

government member, you have to sit over here as an independent.

MR. R. AYLWARD: The hon member is independent-thinking

and he probably should be over here, too. He probably should be sitting here as

an independent.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. R. AYLWARD: I don't mean there, no. The only thing

that is keeping the hon. member on that side is because he would have to sit so

close to the hon. member down on the end on this side, I would think.

I want to have a few words on the Throne Speech, Mr. Speaker,

and before I get started, I want to congratulate the hon. the member for Eagle

River as the mover of the Speech. He did a very good job. I will make a few

comments on his presentation in a little while. I have a differing view of the

world than he has. I also want to congratulate the Member for Carbonear as

seconder for the Throne Speech.

I sat here listening to the Member for Eagle River, as mover

of the Speech from the Throne, Mr. Speaker, and I was very interested in the

theme of his speech. He called it the hallmarks of government, I believe that

was the general thrust of his speech. He had four or five hallmarks that he

wanted to highlight. I found it ironic that in the situation we have in this

Province today, economically in particular, and in our fishing industry, that

the hon. Member for Eagle River was talking about this Government that he is a

part of in glowing terms.

The first hallmark that he used, which happened to be the

most ironic of all of them, his first hallmark of this Government was fairness.

The hon. Member for Eagle River, who represents a Labrador seat, the only one on

that side of the House who represents a Labrador seat, was not invited into

Cabinet two or three weeks ago, and he calls this a fair Government. Now I

cannot see how the hon. Member for Eagle River, unless he was afraid, because he

is a fairly forceful young man. Maybe the same fate would happen to him as

happened to the Member for Port de Grave, I am not sure.

But as far as a hallmark of fairness, I do not think the

people of Labrador would consider it to be very fair that they have an elected

Member to this Legislature - they have a person who wishes to stay here. They

have another one who does not wish to stay here. I say congratulations to the

Member for Happy Valley - Goose Bay, whatever the name of that one is, Mr.

Speaker. That was his choice.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Naskaupi.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Naskaupi, yes.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: No, I do not know the name of it. Mr.

Speaker, it was his choice to give up and back out on the people from Labrador

if he wanted to before he served his full term. So be it, that is up to him.

But there is a Member of this Legislature who sits on the

Government side of the House, who was elected by the people of Labrador, and who

I am sure will be elected probably many more times if he wishes to stay there.

From knowing him a little better now than I did before, because I am lucky

enough to serve on a committee with him, I am sure he is very interested in

politics generally and dedicated to Labrador. I cannot see how he would think

that one of the hallmarks of this Government is fairness when he is ignored once

again. By ignoring him the people of Labrador are being ignored and not having

Cabinet representation.

The only Cabinet representation that this Government, this

Premier in particular, thinks the Labrador people should have is a shotgun

candidate from St. John's. Now I really find that objectionable. I cannot see in

this day and age why any group of people from any part of our Province needs to

have someone brought into their area to tell them what they want. We have gone

beyond that. That went out with the... oh, even before Joey. Joey was doing some

of it. But he started to change it. That went out with the... what do you call

it, the mentality?.. the fish buyer's mentality, merchant's mentality. That is

when that went out. Should be gone fifty, 100 years ago.

But here we have it again. There is only one reason why we

have it. Because we have the merchant's mentality sitting in the big seat. He is

the one who would agree with that mentality, I would say, and he has shown it

now, he is going to show it in Labrador. When they have a very capable Member in

this House of Assembly. He is not only ignored but embarrassed. Called immature

by the Premier, one time last year. 'He is an immature Member,' I believe was

what he said. That is not fair. Because the hon. Member's heart is in the right

place and he is very capable. He is probably the only one in this House of

Assembly who has a degree in political science, I would not be surprised. There

is another.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: He has two degrees. Well, it makes him

twice as good as all of us. He was always better, but, Mr. Speaker, that shows

his interests in the business, shows he did the background work. He has shown

himself to be electable. As all of us who come into this House, we all come in

here equally, and one should be able to serve in Cabinet as well as another.

