May 8, 2002 HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLIV No. 20

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): Order, please!

Before we begin our routine proceedings, I just want to rule on a point that

was raised yesterday by the Opposition House Leader, who rose on a point of

privilege concerning the procedure used by the Chair of the Resource Committee

on passing the Estimates of the Department of Mines and Energy in that

committee. The Opposition House Leader complained that his privileges as a

member of the House were breached because of this procedure.

As Speaker, I take these issues very seriously but I must refrain from

commenting on the conduct of a committee. I would suggest that the matter raised

by the Opposition House Leader should be raised in the Resource Committee

itself. The authorities are quite clear, that committees of the House are

masters of their own procedure and matters of privilege may only be addressed in

the House on a report from that committee.

I have been unable to find any basis upon which to act on the hon. member's

point of privilege and suggest that it be taken back to the committee.

As well, just for information purposes for hon. members, yesterday the Leader

of the Opposition put a motion respecting the Standing Orders of the House of

Commons. If you look at your Order Paper, you will notice that it is not printed

on today's Order Paper because I have not yet decided whether the motion is in

order. I have decided to review the authorities and there was not enough time to

complete the task; therefore, the Order Paper went to the printers before I had

a decision on that. I will be in a position tomorrow to inform the House on this

matter.

Before we begin our routine proceedings, as well, I want to welcome to the

gallery, seventy-four Grade 6 students from Vanier Elementary in the District of

St. John's East. They are accompanied by teachers: Gillian Blackmore, Jennifer

Vokey and Mark Cole.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS JONES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

During this year, the eleventh annual Labrador Society of Ottawa Spring Fling

will take place. Over the years this event has raised and donated funds for many

worthy causes in Labrador, such as school and community libraries.

This event takes place in the early days of May, this year's being May 11,

in the nation's capital, Ottawa. The dinner and dance event will be held at

the Ottawa-Carleton Police Association Hall. Unique Labrador prizes, mostly

those that are handcrafted by local people, can be won at this special festival.

Most participants are ex-patriots from Eastern Ontario and Western Quebec who

chat about the good old days in Labrador. People go to make new friendships,

renew old ones, and help raise money for Labrador charities.

Garth McElree, the president of the Labrador Society of Ottawa, will wrap up

his term at this year's festival and a new president, Hannie Fitzgerald will

take his place.

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to recognize Senator and Mrs. Rompkey. Senator

Rompkey was the former MP for Labrador when he became involved in this society;

and also Wally McLean, who was a former resident of North West River, for their

contribution to the Labrador Society of Ottawa over the years.

Mr. Speaker, I would like every member of this hon. House to join with me in

congratulating the Labrador Society in Ottawa for their hard work in creating

such a successful event. I would also like to wish them well in their future

endeavors in providing funds for charities in Labrador.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Andrew Critch

of Hillview. Andrew is a Level I student at Clarenville High and he has placed

first provincially in the Cayley mathematics competition. Mr. Speaker, he is the

only Newfoundland student to be placed on the national honour role for the

Cayley contest this year, and to be invited to the University of Waterloo,

Ontario, to write the Invitational Mathematics Challenge.

Mr. Speaker, the IMC is written by a select group of 250 Grade 10 students

nation wide. Andrew's outstanding performance on the IMC has awarded him a

further invitation to attend the Canadian Mathematical Society's national camp

at the University of Western Ontario in June. Mr. Speaker, Andrew is one of only

twenty-four students selected to attend this camp, from over 53,000 competitors

from across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I have stood in this House several times in the past to

acknowledge Andrew's significant academic accomplishments and his outstanding

participation in the Air Cadet movement. I ask the members of this House to join

with me today in congratulating Andrew on yet another significant achievement in

his life.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Conception Bay East & Bell

Island.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. WALSH: Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of an historic event

which helped to shape the world as we see it today. That Battle of the Atlantic

ended fifty-seven years ago today, in 1945.

The Battle began on September 3, 1939 when a German U-boat attacked the

passenger liner SS Athenia which was bound for Montreal with 1,400 passengers

and crew. This 2,075 day battle was the longest of the Second World War, and saw

the loss of over 50,000 Allied sailors and merchant marines.

There are only about 1,000 of the 4,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who

were involved in the Battle of the Atlantic still living.

As members would remember, this battle was primarily fought in Europe and on

the high seas, but there were also confrontations right here in Conception Bay.

Today, vessels lie just off Bell Island as a reminder of the war and the past.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members in the House to join with me as I recognize

the contributions of our war veterans, and remember those who lost their lives

in the Battle of the Atlantic so many years ago.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Windsor-Springdale.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is my privilege today to honour a remarkable woman whose life demonstrates

just why we value volunteers so greatly in our society.

Mrs. Viola Moores of Grand Falls-Windsor has been perfectly described as one

of those low-profile individuals who work tirelessly in their community without

any thought of gaining public recognition or honours.

Mrs. Moores is a widow who nursed a sick husband for years, raised fifteen

children, two of whom predeceased her. Yet, despite her personal hardships and

burdens, she chose to look outward and fond her purpose in the service of others

- on a personal level, on a church level, and on a town level.

There was a flood of letters from people and organizations in the town,

celebrating her contributions and expressing admiration that she chooses to do,

not the things that often grab the spotlight, but the quiet things that make all

the difference in the world to people in need.

She prepares clothes and blankets for orphans overseas. Her church's Women's

Ministries speak of being able to rely on her whenever they are in need. She

teaches a midweek program for children in Grades K to 6. She is a volunteer with

the Canadian Blood Services, the Canadian Bible Society, the hospital Ladies'

Auxiliary in Grand Falls-Windsor and the Grand Falls-Windsor-Bishop's Falls

Community Food Bank. Her church speaks of her visiting those in hospitals and

seniors' homes, and how often she prepares food for people in need and even

bakes treats for the church staff every Valentine's Day without fail.

But perhaps the most touching tributes are the personal testimonies from

those who speak of her visiting their homes when someone in the family was

suffering from a devastating disease. She spent countless nights singing hymns

and praying with them -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

AN HON. MEMBER: By leave.

MR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave? By leave.

MR. HUNTER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

- and offering tea buns, and partridgeberry pies and homemade bread to their

families. You just can't put a price on kindness like that, Mr. Speaker.

Quite fittingly, Mrs. Moores has just been distinguished as the 2001 Citizen

of the Year for Grand Falls-Windsor. I, too, want to honour her here in the

people's House of Assembly. What a remarkable woman she is, and how much

better the world is because she is in it.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Port de Grave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. BUTLER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, this year marked the third annual Law Day Poster Contest.

Students from elementary schools all across the Province are eligible to enter

this contest, and this year the topic was perception of the phrase "Access

to Justice".

Jocelyn Gifford, a student of Coley's Point Elementary School, was this

year's winner. She received art supplies and her school received a mounted

copy of her poster.

The contest is one of the activities held during the week of April 15-20 to

promote the theme of Law Day, which was held on April 17.

This year marks the 20 th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of

Rights and Freedoms. It was the Charter that influenced the creation of Law Day

as an annual celebration.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Jocelyn on

her hard work in creating the winning poster, and the Canadian Bar Association

on the overall success of Law Day 2002.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr Speaker, I am most pleased today to announce that

Moody's Investors Service, one of the major credit rating agencies which rate

the Province's debt, has increased our rating from a "Baa1" to

"A3".

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, it certainly speaks to a confidence in this

Province and this government that we are very proud of.

Together with the "A-" rating we currently have with Standard &

Poor's, this marks the first time in our history, Mr. Speaker, that this

Province -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: This marks the first time in our history that this

Province has an "A" rating with two credit rating agencies.

Mr. Speaker, the Province's rating with Moody's had been "Baa1"

since 1974, and we last had an "A" with Moody's in 1933.

In announcing the upgrade today, Moody's noted -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It is hard for the Opposition to hear this today I

understand, so I will just repeat this line again, Mr. Speaker.

In announcing the upgrade today, Moody's noted the Province's strong

economic growth, improved fiscal position, and the resultant improvement in key

debt ratios, such as debt to GDP. Moody's also point to the level of fiscal

support provided by the federal government, and the likelihood of a continuation

of this support in light of Canada's improving fiscal position and debt

burden.

The rating upgrade will result for us, in Newfoundland and Labrador, in lower

borrowing costs for our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: And, Mr. Speaker, it will improve our access to the

capital markets. All the more reason to approve the loan bill this year, Mr.

Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: In addition, Mr. Speaker, this will enhance our ability

to finance major projects such as the Lower Churchill Power Project in the event

a deal can be reached for its development.

Mr. Speaker, this announcement today confirms that government is making the

right choices.

Mr. Speaker, let me repeat that again. This announcement today confirms that

government is making the right choices with respect to striking a balance

between continuing to build our economy while maintaining the integrity of our

health and social programs. It is very important that we continue our resolve to

prudently manage the finances of our Province so as to ensure a strong economy

in the future.

Mr. Speaker, this is a very proud day for all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I hope this is not an omen, I say, Mr. Speaker. The last time we had an

"A" rating from Moody's was during the Depression of the 1930s, I

might add.

On a very serious note, Mr. Speaker, I don't think the 40,000 people who

left this Province in the last five years think that the economy in this

Province is booming, and I don't think the projected 40,000 who are going to

leave over the next five years are of the same opinion.

