VOL. 2 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 1983 NO. 24

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1209 JV- 1 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): Order, please! MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS PREMIER PECKFORD : Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, this morning the President of the NTA, Mr. Noseworthy, wrote me a letter,which I think has been made public in a Press Conference that the Newfoundland Teachers' Association had this morning and I guess all han. members are aware of that letter. It says~Dear Mr.

Premier: I understand you stated to the news media ~esterday that our Association is seeking a contract containing a wage restraint programme of only nineteen months and other issues which will cost your government tens of millions of dollars. You know this is not so. Let me clarify. There is no question of the fact that twenty-four months of restraint without provisos will be in our new Collective Agreement when it is signed. 11 Of course, that is the first time in writing that the NTA has recognized that and has acknowledged it and indicated that they are willing to go along with it.

IIIn relation to other items such as length of day,preparation time, class size, we can provide language in the final version of the agreement that will guarantee there will be no costs related to these provisions, either in capital expenditures for classroom space or in additional allocations of teacher salary units. The language can also guarantee that there need not be any reduction in current school programmes nor in the ability of the School Boards to manage the system. 2645

April 20, 1983 Tape No . 1209 JV - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: III trust that our current efforts to reach an agreement with the assistance of a mediator will continue and hopefully a way will be found to forge an agreement and end the current dispute before any further damage is caused the education of the Province's youth. Sincerely yours." This afternoon I replied to Mr . Noseworthy 's letter . "Dear Mr .

Noseworthy : This is to acknowledge receipt of yo ur let te r of April 20th in which you accept Government 's two -year Wage Restraint Program unconditionally. ''With respect to the other outstanding issues, I see no meaningful change in you r position . And I think the important thing is meaningful change. As we have stated many times in the past, 2646

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1210 MJ - 1 PRE~UER PECKFORD: ''Government is not prepared to accept commitments on workload and class size that it cannot reasonably meet.

To recognize as desirable goals"­ in an agreement~items which both sides agree Government canna~ reasonably implement would be morally dishonest! 1 There is no point for us to p•1t goals, especially in a contract. if thev cannot be met because obviously you have to move towards meeting them. 11 specifically,your letter attaches so many conditions to certain of your demands" - all the conditions of no cost here, no cost there, no cost somewhere else-" as to render them meaningless in the context of a collective agreement!' I mean, the provisions become meaningless with all those provisos on them.

"Obviously,then, the arguements you make lead to the conclusion that such matters should continue to be handled at the local level, as provided for in the existing contract'~to be handled between the principal and the staff and the superintendent as is being done now. "The Deputy Minister of Labour and Manpower advised us yesterday that grounds did not exist for a resumption of negotiations. Specifically, he advised us that your Association has no flexibility on the substitute teacher issue.

I note that there is no reference to this issue in your letter." " I suggest that if your Association has significant changes in all outstanding issues to put forward, please contact the Deputy Minister of Labour and Manpower so that he might evaluate these and again assess whether or not any basis exists for a resumption in negotiations." So, what we are really saying, Mr. Speaker, is tha.t we believe that if now rather than 'iust do it through letters like 1 that if the NTA has changed on some of its 2647

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1210 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: positions,which on the wage restraint programme it seems that they have,and are willing to change on other items they should meet with the mediator, whose . I mediation had been suspended, so that he has an opportunity to objectively go through that and then a medlator can come back and talk to government then we can see whether in f~~~ there has been significant changes in positions to allow for meaningful negotiations to resume. MR. T. LUSH: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr.

Speaker, I am again disappointed that there seems to be no resolution to this teacher contract dispute. It seems to be sheer madness, Mr. Speaker, by this government that they have not resolved this dispute. It seems to me the NTA's response this morning to the Premier was a most reasonable response and they have again made is crystal clear that they have agreed to accept the twenty-four month restraint programme 1 which they have said 2648

'· April 20, 1983 Tape 1211 PK - 1 MR. LUSH: ti::.;e and time again, and the Premier refuses time and time again to recognize this, to accept the reality of this situation,that the N.T.A. have indeed acceptec it. Today they do it formally, they do it by letter, they say that they have accepted this position with no strings attached. Now, Mr. Speaker, what more does the government want? What more do they want?

The N.T.A. have said that the other items,relating to class size and length of day and preparation time, they said they could phrase these in a way that would be of no cost to the government, no cost at all, Mr. Speaker. So why is it that the government is holding up this contract? Why is it that they are keeping our students out of school, depriving them of their education going on two weeks now, Mr. Speaker, for one item , and that is the substitute teachers. And, Mr.

Speaker, the government understands very well that this was a mat£er of contract stripping 0 This was agreed to, and you are not going to get any union in the Western world that would agree to contract stripping. It is a matter of principle. The N.T.A. had been very reasonable and now the government should follow that reasonable stand and they too should give a little. The N.T.A. have given. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LUSH: This government have not given a bit, have not given one bit.

The N.T.A. have demonstrated that they understand the negotiation and they told the government about their willingness to accept the twenty- four month restraint programme. Now why does not the government in man-fashion, why do they not in man-fashion acknowledge the fact that they are guilty of contract stripping and get the deal signed today so that our kids can get in school tomorrow, Mr. Speaker? 2649

April 20, 1983 SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Russell} : MR. MORGAN: Tape 1211 PK - 2 Hear, hear! The hon. Minister of Fisheries. Mr. Speaker, today being the first day of the lobster season in the Province I have a statement to make in connection with the lobster fishery. Mr.

Speaker, despite the recent meetings that I held with the com~c~ies involved in buying lobsters in this Province, and in .~recent meeting involving the companies, the Fishermen's Union and the Fishing Industry Advisory Board, the companies have refused to negotiate with the Fishermen's Union to establish prices to be paid to Newfoundland lobster fishermen this year.

Because of this and, because I am determined to see that the fishermen get a fair price for their lobsters this year, I will be issuing a statement to all of the companies and buyers who, over the next couple of days, the next twenty-four hours or so, will be issued the necessary licences from the Provincial Department of Fisheries to enable them to buy lobsters in this Province.

The buyers licences will be issued to all of these 108 buyers who bought lobsters in Newfoundland last year 1in 1982,and the statement to be attached to the licences will clearly indicate the position of the Department of Fisheries with regards to the buying of lobsters and the prices to be paid to fishermen. That position is:

(1) That the companies and buyers will have to practice consistent buying practices; and (2}, It is the 2650

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1212 SD - 1 MR. MORGAN: opinion of this minister andthe Department of Fisheries that fishermen should receive a price for their lobsters that is at least 70 per cent of the Boston,U.S.A. Canadian dollar wholesale price. This price, Mr. Speaker. has been established based on five years of research on lobster prices carried out by the Fishing Industry Advisory Board. This Canadian dollar wholesale price for lobsters in the Boston market indeed does fluctuate throughout the season.

However, weekly Boston Canadian dollar wholesale prices should be and, in my view, must be reflected in the prices paid to our fishermen. For example, at the present time in the Boston market, the Canadian dollar wholesale price for lobster is $4.30 per pound, Canadian. Thus, our lobster fishermen should receive 70 per cent of this price for their lobsters in this case equalling $3.00 per pound. And again, for example, Mr.

Speaker, if the Boston Canadian dollar wholesale price drops, fluctuates and drops, ·' for example, from the present $4.30 per pound to $3.30 per pound, our lobster fishermen again should receive 70 per cent of that price equalling $2.30 per pound. Some of the companies who will be issued licences to buy lobsters in this Province are presently buying lobsters in Nova Scotia. At the present time, as of today, these companies are paying Nova Scotian lobster fishermen $3.50 per pound, as of today. Mr.

Speaker, in connection with this and the position I have taken to ensure our fishermen receive a fair price for their lobsters, I have establish .ed a daily lobster price monitoring system. This monitoring system will cover prices · in the wholesale 2651

April 20, 1983 Tape No . 1212 so - 2 MR. MORGAN: OS market, in Boston in particular . It will pay the prices paid to the Nova Scotian fishermen on a daily basis and it will cov er the prices paid to Newfoundland £ishermen by the various companies, again, on a daily basis. ~ne compan~es w~ll be issuea tne necessary licences from this department within thP ~~xt twenty -four hours . Mr. Speaker, it is my intention to work in close co~operation with the Fishermen's Onion, the fishermen through their union, on this matter. Again I want to say I will not hesitate to review the situation at any time throughout the season 2652

.J April 20 ., 1983 Tape No. 1213 NM- 1 MR. MORGAN: if it is felt that the wishes of ·i the government and the Department of Fisheries are not being complied with. And again r want to reiterate what we are saying is · that the prices in the market place, that the buyers get for the lobsters they buy frOl•L fisherruei1, should automatically reflect back to the fishermen in tne price that they receive from these buyers. In other words the market dictates the price paid to fishermen. That is what we are saying.

And whenever the price in Canadian dollars in the Boston market where practically all of our lobsters are sold, that when these prices are firmly established each and every day, from three different sources we use in the monitoring process, not just the Boston blue sheet, but three different separate sources. We establish these prices on a weekly bas .is and we say to the buyers in Newfoundland, "You must pay the Newfoundland fishermen 70 per cent of the price you are getting on the wholesale market in the USA." We think it is fair to the companies and fair to the fishermen. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I am responding .... .. ... ·- - ·-- - to the ministerial statement because my colleague, our spokesman on fisheries, is travelling on some very important business and r am sure if he were here that he would say the same things that I am going to say. And I am also speaking for my colleague by the way, the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder) who represents the district where the lobster fishery is probably the largest in the whole Province. we concur with the action taken by the hon. gentleman.

It is not very often we get an opportunity to agree with the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), this is one of those rare occasions. The lobster prices,I 2653

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1213 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: suppose is a topic that has been bandied about this House now for a good many years. It has been talked about more I suppose than anything else in this House. I do not understand, the minister did not make it clear, why it was 70 per cent of the Boston prices. Why was it not 60? Or why was it not 80 or 90 per cent? Perhaps the han. gentleman, when he gets an opportunity can clarify that. That is our position, Mr. Speaker, we concur with the action of the minister. It appears to be drastic action. It is probably unprecedented.

I would hope that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Morgan), the Department of Fisheries ·, will have the courage to follow through. I _hope that they will cancel licences immediately when the discover that buyers are not paying the required price laid down under the conditiorsof the licence, that there be no hanky-panky, no beating around the bush, it will just be if you are not paying the price your licence is cancelled, that is it. And another point I would like to make before I take my seat, Mr.

Speaker, is that I believe in the long-term that we are going to have to look at a better system for purchasing and marketing lobsters. We have talked about marketing of other species of the sea on a number of occasions in this House. we contend on this side that the terms of reference of the 2654

April 20,1983 Tape No. 1214 ah-1 MR. NEARY: Canadian Saltfish Corporation should be expanded to include the marketing of all the products of the sea. Perhaps the minister might give some consideration to that. And then there is the matter of holding the lobsters for the time when the fishermen can get a better price. That is something worth looking into to, Mr. Speaker.

But we welcome this Ministerial Statement and we welcome the fact that the lobster fishermen will get a better price for their lobsters this season,and we hope that the hon. gentleman will follow through and take drastic action in the event that some of the buyers do not follow the rules that are laid down by his department. MR.SPEAKER (Russell): MR. LUSH: ORAL QUESTIONS The hon. member for Terra Nova. Mr. ~peaker, I have a question for the Premier. Mr. Speaker, would the Premier not agree that the negotiating process is one of give and take? The NTA have certainly indicated their willingness to give.

They have accepted in no uncertain terms the government's condition of accepting the twenty-four month restraint programme. The NTA have emphatically and clearly demonstrated their intention to do this. They have indicated that the matters of preparation time, class size, these matters 1will not cost any money and they say they are prepared in the negotiations to come forward with that kind of language. Now, Mr. Speaker, it seems as though the big matter that the government will not accede to is the substitute teachers. I want the Premier to listen very carefully.