It is a well known tradition in the parliaments of this

country, in particular in the Legislature of this Province, that different areas

usually get cabinet representation. There is usually a central, an eastern and a

western, a southern if possible, and a northern if possible.

AN HON. MEMBER: Like a Triple E Senate.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker that is tradition in this

House. I think it is a tradition that is worthwhile following and it should stay

in place.

The second hallmark that the Member for Eagle River said that

this Government shows is compassion. I don't know where he got that one. He must

have not only a political science degree, he must have a writing degree. He is a

fictional writer at heart. He has to be. For anyone to say, even if it is the

furthest stretch of your imagination you could never say that this Government is

compassionate. It has not shown one ounce of compassion anywhere, in any policy,

in any dealings they have had since 1989 - since they were elected. There has

been no - zero - compassion shown by this Government. The most blatant sign of

non-compassion that this Government has shown it showed in its last budget when

2,500 people were thrown out on the street - 2,500 good, dedicated public

servants who went through a Public Service Commission to get their jobs, fair

and square, did their work every day, and 2,500 of them were thrown out on the

street. I do not think that the Member for Eagle River could possibly convince

them that this Government is compassionate.

The next hallmark is almost as ridiculous. The next hallmark

he says this Government shows is fiscal responsibility. Even that is an awful

stretch of the imagination. Every single budget that the administration has

prepared to date, 1989, 1990, 1991, probably again in 1992, have been off by

millions and millions and millions of dollars. They cannot come close to their

estimates on budgets, so I do not know where the fiscal responsibility is. If

somebody tells me there is going to be a $10 million deficit and it turns out to

be a $100 million deficit, it does not show fiscal responsibility in my mind.

There is something missing in the mix there somewhere. If the hon. members

opposite or on this side did that with their businesses they would not be in

business very long. Your board of directors, if you had one, as CEO of a company

certainly would not congratulate you as being a very fiscal, responsible person

if your budget showed a deficit of $10 million and your revised estimates at the

end of the year, three-quarters of the way through the year sometimes - one time

at six months through the year - show that you were ten times out. You were $100

million instead of $9 million or $10 million. Fiscal responsibility is certainly

not a hallmark of this Government - anything but from the budget estimates.

Mr. Speaker, the other hallmark of this Government, according

to the Member for Eagle River, is reform. Reform. I guess reform can come in

many different ways. There is good reform and there is bad reform. I cannot say

that this Government has lacked in reform. I cannot in all conscientiousness say

that this Government lacked reform. They reformed the Ombudsman's office. That,

I suppose, was reform. I do not think it was good reform - not in a democracy;

not in a western world democracy. I think we probably would be the only western

world democracy who abandoned or abolished the Ombudsman's office. I think

probably we would get that distinction. Maybe that is the type of reform the

Premier likes to see, but I am sure people who used and who wish to use the

Ombudsman's office did not appreciate that reform. The unfortunate part of it

was that there were not enough people using it, I guess. Not enough people took

advantage of that institution in our Province. Unfortunately it now has become a

thing of the past.

Mr. Speaker, I suppose another reform that this Government

did was to take our consumer rep off the Public Utilities Board. That again is

reform no doubt. But I think it was better reform when he was put on there. It

certainly showed more compassion for the rate payers of the utility companies in

this Province. So I think a better reform would have been to strengthen the role

of the consumer advocate on the Public Utilities Board rather than weaken it.

The consumer advocate whom we have in the Province now, Mr. Brake, I think is

his name, he is trying his best. I do not say he is not trying to do everything

he can do. But he certainly does not have the power that the former consumer

advocate had when he was on the Public Utilities Board.

But yes, this Government has reformed, but it has reformed in

the wrong way. It is going backwards. It has almost reformed Canada out of

existence to date. That's how much reform this Government has taken.

The other hallmark of this hon. Member was the defender of

the Province's best interests. I do not really know what he meant by that. I

guess it is a reference to Meech Lake, is all I can figure, I do not know what

best interest this Province had in scuttling Meech Lake. I do not know what

Provincial interests were defended by scuttling Meech Lake but I guess maybe in

a fiction writer's mind you could come up with some reasons.

