PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY Volume 1 Number 26 5th Session 34th. General Assembly VERBATIM REPORT THURSDAY, APRIL 22, 1971 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE GEORGE W. CLARKE

April 22nd, 1971 The Pouse met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: Order! RON. J.R. SMALLWOOD(PREMIER): Tape 353 JM - 1 PETITIONS: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present a petition fr0111 some 246 voters in Flat Bay in the district of St. George's. The prayer of their petition is that the road connecting the Trans Canada Highway to Flat Bay and St. Teresa's be fully repaired and a start made toward pavin~ it as soon as possible.

The petitioners point out,by way of justification of this request,that there are four different industries in the area nc1J11ely: fishing which employs some fifty fishermen, lumbering employin~ approximately twenty men, tourist operation employing ten to fifteen men and, of course, the Flintcote Company operation at Flat Bay_, quarrying gypsum rockJemploying one hundred men making,a total of 180 to 185 men. Then still further to justify their request they point out that there are some 1,000 to 1,200 people who depend on this road for their every day needs.

Then, Sir, they wind up their petition with a point of stupendous importance, it seems to me, and very great weight, one that ought to weigh heavily with this House, when they say, ''We feel that we have been loyal to the Liberal Government of Newfoundland for the past twenty-two years and deserve a decent road to show that it was all worth-while,'' and, Sir, they must never be allowed to think for a 1110ment that it was not worth-while. So for that reason I have ~reat pleasure and t~e honour to submit this petition to the Pouse,praying that it may be referred to the Department to which it relates. MR. A.J.

MURPHY(LEADER O'F 'J'RF. OPPOSITION): Mr. Speaker, I can do no less but to support this petition because I think we are all aware,where so many districts like St. George's have been Liberal for the past twenty-two years have been so badly neglected. I think I reco~nize the problem that these 176~!

April 22nd, 1971 Tape 353 JM - 2 MR. MURPHY: people are facin~,as many people in other parts of the Province are· facing~ and the way the Premier presented this petition I am sure that his Government will give the best consideration they can to solving the needs of the people in the area of Flat Bay in the district of St. George's On motion, petition received. HON. W.N. ROWE(MINISTER OF COMMUNITY AND SOCIAL DEVELOP~NT): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition to the hon. House,which I have received from the residents of the communities of Sops Arm and Pollards Point in the district of White Bay South.

The petition is signed, Sir, by nearly two hundred voters of those two communities and the prayer of the petition is that they be supplied more efficient telephone services. They say that they consider four to six households on the same line intolerable and desire more private and semi-private lines. Now, ~r.

Speaker, I am very much aware that -the substance of this petition falls outside of the jurisdiction of any Government Department or indeed of the Government of Newfoundland or this House of Assembly but the people have gone to the trouble of signing the petition and sending it to me,as a Provincial member,and I thought it necessary to have the matter mentioned in the House of Assembly.

So, in making my motion that it be referred to the Department to which it relates>! would ask that the clerk return it to me after it has been tabled so that I can forward the petition on to the Canadian National Telecommunications in St. John's. I move, Sir, that this petition be received by this hon. House and referred to the Department to which it relates. MR. MURPHY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to add ~y support to that petition. As tJte hon.

Minister has pointed out,it is without the jurisdiction of this House but I am sure if this Government would make strong representation, this House of Assembly, I f~el that perhaps we may get some action on it. We know 1763

April 22nd, 1971 Tape 353 JM - 3 ~. MURPHY: that that particular district comes under CNT. I just recently visited " the area, a small part of it, and this is one of the problems that were brou~ht before me, I have very much pleasure indeed in supporting the petition as presented by the member for the district, the hon. Minister. HON. F. W. ROWE ( MINISTER OF EDUCATIOM AND YOUTH) : Mr. Speaker, I think I would again•be derelict if I did not dse also to support the petition from this very fine group of Newfoundlanders who populate Sops Arm and the area near it.

I have had a fair amount of dealings with all parts of the Province and much of it, of course, by telephone and I can say,quite truthfully,that in the past twenty years one of the areas that I found it liost difficult to communicate with(and this included the ten years that I represented that district of l~ite Bay South) one of the areas that I found it most difficult to get in touch with, to co111111unicate with (first it was no telephone and then it was one of these two-way things and later on there was a modification of thatJ was that area of Sops Arm and I do not understand the reason for it.