I always like to see a positive credit rating. I sure hope the other credit

agencies, too, will see fit to improve the rating of our Province. My greatest

fear, Mr. Speaker, is that this minister now, on top of being able to borrow

cheaper, might go on another spending spree and look for another $200 million

without approval of this House, because he can borrow cheaper. That is the

greatest fear that we have, from this government.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Signal Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is nice to have a good credit rating. I would venture to say that Ebenezer

Scrooge and Jacob Marley had good credit ratings too, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. HARRIS: I am more interesting, Mr. Speaker, in the child poverty

rating, which has gone up in the last number of years, than the credit rating of

the Province. I am interested, Mr. Speaker, in the 25 per cent of school

children who go to school hungry, without this government having a universal

school lunch program. I am interested, Mr. Speaker, in the 3,000 people who, as

a result of a change in policy - young people under twenty-five - who were

driven off the social assistance support. The Department of Human Resources and

Employment doesn't even know where they are, Mr. Speaker, whether they are

gone, whether they are living, whether they are dead, or whether they have left

the Province. These are the things that I am interested in, Mr. Speaker. The

credit rating should allow this government to do something about these things,

and I hope they will, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Oral Questions

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My questions today are to the Minister of Finance.

I want to ask the minister about the $200 million line of credit that she

wants the House to approve without any itemization in this bill of what she

wants the money for. Now, the minister's only explanation so far has been that

it has been done this way for the past twenty years. Well, I want to say to the

minister that the people have set a higher standard of accountability in 2002.

They want to know what the government is going to use this credit card for. The

previous and the Acting Minister of Finance, the current Minister of Mines and

Energy, said last Thursday that government will provide this itemized list. I

want to ask the minister: Will the minister itemize in this bill the specific

purposes for which this line of credit will be used, and the amount to be

borrowed under each heading?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am delighted today to have an opportunity to speak to this bill and to

explain to the member opposite what this is for.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It is certainly about the bill; it is about the loan

bill. It is something that we have been doing since 1980-1981 when I think it

was Bill Marshall who introduced the first bill into the House of Assembly.

I would say to the members opposite that this is not authority to spend; it

is authority to borrow. This Province has three methods of obtaining funds to

pay its debt: We do ninety-one day Treasury Bills, which is covered under the

Financial Administration Act; we can run an overdraft, which we have to do from

time to time, and we prefer not to; or, we can do capital borrowings in the bond

markets, which we all know is one of our options for long-term borrowings.

Are we going to borrow this money today? No, Mr. Speaker. Why? Because the

interest rate is at 6.5 per cent and we are getting about a 2.25 per cent or 2.5

per cent on our Treasury bills. But, based on this credit rating today, opening

up the markets to a whole group of investors who previously could never have

worked with us. We now ask the people of the Province in this Legislature to

allow us to go into the markets, if it is deemed appropriate, to borrow for

long-term borrowings. The only thing - I am sorry I am boring the Member for

Cape St. Francis, but I think it is an important issue.

MR. MATTHEWS: It's a little over his head.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: It is very important. Perhaps it is over his head, I do

not know.

I can say unequivocally today, to the Member for Ferryland, the only thing

that we would spend this money on, if we are to borrow, and only if the interest

rates are actually absolutely good for us, would be on the $93.3 million

deficit.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance called a news conference Friday to contradict the

Acting Minister of Finance on Thursday. She stated: This bill is to provide for

the ability of the Province to take advantage of existing optimal new

(inaudible) size and to avoid arranging loans in a capital market for small or

odd amounts.

I do not understand, Mr. Speaker, why the minister cannot provide headings

and amounts. If government wants to borrow to take advantage of a sudden drop in

interest rates, why doesn't the minister stipulate a specific amount in this

bill for that purpose? Then you will only be able to borrow -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary.

MR. SULLIVAN: - that amount you specified for that specified purpose. I

want to ask the minister: Why can't you do that?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the only reason that we called a press

conference Friday was to clear up the misleading statements by the Opposition.

That is the only reason.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: And I would say further to the members Opposite, so that

they are clear: This is not permission to spend. This is permission to borrow,

and only if the rates are appropriate.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I have to say that I came to this House with this bill on

the advice of my officials to say to me: Minister, you need to seek authority in

the event that the interest rates and the long-term capital bond markets improve

that we are able to go to those markets and borrow the money. I can honestly

say, before we spend any money we have to either issue a special warrant or come

to this House in supplementary to supply to seek permission.

Mr. Speaker, we have no list because we do not intend to spend the money. The

only thing we would spend it on right now - and I will give you the list that I

have - one item, and that would be if we chose to go to the long-term capital

markets we would use it on our $93.3 million deficit. Nothing else. What the

member opposite is confused about is that this is not permission to spend, this

is permission to borrow, and only in good financial administration for the

people of the Province that we would even consider doing it.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

If the minister does not itemize, she can use this line of credit to pay for

expenditures not approved in the Budget, as government has done many times

before I say to the minister, and then you can come back to the House for

supplementary supply, like they are doing in Bill 8 now this year to cover off

this $51 million that was unauthorized and spent several months ago, and you are

looking for permission this year, this month, for that bill. We want to avoid

that, Minister.

I ask the minister: Isn't it a fact that the minister has used carte

blanche borrowing bills, like Bill 7 last year, and the year before, to finance

expenditures that were not authorized in the Budget? This is what the minister

intends to do this year, if we pass this bill. I ask the minister: What will be

the real deficit at the end of this year?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Treasury Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, the crystal ball comes with the voodoo

economics, quite frankly. I can say very clearly here today that the member

opposite is clearly trying to confuse and mislead the people of the Province by

confusing two bills.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: He is confusing two bills right now. This is a loan

bill, it is permission to borrow. He is talking about special warrants that are

covered under the Financial Administration Act. It has been in this House of

Assembly - and you know the difference. I know that the member opposite does

know the difference.

I would also say to the people of the Province: Is there anybody out there

who thinks spending money, $34 million in helping community services was not

justified as a special warrant? I ask the member opposite and I ask the people

of the Province to make that judgement. This is not in violation of the

Financial Administration Act. I would also ask the people of the Province: Is

spending $10 million in ordering new books for our education system misuse of

our funds? Does this not warrant a special warrant in the House?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

By spending $3.3 million in Justice for better policing and dealing with the

issues in the Justice Department: Is this not a justified way to do a special

warrant?

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: I would also say, in light of the demands we had with

fuel and gasoline for Works, Services and Transportation, Mr. Speaker, we have

not -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS J.M. AYLWARD: - misused or abused anything here. Nothing! And we have

not misled the people of the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When you spend more than you plan in a budget, you have to borrow more,

minister. You would then have to borrow more. For example, minister, this year

when you delivered that Budget you knew, and this government knew, that you

would have to spend money on Harbour Deep, as one example. You knew there is

$120 million in health care boards that are carried over on current account. You

knew. How much more, minister, will you tell this House, hidden ones like this,

have you not put into this Budget that you are now going to go to the people and

look for?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of Treasury

Board.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted today to answer the question

about how much more we will spend. Yesterday, I tabled forty-seven requests,

direct or indirect requests, from the Opposition looking for more money. Mr.

Speaker, how much we will spend? If we spent half of what they wanted, we would

never see the light of day again, quite frankly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS J.M. AYLWARD: Mr. Speaker, I will also say and the member opposite

knows, and this is a very important issue; again, misleading - in as much as he

knows, a government has every right and responsibility to spend money which is

already allocated and voted for. When we spend more money in health and

education, this is strictly within the guidelines of the Financial

Administration Act. The member knows. He is trying to make a point, which is a

very ill-made point, that we are doing something wrong, and it is not true and

it is misleading.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, last week, on May 2, I stood in this House

and offered the Minister of Health and Community Services the opportunity to

disassociate himself and this government with any further damaging comments in

the Hay report before it blew up in his face. Today, we have another desperate

situation in the Province. The Minister of Health and Community Services now has

before him a situation involving the only adolescent internal medicine

specialist in the entire Province - in fact, the only one east of Montreal - who

is demanding an apology and a retraction for damaging statements made in the Hay

report before she pursues further action.

Will the minister stand in the House today and tell us what is he going to do

with this additional, critical situation in our health system?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First of all, I must say to the hon. member that if, in fact, the request has

been made or something has been directed, it certainly has not reached my desk

yet. I have been so busy in my office today, I haven't seen the news report

if, in fact, it is being carried within the news.

But speaking to the issue, generally, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member opposite,

and all hon. members of the House, and the media, on a number of occasions, have

referenced the Hay Report. What we need to realize is that the Hay Report was an

independent look at the operations of the Health Care Corporation for St. John's

from the perspective of trying to determine within that large corporation if, in

fact, there are some efficiencies which can be realized. That was the sole

purpose of the consultation that was undertaken. That was the sole purpose of

the contract that was leased. It is unfortunate, in terms of the report, when it

was produced, that there were certain groups who felt that they were slighted or

somehow that reputations have been castigated.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SMITH: I say to the hon. member, he may think it is everyone but that

is certainly not where I am coming from.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, the situation is that, this is an independent

look at the operations of the St. John's Health Care Corporation from a point

of view of trying to determine where efficiencies may exist. In fact, hon.

members opposite, certainly the hon. Member for Ferryland, for weeks and months

in this House, when he was operating as the Health critic, stood here and said

that he knew of at least $100 million in efficiencies that could be realized.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. minister now to conclude his answer.

MR. SMITH: Why are we afraid to expose the operation to the light of day?

If there are savings, if there are efficiencies, which may be realized, we need

to realize these because we need to redirect these where they are most needed in

our health care system.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Trinity North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I understand fully the minister is busy,

but I wonder: How can a minister, on May 8, stand here and tell this House, and

the people of the Province, he knows nothing about an issue that was raised to

him on April 27?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: It is a letter to the minister on that date, and this

is May 8.

I think, Mr. Speaker, the critical point now is, this Province has to

acknowledge that they just wasted $500,000 on a report everybody wants to

reject.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Mr. Speaker, I will repeat the question of a week ago.