The Premier in his Throne Speech, once again as he did in

three of the others - this is the fourth one - keeps talking about a long-term

strategy. There is a plan being prepared. If we do not soon see the plan there

will be nothing left around to plan. I think what the Premier is using - when

you try to prepare a plan you must have some kind of a formula in mind of what

you are going to do, what way your plan is going to proceed. I believe the

formula that this Premier is using to prepare his plan could be called the Jay

Parker formula. He wants to get as many people away from this Province as he can

so he can get it down to his estimate of a manageable population.

Well if that is what the Premier is trying to do it was tried

before with resettlement and it did not work. It won't work this time because

people of this Province are not going to put up with it. They are not going to

leave this Province.

One statistic I find interesting - and I do not say hon.

Members over there even wish to hear this statistic; they certainly are not

promoting it out in their districts - is that since this Government took over in

1989, there are 25,000 less people working in the Province than there were that

time. Now that is a frightening statistic.

MR. DOYLE: Horrendous. Frightening in the extreme.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Twenty-five thousand less jobs, less

people working in this Province today than in 1989 when you guys took over. Mr.

Speaker, I can list off some of them. I know the hon. Members are looking

puzzled over there, saying - while I was sitting here listening to Question

Period I just marked down a few that I thought of at the time. There are many

others. These are just a few - set down for the minute.

There are 500 or so jobs gone out of Marystown. They are

still trying to sell it. They might sell it and they might not. I do not know

what is going to happen some time this week. But there are 500 jobs gone out of

Marystown. Those skilled tradesmen, most of them are gone away from the

Province. They all still want to come back. If you can get a deal on it, if you

can get it sold and get it in operation I am sure you will get a lot of them

back. But that was 500 jobs.

Newfoundland Dockyards, since this Government took over,

between 300 and 600 jobs gone down there. I am not sure with the contract they

are finishing up now. There was a time when there were twenty-eight people

working down at the Newfoundland Dockyard. There was a time down there when it

was up to 620 people working. The Member for St. John's South will say this.

During our time, Mr. Speaker, we put the syncrolift in. We

were pro-active, we did something. The Dockyard was in trouble, it was going out

of business, no doubt about it, and there were very few people working there.

So, what did our government do with that federal facility, Mr. Speaker? We could

have shrugged our shoulders the same as the Premier is doing with everything:

That is a federal responsibility! Let the feds do it, their in charge of

management! Their in charge of the resource management, it is their fault! Let's

leave it! We could have done that with the Dockyard. But what did our government

do when we came across the situation where there was strictly federal

jurisdiction and responsibility? We put $11 million into it and built the

syncrolift there.

Now, Mr. Speaker, that is being pro-active, that is doing

something. That is not shrugging your shoulders every time something comes up

and saying: Let the Federal Government do it. You have to get off your rear ends

and do something.

Mr. Speaker, National Sea used to be a very thriving fish

plant at one time. What was done down there? There were 300 to 400 jobs lost,

300 to 400 jobs gone out the door, most of them in the District of the Member

for St. John's South, a lot of them in my district, from both the Dockyard and -

MR. MURPHY: I fought for them.

MR. MATTHEWS: You didn't do anything.

MR. MURPHY: I never heard anything from you, not a peep.

MR. MATTHEWS: Flew up to Halifax. Big bluff!

MR. R. AYLWARD: Did not hear a peep? Yes, you did fight

for them. The Member for St. John's South fought for them. He would not tell

them the truth. The Premier would not tell him the truth about what was

happening. I know that. It was only because the people from Grand Bank came in

here, backed the Premier into the wall and gave him a good fright that the hon.

Member for St. John's South got some money for projects down there. They are the

ones who fought, not you. You made a lot of noise and you had a few

demonstrations around, but you did not do it. The people from Grand Bank, who

came in here - two hours after they left, after they pinned the Premier against

the wall there was $14 million floating around. Two hours before that there was

nothing.

MR. MATTHEWS: Do you know what he said?

MR. R. AYLWARD: What was it he said?