It is an area of fine, independent, hare-working people. lt is an area that has been opened up by road and it is an area that has a future. lt has a future in a number of ways there,and I would like to lend my support to this plea 1 to the Federal agencies concerned,to improve the telephonic services to Sops Arm and the West side of White Bay generally. On motion, petition received. HON. E. JONES (MINISTER OF FINANCE): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition on behalf of the residents of Tilting on Fogo Island in the district of Fogo.

The prayer of this petition is that a bridge and causeway, actually it is a combination of bridi.:E and causeway. be built to span the narrow tickle across the harbour. Now this 1!18.tter has been under consideration, Mr. Speaker, for a number of years and at one time there was not complete unanimity amen~ the people of Tilting as to whether or not this structure should be built because it was felt that it mi~ht interfer with the operation 1764

April 22nd, 1971 Tape 353 JM - 4 MR. JONES: ----- of some of the fishinp, boats and other craft operating out of the harbour. However, Ur. Speaker. this petition has been sijlned by 186 voters and they tell me that there were twenty-five voters absent from the community and therefore did not sign it. The petition is headed by the parish priest, the Rev. Barker.and it has been sent to me by Mr. Alan Dwyer who is very well-known on Fogo Island for his interest in education. In view of the fact, Mr.

Speaker, that this petition now seems to have the unanimous support of all tne people of Tilting Harbour,! beg leave to lay it on the table of the House and ask that it be referred to the Department to which it relates. ln saying that I would remind my hon. collea~ue, the Minister of Highways, that preliminary surveys have already been done on this structure. MR. H.R.V. EARLE: Mr. Speaker, I should like to support the petition .1ust presented by the hon. the Minister of Finance.

Havin~ known the area very intimately as a young man and visted it on many occasions since,! can well realize the necessity of a bridge in that particular locality. Tilting Harbour Below,as the hon. member forgot to mention the correct title of that area. was a very shallow harbour with many rocks and many shoals,which could easily be connected up,and I should ima~ine that the construction of this bridge would not be a very big norexpensive undertaking but would be of v.reat service to the people.

Therefore I support it and think that the people have lonr, been due such a facility, I·am glad that they are all in a~reement and desire it now. I support it most hearily. On motion, petition received. MR. W. RODDER: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition on behalf of the people of Channel, Port aux Basques,who have summer cabins in the Codrov area between Cooper's Brook and Campbell's Brook,where apy,roxinately thirtv families reside during about fifty to seventy-five per-cent of the yrar and 1765

April 22nd, 1971 Tape 353 JM - 5 MR. RODDF.R : also on behalf of the people who have SUr.tmer cabins in the MacDougall's Beach area and the permanent settlers~of which there are between forty and fifty families. The prayer of the petition is that electricity be extended to these areas so that they would have the conveniences that they require during the summer months. I ask that this petition be laid on the table of the House and referred to the Department to which it relates, MR. T.A. HICKMAN: Mr.

Speaker, in rising to support the petition just presented by the hon. the member for Burgeo-LaPoile the Codroy area and the Codroy Valley is developing into a very attractive area for summer residence,but with that there is arising another very serious problem that I suspect the hon. member is aware of. We are on the verge.in this Province, of facing an avalanche of land grabbers,from the United States of America in particular,who seem on the verge of followin~ the same route and creating the same problems that Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island now find them­ selves facing.

Indee<4I understand the Government of Canada has been called upon to provide massive funds to enable the Province of Prince Edward Island to buy back a lot of these lands. Now what I a~ ~etting at, Mr. Speaker, in this attractive area of Codroy,is that we have a lot of abandoned farms all up through that area and abandoned land generally which is very attractive and the owners have an absolute ri~ht to sell this property and nobody would suggest that that ri~ht be taken away from · them. They have the right to sell the property at the going market price,which is conq,aratively cheap,but if we are not careful, Mr.

Speaker, we are roin~ to find th~t over the next few years that entire area will be bought,in lar~e land tracks by outsirlers,to the exclusion of Newfoundlanders. You say, Mr. Speaker, how do you resolve that, how do you in the one breath say that a man has the right to ne~otiate and sell his ~roperty to whoever he wishes and on the other hand say that yon 1766

April 22nd, 1971 Tape 353 JM - 6 MR. HICKMAN: should try and protect some of this land and save it for Newfoundlanders? I believe that an answer to it and an answer that is being studied in other jurisdictions in North America is to provide some form of commission to look at these particular areas in the Province and,if it becomes apparent that this is what is setting in,then Government should have the right to purchase from the owner the land,at the price that has been negotiated by the owner with some private individual.