I give the minister an opportunity now, again, to stand before the House and

tell us what parts of the report he agrees with and what parts of the report he

disagrees with, so we will understand what he is about to disassociate himself

with and what he is about to do.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The report that we have is a comprehensive review of the operation of the

Health Care Corporation which, at the present time, is being examined by the

officials from that corporation and with the direction that they will report

back to this minister at the end of the month indicating where are the areas

that they are in agreement with, that they feel there are some savings or some

efficiencies which can be realized.

Surely the hon. member opposite, and surely everyone in this House,

recognizes - repeatedly I have stated in the short time that I have been in that

portfolio and my colleague who preceded me there - we all recognize the

challenges that we face in trying to - day after day people opposite are

standing, as the hon. member for St. John's did yesterday, in referencing

cases where there is a need, a dire need, as identified opposite, within the

health care system. Surely, you will not criticize or condemn this government or

this minister for trying to be - to look at it in a logical fashion, to be

realistic and examine the efficiencies that are there, and, if we can realize

savings, to try and ensure that they are directed to where they are most needed.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Trinity

North.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Obviously, Mr. Speaker, the minister has no intention

of dealing with this critical issue at the Janeway today. It is obvious, Mr.

Speaker, that this minister has no idea of the chaos that he has created in the

system. He has physicians outraged. I just want to quote from Debbie Forward of

the Nurses' Union.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary; I ask him to get to his question now.

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The union says, once again nurses and other health professionals in this

Province are holding their breath to see if their jobs are going to be lost.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his question.

MR. ROSS WISEMAN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, thank you.

The question to the minister is: Will he finally, given all the rejection of

this report by everybody else in the Province, will he stand today and let the

health providers in this Province that he, too, is rejecting this report?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health and Community Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, first of all in terms of him saying that

everybody in the Province is rejecting, I do not know what the hon. member is

basing that on, because obviously it is a report that deals with the operations

of one board within this Province and it is very specific in terms of its focus.

Not to say, Mr. Speaker, that there may not be from that report - there may very

well be - some things that we will learn from there that will have some

applications elsewhere.

I do not know why the hon. members of this House feel so frightened or

threatened, or why anyone should be. Why can we not say to an institution that

taxpayers in this Province are funding: Why can we not hold your operation up to

the light of day, and if there are efficiencies which can be realized, why are

we afraid to do that?

Mr. Speaker, I say to the hon. member , he is doing a great job on spinning.

I must say, lately, some of the statements that he is making with regard to what

he is attributing to this minister -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. the minister now to conclude his answer.

MR. SMITH: I would suggest to him, if he is going to be quoting me in the

future, maybe he might give me the privilege of sitting down with him beforehand

so I will make sure he at least has the accurate information when he does choose

to quote me.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

My questions today are for the Minister of Municipal Affairs and the Minister

Responsible for Housing in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

The Provincial Home Repair Program is meant to assist low income families who

desperately need repairs to their homes, just to make them liveable. Mr.

Speaker, last year, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing reported that there was at

least a three-year waiting period.

I would like to ask the minister today if he can confirm that, on top of that

three-year waiting list, there are an additional 1,000 requests this year for

that, and can he tell the House today what they plan to do to address this

escalating concern in the Province?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We recognize that there is a need right across the whole Province for repairs

for those people who are on low incomes. We have a number of requests that come

to every one of us who are in the House here as MHAs. The department has been

working with the Housing Corporation and I believe right now we working on the

2000 list. We are hoping that by the end of this year we will be able to bring

it all to current.

We recognize that we need more money. This is the last year of the $9 million

program that we put in place, and I am looking forward to putting another one in

place. Working also with the particular group, the Canada Mortgage and Housing

Corporation, we are hoping that we can sign a $30 million program so that we can

help alleviate many of the needs in our Province, where we have the low income

social needs right across the whole Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: In fact, Mr. Speaker, we are still being told by officials

in the minister's department that they are still dealing with 1998 cases.

Mr. Speaker, what is really sad about this is a lot of that list is from the

elderly in this Province. The senior citizens in this Province are a big part of

that growing list. When they call Housing to look for such things as leaky roofs

to be repaired, and windows and doors, they are told that is urgent but not

emergency. In fact, the Housing is telling them that they are only dealing with

emergency and not urgency.

Can the minister explain to them, tell the seniors of this Province, why they

have to continue to live in such miserable conditions, Mr. Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

There will always be need for people on low income to have home improvements.

I can say to him, that we spent $1.3 million more this year than what was

budgeted for to take care of the many needs that were there.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: We recognize the need for it. As I said earlier, if we can

conclude very, very shortly the federal-provincial agreement with Canada

Mortgage and Housing Corporation, we can do a lot with a $30 million program

over the next two years to address many of the social needs that are there, not

only in the urban areas but in the rural parts of the Province as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Member for Baie Verte.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I hear the Minister of Finance say that on the

list she has over there of requests from us, it is number forty-eight on her

list. It should be number one, I say to the minister, seniors in our Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SHELLEY: Mr. Speaker, I just spoke to an elderly woman in my

district, whose husband is deceased, all of her children moved away, and she

just had open heart surgery. She was told, by an inspector from Housing, from

the minister's department, that she should board up her bedroom, move into

another room -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member is on a supplementary, I ask him to get to his question.

MR. SHELLEY: - and get a sheet of plywood to put over her front door, so

she can use the back. That is how desperate it has gotten in this Province, Mr.

Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to get to his question.

MR. SHELLEY: I ask the minister: How is he going to address those type of

concerns, and doesn't he agree that this should, indeed, be urgency and

emergency, and it should be addressed immediately?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. LANGDON: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to say the hon. member opposite, we recognize the need. Last year, in

2001-2002, we looked after 2,500 homes in Newfoundland and Labrador; 2,500. Now

there probably are another 2,000 that we have to look after. We will continue to

work with it, and I am sure that, at the end of the day, working with the people

in Housing, we can take care of even more. We are working towards it. We have

empathy, we have compassion for the people who are there, and I am confident

that the people within our different regional offices, when there are situations

like that, that they can deal with them and continue to deal with them on a

day-to-day basis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is for the Minister of Mines and Energy.

The Environmental Impact Statement Inco put forth in 1998 for the Voisey's

Bay project stated that Labrador West would receive 24 per cent of the economic

benefits and 18 per cent of employment; the North Coast 21 per cent, Upper Lake

Melville 27 and 20.

Since the minister has stated that the majority of Voisey's Bay issues have

been resolved and that government remains committed to making sure that the

Province receives substantial benefits, I ask the minister: Are these employment

numbers Inco proposed in the EIS speculation, or will they be guaranteed for the

people of Labrador, and do you have that commitment from them?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The EIS, of course, was conducted three or four years ago and they provided

advice for the direction for the consideration of government a number of

recommendations and they made some projections as to what they thought

employment numbers should be in terms of attainment.

The current circumstance we are in is that the company is negotiating the

Impact and Benefits Agreements with the Aboriginal Nations, both the Innu and

the Inuit, and they are, of course, taking into consideration all of the

information that has come from the Environmental Impact Study. I am sure, while

we are not sitting as a party to their negotiations on the IBAs, I am confident

that the company is taking into consideration what it should duly take into

consideration as a result of recommendations that have come from the EIS that

was done three or four years ago. To the extent that things are mandated, they

obviously and legislatively and legally required to occur, they will occur to

the extent that they are recommendations for consideration. They will be, I am

sure, considered in that context.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I say to the minister, it is great that the Aboriginal people will have their

needs met, but there are other people in Labrador who live there and need

employment opportunities as well.

I ask the minister: Given the fact that government allowed the pellet plant

to leave Labrador, that the smelter from Voisey's Bay is not being in

Labrador, doesn't the minister believe, and will he insist, that any final

deal between Inco and this Province will contain a provision that people in

Labrador will be guaranteed a certain level of employment opportunities and

guaranteed jobs as a result of that project?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What I could say to the hon. member is this: that any statement of principles

or final negotiated arrangements that we conclude, if we are successful in so

doing, with Inco for the development of Voisey's Bay, we will take into

account, not only the recommendations of the EIS, but we will take into account

also, of course, what is appropriately the legal context that we find ourselves

in as a government.

Things that will be mandated will be things that will be negotiated rather

than mandated between the company and the Aboriginal Nations. In terms of

absolutely guaranteeing quotas with respect to employments, it is more than just

the particular project that has to be considered. It is the provincial

legislation that govern all of these things, including equal opportunity, first

preference obligations, and all of these issues for all of the people of

Labrador will be taken into consideration. The Aboriginal people are negotiating

separately, IBAs, for a very specific purpose because of whom they are and

because of our responsibilities and the responsibilities the company feels

toward them.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the hon. member now to conclude his answer.

MR. MATTHEWS: But with respect to the Province generally, including the

other peoples in Labrador, everything has to be taken into consideration, and

all of the obligations, legislatively and on the basis of recommendations, will

be the basis of their decision.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

Minister, your government, through your department, provided seed funding to

allow for the creation of an organization known as the Newfoundland and Labrador

Legacy Nature Trust. My understanding is that this Legacy Nature Trust is to

provide stewardship for the protection and enhancement of our inland fish and

wildlife resources.

I ask the minister: How much of taxpayers dollars were dispersed to this

committee, and why a new committee was given priority rather than funding an

existing committee which maintains the same interest?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, to the best of my knowledge, there was a $1

million block funding provided to the Legacy Trust. That is to be used in order

to leverage and to generate a much larger trust fund that can be used for

conservation projects throughout the Province. This was established some years

ago, a couple of years ago. I am not exactly sure of the date with which it was

established, but it does not duplicate any other existing foundation or trust

that I am aware of.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister, your Liberal colleagues travelled around the Province a short time

ago seeking information and guidance on how our outdoor resources should be

managed. From those meetings, your committee stated that the public will be

involved on all issues concerning indoor/outdoor management and no backroom

politics would be involved.