He obviously knows that this is a matter of high principle with the NTA. This was a ma~that was agreed to and it seems as though the Premier is trying to push the NTA right to the limit, to cave in on a matter that is of very great 2655

April 20,1983 Tape No. 1214 ah-2 MR.LUSH: importance to a union . Now, Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of give and take. The NTA have given and would the Premier not agree to give in on this very insignificant matter of substitute teachers, Mr . Speaker? MR .SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Premier . PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we are not going to negotiate across the floor of the House and neither do we want to negotiate in public in an exchange of letters.

At the end of my statement a few minutes ago I indicated that it is the government's feeling that,given the letter back from the NTA this mor ning and our response ,and whilst we are disappointed that they never even mentioned the substitute teachers situation,which was a critical element for them,it would seem - and the question of the twenty - four month wage restraint, I mean, the governm .ent ' s position is we had to be fair and equal to all 2656

.l: April 20, 1983 Tape 1215 EC - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: the people who receive funds or salaries from the government. I mean, it is only today that we have in writing from the NTA the acknowledge­ ment that that twenty-four month wage restraint programme will be accepted by that association. This is seven or eight days after the strike began. So, you know, it has been a very difficult course that both of us have been on over the last week or so. Without the acceptance of that as at .given, we had all kinds of problems.

So I think the approach now to take, rather than exchanges of letters which I or the Minister of Education (Ms Verge) or the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) or the acting President of Treasury Board or somebody else would send to the President or somebody else in the Newfoundland Teachers' Association, that the proper course now to follow - I mean, we had a mediation process in place, it did not work; there was a lot of hope built up that it would work to me the way to proceed now would be for the NTA to contact the Deputy Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr.

Blanchard), sit down, go through that letter, go through all the points, that of the substitute teachers and on some of the other points that are not in that letter that the NTA have mentioned during the mediation process, which they had mentioned were very important and which are not there. So, you know, it is not just that letter. So to me the way to proceed now is for the Newfoundland Teachers' Association people to contact Mr. Blanchard, sit down and have a meeting and then Mr.

Blanchard can sit down at a meeting with the government side and then we can see whether in fact there is a meeting of minds or enough common ground for both sides to get together eyeball to eyeball and settle 2657

April 20, 1983 Tape 1215 EC - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: the dispute. That is the way we would like to see it go from here rather than getting back and forth into class size or preparation time or lunch period or length of day,and whether it should be in or not in the contract, the kinds of wording that they are talking about.

So, you know, I think that is the next approach now for the NTA to take, because I do not think we can negotiate this contract or any contract with any group through an exchange of letters like this that ' are made public or across the floor of this House even though I appreciate the question from the Education critic for the Opposition. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr.

Speaker, I do not know why the Premier insists on saying that this is the first acknowledgement ~y the NT~ of accepting this twenty-four month requirement, the restraint programme. In a press release this morning - and I happen to have a copy of the press release given by the President of the NTA - at one point he makes that statement that they will be accepting this wage restraint programme. And he says, 'This, of course, is nothing new. We have told Mr.

Peckford this at the bargaining table as far back as January through the public media and most recently through the Deputy Minister of Labour.' So the President says 2658

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1216 SD - 1 MR. LUSH: that he let the government and the Premier know this back in January. So, Mr. Speaker, you know, let us not carry on with this. I mean, why carry on with this? The N.T.A. ha iTE: ac:cepted it, w1ay ~lave said so again today very clearly. Another question, Mr. Speaker, regarding the mediation process. The President of the NTA today, again in that public statement, said that he was surprised by the Premier's announcement yesterday to the effect that the process of mediation had failed to bring about a final agreement in the dispute.

And he says, 'The provincial government ended those mediation efforts with the announcement that talks had broken down'. It says, 'The announcement came as a surprise to the NTA'. Now, Mr. Speaker, this again seems to be a very questionable process of carrying on negotiations when the one side, the major side, the people who are concerned, , do not know anything about it. Their understanding was that the mediator was back here talking to the government team and the next thing they knew was the Premier made this statement in the House. Can the Premier comment on that set of circumstances? MR.

SPEAKER lRussell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, let me just deal with first things first and that concerns Mr. Noseworthy's · statement again this morning about he had always acceptedthe twenty-four month wage restraint programme. I mean, this is one of the problems that we are only having with the NTA. We have not had it with all the other union groups. MR. NEARY: Creating new problems. PREMIER PECKFORD: Wait until I explain the problem so that you will know what I am talking about then you will know whether it is the same or different 2659

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1216 SD - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: than another one. That is how you bargain, how the bargaining process works 1 and both sides put positions on the table, and it is that position which is the position of that group. Now there is a lot of ~a~K tna~ goes on in oe~ween ~hat, verbal jostling back and forth on differp,nr issues.

But the final written formal position of the NTA when negotiations broke off between the government and the NTA was the position of a nineteen month wage restraint programme 1 and that they would only go to the twenty-four month 1 that had already been announced last Fall by the government and had been accepted by 10,000 other workers 1 on condition that they go some other things in the agreement. We kept saying that it was a non-negotiable item.

The other items were negotiable, this was non-negotiable because it was public policy~ We have the nurses coming up for new negotiations soon, other groups coming up and we have to treat them in exactly the same way as we treated the teachers otherwise what is the point of dealing with the government at all if they are going to do one thing for one group and something else for another? Now, in that January 26 meeting, the Minister of Education (Ms·. Verge)., myself and others 1 when this had been alleged in the press · by Mr. Noseworthy, we checked with our negotiato~s and at one point 2660

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1217 MJ - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD : in the meeting of January 26 one of the members of the negotiating team mentioned this business of the twenty- four months and that they might be willing to accept it,but it was never advanced as a position from the Newfoundland Teachers' Assocation. No•,r t,.re got to understand that. You cannot go picking up loose comments. I mean, in the same way I can pick up on a comment made by one of our negotiators and release it to the public to show our reasonableness and flexibility on a given issue but that is not the point.

The whole nature and process of negotiations is what your position is is put on the table. You talk away about the issues and then you jostle and then you either amend your proposal or you do not amend it. You are looking for openings, you are looking for flexibility. So,I rnean,that is neither here nor there, that does not deserve any further comment. The long and short of it is that until this morning we have not had a formal position from the NTA saying that they accepted the twenty-four month wage restraint programme.

It is no good to into verbal discussions that went on between the two sides in the negotiating process. There is a position and only one position; that is the position submitted in writing on the table by that given party. That is all, thatis the only position. You cannot have positions based upon a verbal conversation between one individual of one party to one individual of another party. That does not work. That is not the way the negotiating process works. It '·mrks on a position that \.,as put forward andthat was the position that was put forward, s~ that is all I can really say on that.

Now, as it relates to yesterday afternoon, the mediator carne to my office to meet with me and the committee and presented the statement that I tabled in the House indicating that he had done up a statement, that he had it sent over from his office,and he did not see that there 2661

April 20, 1983 Tape No . 1217 MJ - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD : were sufficient grounds for negotiations to begin,and that really the mediation process might have been a bit too early or whatever, there did not seem to be enough flexibility and that he was suggesting that to me ana that he was then leaving me and going to contact the NTA and to let them kno w the same thing. So then we immediately prepared our statement and submitted it to the House before 6:00 P.M. along with the statement that the mediator had given to the press some time before that. So, I mean,I do not know what Mr. Noseworthy is talking about.

I can only, for my part, know that the media .tor came and saN us , told us that there was no grounds for negotiation, that the mediation should be suspended for the time being , and t.'lat he \>Tas issuing a statement that he had done up to the press, and he gave me copy. So we went and did our bit and piece and 2662

April 20, 1983 Tape 1218 PK - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: present~: it to the House before it closed, after the mediator had given it to the press. And,as I understood it, he left then and called and informed the other side of the same information. That is all I know about it. Itwa5 -fair, decent, honest, straight and, you know, any.allegatiens to the contrary, are completely unknown to me. I was just carrying out my functionsas I saw them to the Legislature in releasing our position,after the mediator had contacted the press, so that the House would be informed and the people of the Province would be informed on it. MR.

SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, the hon. Premier in response to one of my questions made the point that one could not carry on negotiations through letters, and I agree~ Yet in the meantime the Premier certainly indicates or points out the government's position. His letter to Mr.

Noseworthy points out that he acknowledges the N.T.A's acceptance of the two year wage restraint programme, but then goes on to say that,with the other outstanding issues, they see no way that the government can negotiate with these~ in other words they said the N.T.A. has not changed their position. Then he goes on to say you have not mentioned the substitute teacher issue. So obviously the fact that the Premier has raised this shows that they ·, are very firm on this matter.

And,as I say again, this is a matter of principle with the N.T.A. 1 and it is a matter of hitting the organization where it hurts most on this matter of high principle, Mr. Speaker. And,as I said earlier,now this oould concern an insignificant matter because 1 when the announcement was made in the first place that they were reducing the pay of the substitute teachers, I think , the reason given was to cut down costs and to · 2663

April 20, 1983 Tape 1218 PK - 2 MR. LUSH: save $2 million for Grade XII or whatever other educational purposes they needed the money. Now , Mr. Speaker, we may as well face the fact"' 1l.lie ':l vv~.L•u1u::ut have l:Jld.<. mon~y . The strike has been going on now for - what? AN BON . MEMBER: MR . LUSH: sevE~n rtays. Seven days. They have that money . As a matter of fact they saved upwards to $9 million and the substitute pay was only going to be $2 million. MR. MARSHALL: MR. SPEAKER '(Russell) : President of the Council. MR. MARSHALL: a speech; 2664 On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Order, please! A point of order, the hon. The hon. gentleman is making

~pril 20, 1983 Tape No. 1219 NM- 1 MR. MARSHALL: it is not a very good speech but it is still a speech. Standing Order 31 (c) "In putting any oral questions, no argument or opinion is to Be offered nor any facts stated except so far as many be necessary to explain the same". There is ample authority ..u. Beauchesne, Mr. Speaker, with respect to making speeches. I think the han. gentleman is out of order, Re is on a supplementary question, he should get to his question if in fact he has one. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. The han.

Leader of the Opposition,to that point of order. MR. NEARY: We all know the rules of the House, Mr. Speaker. We gave the Premier over there an opportunity when he was answering the question to be long­ winded. We did not object because this is a very serious and crucial matter; we would like to see it resolved. And my colleague was making some valid points and I thought, because of the serious n~ture of this topic, Mr. Speaker, that the House would agree to allow a little latitude so that the points could be made adequately. We know what the rules are. We do not have to be reminded by the hon. gentleman.

The han. gentleman, when the government is getting in trouble, ~ets up on points of order and tries to bail them out. In this particular instance, the han. gentleman should have let it go. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, it is correct,of course 1 that a supplementary question should not need any

preamble whatsoever. The Chair has been fairly lenient with the han. member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush), and with the han. Premier in his answers. But for all intents and purposes the question should be brief and the answer should be brief. 2665

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1219 NM - 2 MR. LUSR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The question then is in view of t~e fact that the goals annot.mced for reducing funds for substitute teachers have now been more than reached, that the government now have $9 million . -they have $7 million more than they should have had, they now have $7 million more .-in view of this and in view of the fact that this is a very high principle with the NTA, would the government not negotiate, Mr. Speaker, this substitute teacher clause? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr.

Speaker, when I answered earlier I indicated to the hon. member that I cannot here in this House of Assembly negotiate a component of a collective agreement between the Government of Newfoundland and the Newfoundili.and Teachers' Association. That is imposs .ible. I cannot go doing that, t'hat is not the way parties negotiate. The member for Terra Nova (Mr. Lush) knows the difference of that. He knows I cannot get up here, as Premier and head of the government, and start talking about what we are prepared to do on this component and not prepared to do on that component.