It is not going to be an expensive proposition at all, indeed it will be comparatively cheap. Then Government can develop these areas for the purpose intended, be it fanning or be it tourist development,and sell it again at the going market price.in lots that are suited for the purpose intended. It is a problem that is just starting to show up this year and last. ln supporting this petition of the hon. member for Burgeo-LaPoile I would 1767

April 22, 1971. Tape 354 page 1. direct the House's attention to the problem•1As is suggested, the cure is now available before it becomes too serious. HON. E.1-llNSOR(~fin, of Lab. Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this petition. It may be unusual for a member for Labrador North to rise and support,a petition presented by the hon. member for Burgeo & Lapoile. But, Sir, in doing so, I do it on behalf of the people of Port aux Bas~ues.

I know that area very well, having served there for four or five years, some of the time on the ill-fated "caribou,"' Sir,~ort aux Bas1ues.as we all know,is a very foggy area, I recall one month, the whole month of June we did not enjoy two hours of fine clear weathe:i:. lf it were not for places such as the Codroy Valley, where we could go when we had time off, to enjoy a little of the sunshine,life would have indeed been very dull.

So,Sir, if for no other purpose but to take and relieve the people of some of the fog and mist•they have to persevere in that air for so long,I think this petition,Sir, is well requested and every effort should be made. to provide electricity in order that those people can build sUD11er cabins and enjoy a little of the sunshine that.they do not ordinarily enjoy around Port aux Basques. Motion carried, ANSWERS·TO QUESTIONS: HON .J .R .St!ALL\IOOD (Premier): Mr. Speaker, Question No. 394, on the Order Paper of April 1, in the name of the hon. member for St.

John's Wl!st, (1) $2, 116. (2) 116,000 copies printing $2,320. folding, sorting,rackaging iabelling and deliv*ry to the Post Office $1,044 Postage 115,814.copies $3,474. Total $6,838. (3) is in some detail here, it consisted of publishing on Feb.24, in the"Echd;Fisherman's Advocate; Western Star; - ~ ,. . . - , , Lewisporte Pilot; Clarenville Packet; Grand Falls Advertiser; Gander Beacon; Springdale News~"Northem Reporter; ~rinity Conception Compass! the 'Aurora;'' the 11 Burin Peninsula Post; the "'Georgian;'' the •Newfoundland 1768

April 22, 1971 Tape 354 page~:2. 11 It ff It I II Herald; the Daily News; the Evening Telegram; on Feb. 17, in the Grand Falls Advertiser;" the"Western Star;'' the"Daily News;" the' Newfoundland . ., ,, "' ,, Herald; the Evening Telegram; and CJON's Speech by the llon. Minister of Education and"CJON'"Speech by the Premier. The total is $5,605 with several items not included because the bills have not aa yet been received, I illlagine it will go something of the order of $6/JOO. making a total altogether of $6, 800. something of the order of $13,000. Question :,o. 518 on the Order Paper of April 19, in the name of the hon. mernier for St. John's West.

(1) Have already been dealt with in this House. (2) already been dealt with in this House. (3) has already been dealt with in this House. (4) which asks for correspondence, asked for something which at the moment we are not prepared to table. lerhaps before the House prorogues we may be in position to table co~respondence, but at the moment we are not in such a position. MR.CROSBIE: Mr.

Speaker, in connection with the last question 518, the Hon. the Premier said that it had already been dealt with in the house, I would like to know when it was dealt with in the Housel These questions are not being explained in the House and certainly part (3) has never been answered in the liouse 0 The Premier said they have been answered on what date were they answeredf MR.SMALLWOOD: I do not remember the dates,Mi. Speaker, but on several occasions I answered questions, all these questions,as they weEe put to me at that time,and I gave categorical lanswers, they were categor~cal and unmistakeable.