Minister, did Newfoundlanders and Labradorians tell you to appoint and fund

an organization such as the Newfoundland and Labrador Legacy Nature Trust or did

this idea come from just a select few?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Recreation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS BETTNEY: Mr. Speaker, this Legacy Nature Trust is an independent

corporation which is made up of its own board of directors. In coming to the

Province as part of this consultation that the Member for Bonavista South

referenced, they came forward with an idea that they could promote the putting

together the means to work with communities around conservation by being able to

leverage funding for many other sources which, of course, a government body

would have more difficulty in doing. So, in that context, it was the Legacy

Nature Trust who themselves were formed into an organization who came to

government and -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I ask the minister now to conclude her answer, quickly.

MS BETTNEY: - we responded to their request positively. We did not

appoint this trust foundation. We do not appoint their board of directors. They

are, in and of themselves, incorporated.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has ended.

Order, please!

On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Ferryland.

MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today to ask the Minister of Health and Community Services to withdraw

a statement he made that was not accurate and I never stated. In this House

before - the Premier rose on this point a couple of months ago, and made a

statement in this House that I said there was $100 million of waste in the

health care system, and Hansard showed that was not true. I ask the minister to

withdraw that because I do not want an impression left in this House on a

statement that I made that is not true. I would ask him to apologize.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

To the point of order; really there is no point of order. It is a difference

of opinion between two hon. members, but there is no point of order.

MR. HARRIS : A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Member for Signal

Hill-Quidi Vidi.

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I didn't bring it up during Question Period, of course, it is not usually

appropriate to do that, but I did notice during Question Period today, the

Member for Ferryland, in questioning the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board, continually referred to her as you, and the minister, and

pointing at her. I just wonder whether the rule has been relaxed in that regard

or is it still required to go through the Speaker?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

Again, the Chair has, on many occasions, interrupted members and brought to

their attention that when questions, or in any debate in this House, members

ought to be speaking to the House through the Speaker. Again, if that has

occurred, I ask hon. members to keep that in mind, and, when questions are being

posed or whenever they are debating, that it be directed to the Chair and not to

individual members of the House.

Orders of the Day

Private Members' Day

MR. SPEAKER: Today being Wednesday, the hon. the Member for

Carbonear-Harbour Grace on Motion 6.

The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This motion which I bring forward to the House today is on air service to

this Province and it is an opportunity for us in this House to speak on this

issue and raise points on this issue. It is also an opportunity to send a

message to the federal government on a very important issue that concerns all of

us here in this Province.

Before we get into making some comments, I would like to read the motion

itself into the record, so we are all clear on what the motion is. The motion

reads:

WHEREAS the availability of affordable air transportation is an important

factor in the growth of the economy of this Province; and

WHEREAS the current air service to the Province is expensive and less than

adequate; and

WHEREAS the growing tourism industry in this Province is heavily relying on

the airline industry;

THEREFORE

BE IT RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call on the federal

government to eliminate the costly air travel fees on passengers; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this House of Assembly call on the federal

government to put in place policies which will result in affordable and

comprehensive air service to the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Mr. Speaker, this is not a new issue for many members of this House. As a

matter of fact, it is an issue on which many members have expressed their views

at various times. For example, I, myself, have spoken out on this issue - back

in December, as a matter of fact - and it was in relation to problems caused by

the closure of Canada 3000. I was concerned about the individuals who had lost

money because the airline had failed. During that time, I also recognized the

need that this country put in place a comprehensive air transportation policy

that takes into account the unique situation in this Province.

Mr. Speaker, other MHAs on this side of the House of Assembly have spoken out

as well. My colleague here, the Member for Torngat Mountains, issued a news

release on December 14, calling on Ottawa to scrap plans to impose air

travellers security charge. He wrote the federal Transport Minister, David

Collenette, expressing his concerns about the proposed air travellers security

charge and the impact it would have on the residents of Northern Labrador. He

pointed out to the federal minister that these fees were slated to be applied to

the North Coast where security services are not even provided. In his letter, he

told the minister that to charge these fees in these cases would place an

unnecessary and unjustified burden on residents of small northern communities.

It is important to note, Mr. Speaker, that the member was successful and changes

have been made in relationship to communities along the Coast of Labrador.

Another example of a government MHA who spoke out on this issue, is the

Member for Conception Bay East & Bell Island. Back in December, he put out a

news release calling on the federal government to link any financial aid to the

airline industry to service to regions such as Newfoundland and Labrador. He was

concerned about the people who had lost money because of the failure of Canada

3000 and the level of competition on routes to this Province.

Several ministers in this government have also spoken out on the issue of air

service to this Province. The Member for St. George's- Stephenville East has

brought forward issues related to the airline industry and, in particular, the

airport in the district he represents.

The Member for Gander has also worked tirelessly to bring these issues to the

forefront and see the airport and industries related to it in the district she

represents get the attention they deserve.

The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation, and the Minister

of Tourism, Culture and Recreation, all have played a very active role in this

issue and they have all been vocal on this issue as well.

Madam Speaker, on the other side of the House, I understand that the entire

NDP caucus attended a protest on this issue at the airport recently. I commend

the NDP caucus and the federal NDP caucus for raising this issue in the way that

they have.

I have mentioned some of the people who have raised this issue. I could

mention others, but I think the point is that this issue has been raised before

and today is a continuation of our concern about this issue.

MR. J. BYRNE: (Inaudible) me.

MR. SWEENEY: Yes, it is true, I say to the hon. Member for Cape St.

Francis, there are others I could mention, but I won't.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) table it.

MR. SWEENEY: I will table it, don't you worry.

Madam Speaker, private member's motions are a way for the members of this

House to express their views on topics which are of importance to the people. It

is a way of bringing public attention to an issue and raising awareness to an

issue.

I am hopeful that by bringing this motion forward today, we can impress on

the federal government the importance of air service to this Province and the

importance of taking our concerns into account when policies are being made in

relation to transportation.

Madam Speaker, the airline industry has historically shown that they have

neglected Newfoundland and Labrador, more so in recent years. We have seen the

reduction of flights in the Province, we have seen increased costs, and those

affected the most are the rural centres.

Air Canada has pressured regional and discount airlines into economic

uncertainty, and many claim that the company is trying to eliminate competition

from the skies. Since Canada 3000 went bankrupt, Air Canada is the only

alternative for rural residents of this Province.

The airline industry was certainly negatively impacted by the instances of

September 11. There was a loss of revenue and, more importantly, the public lost

confidence. Some would say that the greatest impact of this has been on areas

like Newfoundland and Labrador. Great pressure has been placed on smaller

airlines and airports that do not have the same fiscal resources for revenue

loss due to larger companies and other airports functioning close by. These

centres are having a difficult time because of more expensive airfare, lack of

airline selection, and reduced flights.

Madam Speaker, the importance of good air service to the economy of this

Province cannot be overestimated. With many businesses today, with the

increasing out-of-Province business involvement, air travel is a major fact of

life. The ability to meet face to face with customers on a regular basis is an

important factor in a growing business. In relation to tourism and business in

that sector, it is of critical importance. The tourism industry is burgeoning in

Newfoundland and Labrador and continued growth is expected this year again.

However, that growth could be hampered by increasing airline costs and, most

certainly, by poor service to other parts of the Province.

It is important to recognize that 65 per cent of visitors who travel to the

Province do so by air. Usually, they do not come on an individual basis. They

usually travel in groups of two or three. The increasing costs are certainly a

disincentive to travel by air.

Mr. Speaker, I want to say that the first

BE IT RESOLVED of this motion is

related to air travel fees. It is important that we be aware of the number of

fees that are currently in place. Starting to look at it first, it is quite

staggering really. You have the Airport Improvement and user fees, you have the

NAVCAN fees, which is, you pay for the air navigation system, you have an

insurance charge, you have a fuel surcharge, you have the travel agent service

charges, you have the GST, and then we have the security surcharge.

In some cases these fees can, in fact, double the cost of a ticket. The new

security fee will cost $2.2 billion over the next five years and it is for extra

security precautions in the wake of September 11. However, it is estimated that

the charge will generate 30 per cent more revenue than is needed to administer

the new security measures. The tax will generate a $130 million surplus this

year alone and will grow to $250 million by the year 2006. All these monies go

directly into the government's general revenues with no guarantees that all

the funds will go towards airline security. Also, the way this fee is collected

and calculated did not take into account how quickly people would return to air

travel after September 11. So, there could be a significant amount of money

over-collected through this fee.

Madam Speaker, there are couple of other specific problems with this security

fee: the $12 one way and the $24 return security fee is charged regardless of

the distance of the trip; charged regardless of the price of the ticket or the

age of the passenger. It is the highest of any country in the world. It is 35

per cent higher than the fee charged in the U.S. for the same purpose. Other

security measures that have been implemented since September 11, such as

increased security of boarder crossings, all those charges have come from the

public purse. The federal government is expecting a $7 billion to $10 billion

surplus this year. So, they have money to fund these extra security measures.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SWEENEY: I say to the member from St. Anthony that it is not the

speech itself, it is the speechmaker. The person who is making the speech who

delivers the quality.

Mr. Speaker, I will conclude my introductory remarks right now. I have raised

a number of points. I know there are others. I have heard them from the gallery,

the peanut gallery, who want to participate in this debate. So I look forward to

hearing what others have to say to this debate today. I think it is important

for this issue to come forward today and I really believe that we have to debate

this issue in the House of Assembly.