That is not the way negotiations occur and the hen. the member for Terra Nova knows the difference of. it. We cannot do it that way. You know, talking about money and so on, I rnean,the situation is not a question of money this year~ We are talking about an educ~tional system which is costing a lot of rrcney and will cost a lot of rroney over the next nurrber .. of years- in order to continue to assist in paying for sorre of the new programmes we brought in, as much as we did not want to get involved in any elements in Education, we were forced to. We have 2666

April 20,1983 Tape No. 1220 ah-1 PREHIER PECKFORD: had to close down hospitals . North West River is being phased out, Markland is gone, there are other hospitals that are going to have to be phased out or closed down or whatever it is over the next few years. All segments of government departments are being affected in order to manage. You know, we have a larger responsibility. It is not a question of whether we have saved enough rroney now, it is a question of trying to budget properly over the next number of years.

This is not a one year deal so that we have the money this year and we worry about next year next year. I mean,that is not the way a government with any credence or credibility is going to operate its - --~- - finances and its planning. So that in my view is not a very fair question to ask because we are talking about trying to save money to improve and continue educational programmes this year, next year, the year after and so on. So, I mean, that is where that is.

But as for the substantive nature of the han. member's question, will the government now do this or do that with a given component that is an outstanding issue between the two sides, that is for the negotiation process. And we are saying in our letter to the Newfoundland Teachers' Association, the process is there, Mr. Blanchard is available,and if you have other positions that you want to put on various items let us be cautious, let us go through this independent mediator that both sides trust and then allow that mediator to suggest to both sides whether in fact we can get back to the table.

And I think if that started again now, if the NTA sees that as still a legitimate and honest process,then I think that is the way for us to proceed from here rather than exchanging 2667

April 20,1983 Tape No. 1220 ah-2 PREMIER PECKFORD: letters back and forth on different things. Because as I said to the han. member, and I do not want to say this, you know, the whole process forces you into indicating things to protect your own creditibility. I mean,the NTA yesterday and the day before through the mediation process put a number of items on the table that hithertofore - or not on the table, I should not say that, mentioned to the mediator certain items which u~ until then had not been mentioned as problems through the last three or four months :'of negoti~tions.

Now I am either telling the truth or I am not telling the truth,but all I am trying to do is say to you what is in this letter is what is in that letter. But there are other items that are also of crucial concern to the New foundland Teachers' -. ~ - ~ -- - -· - Association. So the best way to handle it is not through me saying something and Mr. Noseworth saying something,even though I appreciate that the Opposition has a role to ask the questions. But we have to get back to some kind of a process which is away from exchanging letters and trying to protect one another's own position in the eyes of the public. MR.

LUSH: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER(Russell) : The rnn. the rrerrber for Terra Nova. Mr.LUSH .: Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the only way to solve this is not through writing letters back and forth. ~he Premier should not be engaging in those games even if the NI'A want to do it. The way to get this dispute solved is get back to the bargaining table and not to be pulling the rug £rom out under the mediation process as it looks lika the government did . It looks like it was not the NTA that pulled the rug from under the mediation process, 2668

April 20, 1983 Tape 1221 EC - 1 MR. LUSH: the government did, and it looks like it was not the NTA who pulled the plug in the mediation process. The question, Mr. Speaker you know, this letter seems awfully stupid"- the question is where do we go from here? The Premier ends up his letter by saying, "I suggest that if your Association has significant changes in all outstanding issues to put forward" - and, Mr. Speaker, they wrote the Premier telling what the issues were and what they were doing, Now, the Premier comes back'again and says, you know, 'if you have significant changes'. They have given their changes.

Also, Mr. Speaker, is this going to be the Premier's move? Is this going to be the move that is going to resolve this or is the Premier going to do something else? Is the Premier trying to bring both sides back and is the Premier going to go down and face these teachers this afternoon? MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: How many questions are there? I do not know how many questions are there. The hon. member has been given an awful lot of latitude in a supplementary question - not an original question but a supplementary.

And that is fine, I do not mind, we will bend the rules for the hon. member so he can ask his question and get his few shots in. That is fine and dandy. MR. LUSH: Where do we go from here? PREMIER PECKFORD: All I can say to the hon. member is is t.hat ~ are suggesting in that letter that perllaps it is time, given what they say in the letter for them to contact the mediator and see whether we have common ground for negotiations to begin. Now, the other thing is - and I want the hon. member to understand this - that the letter does not include all the issues that they have 2669

April 20, 1983 Tape 1221 EC ~ 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: been talking about. But I do not want to be saying that over and over again to somehow provoke the executive of the NTA. I mean, I am serious about it to protect my position here, because I have to protect it now under this kind of interrogation. And that is why we say 'all the issues' because they do not address the substitute teacher thing at all and other issues that they have been, you know, verbally talking about to the mediator which are not in the letter.

So the thing for the NTA to do, so that we get back to some process which is legitimate, is to go back to the mediator and say, 'Okay, as a result of the letter we sent to the Premier this morning, here is where we are on these issues,' then he brings it to us. Then, if there is enough common ground, we sit down and try to negotiate something. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : The hon. the member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ottenheimer).

In view of the fact that the Fire Commissioner has issued a close order on an apartment building, McFadden's apartments in Happy Valley - Goose Bay some several weeks ago,and since there were sixty-six outstanding deficiencies in this apartment building and the fact that at the present time there are still foqr families including, I think, eleven children, still left in this building that is unsafe, has the minister decided to move those families out of this building that, according to the Fire Commissioner, is unsafe? 2670

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1222 SD - 1 MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman is quite correct. On April 6th or 7th, one of those dates, there was an order given for closure with respect to these apartmentaThatwas later modified or amended to a compliance order on the understanding that the owner,who lives outside the Province but has a local manager up there, would agree to put in the improvements required by the Fire Commissioner.

They included a sprinkler system, repairs to exit lights, repairs to the electrical system, cleaning up debris and also to keep a night watchman on duty until those things had been affected. Some work was done and it is our understanding , the understanding of the Fire Commissioner that work has now ceased. The building,therefore 1has been closed for occupancy and I understand there are four families left who have not found alternate accommodation.

The Department of Justice 1through the Fire Commissioner's office,has been in touch with the local Social Services office and they are endeavouring to find alternative accommodation for those four families.I understand the position is being monitored very carefully by the Chief of the Happy Valley - Gosse Bay Fire Brigade acting in his own capacity but also, of course, he and other Fire Chiefs act as assistants to the Fire Commissioner. MR. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER (Russelll: member for Torngat Mountains. Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary, the hon. MR. WARREN: Mr.

Speaker, I think it is - shocking to know that Department of Rural Development officials knew about this several days ago, in fact, did weeks ago, that this dangerous building was still ~eing operated in Happy Valley - Goose Bay 1 but very 2671

April 20, 1983 Tape No . 1222 SD - 2 MR. WARREN: little until th. .e day I got in contact with the Fire Commissioner. And I am glad that the minister and the Fire Commissioner have decided today to take the neces~:;ary action, but it is only now that the minister has been advised that they are trying to move the four families out of this house. I would like to ask the minister another question. Will those familie~ left ~n this dangerous apartment building in Happy Valley, be moved within a matter of hours? That is my question to the minister. MR . SPEAKER (Russel l): The han. Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: A slight correction on the han. gentleman's

preamble. It was not just today; as soon as it came to the attention of the Fire Commissioner, that was around the 6th of April, then action was taken and the compliance order was given, work commenced and it was wben work was discontinued then that the building was ordered to be closed. The Social Services Department is doing, I understand, everytning possible to find alternate accommodation for those four families. 2672

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1223 MJ - 1 MR. G. OTTENHEIMER: I would assume they would find that accommodation in a very brief and reasonable period of time. But obviously it would be impossible to say here in St. John's when they will find it but I know they are making every effort and I have no doubt will find it 1but I could not say at what moment they will find it. MR. G. WARREN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The han. the member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Mr.

Speaker, the Fire Commissioner did not know until I spoke to him today, did not know that work has ceased on the building, The Fire Commissioner advised me toda y that the first word he heard about work ceasing on the building was today. Still and all the officials in the Department of Rural, Agricultural and Northern Development knew that this building was still occupied for several days with no work being carried out to correct the deficiencies.

So I am just asking the minister,now that he does know 1 although he has said that they are looking for alternative accommodations, if the Department of Social Services cannot find alternative accommodations,will those four families be moved out of this apartment today and moved into some other accommodations in Happy Valley - Goose Bay? That is the question to the minister. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MR. OTTENHEIMER: Mr. Speaker, certainly the government departments concerned will do everything possible to find appropriate accommodation for the people.

That is about all I can say. MR. E. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for the Strait of Belle Isle. 2673

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1223 MJ - 2 MR. E. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, we have only a minute or two in Question Period. Perhaps I could ask one brief question of my friend the Minister of Health (Mr. House),whohas had an easv time of it the last little while: EXTRANEOUS NOISE •'=. rtu.o:C::RTS : The tides of revolution are lapping arC'" ... ,_ the base of Your Honour's Chair out there. The line goes from here back to the Holiday Inn. I would like to ask the Minister of Health, Mr. Speaker, if1in the light of the appointment by him and his colleagues of the Royal Commission headed by Mr.

Orsborn -by the way,I think they are three excellent appointments, those three men -if he is prepared to give the House a commitment that the government will not initiate any action to close any hospital in this Province until the Royal Commission report has been received? MR. SPEAKER (Russell): The hon. the Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, the Commission will be reporting in less than a year, I think it is in February, and we have announced the closure of a hospital and we have no plans to - MR. ROBERTS: I was not speaking of the North West River Hospital. 2674

April 20, 1983 Tape 1224 PK - 1 MR. HOUSE: Pardon? MR. ROBERTS: I was not speaking of North West~ That is a fait accompli, that is dead r.o~t;. MR. HOUSE: The mandate that the Commission has is to look at health care costs and to make some recommendations to government, and that has nothing to do at this point in time with the closure of any hospitals. And I might add, Mr. Speaker, we are not going around happily looking for hospitals to close. So I am not going to give any commitment that we would do this or that until the Commission reports.

I am saying simply and plainly that we at this point in time have no intention of closing any hospitals. MR. SPEAKER (Russell): I will permit one more question, The han. member for the Strait of Belle Isle. !-1R. ROBERTS: Just a supplementary growing out of that; I will have some more another day.

So the minister then, just so we are all crystal clear, is not prepared to give a confirmation in behalf of the government of which he is a part ! leaving aside North West River,which is as dead as the administration's political career is, leaving aside North West River, that the government will not initiate any action to close any hospital in this Province between now and the period of eight or nine months from now whenever this Royal Commission does report? That is the administration's position,that all bets are still open, is that it? MR. SPEAKER MR. HOUSE: The han. Minister of Health. Mr.

Speaker, there is nobody saying anything about all beds being open. The han. member was asking about hospitals closing. 2675

April 20, 1983 MR. ROBERTS: MR. HOUSE: be closures of beds, but - MR. ROBERTS: I said all 'bets' open. MR. HOUSE: did not hear it. Tape 1224 PK - 2 Yes, I mean t hospitals. I have no doubt that there will I said 'bets' not 'beds'. Oh, I see, . I am sorry. I Mr . Speaker, as I have mentioned, there is no intention of this administration closing any hospitals at this ?articular point in time. MR. ROBERTS: No intention! 'Goudie' learned of closing North West two days before it closed. MR. HOUSE: North West River Hospital, Mr.