MR. MATTHEWS: I would if I could, but I can't.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I would if I could, but I can't, until he

got pinned against the wall, and he could then. It depends, Mr. Speaker, on the

approach sometimes.

Mr. Speaker, I encourage the people from Grand Bank to come

in here and do that, along with the Member for Grand Bank, because I know when

the Premier is cornered he will react. The trouble with it is he has a group of

people over there who are afraid to corner him. They are afraid to corner him or

tackle him.

Now, Mr. Speaker, National Sea is gone. That is 300 to 400

more jobs. In Grand Falls there a little while ago there was a restructuring of

the woods operations, and there were another 420 jobs gone there last year or

the year before in the forest industry. Mr. Speaker, those are only four

different places and I have 1500 jobs without a spinoff job. That is 1500 jobs

right off the bat without a spinoff job when I just sat down for a few minutes.

Mr. Speaker, Long Harbour is gone in the District of the

Member for Placentia. I do not know how many jobs are out there. I will just

guess. We lost 200 or 250 jobs?

AN HON. MEMBER: It will be open again (inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: Is that right? And the hon. Member for

Placentia who was elected did nothing, Mr. Speaker, since 1989 when he got

elected.

MR. MATTHEWS: The Premier was out shaking hands with them

in the election.

MR. R. AYLWARD: I will open it again! I will keep it

going! I will look after you!

Mr. Speaker, a little project that employs Newfoundlanders

and is very valuable to the future of our Province, a project out in Wooddale

where we have a nursery to generate trees, sixty jobs gone out of there in the

last two years. Mr. Speaker, there were only 120 or 130 jobs out there, mostly

part-time during the summer, and sixty of those were eliminated. So, that not

only affects the workers who were laid off, it affects our forests in this

Province from now until forever, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the hon. the Member for St. John's South

continues to make a joke of this. He wants to make a joke of the economic

situation in this Province, Mr. Speaker, when his district is one of the

districts that has felt the policies of this Government drive them into the

ground more than most districts in this Province. Mr. Speaker, if he wants to

make a joke of this, go up on Shea Heights and make a joke of it. You will not

last long up there if you are making fun of what is happening to the people up

there.

Mr. Speaker, I had to serve my time up there and if the hon.

member gets a few votes out of it like I got up there, then I would say he is

doing okay. But, Mr. Speaker, I wouldn't come out of that district anytime

winning by two votes, I will tell you that right now. I would not come out of

there winning by two votes, Mr. Speaker, I would chuck it in and go run again.

That is what I would do. Two votes would not be worth it, Mr. Speaker.

MR. MATTHEWS: Give it up by default.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Superior Seafoods in Stephenville - the

Member for Stephenville is working very hard to get another project in his

district, but Superior Seafoods in the last couple of years went down in

Stephenville since this administration took over. I suppose at peak times there

might have been 300 or 400 people working there. That is another project that is

gone. It is starting to add up.

The people who did not believe my 25,000 figure when I

started, if they gave it a bit of thought they could probably add up most of it

in their own -

MR. HODDER: Coady Mechanical in Stephenville there was

another twenty or thirty jobs; Regional Optical another forty jobs gone out of

Stephenville. That is just out of Stephenville.

Those are ones I was keeping going when I was there.

MR. R. AYLWARD: The pride and joy of Newfoundland, the

one that is going to be our saviour of the last two years, Hibernia. How many

jobs have gone out of there in the last month? Have we lost 400 jobs there over

the last month? That is another 400 - another 400. The public service of the

Province - the Premier's own budget - the one that you have total control over,

the one that you have complete say over, and what did you do to try to alleviate

the major problem in this Province, which is jobs? What did this Government,

with the support of their backbenchers do to try to solve the problems, which

governments are supposed to do, try to solve the major problem in this Province,

which is jobs, you laid off 3,000 of them. That is how you solve problems.

Hopefully they will go away. I can almost hear that in the cabinet room again.

We will get rid of 2,000 or 3,000; hopefully they will go away. Maybe we will

not have to bother about them any more.

Mr. Speaker, we are exporting brains now more than we ever

did before, which is the most important resource that we have - our young people

and the education that they have. If you are laying off management and technical

public service people in this Province, you are sending away your education.