Thank you very much.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER (Hodder): The hon. the Member for Cape St. Francis.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I am pleased to stand here today and speak to this private member's

resolution and I would like to thank the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace in

bringing it forward today. It is a very serious issue in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador for many, many reasons, but I have to say, Madam

Speaker, that I cannot disagree with anything that the member has said when he

was introducing this private member's resolution. Some very good points.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. J. BYRNE: One thing he did not say though, when he was up, was the

fact that when this was first introduced by the federal government after

September 11, that this side of the House and myself, in particular, had put out

a number of releases opposing this $24 fee; $12, but really $24 for the people

of Newfoundland and Labrador. I have a couple of those releases here. Just for

the members' interest, if you would like a copy you can certainly have a copy

and see some of the things that we have been seeing, much similar to what he has

said here today in the House of Assembly.

Now, Madam Speaker, this fee is really, basically, nothing more than a major,

major tax grab on the people of Canada, not only Newfoundland and Labrador, but

more particularly on the people of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. I

did some research on this during the winter months, back in January, and at the

Torbay Airport alone - there were 950,000 passengers who went through that

airport last year, in 2001. That works out to be, for this levy alone - if they

are only charging $12 - some $11.4 million to Torbay Airport alone.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. J. BYRNE: It is a fact.

We have other smaller airports in the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,

Madam Speaker, and some of the smaller planes are not charging us $12. They are

not, and I would imagine the member is aware of that. If you take into

consideration the other levies, as the member just mentioned, and add it to the

$11.4 million on this one, some $20 million from one airport alone.

When you talk about Newfoundland and Labrador, and we are so dependent on air

travel and so dependent on the ferry system in Newfoundland and Labrador to get

people on and off the Island, but I talked to some people at the smaller

airports and a number of the smaller airports have been privatized, as has

Torbay Airport, Madam Speaker, and some of the smaller airports, such as Deer

Lake and Stephenville, feel that they have been left out in the cold with the

privatization. Since they have been dropped by government they formed their own

airport authorities. They feel that they have been left out in the cold. They

feel that the federal government dropped them too quickly. There should be some

liaison with the federal government with respect to promotion of the airports

and development of the sites.

These airports, of course, because they are smaller and in more remote

locations, do not get the same amount of traffic, flights in and out of those

sites, and they are looking to the federal government for some support, which

they are not getting at this point in time. They are telling me that there is no

leadership from the federal government, and that in itself is a problem. They

want the government to play a role in what they are doing and how they are

developing their sites. The government does not appear to be too interested in

doing this, Madam Speaker. So we would request that the government, when they

privatize these smaller airports, still try and play some

part in the

development of these sites.

Now, Madam Speaker, when you talk about this levy, this $12 for a flight one

way or $24 return, if you sit back and size it up, if you looked at the Torbay

Airport alone, $20 million in a year or $11.4 million for this particular levy.

I feel that in a very short period of time within Canada, if you look at the

major airports across the country, Toronto and places like that, I would think

that this fund for air security within the country is going to easily compete

with the EI fund. Now, I did some checking on that, Madam Speaker, and the EI

fund is now up to $20 billion. It is almost increasing by $10 billion a year;

almost up to $40 billion. In St. John's alone, if they are taking $11.4

million out of just St. John's Airport - and it is fairly small when you

compare it to some of the airports in the country. Can you imagine how much

money is going to be taken in from this levy? They make a comparison with the

money that they are going to spend out for security services at Torbay Airport.

Are they going to spend $11.4 million for security purposes at Torbay Airport? I

doubt it very much.

So, Madam Speaker, this is nothing more than a major tax ripoff. The member's

resolution says that the government should cut the levy, and rightly so. It is

way out of proportion to what the actual costs are going to be, in my opinion.

It also hurts our Province, disproportionately, Madam Speaker, and for many

reasons. It hurts our Province - obviously we pay more for airfares, we all know

that. Even inter-Provincial here, if we want to fly from St. John's or Deer

Lake to Labrador, the cost is huge. It is abnormal when you compare it to other

areas. If you want to fly from St. John's to Halifax, it is cheaper than it is

to fly from St. John's to Labrador. We are going to be charging $24 on top of

that, Madam Speaker, so it hurts. We should not be paying this type of thing.

Also, the airlines will tell you, Madam Speaker, that we are off the beaten

track, basically, and that is why we pay so much. We are at the end of the line,

that is why we pay so much. Again, there should be some consideration given for

that very fact.

If you look at a country such as Canada, the geography of a country such as

Canada, basically the federal government, in my personal opinion, should be

subsidizing some of these flights per year to get to remote areas like St. John's,

over Newfoundland or Gander or Corner Brook, whatever the case may be.

AN HON. MEMBER: And Labrador.

MR. J. BYRNE: And Labrador, Madam Speaker. That is a fact in itself.

The airlines also say, Madam Speaker, that we have fewer passengers. So it is

more expensive again. When you look at it, basically, what they are saying here

is that we, as a Province and people living in this Province, are being treated

unfairly because of where we live. If there are fewer passengers into the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, so be it. We are a part of Canada and it

is a factor that should be looked at, in my mind, Madam Speaker. Basically, we

have few alternatives in the Province to get onto the Island. We have to use the

ferry system, the Gulf to get here, or fly.

Madam Speaker, we saw this past January, I think, that the Gulf ferry rate

increased by 4 per cent. Again, outrageous. The Gulf ferry system is supposed to

be a part of the Trans-Canada Highway system and we should not - if anything,

that in itself should be subsidized. If the air service is not subsidized,

certainly the Gulf ferry system should be subsidized.

Now, what is hurting us within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador,

Madam Speaker, is we have higher fares, obviously hurting our people; coming out

of our pocketbooks. We have young people going away to university and coming

back paying abnormal amounts of money, extraordinary amounts of money for that.

It hurts our tourism industry, when we are trying to get people onto the Island

either through the Gulf ferry system or through the airfare. The cost to get

tourists into the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador; that hurts. And this

$24 per ticket hurts our tourism industry. It hurts exporters when we are trying

to export our goods out of the Province. Again, the extra cost for

transportation with respect to even gas, getting on the ferry system and the

flights to export our goods out of the Province. It hurts our industry that way.

It hurts investors, who weigh the costs of locating businesses within

Newfoundland and Labrador, within our Province. We have industries out there

that may be very interested in coming to the Province starting up businesses but

the first thing they will look at, I would imagine, Madam Speaker, is the fact

that they have to transport their goods out of the Province. Again, these extra

costs are basically hurting industry within the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador. It forces our government to pay more money for travel. We have seen

travelling out of the Province. I mean, thousands upon thousands of dollars in

extra costs there to get out of the Province and to get back into the Province

when they travel, Madam Speaker.

Also, we see it hurts our athletes. Not long ago, when the House of Assembly

was open before Easter, we had some young kids wanting to come down from

Labrador - and the members from Labrador could certainly speak to this more than

I could - they wanted to come here on a competition. I am not sure if it was

hockey, it may have been, but they were delayed and they could not make it. They

ended up coming in a day or two late, Madam Speaker.

So the cost of travel within our provinces are far too high. This fee should

not be there. As the member recommends in his resolution, that we cut this fare

altogether. I would certainly agree with that.

Madam Speaker, what we are seeing here now - it was only last year that we

opened the Mile One Stadium and the Convention Centre down there. It is hurting

our convention business. We are promoting the Province as a destination for

conventions. The cost to get here, of course, is a deterrent and this airfare,

again, is affecting that when you have hundreds or maybe thousands of people

wanting to come into the Province for a convention. It is hurting that.

We can go on and on with respect to the areas that have been hurt. One very

important thing I think that should be noted here is the fact that when we send

patients out of the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador for treatment, when

they cannot get the certain treatments and surgeries within the Province itself,

we have to send patients outside the Province, and that is a deterrent in

itself. It is an extra cost to the patients themselves, it is an extra cost to

the government, and that is something again that this is impacting upon us as a

group, as a population, within the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

As I mentioned earlier with respect to the freight, that is a fact of life

that we have here in this Province. When you look at it, we suffer more than any

other province with respect to travel, airfare, and what have you, because we

are an island. Now, there are some people who would laugh or scoff at the idea

of putting a tunnel between Labrador and the Island portion, the Northern

Peninsula. That is not a bad idea, in reality. It is something that I think

Ottawa should be seriously considering. It is something that we have promoted on

this side of the House. If we had a link between Newfoundland and the Labrador

Coast, a tunnel, and we could continue the Labrador Highway - and there are all

kinds of agreements, I suppose, that you could negotiate there, all kinds of

negotiations that could go on - we could take a serious look at that; but, we

have to have the imagination to be able to do it. We have to have people on both

sides of the House to agree to something like that and to start promoting it,

rather than trying to tear it apart.

There were times, I suppose, back years and years ago, when someone would

talk about putting a highway across Newfoundland, or a railway across

Newfoundland, and it would be considered to be outrageous; but it really wasn't,

in the long haul. That is the point we should be looking at.

This security service that is going to be put in place because of September

11 - and we all know what went on there. It was a tragedy, there is no doubt

about that. It is something we have never seen the likes of in our lives, that

is for sure. This security should be financed out of general revenues, and not

tax to people, because of the fact that the cost to implement this is going to

be - in my mind, from what I can see and from what I have said - a lot less than

the revenues that they are going to take in. This revenue, this fund, will rival

the EI fund, as I said earlier in my comments. It will rival it within a few

years, at the same pace. It is just unrealistic to expect the people of the

country to pay for this kind of a service. As I said, it is part of being a

federation, compensating for the geographical challenges; and the country

itself, and the general taxes that are brought in, what are we paying taxes for?

We find government charging for whatever they want to charge for, for services.

We are even talking about health care now, in some provinces, where this is

going to be a fee for service.

There has to come a point in time when the taxes that we pay - the income

taxes, the taxes on gas, the payroll taxes, all kinds of taxes - have to be used

for certain things. We cannot expect the government to basically charge for

everything, when we are paying taxes. There has to be a cut-off point somewhere.