Speaker, had been under study for a number of years and I think it was a foregone conclusicn by most people in the know that it would be closing at some point in time and, of course, this was the year for it. MR. ROBERTS: Buchans and Botwood. MR. HOUSE : And the samewith Placentia, Mr. Speaker, there are studies going on looking at that status of a lot of ti:ese hospitals. I mentioned some time ago that 2676

.Jij April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1225 NM- 1 MR. HOUSE: we were looking at a number of the cottage hospitals with. a view to changing their role for them to give better service to the public 1 but we have no intention, as Ihave said, at this point in time, of closing any hospitals. MR. SPEAKER ( Rus se 11) : The time for the Question Period has expired. ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: MR. SPEAKER: MR. WINDS'OR: The han. Minister of Development. Mr. Speaker, I. would like to table an answ·er to Question No. 54 from the han. member for Bellevue (Mr.

Callan) asking a list of places where properties have been acquired by the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation for the purposes of land banking, giving acreage and so forth. We have some 7,700 acres of land held in the Province at the mement and the details of where they are and how much it cost and how we paid for it are all provided, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Transportation. MR. DAWE: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if we might revert back for a moment to Presenting Reports. MR. SPEAKER: Is it agreed to revert back to Presenting Reports? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Agreed. 2677

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1225 NM - 2 PRESENTING REPORTS' BY STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES: MR. SPEAKER (Russell) : MR. DAWE: The han. Minister of Transportation. As required by the Mineral Act 1976,

section 3 (2), I would like to table mineral licences •~oucu during the twelve months immediately preceeding the 31st . of March,l982. MR. SPEAKER: It being Private Members' Day 1we shall proceed with Hotion Number 3 on the Order Paper, to be moved by the han. Leader of the Opposition. MR. · NEARY: Mr. Speaker, just a few days ago the han. the Premier stood in his place in this han.

House and stated categorically that the development of the five head waters in Labrador, for the purposes of hydro power generation, is not economically feasible, that the cost of developing these rivers would not justify the returns, in other words. I find that information very depressing, Mr. Speaker, because if it is true it means yet another economic escape hatch for Newfoundland and Labrador has been clos ·ed because of the incompetence and delays by this administration in deploying our resources to their best advantage. Incidentally, Mr.

Speaker, I am checking the Premi .er's statement for credibility, because quite frankly I find the statement that he made hard to believe so I am trying to have the facts checked out, to have them verified or otherwise as to their accuracy or inaccuracy and I hope, Mr. Speaker, that the statements are inaccurate. MR. MARSHALL: MR. SPEAKER (AYLWARD): President of the Council. 2678 Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. A point of order, the han.

April 20, 1983 Tape 1226 EC - 1 MR. MARSHALL: We are on Private Members Day today and it is my understanding that what we are discussing is the han. gentleman's resolution related to the offshore, which we all look forward to. I do not know whether the han. gentleman realizes we are on Motion 3 on the Order Paper, which was his motion. He is now talking about the five rivers in Labrador, which is not related to it. I like to assist the han. member at all times and particularly to make him aware of the fact that it is his resolution that is on the Order Paper. That is why he got up.

But he has to be relevant, at least, to his own resolution. I do not know why he brought it in in the first place if he does not know what he brought in, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : To that point of order, the han. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. NEARY: If the han. gentleman would just sit back and relax and listen, he would soon learn, Mr. Speaker, what it is I am driving at. MR. MARSHALL : Are you speaking on the resolution? MR. NEARY: I am speaking on the resolution. I am merely giving a

preamble just to show, Mr. Speaker, how this government have waited and waited and waited in a number of instances,and I am leading up to the offshore, which will be dealt with in due course. So I think I am in order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order. I will allow some

preamble on what the Leader of the Opposition is saying, but we are speaking on the offshore motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary). The han. the Leader of the Opposition. 2679

April 20, 1983 Tape 1226 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: So, Mr. Speaker, this is one example of where the administration waited and waited and waited and eventually the feasibility of developing these five rivers became impractical. Now, Mr. Speaker, a little over a year ago,the Premier called an unnecessary general election and in that election he used one issue and one issue only, and that was that if he were given a mandate that he would negotiate an agreement on the offshore. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. NEARY: I am afraid han. members' hearts are outside the building today and, Mr.

Speaker, I can assure members that that is where my mind and my heart is at the moment, outside this building. So, Mr. Speaker, the Tory policy, the one plank in their platform a year ago,and the show that they put art to win this election,was the fact that they had one issue and one issue only, and that was to negotiate an offshore agreement. Well, Mr.

Speaker, during that election and leading up to that election,we heard all kinds of statements being made by the Premier, who went around the Province beating his chest and saying, 'JWe will not be second-class citizens, we will not be robbed of our heritage, we will not go on being 'have not' forever. We will have our day in the sun. 'Have not' will be no more." Well, Mr. Speaker, that was a little over a year ago, and today what do we have? 2680

J April 20, 1983 Tape No. l227 JV - 1 MR. NEARY: Well,we have 50,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians who are unemployed Mr. Speaker, whether or not they are second class citizens. They are unemployed. So, Mr. Speaker, whether'have not'will be no more is something that the Premier will have to decide. 'Have not will be no more•, Mr. Speaker,when translated into the grim, brutal reality of the 1982 election, I guess means we will have more unemployment in this Province. Mr.

Speaker, in a way,I suppose, if you wanted to you could show where the Premier actually delivered the exact opposite of what he promised in that election. He promised that 'nave not will be no more' in the Premier's world and that- I am trying to listen and talk at the same time. It is very difficult. I am like the former Premier, I am like Mr. Smallwood in that regard,that I cannot speak and listen at the same time. I wish I could. But anyway, Mr.

Speaker, all kinds of things have happened concerning the offshore, but I think the main thing that happened was the fact, and I think history will record this, that there has been a whole string of failures in connection with the handling of the offshore resources, a whole string of failures, But I believe the most significant thing that happened, and I have said this before in this hon.

House and outside the House, is the fact that the Premier,and I think he was probably more responsible for doing this than any other member on the other side, he may have been aided and abetted by the minister responsible for the Petroleum Directorate (Mr. Marshall),but I believe,Mr. Speaker,that the Premier 2681

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1227 JV - 2 MR. NEARY: unilaterally ,just running a one-man show , in a dictatoria l fashion bull ied his caucus and c.he Cabinet into allm.,ing him to put the offshore ownership question before the Newfoundland Appeals Court. And when the administration made that decision,Mr . Speaker,they made one of the most colossal blunders in the whole history of Newfoundland politics. What they did ,they took the resource, they brought it to the three Jucges of the Newfoundland Appeals Court and they said, 'Here is the resource,now you decide who owns it, you decide its future '.

That is what the Administration did and, of course, we all knm., the result : The Ad!r:inistra tion gambled 2682

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1228 SD - 1 MR. NEARY: and they lost. And now, Mr. Speaker, they sit there day in and day out like dummies. They have no input into the development of the resource, they sit there - I like to compare them to spectators at a hockey game, they just watch the play going back and forth between the oil companies and the·federal government and there is not a thing in this world that they can do about it. They have no input, they are not up to date, they do not know what is happening with the development of the resource from one day to the next.

They have to sit there and listen to announcements being made about job creation, about providing business for Newfoundland companies and, Mr. Speaker, there is not a thing they can do about it. Even the oil companies defied their orders to bring the rigs in from the Grand Banks. Now, Mr. Speaker, why, then,did I put this resolution on the Order Paper? Well, I put the resolution on the Order Paper in a hope that it is still not too late, Mr.

Speaker, for the parties to sit down, as we have been trying to persuade the parties to do in the case of the teachers, sit down in all sincerity in an atmosphere of trust and good will and try to resolve this matter before we completely lose everything that we have. The resolution before us · today, Mr. Speaker, states: 'BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this hon. H.ouse of Asseinbly go on record, today,as supporting a negotiated settlement to this question at once', the offshore that is, 'which would provide maximum long term and short termbenefits to this Province and to Canada'. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I ask hon. members of th.e H.ouse, is. that too much. to as.k? Is 2683

April 20, 1983 Tape No . 1228 so - 2 MR . NEARY: that a lot to ask? Let our Premier call Mr. Chretien on the telephone,or Mr. Trudeau for that matter, and say, 'Look here, let bygon es be bygones, let us forget pre-conditions and let us talk a deal' • Now , i.:.... . :;;;.z.c...;~.,.L. , .:.a that. ... ....,v tnu\..;. to a.sk for? Is that too much? Is that a lot to ask for? I would · love to be out there clapping and cheering, Mr. Speaker, and the hon. gentleman, his mind is wandering . MR . CARTER: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Aylw ard}: A point of order, the hon. gentleman for St . John's No rth. MR. CARTER: It is a long established rule in this Rouse that member s 2684

April 20, 19.83 Tape No. 1229 NM- 1 MR. CARTER: are required not to read their speeches. It is all right for a person makincr his maiden speech,and this could,perhaps,be construed as the hon. gentleman's maiden speech,because it is the same speech he has been making for the last sixteen or seventee1:;. years. But,nevertheless,he is reading a speech. He should be directed to table it if he is, and also to sit down and discontinue reading it,or to debate from his mother wit of which he does not seem to have very much. MR.

SPEAKER (Aylward) : The hon. member is correct that that is a point of order,but it also is correct that in this House a member can use extensive notes. I rule there is no valid point of order. MR. NEARY: The hon. Leader of the Opposition. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am · not reasonably convinced, Mr. Speaker, that what I am suggesting will not happen, that the Premier, unfortunately, cannot accept the fact that he was wronn, that he ~·'as blatantly wrong and tragically wrong and fatally wrong and historically wrong in what he did. And he knows that, Mr. Speaker, but he just will not admit it.

And the first thing that has to happen is that the Premier of this Province will have to admit,first of all,that he is wrong, that he has one failure after the other in connection with the offshore. Now, once he admits to himself he does not have to come into the Legislature and bare his soul, or he does not have to take to the radio or television from the Conference Room on the eleventh floor. l\_ll the Premier has to do is admit to himself that he is wrong, Mr. Speaker, but he will not admit it. So no wonder, Mr.

Speaker, there is dissent in the backbenchers on the opposite side, and I refer to th .e member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry) who has taken a very statesmanlike stand in this whole matter, who has made a suggestion similar to the one that I am making here today, and that is that the parties 2685

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1229. mt ·- 2 MR. NEARY: return to the bargaining table and negotiate a sett::lement. The Premier, .Mr. Speaker, is becoming an embarrassment to those other forty-two members over there. They are ashamed to tell the peo]hl.e who they work for, and ashamed to say, "On, yes, I work for the Premier," · Mr. SPeaker, "yes; Sir, I work for him but I am not proud of him. " Not ·one of them over the .re is -willing to make that statement to a businessman in this Province.

We have all heard what the Board of Trade had to say aBout the administration and the dictatorial actions of this administration. Mr. Speaker ., they are not prepared to make these statements to tea .chers, or to the students . in thi.s Province with. any sincerity. Mr. Speaker, who can blame members on the opposite side Who have turne .(l their b1;1cks on the constituents and 2686

April 20, 1983 Tape 1230 PK - 1 MR. NEARY: on the teachers and on the students and on the mine workers and on the pul~ and paper workers? Who can blame them for being ashamed to look their -constituents and to look these groups straight in the eye and say that they work for the Premier of thisProvince? Who can blame them, Mr. Speaker? I am appealing now, you may call it a last ditch effort, and I speak to each and every member on the opposite side,that ifthey have an ounce of decency left intheir bodies, Mr.

Speaker, if they have any sense of decency at all 1 that they will speak out in favour of this resolution and in favour of theirProvince, Mr. Speaker, which will enjoy the benefits of a negotiated agreement on the offshore resources. And if they are too ashamed to do it over there, Mr. Speaker, let them come on this side of the House, if they are true Newfoundlanders, come over here and join with us, Mr. Speaker. We will welcome any man or woman from the other side who ia brave enough, ~x.

Speaker, to speak out for theirhomes, for their communities, for their districts and for their own people, and stand up and be counted if they are true Newfoundlanders. Because if they stay on the disaster course that they have been on since the Tories took over in this Province eleven years ago, Mr. Speaker, then we are all going to go down the tube, down the drain with the administration. ¥~.