I repeat them now.I stand by them. MR.CRuSBIE: They were misleading they were not categorical · the HoQ. the Premier never answered -.'.- MR.SPEAKER: Order please! MR.SHALL\{00D: Is this all right Hr. Speakeri MR.CROSBIE: Sure, it is all right. All right for you not to answer 1769

April 22, 1971 Tape 354 page 3. the question. MR. S:lALLWOOD: Bully boy thinks it is all right. ~tR.SP.EAKER: Order please: It is not correct at any time to say that a re~ark Made in the House is deliberating misleading,by any hon. member t9 another. RON. E.ROBERTS(Min. of Health): Mr. Speaker, a few more of the questions that have been addressed to me. Question No. 51, hon. member for St. John's East,on the Order Paper March 25, has been answeTed, that is tbe answer, it is a policy matter. MR.MARSHALL: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary on that, the answer given was that this was a matter of policy and the question was not to be answered at that time, - MR.RO.ISERTS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, although the hon. gentleman,as the Order Paper has on it a Hotice of Motion. A Bill,

An Act with reference to Hospitals and this will affect H.M.N.D. and the House will in due course be asked to debate it. Question No. 93,

(1) I have a list here as of April 1, I will table it and copies could be made for any members and for the press. ' (2) the Chairman,of the Council.Mr. French,was paid $6,000,the vice-p~esident, Mr. William Keep!ng,was paid $4600;no other member ~as paid. MR.MARSHALL: A supplementary question,Mr. Speaker, would the minister tell us how many meetings were held by the Provincial Health Council in 1970? MR.RO~ERTS: I thought I had already. I have answered that and the answer is none. Uhich does not mean,Mr.

Speaker,that there was not a great deal of work done by the Council,'Ihis means that there was no meetings of the Council, there were none. MR.CROSBIE: ( inaudible) MR.ROBERTS: Only in the mind of the hon.gentleman,those of us who know the facts - ~r. Chairman, the Chairman of the Council is not paid by 1770

April 22 19 71 Tape 354 page 4. the meeting, he is not paid by the hour he is paid to be Chairman of the Council for the year. The arrangements were not made by me but I am delighted to carry them on. MR.MARSHALL: Who made the arrangements? MR.ROBERTS: We will have to get one of my predecessors. MR.MARSHALL: Mr. Speaker, a further supplementary question, could the minister tell us what work was actually done by the Provincial Health Council in 1970, what meetin1s were held? MR.ROBERTS: ~r.

Speaker, yes, I would be delighted to, the Council Chairman and on I suppose fifteen or twenty or thirty occasions had discussions with me or with some of my officials. Some of them at a very great length 1on a number of problems, points on which we wanted his views,not the least of them was the reconstitution of the Council, a matter~which is now in proces~. I believe there is some sort of question on the Order Paper but4 in any event,as seon as I am in a position to make a statement I will be making a statement on it.

Question No. 114: The answer is that service is being provided on a p~rt-time basis by one of our Public Health liurses and the matter is being kept under review in the event that further action becomes necessary. The lady who is providing it,Sir, is Mrs. Ann Reid. Qµestion No. 136: on the Order Paper of March 25, (ll 7½% I guess,of the final value,

(2) Uo, (

l) not applicable.

(4) July 31, 1971. (51 immediately subsequent to approval and acceptance of the final plans and specifications. MR.MARSHALL: A supplementary question. Is the Minister then going to - this facility is still goini to be built aujacent to the Hosrital for Mental and :--ervous Diseases. ~tR.ROISERTS: The 11uestion I am about to ans\,er, Mr. Speaker, deals with that in part,but the answer is,yes,it will be built. A great

part c:,f. it 1771

April 22 1971 Tape 354 page 5. will be part of the present physical buildings at the Mental Hospital because part of it is to replace some beds which are quite old and should be put out of service. ~R .MARSHALL; In spite of the Brain Report, You are not going to go with the Brain Report. MR.ROBERTS: Yes, Mr, Speaker, I have already announced that we do not agree with the Brain Report on mentally ill 1where His Lordship recommends that mentally ill people should be put in prison. We think they should be in institutions for the mentally ill. Question No. 137:

(1) Yes. (2) generally the new maximum security unit will be self-contained bub there will be sharing of some facilities such as the heating, dietary and diagnostic services. Question No. 143: AS l have already announced in behalf of the Government, it is our intention to proceed with each of these projects as quickly as possible. Question No. 148: I dealt with that yesterday 1 in response to some questions, Mr. Speaker, unless the hon. gentleman wants me to repeat what I said,I will take it that he has the information he sought, Question No. 155:

(1) The Government have received recommendations from a number of bodies as to the site of a proposed hospital for the north shore of Conception Bay. Among these groups are the Town Council of Harbour Grace, the Town C:>uncil of Spania .~ds Bay, the Town Council of Carbonear and a great number of private organizations -. (2) the question is quite meanini;zless because it assumes that just one hospital wilL be built We have never said we will . just one hospital.indeed we are committed,as the House is well aware,to build two hospitals on the north shore. (3) ~r.