It is too bad, really, that the Province has not been making a bigger issue

of this. It really hasn't. It is good to see that the Member for

Carbonear-Harbour Grace brought this forward today. The Province has not been

making this a big enough issue. We have a very small voice in Ottawa. We have

seven members, Madam Speaker, compared to over hundreds in other provinces.

Therefore, we do not have the clout. If the government really got behind this

and tried to promote that this is unfair to the people of Newfoundland and

Labrador, maybe then we could do something about it and maybe this resolution

that is before this House today certainly would be approved - there is no doubt

about that in my mind - and maybe this will spur the provincial government to

actually create a voice, talk to Ottawa, and try to do something about this very

serious issue.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time is up.

MR. J. BYRNE: Just in conclusion, Madam Speaker. I would like to clue up,

to finish this off, if I could, by leave.

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MR. J. BYRNE: Thank you. I would like to thank the members opposite for

their support, Madam Speaker.

We need measures to boost our economy so we can stand on our own within the

Federation of Canada. That is what we need to do. We do not need the federal

government imposing taxes on us, making it even more difficult to survive within

this Confederation that we have been in since 1949. We know that measures like

this hurt our economy.

I want to say that I support the member's resolution. I support the member

for bringing it forward here today. Hopefully this Administration will lend an

ear to this resolution, be more vocal in Ottawa, and not only leave it up to

seven voices in the wilderness in Ottawa, which are our seven members.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Youth Services and Post-Secondary

Education.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS KELLY: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

I am pleased today to rise to support the motion from the Member for

Carbonear-Harbour Grace. As most of you would know, I represent a district with

a long and very proud aviation history. Many of the issues that will be

discussed in this House this afternoon are issues that have long been discussed

in my community and are issues of great importance to the whole region of

Central Newfoundland.

Before entering provincial politics, I chaired the airport transport

committee as mayor of my community when the federal government announced its new

National Airports Policy. As most people would know, we have a system of

national/regional small and remote airports in our country. Gander is one of two

national airports in our Province, the other being St. John's. Of course, we

have our regional airports like Deer Lake, Stephenville and Wabush. Of course,

the Province itself has great experience in running small airstrips and air

services, particularly in remote areas and on islands.

As in the rest of the country, though, Newfoundland and Labrador has a great

need for accessible, affordable, quality air service. This is something that all

of us, I think, would agree that we need to work together on with the federal

government. We do have something different, though, in Newfoundland and Labrador

than other provinces of Canada, to discuss with the federal government.

The Terms of Union in Confederation address civil aviation issues and is

another matter, as I have said, that we need to address with the federal

government because they certainly now, as we are moving forward with new

aviation policy, have not been upholding their responsibilities in regard to the

Terms of Union with Newfoundland and Labrador, in regard to civil aviation

issues.

Madam Speaker, we all know that our Province has a vast geography and a

sparse population. An air transportation system is even more important in this

Province than in any other area of our country.

Now I would like to outline briefly our Province's role in addressing many

of the aviation issues that are important to us. The Premier, just this past

year, put in place an air access and military affairs committee of Cabinet. That

committee, that air access and military affairs committee, is chaired by our

hon. House Leader and Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs. This committee has

been working intensively on these issues for the past six months. We have met

with the airlines. We just recently met with Air Nova; JAZZ, as they are now

known. We have met with Air Labrador, Provincial Airlines, and now we are about

to meet with community stakeholders, and community stakeholders who are very

interested in these matters would include airport authorities, for instance, and

municipal councils. I know in my own region, in Gander region, a community

committee has been formed to address these important issues. They have requested

a meeting with our air access committee and we will be meeting with them soon,

and, of course, we will be meeting with other stakeholders in other communities

throughout our Province in all of our regions.

Madam Speaker, airports and air travel are important issues for everyone, not

just the towns that have airports. It is important for tourism but also as an

everyday service in a Province as large and remote as ours, whether for

personal, business or health reasons. It is also extremely important to our

economy. Airports themselves are economic generators. I know that across this

country, since the devolution of airports under the National Airports Policy,

many communities themselves have taken over airports because airports are so

important to the economy of their regions.

While we, today, are mostly talking about affordability for passengers and

for tourists, we also have to consider how important the shipment of cargo is in

our Province. I have some very pertinent examples in my own district: Canadian

Helicopter Composites, for instance. This is a big problem for them, the fact

that our airport now is not as well serviced with cargo capacity. Right now, for

them to get any large shipments of cargo out, they have to first truck cargo to

St. John's. First when the Dash 8s and the jets were taken off service last

year, Air Nova were paying for this, to have the cargo shipped to St. John's.

Now, I have recently heard that they are discontinuing this service and the

company itself has to pay to have cargo shipped to St. John's so then it can

be air shipped onto the mainland and into the U.S. It is very hard for this

company to compete when they have these increased shipping costs. Also, many of

their shipments are time-sensitive. You know, having to truck them first, then

wait at another airport, go to a mainland airport and wait there before it can

go into the U.S., is not at all acceptable. When Newfoundland Bonding &

Composites, Canadian Composites, were set up three years ago, one of the reasons

they chose Gander was because of the very good air cargo shipment availability

from our community. Now, they have to cope with increased costs and the fact

that the time-sensitivity for many of their products is making it extra hard for

them to compete. We have to do something about all of this.

Also, our hunting and outfitting businesses in Central Newfoundland are

having great difficulties with being able to ship product out for the hunters

who are coming into our area every fall. They are finding that, while the

hunters may be able to get in and out, and they are mostly successful in their

hunting endeavors, there is not room on the small aircraft that are leaving our

airport now to be able to ship their meat and antlers out. This has to go by

truck and really causes the same problems that Canadian Composites have.

Fish plants in our area are having great difficultly in being able to ship

fresh product and, as we all know right now, the cost per pound in the fishing

industry, the highest cost is in fresh products. This is creating a big problem

in our area for our fish plants.

An even bigger problem for a bigger number of people is the convention,

tourism and sport tournament industry. It is very important to the central

region and especially to Gander. Right now, I think we had a prime example of it

last year when we had a big international curling tournament, the Masters

Curling Tournament, which was held in Gander. We had great difficulty even

getting the participants in. Many of them had to fly into St. John's because

there were not enough seats available. They could not fly on to Gander; they had

to be taxied to Gander. That is a long flight when you have come from many

points across the U.S., Canada, and around the world. It is making it very, very

hard for major tournaments and conventions to attract the tournaments and that

type of business that we have been used to having. It is a really important

industry in Central Newfoundland.

I also think that security, while it is a really important issue - we all

know how important since the incident of September 11 - we must realize, though,

that while security is important we still have to be competitive in this

country. My understanding is, from the material and the research that I have

been doing, that in the U.S. they are charging $4 per flight segment,

whereas in

Canada we are charging $12 per flight segment. I also understand that $12 is

going to probably give the federal government more money than they require for

the security system that they are planning. This is something that we have to

speak very strongly to our federal government about, because right now the cost

in Newfoundland already is much higher than it should be. This is an added cost

that our consumers should not have to bear and that they just cannot afford.

Madam Speaker, I am also very worried about what happens when the three-year

federal policy that required Air Canada to continue servicing airports that

Canadians serviced before the merger occurred, that they will, as of January 4,

in just seven short months, be able to just notify airports that they are

withdrawing service. After this date, Air Canada, as I have said, will be free

to give notice of its intention to abandon service at any community which it

feels cannot be served economically with its current fleet and cost structure.

As you know, with the low population that we have in many of the remote areas of

our Province, they will very easily be able to prove that it is not economical.

While it must give notice of its intent to abandon service, there is no

current means by which the federal government can ensure that small communities

continue to receive any service. This is an issue of vital importance. This is

as important as any other issue we have been discussing here this afternoon.

I know that it is a big issue out in my community. Whenever I go to check in

for the flight when I am coming back to St. John's at the end of spending time

in my district on the weekends, the staff at the airport are all saying to me:

What will happen come January 4? We have not received any answers from anyone in

the federal government or from the airlines. When we met with Air Canada, they

told us that they are putting a plan in place now and they expect to have it

done in a matter of weeks. Everyone is very worried about this. With the plans

that they put in place last year, they are not serving us adequately now and we

are very worried about what they will propose in the upcoming weeks.

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. minister that her time is up.

MS KELLY: Leave to clue up?

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. the minister have leave?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave.

MADAM SPEAKER: Leave granted.

MS KELLY: At present, as I have said, the federal government has no

policy on this and we need to get one. We need this immediately done.

In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I totally support the motion of the Member from

Carbonear and I know that our government will continue to work diligently on

this important issue. As a member of the air access and military affairs

committee of Cabinet, I look forward to tackling these challenges on

affordability and accessability with the various stakeholders in our Province,

with the airlines and with the federal government.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. COLLINS: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I want to point out, before I begin my debate on this, and I want to say to

the Member for Gander, if she noticed that we gave leave for her to clue up,

something that she denied us yesterday. I hope she keeps that in mind for future

times when we ask leave.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. COLLINS: Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of the motion that is

submitted by the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace. I can tell you that this

motion, Madam Speaker, strikes near and dear to my heart because, living in

Labrador West, airline travel is something that we have to depend on each and

every day of our lives.

I will just quote you a couple of figures, Madam Speaker, that people may not

be aware of and may find hard to believe. If you had to leave Wabush today and

fly to St. John's, return, on short notice, without having the ability to take

advantage of any savings that may be had by making your reservations earlier,

then you will pay $1,628.89. Madam Speaker, that is a lot of money to travel

within this Province, from Wabush to St. John's, return, $1,628.89. If you

were to travel from Wabush to Halifax, return, it is $2,148.69. I think we can

all agree that these are outrageous prices that we have to pay in order to

travel within our own Province and short airfares outside.