Speaker, as I said a few moments ago,instead of delivering onthe one issue in the last election,to deliver an agreement to the people of this Province if they were given a large mandate, . we have seen just the opposite happen in this Province. Instead of delivering on an agreement that would give the people of Newfoundland 2687

April 20, 1983 Tape 1230 PK - 2 MR. NEARY: and Labrador prosperity, that would provide jobs for the unemployed, that would provide business for companies that are going bankrupt, especially small businesses, instead of delivering that agreement, Mr. Speaker, t..:.: . ::'::::--::: ::.:.~= :.::3 done ~;..wi.. ;,.:._ opposite . But that is not the first time that has happened since the Tories took over in this Province eleven years ago. We saw examples of where projects were started by this administration,and probably the most obvious one was the setting off of the two 2688

April 2 0 , 19 8 3 Tape No. 1231 ah-1 MR.NEARY: explosions on either side of the Strait of Belle Isle to commence the development of the Lower Churchill, and when the election was over, Mr. Speaker, that project was cancelled. The two fire crackers that they set off were worth about $110 million, but it was written off as an election expense, Mr. Speaker, because that is all it was. And as soon as this election was over they forgot the mandate. What was the mandate, Mr.Speaker? The mandate was to deliver an offshore agreement. Now,if they do not deliver on that agreement what are the consequences?

What are the consequences? Should we wait until another election is called in this Province before the electorate can get an opportunity to deal with the administration who hoodwinked them in that electioni The reason you have forty- four members s-itting on the opposite side, forty-four members there opposite 1 is because they were given a mandate to negotiate,And they failed to deliver, ~hey .failed to deliver an agreement to the people of this Province who placed their trust in each and every member sitting on that side of the House. So, Mr.

Speaker, I hope that han. gentlemen in good conscience will, today, stand and support this resolution. As han. members can see there is no politics mixed up in this resolution. I have not made a politica& speech. I have tried to steer away from partisan politics in order to try to entice some han. gentlemen on the benches opposite to support my resolution. I think it is a very important resolution, Mr. Speaker. I really do not think that we should wait for the Supreme Court of Canada to hand down its decision on the offshore ownership question before negotiations resume.

But ob~iously that is the strategy of the administration. 2689

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1232 MJ - 1 MR. NEARY: Not only are they going to wait for the Supreme Court decision,but it is obvious to every citizen of this Province, every man, woman and child, that they are also playing politics with this very, very important matter. They are hoping that a Tory government will be el.ected in Canada in the next election, Mr. Speaker, so they are continuing with the gamble.

They are hoping that a Tory government will be elected.But even if a Tory government is elected they cannot give the resource back to Newfoundland once the court has reade its decision, it would take an amendment to the Constitiution to do that.And not only is it a gamble in that regard,but, Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier in this House, if Mr. Mulroney is unfortunate enough to become the Prime Minister of Canada,then, Mr. Speaker, I am sure that you would see the screws turned a little tighter on this adrninistration,because it is a well-known fact that Mr. Mulroney, and now Mr.

Clark1has been stabbed in the back by one of his main supporters in this Province, the Premier. I would not consider him to be a very good friend of this Province. So, what should happen now, Mr. Speaker, is to forget all the things that have gone before, let ·bygones be bygones, vote in favour of this resolution, follow the advice of the member for Mount Scio, follow the advice given in the resolution, get back to the negotiating table, bargain in good faith, bargain in an atmosphere of trust and try to get this matter straightened out once and for all, Mr.

Speaker, so that we can carry on with the development of our other natural resources and get on with the job and deliver·an agreement for which the people of this Province gave the administration a mandate. a little over a year ago. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Alyward) : The hon. the member for Baie Verte - White Bay. 2690

April 20 , 1983 Tape No. 1233 MJ - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I want to have a few words to say on this resolution as brought down by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary). Let me begin my remarks, Mr. Speaker, by saying this: I very seldom say anything personality­ wise about any member in this House. In fact,I do not recall that I have ever done it1 although one is provoked from time to time and one might do that in the heat of debate.

But when I see the Leader of the Opposition in this Province getting up and pointing at members on this side of the House and talking about decency,and talking about morality,and talking about honesty,and talking about backbone or the lack thereof, then, Mr. Speaker, I cannot let that kind of thing go unchallenged and unanswered~ Becauseif there is anybody, if there is any politician in this Province, Mr. Speaker, who wants to talk about decency,then I suggest it is anybody but the Leader of the Opposition. I suggest that it is anybody except that gentleman.

If there is anybody who wants to talk about backbone-and thenhe throws in the little thing about members on this side turning their backs. I wrote down the words 'turning their backs on their constituents'- and he makes the big list. One on the list is miners. Well, Mr. Speaker, I will have the Leader of the Opposition know,and anybody in this Province know,and all people in this House know that I am not going to stand here and have that kind of innuendo thrown across the House, 'turning your back on your constituents'.

What happened to the Leader of the Opposition on Bell Island and his miners if you want to talk about turning your back. It certainly did not happen to me in Baie Verte. I did not run away. I did not turn my back. And then he gets up and he talks about decency and honesty and turning one's back on one's constituents and becoming turncoats. Mr. Speaker, it is scandalous,really, that when you get up to speak on a serious resolution like this 2691

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1233 MJ - 2 MR. RIDEOUT: you find yourself forced to respond to those kinds of political accusations coming from the hon. gentleman. ~~d then he ends off his few remarks by saying that he made his remarks in a nonpartisan spirit, he did not want to be partisan . The resolution was nonpartisan . You know, ~·~·· get in your flicks and your digs and then you try to paint it all over in the last gasp of breath that is coming out of your mouth,before you sit down,by saying it is nonpartisan, you did not want to get into a partisan battle. l wonder how naive, Mr. Speaker, does he think people in this House and in this Province are? 2692

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1234 JV - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: The bon. gentleman spent the first five minutes he was on his feet talking about the headwaters of the five rivers in Labrador and the development of those rivers. What on earth it had to do with the Resolution that he himself put down I do not know. It seems to me that it has no bearing whatsoever, no bearing whatsoever on the Resolution that the bon. gentleman put down on the Order Paper. Then he goes on to take another five minutes talking about an unnecessary election. Mr.

Speaker ,the people of this Province did not think that the election was unnecessary, they went out in numbers unprecedented, the turnout at the polls last April was one of the highest we have ever seen in this Province - MR. WINDSOR: · He wanted another one a couple of weeks ago. MR. RIDEOUT: Yes, he wanted another one a couple of weeks ago. Is the hon. gentleman calling the people of the Province fools?

What is he saying? -• Talking about an unnecessary electio~ I would say to the hon. gentleman that the election was unnecessary for one group and one group only, and that was the group that he leads, the Liberal Party in this Province. That is the only group that the election was unnecessary for. Then he talks about the blunder, the blunder made by this Government in putting the question into the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals in Newfoundland. Mr. Speaker,it is awfully easy to try to be dishonest with one's self. The last refuge, I supp~se.~of a skunk is when one wants to be dishonest with one's self.

Everybody in this Province, everybody in this House, knows how the question came to be in the courts. 2693

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1234 JV -2 MR. RIDEOUT: That is no secret,Mr. Speaker. Everybody knows that it was the Federal Government Which asked the Federal Court of Canada to expand the question on the SIU case into a full-blown ownership case. Everybody knows that -the people of this Province know that and they knew that in the election last April. How many times, Mr. Speaker, has it got to be said that it was not this Province who went to the Courts first? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear! MR. RIDEOUT: How many times has it got to be said? So nobody1Mr.

Speaker1is being fooled by that kind of statement1and nobody out there,in the four corners of this Province, are ~g fooled by that kind of statement. The only people being fooled by that kind of statement, Mr. Speaker, are the fools themselves who want to fool themselves and they are on that side of the House, they are not on this side. Day after day, Mr. Speaker, you hear that kind of thing said in this House,that this government took the decision to put the case in the courts. Well,that is not true. N-0-T MR. WARREN: MR. RIDEOUT: T-R-U-E. It is true.

It is not true/ it is to cover up for their political flunkies in ot~ that they kee:e_ __ _ saying that. It is to cover up ~· 2694

1.:,;.' April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1235 SD - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: for their masters in Ottawa that they keep saying that. Now let the truth be known, Mr. Speaker, and, of course, the truth is known. MR. WARREN: Why did you cross the House? MR. RIDEOUT: I can shout down the han. gentleman anytirne,but I never said a word while the han. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) was speaking. I know how to be courteous, that is the difference between me and some people on the other side. MR. SIMMS: No respect. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Order, please! MR.

RIDEOUT: Then they talk about pre- conditions about going back to the bargaining table, Mr. Speaker, pre-conditions. Is it wrong, is it unreasonable to ask that if there had been an agreement, and both ministers say there was, if there had been an agreement between both ministers, is it unreasonable to ask that that be written down? MR. SH1MS: No. MR. RIDEOUT: Are we going to have a verbal agreement on the offshore, Mr. Speaker? How can we talk about Winter drilling regula~ions or revenue sharing or joint management if it is not written down? Is it going to be verbal forever more? Who is going to interpret it?

What are the parameters? I mean, somewhere along the line you have to have the thing written down. There had been an agreement in principle between the two ministers and the time had come to write it down, and one side agreed to write it down and the o~er side did not. And then they talk about pre-conditions. I mean, what are we going to have, an agreement with our understandings on one side and nothing on th .e other? MR. MARSHALL: That is right. 2695

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1235 SD - 2 MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I mean, how silly, how ludicrous can you be? And when they did finally sit down around the table and try to put something down on paper, the verbal agreements, the agreements in ~rinciple that had been agreed on between the two ministers , you would not knowthem from a hole in the ground when you came to see the drafts,around the table. So 1 you know, Mr. Speaker, it just cannot stand scrutiny, it just cannot stand the light of day.

It is time for the hon. gentlemen on the other side to stop burying their heads in the sands of irreality , take their heads out of it and join with us 1 because we have been saying'a negotiated settlement' for months and months and months. But you cannot keep going on with those political blunders that the han. gentlemen are going on with from day to day and still expect to have any credibility left. Talk about the courts, talk about unnecessary elections, talk about pre-conditions, talk about what you like, they cannot stand scrutiny, Mr. Speaker.

And the h.on. gentlemen know they cannot stand scrutiny but yet they get up day after day, week after week, month after month, and they still mouth the same things that cannot stand th .e light of day in this H·ouse and in the Province. It is time for that to be over. The hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary)_ wants to talk about non-partisan and that kind of thing, it is time for that to be forgotten about~ throw-out that foolishness and get on with something reasonable and something new. Now,talking about non- partisan, Mr. Speaker, let me have a look at this resolution, 2696

April 20, 1983 Tape 1236 EC - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: let us have a look at the resolution to see if it can stand the scrutiny of a non-partisan look at it. Let us have a look at it. 'WHEREAS on February 12, 1982 the Premier of this Province announces that the provincial Cabinet' - not even good English - 'announces that the provincial Cabinethas referred the offshore ownership issue to the Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal' -that is a fact. There is nothing wrong with that, Mr. Speaker, that is a act. That is not partisan. The hon.gentleman got up and tried to lump in why it was done,but I have explained that again for the 17,000th time. That is a fact. We have no problem with that. The second

WHEREAS: 'WHEREAS the same Court did on the 17th day of February, 1983 rule that the resources in question do not fall within the meaning of Term 37 of the Terms of Union and thus do not belong to Newfoundland' - that is a partial fact. It is not the whole fact. It is not exactly what the Court said, but it is fact enough that we can accept it as a fact. And our accepting it as a fact does not necessarily mean that it is a fact, but it is factual enough to accept. The third

WHEREAS, !~. Speaker, talking about non-partisan resolutions, let us look at the third

WHEREAS: 'WHEREAS this present administration has 1 by its own admission 1 no other reason to exist except that battle for ownership of the offshore now lost by that administration in the Courts' -no other reason to exist! That is non-partisan, Mr. Speaker, that is the kind of recital that the han. gentleman wants us to wrap our arms around. That is the kind of recital 2697

A,prii 20, 1983 Tape 1236 EC - 2 MR.. RIDEOUT: that he expects forty-four people on this side of the House to wrap their arms around and join with him in a non-partisan cause and vote for it, Mr. Speaker. How silly! How silly, Mr. speaker! Let us look at the next recital: 'WHEREAS this Province still needs an offshore develop­ ment agreement to boost a desperately failing economy' - that is a fact, nothing wrong with that.