That is the most serious part of it all. Again, the Member for Baie Verte is

over there laughing; the Member for Pleasantville was just laughing - or

Placentia was just laughing. I am sorry - not Pleasantville - from Placentia.

Every time you mention 300 or 400 jobs gone, three or four of the members

opposite get a chuckle out of it. It is not funny. It is not funny. It is very

serious what is happening in this Province.

Youth unemployment - there was a statistic given here today

of the youth unemployment in this Province; 31.5 per cent on youth unemployment.

There is the hon. Member for St. John's South again. Yes, there is Ottawa. We

hear Ottawa. I would say if we did not have Ottawa, if the Member for St. John's

South did not have John Crosbie pumping money into his district day and night,

you would not be allowed in the district any more. I do not know if you go there

very often, but you would not be allowed there any time if you do go there.

Ottawa has pumped a lot of money into this Province since

this Government has come into power, and they had to because this Government is

doing nothing.

The project that we all hoped - everyone in this House of

Assembly hoped - would get us over some hard times in the fisheries, is the

Hibernia project. It is very important and becoming more important daily as we

see the problems we have in the fisheries that it is going to take time to

rectify. We have a Hibernia project that has lost one partner - 25 per cent -

will have lost it by October. We know that there is another partner who wants to

off-load 15 per cent more. So we have 40 per cent of that project that we have

to find someone to fill in. Petro-Can is going, whether you like it or whether

you know it or not. Petro-Can is getting out of there at least 15 per cent of

their share. So we are looking for 40 per cent. The companies have put someone

in place to try to hustle up a new partner. The companies have. I know they have

put a team in place to try to do something. The Federal Government has put a

team in place to try to find a new partner, and they are even willing to change

the structure to allow more foreign investment, which is a big step for a

national government to do. They have put a team together to try to find someone

to fill up this 40 per cent - 25 per cent or 40 per cent, whatever it would be -

but the project is most important to this Province. What has our Government

done?... absolutely nothing. Not one thing. There is no team in place. Right off

the bat the day that the rumours started, this Government should have been able

to find out whether they were true or not, they should have had a team in place

that day to scour the world if necessary to find a partner. Find somebody who is

interested. The companies have their team and it is looking after the companies'

interests; the Federal Government has its team and it is looking after the

Federal Government's interests; who is looking after our interests?

MR. HEWLETT: Nobody!

MR. R. AYLWARD: Nobody. Not a soul, Mr. Speaker, looking

after the interests of this Province on a project that should get us over the

hump. It should be able to keep us surviving until our fishing industry gets

back in place again. But what is this government doing? Absolutely nothing.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. R. AYLWARD: The hon. Member for St. John's South

again. Rather than getting up here and saying: yes boy, there is (Inaudible) I

must go to the Premier and see if I can get him to do something on this. I must

go and see if I can finally beat it into his head that this is important. What

does the Member for St. John's South say? He laughs at it again and he says:

Ottawa. That is all he knows how to say, is 'Ottawa.'

You have responsibilities as a Member of this Government to

the people of this Province. One very simple thing that this Government could do

is to put a high-powered team in place - I do not care if they are Cabinet

Ministers or senior public servants, or they're consultants that you hire - to

get out and scour the world. Go to the Eastern countries and see if Japan or

Korea or Hong Kong have some money over there. We all know they have piles of

it. Are they interested in our oil? We do not know. Nobody in this House knows.

Nobody ever said that they were interested or not.

But if I was in Government we would know. Because I would

have been over there, Mr. Speaker. I think Charlie Power is over there now.

Maybe we will find out when he comes back. There would be a team in place.

Because I would consider it to be our responsibility.

AN HON. MEMBER: A lot of nonsense.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Yes, Mr. Speaker, it is nonsense.

Exactly, nonsense, what the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs says.

Exactly what he said, nonsense. That is the mind-set of this Government. The

main way to assess the hallmarks of this Government, as the Member for Eagle

River said in his speech, the hallmarks of this Government, if I had to assess

it, I would say just one statement: let her slide, Clyde.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the