So, Madam Speaker, this resolution really goes to the heart of the matter and

it talks about the federal government to put in place policies which result in

affordable and comprehensive air service to the Province of Newfoundland and

Labrador.

Again, as I said, living in Labrador, we have no option. We don't have the

alternative of getting aboard our vehicles and driving from point A to point B,

because you cannot do it. If you are into an emergency situation, where you

really have to get out in a hurry, then the alternative for us is, if you want

to drive, to drive out over the Baie Comeau Highway, down through the Province

of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, across on the boat, before you get on the

Island portion of the Province. So airfares have always been an issue with

people who live in Labrador, and that is no different today.

I would like, also, to talk about the cost of airfares and what is included

in those airfares, Madam Speaker. For example, on the airfare that I quoted from

Wabush to St. John's, return, there is the infamous $24 security tax that the

government has just levied on airline travel. That tax is very unfair because,

when we are talking about security, we are talking about security of the

country, every region of the country. Yet, this $24 is only targeted to people

who use the airlines to travel. It is not targeted at any other group in society

other than people who have to use airlines as their mode of transportation.

There is also a $10 Airport Improvement Fee charged on that. There is a Nav

Canada fee of $20. There is a $30 fuel tax charge. There is a $6 insurance fee,

and there is a $57.50 fee if you should use a travel agency to make your travel

plans.

I think we can all look at what is happening in the airline industry in this

country and clearly know and see, from the figures that I just quoted, that it

is not only the high cost of tickets by the airline carriers, it is also all of

the taxes that are attached to that ticket by the government. It is quite common

to go to an airline or a travel agency and they advertise the price of a ticket

from point A to point B as one rate; yet, when you go to buy that ticket, it is

$150 to $200 more than the rate you were quoted, simply because of all of the

taxes that are associated with it.

The high cost of transportation affects us in many ways. For example, if you

live in a remote area and you have to travel outside that area for medical

reasons, each and every time you travel, it is costing you huge sums of money in

order to be able to do so. It is not a matter, as I said earlier, where you have

the option of getting aboard your car and driving. That option does not apply to

many of us in this Province, particularly those of us who live in Labrador.

The other thing with the airlines is that right now, if you come out from

Labrador West and you are admitted to a hospital here in St. John's, which

happens to many people, and if you are confined to a stretcher, then you are in

one serious predicament, because no airline that services Labrador West today,

or for some time now, has the capability of carrying a stretcher. So the only

way that you can get back to your home after you are released from the hospital

is by air ambulance, and that is not always done immediately upon release from

hospital. Sometimes there are many waiting periods, or long waiting periods,

before you get the opportunity to get back home. There are many problems with

the airline industry in this country and, living in the area that I represent,

we experience all of them.

It also impacts upon the tourism industry, with the high cost of travel to

get around this country. Many people can look around and see all kinds of

airfares advertised to locations down south, to Europe, to anywhere in the

world, cheaper than we can fly around within our own Province. The difference

being is that when you go on a vacation that is an option that you are

exercising. Many times when you are flying around the Province it is necessity.

It is not because you want to. It sometimes is because you have to and there is

no other choice.

Other forms of transportation in this country, like the ferry service, is

subsidized. The train service is subsidized, but the airline service you pay

through the nose each and every time you have to fly from point A to point B.

It also impacts, Madam Speaker, on the outfitters in Labrador who strive to

do a good business in fishing and hunting. When people make plans to take a

vacation one of the first and top considerations is: How much is it going to

cost me to get there? Using the airlines to travel within this Province from

other places is very high, and a lot of times it is the single turnoff towards

people coming to this Province or to the Labrador portion of the Province.

It also impacts upon our school system, our students and their ability to

interact with other students in the Province through sporting groups or sporting

meets. Many times we do that and we have representation but it costs a lot of

money to have it. There are not as many people involved as we would like to see,

and the number of sports that people are able to participate in within the

Province is limited strictly because of the high cost of travel.

There are, Madam Speaker, many areas of our lives that are affected by this.

As I said earlier, the other charges that I alluded to, then you put the

infamous HST on top of that and it really drives your ticket out of whack. So,

it is not a matter of complaining about the high cost of travel with the

airlines, it is not a matter of complaining about things that you would like to

do, places you would like to go, while that may be an issue, the issue that

concerns me the most is the fact that people in the area where I live, and the

people that I represent, have to use the airlines as a matter of choice, not as

an option. Each and every single time that they have to use the airlines it is

at absorbent costs that many times set families back years and years in their

plans for retirement. Many times people are affected where they have to travel

out here several times in one year. If you add to that sickness in your family,

who may be residing on the Island portion of the Province, and you have to come

out and see if they are very sick, then all of this adds up and the cost can be

in the thousands and thousands of dollars in any given year. That is highly

unfair, particularly to the people who have no choice but use the airlines to

get where they have to go.

Madam Speaker, I say to the member that I certainly appreciate his resolution

today. I think it hits on a lot of the topics that many of us, particularly us

from Labrador, the MHA for Torngat, Lake Melville and Cartwright-L'Anse au

Clair, where that is the form of travel that people use. They do not use it as a

second choice, it is the only choice. We are held to ransom by the airlines, and

by the federal government with their taxes. We are held to ransom because we do

not have the option of any other form of transportation.

Again, I thank the member for his resolution and I certainly hope that the

federal government will respond to the representation that is made to the

Province because something has to be done in this country to curb the cost of

air transportation.

Thank you.

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. ANDERSEN: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I rise today to speak in support of the resolution put forward by the Member

for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

Madam Speaker, when it comes to travel then I guess the part of reality of

the high cost sets in. There is no better definition of it than in my riding.

The people in my riding depend upon the airlines, two small airlines, for seven

to eight months of the year. It is just not a question of travel, any food items

or any necessities that they need have to be flown at very high costs.

If someone today were to book an airline ticket from St. John's to Nain it

would cost them $1,900 plus the cost of a hotel bill. Many times when people

travel to the Coast, or to and from, they can be caught on the Coast, or in

Goose Bay, trying to get back home for three or four days, sometimes as high as

a week.

Also, the professional services that are required in my riding; many times,

at this time of the year, the Labrador School Board is in a great need of

teachers. One of the difficulties with teachers going to the Coast of Labrador

is that they have to pay their own way up there and when they want to travel

back home to be with their families at Christmastime they have the added cost

again. All of these factors, Madam Speaker, certainly holds back the riding of

Torngat Mountains when it comes to air transportation.

I stood in this House last week and spoke on how proud I was that the riding

of Torngat Mountains was going to host a first-ever provincial tournament with

teams travelling from the Island because of the years and years of these small

communities sending their teams out to the Island. Yesterday afternoon we got

some bad news that the team from the Island said they cannot afford to travel to

Labrador. Madam Speaker, when we have youth programs and provincial

championships where the youth are involved, when they cannot afford to travel

into Labrador, to Coastal Labrador, then it certainly shows the need of where I

fully support the member's resolution.

Madam Speaker, I fully support the Trans-Labrador Highway and the completion

so that teams in Labrador will be able to travel by bus from Labrador City on

down through to Cartwright-L'Anse au Clair and from Cartwright-L'Anse au

Clair back to Goose Bay. It will be a while before the people in my riding have

that opportunity; many years. But, we are hoping that as more and more

transportation can be supplied by the Trans-Labrador Highway that it will free

up more monies for people on the Coast of Labrador to attend more functions.

Madam Speaker, the federal government, some time ago, gave a large sum of

money to bale out an airline. I have to question as to where that money went. I

wonder how many executive members are going to be retiring with large pensions?

They put this money into this airline to help keep it afloat but there has been

a steady increase in the airfares ever since this company got the money.

Madam Speaker, the federal government has always said that all Canadians are

entitled to an equal way of life regardless of where you live in Canada, and

when we see the high cost of transportation into the small and isolated

communities, then I wonder if the federal government is true to their belief and

their sayings, that all Canadians are entitled to an equal opportunity

regardless of where you live in this country.

Madam Speaker, I have heard people talk on tourism and what it means, but we

do not have any road transportation and many times - and I know how important it

is to the big centres to have all these conventions and so on where people fly

in, but the part that certainly sets the people back is on the North Coast. Even

in the political arena, I would say that when there is a convention held,

regardless of what party it is, that most members from Central Newfoundland, and

other ridings, can jump aboard a car with three or four people, but those who

live in Labrador or far away, have to fly and try to cover the cost of ten and

twelve executive members to get to a convention, which holds back the number of

people we can bring into these conventions as well.

So, Madam Speaker, these are just some of the examples where the high cost of

air transportation holds back my riding. Certainly, where it costs almost $2,000

to fly, in our own Province, from St. John's to Nain; when you can turn around

and book a ticket for your wife and your two children to fly to England for

probably $3,000 or $4,000, one would only have to wonder as to where all this

money for the airlines is going.

Madam Speaker, these are my points of view. These are issues as raised to me

by the people in my riding. I know that they are certainly different than a lot

of other members, but, nevertheless, it is important to us. Again, I want to

thank the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace for bringing the resolution

forward. I look forward to it and again, to the member for bringing forward such

an important resolution. I thank him for that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. FITZGERALD: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

I stand today to say a few words on the private member's resolution as put

forward by the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, and I say it is a good

resolution. I say it is a good private member's resolution and it affects most

people or everybody, I guess, in this Province because we all have occasion to

have either ourselves or our families travelling into the Province or outside

the Province by air transport.

Madam Speaker, as everybody knows, there are only two ways to visit the

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador, the Island portion of the Province, and

that is why you hear both; because, when you see the astronomical fees that are

being charged by the different organization and, I suppose, the different fees

that have been put in place by the airport authorities and by some of the travel

agents, it certainly must be detrimental to the number of people who are going

to plan vacations to come here and visit this Province.