We agree with that. 'BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this House go on record as supporting a negotiated settlement' and then, 'BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we dedicate the federal/ provincial Winter drilling regulations to an offshore board.' You know, those things are not too bad. But the han •. gentleman gets up in a 'holier than thou' attitude - and he is really bad, Mr. Speaker, reading a prepared speech. He is alright when he is up flailing his arms and going to it, he is interesting, but when he is reading a prepared text he is worse again.

But he tries to wrap himself in the flag of innocence and asks us to support that kind of resolution. Well, Mr. Speaker, I can assure you that that is not going to happen. Now, there is a lot in that resolution that we like. We like the facts of the resolution, we like the truth of the resolution but, Mr. Speaker, we do not like the purely political purpose of the resolution. We do not like the partisan, provocative statements in at least one or two of the recitals ~n the resolution. And we are not going to 2698

.l:L f\,p,ril, 20, 1983 Ta;pe 1236 EC - 3 MR;. IUDEOUT: be duped, Mr. Speaker, into voting for that kind of resolution. So, Mr. Speaker, I am going to lll.OVe an amendment, seconded by my colleague from Grand Falls (~. Simms). The amendment, Mr. Speaker, ;is :a;i:lll.ply this: 2699

April 20, 19 83 Tape No. 1237 NM - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: I move , seconded by my colleague from Grand Falls (Mr. Simms), to delete all the words after the second "WHEREAS", and the second "WHEREAS", of course, finishes up with•and' after 'Newfoundland', 1Newfoundland and 1, to delete all the words after the second "WHEREAS" and to replace it by adding the following: "BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that this hon. House of Assembly go on record, today," , word for word, Mr. Speaker, "as supporting a negotiated settlement to this question," practically word for word from the resolution that the han.

Leader of the Opposition (.Mr. Neary). put down, ''including a federal/provincial joint management board which would include in its terms of reference consideration of Winter drilling regulations'~ SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ MR. RIDEOUT: Now, Mr. Speaker, that takes the politics out of it, that takes the provocative statements out of it, that makes it a resolution that can be unanimous in this House and I submit it to Your Honour for consideration. SOME RON. MEMBERS : Hear, hear~ MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Order, please! It appears to the Chair that the amendment is in order.

The hon. member for Baie Verte- White Bay. MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, w.e will see the colours . Now we will see the colours of the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Nearyl and the gentlemen opposite, because everything that I have proposed in this amendment, everything except the dirt which was contained in the third "WHEREAS", is in this amendment. 2700

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1237 NM - 2 MR. RIDEOUT: In this amendment, Mr. Speaker, I am allowing the facts of the first and second recital to stand, I am allowing the purpose of the first "BE IT RESOLVED" to stand, and that is a negotiated settlement, I am proposing the purpose of the second "BE IT RESOLVED", which is to include a federal/provincial joint management board, and the terms of reference of that board will be to work out Winter drilling regulations. Now that is the nuts and bolts, Mr. Speaker, of the resolution that the han. gentleman has put down.

That is what the han. gentleman wants to talk about if he wants to talk about a non-partisan debate over this issue that is so vital to the future generations of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Now,if the Opposition does not support this amendment,then, Mr. Speaker, we will know that the real purpose of this amendment was contained in the third rectial, we will- know that the real purpose of this· amendment was for nothing more or nothing less thana full-scale political diatribe,once again enunciating the position of the Liberal Party in Ottawa. That will be crystal clear. We will know that,because this 2701

April 20, 1983 Tape 1238 PK - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: amendment that I propose includes the nuts and bolts of what the Opposition say they are talking about. Now we will see if what they say they are talking about is,in fact,what they are talking about, and if it is not,then that will become clear next Wednesday when the vote is held. Now, Mr. Speaker, this resolution as it is put forth 1and now as amended 1 is very, very important to future generations of this Province.

This Province has tried unsuccessfully month after month, year after year, we have the support of hundreds of thousands of people across the country,Our compromise proposal that was put on the table a couple of years ago, in January, has been scrutinized by the industry, by political leaders , by community leaders across Canada,and they say to a man and to a woman that it is a reasonable position. How come you cannot get a deal with the federal government on this? My God,how reasonable is your positionL And we are asking the same question, Mr. Speaker. The people of this Province are ~sking the same question.

The hon. gentleman talks about an amendment to the constitution, whatever the Supreme Court of Canada decision might be. Does not the hon. gentleman realize, Mr. Speaker, that all provincial governments in Canada are on record , on the public record as supporting this Province on its offshore ownership fight. Does not the hon. gentleman realize that all of the political parties federally, except one, except one, is on side as supporting this Province. MR. SH1MS: Which one is that? HR. RIDEOUT: That is the party to which the hon. gentleman has so much allegiance, Hr. Speaker.

So why is it impossible to get a constitutional amendment, if all the provincial governments are on side, all the political parties 2702

April 20, 1983 Tape 1238 PK - 2 MR. RIDEOUT: federally except one are on side? Why is it impossible? il'hy do we need to amend the constitution of this country, Mr. Speaker? We need seven provinces containing -what?-51 per cent of the population, is it? I believe that is the way it reads, 'agreement of seven provinces containing 51 per cent of the population'. We have all provinces, we have all political parties federally except the present party that makes up the present Government of Canada , so why can we not, if that is what it takes,a constitutional amendment? I am not sure that that is necessary.

That would be necessary to enshrine it in the constitution. That would not be necessary for an agreement but to make sure it is enshrined. It was done for the Prairie Provinces in 1930 by a Liberal Government,I might say, Mr. Speaker. But if that is what it takes, is that impossible? No, Sir, it is not impossible,because the political will in this country is there, everywhere but Ottawa, to do justice to Newfoundland. MR.SIMMS: And over there.And over there. MR. RIDEOUT: It is everywhere but in Ottawa which,of course 1 is represented in this Province by people on the other side,and the party 2703

April 20,1983 Tape No. 1239 ah-1 MR. RIDEOUT: on the other side. It is every- where else to treat Newfoundland equally, to give Newfoundlanders and Labradorians equality within this Confederation, but the political will does not exist with the present political party in power in Ottawa. That is the problem, Mr.Speaker.

It is not the problem of doing it constitutionally or otherwise, it is not the problem that this government cannot negotiate, it is not the problem that this Province has dug in its heels and will not talk, it is the problem of the political will in the political masters that presently control the government in Ottawa. And that is the message that has to keep going out to the people of this Province and to the people of this country. And, Mr.

Speaker, if the Opposition are sincere in what the leader enunciated today,then he and his colleagues will vote for this amendment and then this resolution as amended,because that is the message and that is the purpose of this amendment and that,therefore,will be the purpose of this resolution as amended. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Mountains. MR. WARREN: Thank you. Hear, hear! The hon. member for Torngat Mr. Speaker, I would like to say a few words on the resolution and also a few words on the amendment. Now,after just listening to the hon. member for Baie Verte-White Bay (Mr.

Rideout) one would never believe that the hon. member,less than two years ago, was sitting over on this side of the House and that the hon. member,on a Private Members Day, basically had the same kind of a resolution that ha was going to present in this House condemning the government that he is part of now. 2704

/- April 20,1983 MR .WARHEN : Tape No . 1239 In fac t, Mr .S peaker, at a caucus meeting the same hon. member ah -2 was very much concerned about the approach that this government was taking to the offshore . And with that , Mr . Spe~~er , I think the member ,once again,as on many , many occasions,has spoken from both sides of his mouth . Now , Mr. Speaker , the resolution does give fact s. There is no doubt about it, there are facts in the resolution .

The resolution does say , "WHEREAS on February 12, 198 2, the Prem ier of this Province announces that the Provincial Cabinet has referred th e off sh ore O\me rs hip issue to the Newfoundland Supr eme Court of Appeal. Now, that is true and 270 5

~pril 20, 1983 Tape No. 1240 MJ .. 1 MR. WARREN: it is the first time that this ownership issue was referred to the Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal. That is true. There is no doubt about that. The non, member can get up and say, 'No, it is not true,' but it i~ true, MR. DINN: What about the SIU case? MR. WARREN: It was not referred to the Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal. It was not. This is true, It is the first time. And the hon, the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) knows it is not true, So, Mr. Speaker, you see that the hon. member, when he spoke just now, he aid not tell the truth.

The h.on. member did not tell the truth. SOME HON . MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. SIMMS: MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): Recreation and Youth. MR. SIMMS: A point of order, Mr, Speaker , The hon. the Minister of Culture, Mr. Speaker, the hon. the member for Torngat Mountains (Mr, Warren) just very clearly ind~cated that the hon, member who just spoke on this side, the member for Baie Verte - White Bay (Mr. Rideout), did not tell the truth. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I submit to you that that is out of order, unparliamentary and the hon , member should be ashamed of it and should be a~ked to withdraw it, ~d if he does not withdraw it, of course, Mr. Speaker, he should be named. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER: Hear, hear! To that point of order, Mr, Speaker, To that point of order, the hon, the member for Torngat Mountains. MR.

WARREN: If the hon. the speaker had the opportunity of reviewing what has gone in Hansard in the last five minutes, the hon, the Speaker would know that the non, the member for Baie Verte - White Bay has said this is not true concerning the offshore issue being put into the 2706

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1240 MJ - 2 MR. WARREN: Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal. That is not true, Mr. Speaker, because this is the first time - MR. DINN: Apologize. MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, he is debating the point. That is not permitted. MR. WARREN: - that it has gone to the Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal. It is the first time, Mr. Speaker, I refer to the Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward): To that point of order, I have to withhold ruling right now until I can check Hansard. The hon. the member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said, Mr.

Speaker, this is the first time that this offshore ownership issue was placed in the Newfoundland Supreme Court of Appeal and it was placed there by this government. This government figured, this government thought that after winning two decisions in the courts, 'Well, we can win the third one.' But once in a while the judges of the Newfoundland Supreme Court do not accept everything that the Premier and his flunky from St. John's East (Mr. Marshall) state, Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker - MR . SPEAKER (A yl ward) : A point of order, the hon, the President of the Council. MR.

MARSHALL: - just in the hope of changing h~m. I mean, y0u know, that is unparliamentary. I could not care less what the han. gentleman really may say but, 2707

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1241 SD - 1 MR. MARSHALL: you know, there are rules in the House. Referring to people, you know, as being a flunky of somebody else is definitely unparliamentary. People refer from time to time to Beauchesne and the lists of words that are not permitted but, Mr. Speaker, as you will see if you look at that, that is not completely conducive, you know, does not answer the question.

On page 114 of Beauchesne it says: 'It is impossible to lay down any specific rules in regard to injurious reflections uttered in debate against particular members, or to declare beforehand what expressions are or are not contrary to order; much depends upon the tone and the manner,and intention, of the person speaking; sometimes upon the person to whom the words are addressed, as, whether he is a public ' . officer,or a private member not in office, or whether the words are meant to be applied to his public conduct, or to his private character; and sometimes upon the degree of provocation', etc.