My wife had an occasion to buy an airline ticket just a couple of weeks ago,

to travel to see our daughter up in Fort McMurray. I have a copy of her airplane

ticket, just to show an example of what it costs and all the different charges

that are being brought forward now in order to travel by air transport out of

this Province, by airplane. I would just like to show you, Madam Speaker, what

the breakdown of that particular fare was. The cost of the airline ticket was

$1,057. The costs for Nav Canada for fuel and for insurance was an additional

$56.20 added to the price of that particular ticket. Coupled with that was an

HST charge of $176.61. Then there is another cost of airport improvement, which

costs $17. Add to that the Canadian security fee of $22.43, Madam Speaker, and

the total cost of the airline ticket was $1,396.02. That is in excess of $340 in

taxes and fees stuck on to a $1,000 ticket, I say to people opposite. That is

certainly not the way that it should be. There are too many people today

reaching out their hand in order to collect and make money off travellers and

other people who have no other alternative when they are travelling but to use a

certain mode of transportation.

When I saw this resolution being put forward by my friend, the Member for

Carbonear-Harbour Grace, I called one of the travel agents in the Province

because I had seen a poster put on the travel agent's desk when I went with my

wife to pick up her ticket. I saw this poster put there. They put it forward in

order to create awareness of what the extra costs and charges that were

implemented on the airline tickets would be. It was titled: More about ticket

fees. It stated, here is why the final cost of your airline ticket can be over

three times more than the airlines advertised price.

Most times when you see an airline advertising a price to somewhere, it is

usually shown as a one-way ticket. For example, it is not uncommon to see an

airline advertisement which says: ticket from St. John's to Toronto, and they

usually advertise the airline's one-way fare, $249. If you or me, Madam

Speaker, were travelling to Toronto, hopefully we plan on returning, so you can

add another $249 on for the return fare.

Let's look at what is added on top of that, Madam Speaker. There is a Nav

Canada surcharge on a return ticket from St. John's to Toronto, of another

$20. There is a fuel surcharge that is added on top of your ticket, for another

$30. There is an insurance surcharge that is added to your ticket, your one-way

ticket, or your return ticket from Newfoundland to Toronto, for another $6. Also

included in the price of that ticket, I say to you, Madam Speaker, is an Airport

Improvement Fee of another $20. Then there is the Canadian security fee which is

the one that, I guess, we are all upset about because we all feel that is a tax

grab and it is not something that should cost $22.43; or, if it is put there for

a price, then there should be a time frame on it when that particular security

fee will be taken off. Just let me continue: a Canadian security fee of $22.43.

Then there is the HST and GST: $96.31. Then there is the travel agent's fee,

which costs approximately another $50. So this price, this one-way ticket that

was advertised for $249, if you turn it into a return ticket, Madam Speaker, you

are up to $498 which we understand, if you are going to go there is nobody going

to bring you back for free - but, look what the final cost to the customer is.

Look what the final cost to the traveller is: $742.74.

Madam Speaker, those are the kinds of things that people are upset about when

they go and ask for the price of something. When somebody asks you for a price,

they would like to know what they are paying for and they would like to be able

to get value for what they are paying out.

I say to people opposite, while the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace and

other members on the other side of the House got up to talk about how unfair

those extra charges were, while they got up and talked about the unfairness of

the Canadian security fee and the Airport Improvement Fee, there is one thing

they did not talk about, Madam Speaker. There is one thing they did not talk

about. While they condemned their cousins in Ottawa for bringing forward those

fees, I did not hear one of them - I did not hear one of them - talk about what

their own family is charging. I did not hear one of them talk about the HST that

is put on top of those tickets and on top of those very same fees that we are so

upset about.

I did not hear the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace, or the Member for

Torngat Mountains, or the minister representing the Gander district - I didn't

hear her talk about the unfairness of giving the consumer and the traveller a

double whammy by going out and saying: We are mad at our cousins, our cousins

should not be adding on this Canadian security fee - but I did not hear one of

them talk about what their own government was doing by going and sticking

another fee, another 15 per cent, on top of the fees that are already charged.

Madam Speaker, that is what is shameful about this. If you are going to tell

the story, then I suggest you tell the whole story. If you are going to start

cleaning house, then you start at home. You start with doing away with the

things that you are in control of yourself.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) federal cousins.

MR. FITZGERALD: Your federal cousins, that is right. Your federal cousins

up in Ottawa have implemented a fee and your own family, who sit in the benches

with you here, have come forward and stuck on another 15 per cent on top of

those fees, and you hear members saying how wrong it is, how unfair it is, that

we are having to pay this tax. Well, how about the taxes that you can take off

yourself? How about the 15 per cent that you have added on to those fees? That

is also wrong, I say to you, Madam Speaker.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: What is the minister saying?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. FITZGERALD: I am talking about the 15 per cent GST that you people

stuck on to these services yourselves. There are only three provinces, I say to

you, Madam Speaker, that charge those fees, and they are: Newfoundland, Nova

Scotia, and Prince Edward Island.

A couple of days ago, we saw the federal Finance Minister come here to

Newfoundland. There is a big picture in the paper of the federal Finance

Minister, the person who is in charge of finances for the Dominion of Canada,

the person who is in charge and collects this money that we call the Canadian

security tax. He came here for a rally, a big rally out in Carbonear or Bay

Roberts.

AN HON. MEMBER: Even on stage with him.

MR. FITZGERALD: I saw a picture of the stage and the members who were

there. Here it is, Madam Speaker. I count five of the present sitting members

over there, and the Premier, on stage with the federal Finance Minister, the

person who is responsible for implementing this particular fee. I would like to

ask them -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: I would like to ask them: How many of those members, when

they had the opportunity, brought this situation up to the Finance Minister and

talked about the hardships -

MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!

I remind the hon. member that his time is up.

MR. FITZGERALD: By leave, Madam Speaker.

MADAM SPEAKER: Does the hon. the member have leave?

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MADAM SPEAKER: No leave granted.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MADAM SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Carbonear-Harbour Grace.

I remind the hon. member that if he speaks now he will conclude the debate.

MR. SWEENEY: Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, I am delighted to stand here this afternoon to conclude the

debate, to have the full support of everybody in the House. We have heard both

parties, the opposition parties, speak. It is refreshing to hear my colleague

from Bonavista South, keeping track of our political federal by-election, but we

did not have any trouble in Bay Roberts, I say to the hon. member, a little

while age, to find somebody to introduce Mr. Martin.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SWEENEY: It was very clear that we did not have any problem, and it

is nice to know that we do have some federal cousins left in Ottawa. As a matter

of fact, quite a few of them.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh!

MR. SWEENEY: I would like to respond to the hon. Member for Kilbride as

well. From what I hear, I think I had more people at my executive meeting for

election of officers a couple of weeks ago than what tickets have sold tonight.

AN HON. MEMBER: They did not sell tickets, they gave them away.

MR. SWEENEY: They gave them away, the hon. member said.

Anyway, Madam Speaker, this is a very important motion. We have heard from my

colleagues from Labrador and it is worthy to note the frustrations they share

and their people share. But, when you stop and look at this, this motion is so

important to the very fabric of Newfoundland and Labrador. Air travel in

Newfoundland and Labrador is not a luxury. Air travel is a way of life; it is a

necessity. Every time we have to move we have to travel by air in most cases to

get off this Island or to go from one part of the Island in an expeditious

manner. Further compounded, my colleagues from Labrador endure a much greater

impediment, especially during the winter months. Travel is restricted by air.

So, I empathize with my hon. colleagues from Labrador.

Madam Speaker, I would like to clarify one point that the hon. member said,

that prior to our Liberal cousins and us coming to office, the retail sale tax

was 19 per cent; or 19.5 per cent, in those figures. Now it is back to 15 per

cent. So there has been a reduction.

Madam Speaker, the hon. Minister of Finance met a short while ago with the

hon. Paul Martin and he said that the security tax should not be a tax grab and

he will review it at a future date. What I am asking today is that the urgency

of this motion be brought forward through the House, through our air access and

military affairs committee to bring forward this point, that maybe the tax

should be reviewed sooner than later. Review it as quickly as possible because I

feel that when the tax was implemented, the tax was implemented based on the

figures of November 2001, shortly after the September crisis. I feel that

confidence in air travel has resumed and peak levels of travel now are

increasing. It is obvious, if you go to an airport, as the hon. Member for Cape

St Francis said, the number of people travelling - you see them travelling and

therefore consumer confidence has gone up. Maybe the tax, if there has to be a

tax - I am saying if the cost is so great that the federal government cannot

afford it, which I suspect they can, but if there has to be tax, maybe it should

be an ad valorem tax; a tax based upon the cost of a ticket.

Madam Speaker, I just want to conclude by thanking all the hon. members of

this House today for being supportive of this motion. It is the second motion I

have had this year. The first one, I have to admit, they were not so friendly

with and they did not endorse it; my motion on research and development. But,

today I want to thank all hon. members for endorsing this motion.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Snow): All those in favour of the resolution, aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

MR. SPEAKER: All those against, nay'. Carried.

On motion, resolution carried.

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

MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, in view of the unanimity for this particular bill,

we have decided not to debate it any further and give hon. members an

opportunity to attend to other committee meetings, and we thank them for their

support.

Mr. Speaker, an announcement with respect to another Estimates Committee

meeting tomorrow. Tomorrow morning the Resource Committee will meet at 9:00 a.m.

in the House to review the Estimates of the Department of Industry, Trade and

Rural Development. This is a change, as the meeting was previously scheduled for

May 13. So, the meeting is for tomorrow.

MR. SPEAKER: This House now stands adjourned until tomorrow, Thursday, at

1:30 p.m.