The point of the matter is, Mr. Speaker, you know, you cannot list in a book .• even though there is a fairly comprehensive list of words that are unparliamentary, but th.ere is no doubt that. types of c'3:erogato:ry references such as this are obviously unparliamentary, they are not conducive to the carrying on of parliamentary debate. And I think that the hon. gentleman should withdraw, I would hope he would withdraw voluntarily. If he does not withdraw voluntarily, I would ask Your Honour to request him to do so. MR. NEARY: To th.e point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER CAylward)_: To the point of order, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. 2708

April 20 , 1983 Tape No. 1241 MR. NE~.RY : I would like to refer Your Honour to page 104 refeu-ring to members in debate and all the unparliamentary words listed there in pages 104, 105, 106 and 107, Mr. Speaker, and there is no listing of 'flunky'. Now, the bon. gentleman's feelings may be hurt but I would say that that is unfortunate. It is too bad, Mr. Speaker, that my colleague hurt the hon. gentleman's feelings. The hon. gentleman does not want to be considered as a flunky and everybody knows what a flunky is. It is 2709 SD - 2

April 20, 1983 Tape 1242 PK - 1 MR. NEARY: not unparliamentary. And the han. gentlemanit not because his feelings are hurt, Mr. Speaker, that he has to get up and challenge what my han. colleague said under the disguise of a point of order. There is,indeed,no point of order, Mr. Speaker. And I would suggest that all the President of the Council (Mr. Marshall) is doing, the Government House Leader,is interrupting my colleague to destroy the momentum he has going and the trend of thought that my hon. colleague is pursuing.

So I would hope that Your Honour will not be swayed by the emotional appeal that was made by the Government House Leader, because,indeed,there is no point of order. All the hon. gentleman was trying to do was :>ersuade the Chair through emotion , appealing to Your Honour's heart and not to the rule book. We go by the rules in this House, Mr. Speaker, and not by the fact that somebody's feelings may or may not ~ave been hurt. MR.

SPEAKER (Ayhrard) : To that point of order, although the word 'flunky' is not listed in the words that are listed as unparliamentary, I have heard the word used in this House of Assembly on other occasions and I will check the rulings in those cases to see if it was ruled unparliamentary in this House, and I will rule on it at a =later time. The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. MR. WARREN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For some reason today, I suppose it must be because there are 4,000 teachers out on the steps of Confederation Building , the members on that side are awfully upset. They must be awfully upset, Hr.

Speaker, an( it shows. Here is an indication: The debate that we are having today, a Private Member's Resolution about the breakoff of negotiations between Ottawa and Newfoundland 1 it shows 2710

April 20, 1983 Tape 1242 PK - ~ MR. WARREN: the same thin g as happened with the teachers of this Province. And this is the kind of government that we have to contend with day after day, a government that knows nothing about consultation, only confrontation. I noticed one of the signs out there said the same thing, confrontation. And this government have shm11n it. They closed down hospitals without talking to people.

Without consulting anybody they just go in and do things, and they just broke off negotiations with Ottawa on the offshore issue, a very delicate issue, a chance 1 as the Premier says, a chance for Newfoundland and Labrador to haveits a day in the sun. However,this government did not see fit and for some reason,when the han. minister responsible for offshore resources was in a hotel; in Quebec, the Premier could have one of his men, with spy glasses, across the 'street, seeing what was happening. I think the minister would have gotten a deal on the offshore .

In fact, I have a lot of admiration for the han. minister responsible for the offshore. However there is something thatis a trigger point, but the trigger pointisbetween the han. minister and the Premier. The Premier was not satisfied with what the minister was doing and, subsequently 1 he has broken off negotiations. He did the same thing .. with the han. 2711

April 20, 1983 Tape 1243 EC - 1 MR. WARREN: the member for Mount Scio (Mr. Barry), the only difference being he flicked him out of the Cabinet. This government cannot and will not negotiate anything. The only way they will negotiate is on their terms or no terms. That is the attitude, that is the way this government will negotiate. The Premier said today in his letter that he wrote back to the NTA - I think I have a copy of it here somewhere - "in which you accept government's two year wage restraint programme unconditionally.

" The NTA said, "Okay, we accept the two year wage restraint." However, the Premier goes back and says, 'That is no good to me; unless you can do this and this and this and this, we will not even talk to you.' But I believe the teachers today have got their message loud and clear to government members. I notice they were up here with the windows open, listening to what was said down on the steps, because they know what those teachers wil~ do with them. They know when the next election is called that they will not be blindfolded like they were last time. The teachers will remember.

We will make sure that those buttons are worn when the next election comes around. MR. STAGG: Well, I am going to give them a few things to remember now when you sit down. MR. WARREN: Yes, I am sure you will, about the rent increases in the Harmon complex, I suppose, about the rent increase when you went campaigning over in Stephenville - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. WARREN: - about the rent increase that they were told they were not getting. Why do you not tell them that? Tell them how you blindfolded them in 2712

April 20, 1983 Tape 1243 EC - 2 MR . WARRE N : the last election. But again, they will remember you. They will remember you over in Stephenville the next time around . Nm·l, Mr. Speaker, the hon. the member for Ba ie Verte - White Bay (Mr . Rideout) who sat on this side until he decided to change his colours - everybody to his own liking - the hon. member got up and brought in an amendment to the resolution. And I agree, because the hon. member , with all due respect to him, sat on this side and he knows what we think . He knows how we think, 2713

April 20, 19 .83 Tape No. 1244 m1- 1 MR. WARREN: and this is why he brought in this amendment, because this amendment, the last part of this amendment, is exactly what the hon. member knew we discuss in caucus day after day after day. This is why this amendment is a good amendment. And I must say, right from the offset, that I have no objection to voting for this amendment . I have not objection at all to voting for this amendment. MR. SIMMS: MR. WARREN: For a negotiated eettlement? Sure, a negotiated settlement. In fact, I will tell you what is wrong, it is that this government will not let the~ negotiate.

That is the problem. And you are a minister of this government and you should know,too;that you should negotiate in good faith. That is all that is needed, that you should negotiate in good faith. Now,in order for anybody to negotiate in good faith there would have to be give and take on both sides. There has to be give and take on both sides.

And we have indications, and the facts are on the table, which you can see afterwards, the facts are on the table. that the offshore negotiatio .ns broke off - the han. minister got a letter, I am sure he got a letter, everyone else got a letter, from the hon •. ~e~n Chretien, explaininq the positionL and this government - oh my goodness, maw maw is in ·--- ._ .... again - this government has decided to break off negotiations, break off negotiations because the Premier could not get his own way in the offshore oil dispute.

Now,that is number one, and here, today, the Premier comes into the Rouse and reads a letter, and a Ministerial Statement at the same time, and breaks 2714

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1244 NM - 2 MR. WARREN: off negotiations with the teachers. And I hate to say this, but I know it is a fact, in fact, all of Newfoundland and Labrador knows it is a fact, that the reason the negotiations broke off - you know, I do not think it was the reason that the han. Premier gave in this letter. No, that was not the reason. The reason was here is another ·.chance to save another million dollars tomorrow, and another million dollars the next day and so on. That is the reason. That is the bOttom line.

The bottom line, why this government broke off negotiations today with the teachers, is the more days the teachers are out of school naturally. MR. NEARY: They have to get their MR. WARREN: That is right. We have to get our money somehow. MR. NEARY: Use the countervailing savings. MR. WARREN: We have to take care of Tiffany Place somehow, you know, so this is why. MR. SIMMS: Do you think everybody thinks like you fellows? That is what you would do. MR.

NEARY: That is how the teachers, their wives, their sons and daughters, and their grandchildren and their uncles and aunts, and their friends and relatives, all think, that the government turned agaL,st them, forced the teachers out of the classroom, to use the countervailing savings to go towards the deficit. That is true. MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : time has elapsed. MR. WARREN: MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON. MEMBERS: 2715 Order, please! The hon. member's Yes, Mr. Speaker, that was true. The han. member for St. John's Centre. Hear, hear!

April 20,1983 Tape No. 1245 ah-1 DR. McNI CHOL AS: Mr. Speaker, I a m ver y pleased to be able to say a few words in favour of the amendment proposed by my hon. friend from Baie Verte­ White Bay (Mr.Rideout). I usually prefer to sit back here and listen to the pearls of wisdom mostly from this side,but the occasional pearl from the other side. So instead,toda y, you are going to hear the pearls of wisdom from me. I think the subject matter of debate today is of paramount importance really to the government and to all of Newfoundland. I remember just after Christmas,leaving here terrifically optomistic.

I felt that an ~greement was around the corner. In fact I asked my secretary,down in my own office 1to cable me when an agreement was made. And I must say I was a very disappointed man to get a cable from her shortly afterwards - because I was away and I could not get any news - saying that the whole thing had fallen through. You know,we all realize that the economy generally is in pretty poor shape throughout the world , the US, Canada,and here in Newfoundland in particular. I remember, just before going away, just before Christmas,going down to Water Street and being appalled at the depression down there.

The first place I saw was the London, New York and Paris. I suppose that was a monument,if you like, of business for fifty years and it was closed down. Incidentally, I saw only very recently one of the building there was for sale for $50,000 - peanuts. MR. SIMMS: Are you going to buy it 'Paddy'? DR.McNICHOLAS: Then a little bit further down I went and I saw Ayre's, that big department store that I remember City Council fighting about only two years 2716

April 20,1983 Tape No . 1245 ah-2 DR . McNICHOLAS : ago,wondering whether to allow tae Bank of Nova Scotia to put up eight or ten stories and now it is there empty . I went along a little bit further to Hickman's and I think they were wondering if there was going to be one tower or two towers of office buildings. I turned back then to that famous district of St .

John's Center and right in the middle of it Brazil Square,where I remember having a fight the Summer before last because developers were buying up that property there to convert into office buildings and I fought very bitterly to try and keep the houses there for my own constituents. I lost that battle but I am quite sure the developer s have burnt their fingers in that because that again has been lying empty. 2717

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1246 MJ - 1 DR. MCNICHOLAS: Coming up West of City Hall,again I have been crying for the last four years for something to be done, that again is empty. I think all of this is an indication that there is a terrible air of depression in Newfoundland at the present time. I know very well if we had an agreement there in January all of that would have been transformed. 'While these talks were going on and appeared to be qoing very successfully, there was th.is terrific air of optimism and hope and suddenly it all fell flat. But one thing for sure, Mr.

Speaker, I prefer to see it that way if, by having it that '"ay, we have to have an agreement that was not one that gave us some real, meaningful, worthwhile control. othen-1ise,what would we have? We would have tankers coming into the Grand Bank,filling up w-ith oil, and off they would go to refineries in the U.S. and elsewhere. We would have absolutely no control on that, we would have exactly the same picture,but in a much bigger way,as we had in the Upper Churchill about twenty years ago. I am sure at that time that was the best·deal that could be had.

I think it is a very interesting book and I am sure most of you read it, on hydro - I do not know '"ho the author is, I think Smith -giving the background history of that and Smallwood and LeSage and Quebec and financiers generally, and from reading that and from othercomments I have heard, I am quite sure in my mind that that was the only way of developing the Upper Churchill at the time. I know it is easy to have hindsight but actually it was a stupid agreement. ~hat happened? At the present time we are getting roughly $10 million out of ~hat deal, Quebec is getting $600 million.

Now that is bad enough but it is going to get worse,because wages, repairs, everything else will have to be taken care of by Newfoundland. So that $10 million will go down and eventually we are going to be in the red1 we will get less than nothing out of that1while Quebec will sit back and they will see their 2718

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1246 MJ - 2 DR. MCNICHOLAS: $600 million going up and up because they can change the price of po,.,er when they want, or when the agreements that they have have run out. I think that was a frightful deal . I do not know who is mainly responsible for that,but why somebody 2719

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1247 JV - 1 DR. McNICHOLAS: did not think at that time of having an escalation clause in the agreement, I just do not know. I think that we would have been better off at that time if we had just let that water run to sea and even if it cost four times that an hour or five times 1 at least we could have an agreement that would be of real value to Newfoundland instead of being a noose around our necks.

Now, here in this ±€solution today I think we have a somewhat parallel position, the only thing is it is a much bigger, colossal endeavour than even the Churchill Falls,which was a billion dollar deal at that time. This is a huge one. This is the largest oil well in Canada. This is one that was actually brought into Canada by Newfoundland in joining - Confederation. It does not matter what the Courts say. We may have lost the court case here in Newfoundland, I think we may well lose the case in Ottawa, I do not know. I hope we do not but I think we may. But what do we want? All we want,Mr.

Speaker,is just a fair share of revenue and we want sufficient - MR. NEARY: Seventy-five/twenty five is that a fair deal? MR. McNICHOLAS: I will get to that. We want some reasonable control so that we will not be left out in the cold again. I believe, Mr. Speaker, that we had an agreement in principle, that we had an agreement, a verbal agreement. I believe that our colleague who negotiated believed sincerely we had,but I had some doubts myself about it. I am wondering if the agreement in principle was ever a real one, if it was a sincere one or was it just a game of bluff right from the start~ I believe 2720

April 20, 1983 Tape No . ~247 JV - 2 MR . McNICHOLAS: that Mr . Chretien intended to carry on these negotiations, carry them on indefinitely, back us here in Newfoundland into a corner that would make it more and more difficult day by day to get out of that particular agreement . You might say, well, that is stupid - why would the Federal Government want to do that? MR. NEARY : MR. McNICHOLAS : (inaudible) the logic . That is perhaps the logic. And I given that quite a bit of thought and \lias wondering exactly that question myself . HR. NEARY: Indeed you were. MR.

McNICHOLAS: I think I know the reason and it is not to do with politics. I think there is a very definite personal anamosity between the Prime Minister and our Premier. MR. NEARY : Go on! 2721

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1248 SD - 1 DR. MCNICHOLAS: And why should there be? I think the reason and the only reason and the real reason for that is that our Premier is a fighter MR. SIMHS: Hear, hear. MR. MCNICHOLAS: -and up until this time we were depending purely on handouts. And that is the only reason. And because he is a fighter, and because this government is fighting and fighting rightly for Newfoundland rights, we are have a pretty rough time. We are having a rough time in hydro.

This corridor that we have is, to my mind-it was held up anyway for six months,but it is a stupid thing that can never be implemented. I can never see that we can get rights right across Quebec1right down to New York or wherever we want to sell our electricity. We have the same in the offshore and the fisheries. Today, we have Kirby sitting - I do not know where he is sitting, but doing nothing definite for us here. We have had the same problem with the Northern cod and it is still there. Why does the Quebec Government get special fishing rights that we cannot get?

Every conceivable thing that the federal government can do they seem to be doing. To take a relatively small thing like the syncroli:ft, I am convinced that we would never have gotten that here unless we had put up our own money. We had the same in the Shoe Cove Tracking Station, that was shifted out to Manitoba and another one put up in Thailand, but we could not be left our one h.ere. Th.e same thi::ng is happening with our road grants. The same thing is happening with our fishery college. They wanted to put it anywhere except St. John1s.

And I am not even sure1today,that the money will be coming from Ottawa for that fishery college. Wh.ere is it? It has be.en promised but so many other things have been promised. 2722

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1248 DR. MCNICHOLAS: Mr. Speaker, I could go on and on but I feel that the federal government in Ottawa is not neutral, it is not indifferent, I believe that the federal government in Ottawa 2723 SD - 2

April 20, 1983 Tape 1249 EC - 1 DR. McNICHOLAS: is actively hostile to Newfoundland. So what are we going to do? Quite frankly, I am a pessimist about what we can do. I think we will just have to do the best we can and mark time for the next two years until we have a decent, honest government in Ottawa, a new P.C. Government. I do not think we are going to get 100 per cent,but I think we will be treated in a decent, honest way. I think what we will have to have in tl>.is offshore is a political settlement. Every one of the candidates now for the P.C. leadership, I think, have promised that. And, Mr.

Speaker, as far as I am concerned, I feel it is better to have no agree­ ment than to be taken to the cleaners again. SOME HON . MEMBERS : Hear, hear! DR. McNICHOLAS: Mr. Speaker, I have great satisfaction in supporting this amendment. SOME HON. MEMBERS : MR. LUSH: MR. SPEAKER (Aylward) : Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: much. Hear, hear! Mr. Speaker. The hon. the member for Mr. Speaker, thank you very I want to say that I was very disappointed in the speech of the han. gentleman who just took his seat. I thought that the han. gentlem~ had a much broader view, had a much larger perspective.

I really did not think that he was one of the gentlemen caught up with this narrow, parochial political view that is held by most of his Cabinet colleagues, Mr. Speaker. MR. TOBIN: MR. LUSH: Mr. Speaker? You are afraid of the truth, 'Tom'. It is very, very disappointing. Am I speaking loud enough, I think han. members can all hear my voice, 2724

April 20, 1983 Tape 1249 EC - 2 MR. LUSH: it carries very well and the context is always good, as well. Mr. Spe·aker, I was very, very disappointed listening to the hon. gentleman attributing 'the kinds of motives that he did to the negotiating process so sincerely set up by one of the best Canadians in this country, Mr. Chretien, and suggesting, Mr . Speaker, that the process was meant only to be a bluff, that it was just put up as a smoke screen practically, just to delay the process. I think, Mr .

Speaker, that is ridiculous, that he should attribute these kinds of motives to such a great Canadian, a man who is concerned about the unity of this country, a man who is concerned with getting this country working in harmony and peace, one of the greatest Canadians on the political scene today or in any segment of life, really . 2725

April 20, 1983 Tape 1250 PK - 1 MR. LUSH: So, Mr. Speaker, I am disappointed that the hon. member would take that approach. MR. TOBIN: Tell us about the dissension in the party, boy. MR. LUSH: He gave another reason why the settlement - dissen~ion in the party I can talk about that, Sir. There is no dissension in the Liberal Party, not one little bit, Sir, not one little bit. We have never been more united, 5ince I have been in politics, never been more united. There is not one ounce of truth, Mr. Speaker, to what the hon. member read today, but I am not going to get detracted by that.

Just let me say that there is no dissension in the Liberal Party, none whatsoever. We are delighted with the way things are going. We are building the Liberal Party. And I will tell you::­ hon., members they are going to get an awful scare when they find out what is going on in the Liberal Party. Mr. Speaker, things are going so well, we are getting so many members now we can set up a screening process, Wecan screen , we can take our own people that we want, we can eliminate people. They are corning to us in the droves now. Mr.

Speaker, ~e have no worries about that and the hon. gentleman will know all about that sooner than he would like. So, Mr. Speaker, there are no problems there. But back to the resolution - MR. STAGG: Back to the amendment. MR. LUSH: Back to the amendment. I will get to the amendment in due course, Mr. Speaker. Again the hon. member carne up with his reasons why he thought there was not a settlement, that it was because of t:'le animosity 1 the personal animosity between our Premier - MR. TOBIN: (Inaudible) animosity for the Premier of Newfoundland. 2726

Ap ril 20, 1983 MR . TULK : MR . NEARY : order. MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): Leader of the Opposition. Tape 1250 PK - 2 Mr. Speaker, on a point of A point of order, the hen. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, the member for Burin-Placentia West (Mr. Tobin) violates the rules of this House more often than any other member in the House. The hen. gentleJ:ttan has only been here . one year and he has added tremendously to the lowering of the decorum of this House.Thirty times in one session the hen. gentleman had to be brought to order by the Speaker. Now, Mr.Speaker, I do not believe that we should allow this to continue.

It is not in the best interest of this House, it is hot in the best interest of the hen. gentleman's constituents who sent him here, he is betraying their trust. so, Mr. Speaker, I ask that if Your Honour cannot enforce the rules, make the hen. member comply with the rules and listen to my colleague in silence 1 that he be named and removed from the Rouse. MR;. TOBIN: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. 2727

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1251 MJ - 1 MR. SPEAKER (McNicholas): The hon. the member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBI N: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker, I was responding to the comments from the member for Terra Nova (11r. Lush) when he responded to it. If the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Neary) wants to stand on points of order such as that or make accusations such as I interrupted th~s House thirty times, I think he should have to prove that to the House. He should not hide behind the truth, Mr. Speaker. Bring in Hansard and prove it. MR, SPEAKER: Order, please!

To that point of order, I had only just come to the Chair and I did not hear these comments but any hon. member has the right to be heard in silence, The hon. the member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: And so, Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman was talking about the fact that the reason why we did not get an agreement was because of the animosity between the Premier and the Prime Minister. He went on to say, of course, he did not like the Premier because he was a fighter. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the problem with the Premier, that he is a fighter. That is his problem.

He does not know When to stop fighting, and his fighting lacks class and style as well. He is a bully, Mr. Speaker, We do not need fighting, we need mediation, negotiation, this is what we need, conciliation, compromise, give and take, but the Premier thinks it is all fighting, And even with that he is much overrated, ~1r. Speaker, he is much overrated as a fighter. He is something like Cooney, who raised our expectations - we thought he was a great guy - but what did Cooney do? Absolutely nothing. Now that is like the Premier, That is the kind of fighter that the Premier is and he gets everybody all excited, Mr.

Speaker, gets the expectations of everybody up, but it becomes nothing, falls a~ flat as a pancake and that is what happens, Mr. Speaker, 2728

April 20, 1983 Tape No.l251 MJ - 2 MR . LUSH: Mr . Speaker, this resolution is an iMoortant resolution and it does not talk about fighting, which created the problem, but talks about getting a negotiated settlement, something that this government cannot do, something that this government is no good at-that is why we have the problem with the teachers. All they know, Mr. Speaker, is h01.,r to break off from negotiating,whether it is with teachers or whether it is with the federal government ,and that is what this resolution is about, getting a negotiated settlement .

It is a very important resolution and it was raised by this side here . We are concerned, Mr . Speaker, and we want to see maximum benefits from our offshore. But , Mr. Speaker, how long are we going to wait? Now, I noticed, ~tr. Speaker, when speaking, he said again that he would rather see no deal, no settlement than to be taken to the cleaners. Now , Mr. Speaker, there is nobody being taken to the cleaners. 2729

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1252 NM - 1 MR. LUSH: Even if the provincial government signed the deal as it is today, nobody would be taken to the cleaners, so that is a lot of nonsense. Nobody in Newfoundland wants us to be taken to the cleaners. All of us want to get the full benefits from the offshore, all of us. But, Mr. Speaker, there comes a times when we have to be sane, sensible and sober. There comes a time when we have to do it in the Canadian way and negotiate. The Premier likes to talk about the Canadian way, but he is the man who is always out of step, always out of step. The Canadian way, Mr.

Speaker, is one of negotiation and compromise and this is what this government is no good at, this is what this government cannot do. They have one approach to negotiations, "Do as I say," Mr. Speaker. And they are giving the great example now to the teachers, they have given the great example to all people who are in negotiations, to hang tough, Mr. Speaker. The Premier is setting that example to all of the people in this Province who have to negotiate contracts by the way he is negotiating on the offshore. Now, Mr. Speaker, the time has come, as I have said, to get down around the table and negotiate a deal.

But these people do not know how to negotiate, it is 'Do as I say'. They do not believe in the process of give and take, it is only take. There is no giving, only take. And when that does not work, then they go to the courts. How many things have we got before the courts now? What is it costing this Province? We are spending enough money in the courts to pave half the roads in this Province, this money that we are spening in the courts, 2730

April 20, 1983 Tape No. 1252 NM ~ 2 MR. LUSH: all because tnis government does not have the ability to negotiate . They do not have the political will, Mr. Speaker, to get down and get this offshore settled. Is it not insidious? Is it not insidious? It is no secret anymore now, Mr. Speaker, .what they are up to. I m