Speaker, that question similarly is without any meaning in light of the position of the Government. MR.MARSHALL: Could the minister now tell us where the two - where the exact locations of both hospitals will be?l understand one is to be in 1772

April 22 1971 Tape 354 pa~e 6. Carbonear but where is the other one? MR.ROBERTS: The other facility will be provided 1as the Government have for some considerable time been committed to,in the,in or near Bay Roberts, which is in Port de Grave District. MR.CROSBIE: Is the minister saying that there will not be any plebiscite to deciae tn1a·we1gncy matter. MR.ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman~! hate to disappoint him,but we have never said there will be a plebiscite - ~. fROSBIE: The Premier did. MR.ROBERTS: No, no,Mr.

Speaker, I know exactly what the Premier said.I was here, the hon. gentleman is at best ~isrepresenting what the Premier said to the House,it was on opening day. 'fhe hon. gentleman has plebicitis but we have never had any plans - MR.CROSBIE: You must have eaught it from the Premier, MR.ROBERTS: We have never had any plans to have a plebiscite,Mr. Speaker, the hon, gentleman for reasons known only to him thinks we - the plebiscite, Mr. Speake 4 will come at some point this year and we will stand by the result.

MR.CROSBIE: Is that a promise you will not change the - MR.ROBERTS: It is a promise indeed.I for one am particularly looking forward to it, and so are the people of Roddickton. MR.HICKMA.~: Would the hon. minister permit a further supplementary. 1773

April 22, 1971 Tape 355 PK - 1 !-'R. HTCJ...1-fAN: A supplementary question. Do I understand from the hon. Minister's statement that a hospital will be built, a hospital,! understand the word "hospital'' at Bay Roberts? MR. ROBF.RTS: The answer is yes, but that is another question, and one we are now deep in deciding what precisely what type of hospital, because, as the hon.~entleman knows, having at one stage being intimately involved, as Minister of Health, hospitals run all the way from,you know,a small cotta~e hospital type facility to a reneral hospital, such as the one down by Forest Road.

A hospital covers a lot of territory. MR. HICK"IAN: Opposed to a clinic. MR. FOBF.RTS: Yes, a hospital opposed to a clinic, yes. MR. CROSBIE: Another supplementary question, ~r. Speaker. Could the minister tell us whether or not a hospital will also be built in Harbour Grace? MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, the answer, I think, is "no." The people of Harbour Grace will make use of the new facilities built in Carbonear~ as they make use of the present facilities. MR. CROSBIE: That is too bad, nothing for Harbour Grace. MR. ROBERTS: No more supplementary questions? MR. CROSBIE: What about Spaniard•• Bay?

Will there be one .in Spaniard's Bay? MR. ROBERTS: My ancestral home at Brigus, Mr. Speaker, is also without a hospital. Question No. 156,asked in the name of the hon. the member for St. John's East, on the Order Paper of March 25; He wants to know the date of presentation of the architectural drawings for the hospital in Carbonear? MR. CROSBIE: What number is this one? MR. ROBERTS: I be~ your pardon? 156. The preliminary plants, Mr. Speaker, were presented to the Govemment 1n November 1968. The hon. ~entleman then asked the cost? I am told the cost was $95,46~.00.

And the name of the architectural firm, it was Hon.,ood, Calllpbell and Geehan. The firm, which,I believe, has since 177 1!

April 22, 1971 Tape 355 PK - 2 MR. RORF.RTS: the partnership has been disolved and it has been reconsituted, as two separate firms. MR. MARSUALT.: Inaudible. MR. ROBERTS: I am sorry? MR. 1-'ARSl!ALL: I did not catch the cost? MR. ROBERTS: Oh, $95,466.00. MR. HICRMAN: Is Mr. Campbell still the architecture? MR. ROBERTS: I think so, I think the Horwood part of the firm is doing Twillin~ate and the Ccll'lpbell part of the firm is doing Carbonear. I think that is the way it is. My colleague the Minister of Public Works is the minister responsible for these thin~s.

The hon. gentleman then asked; will the architectural drawings be adequate for the construction of the said hospital? And the answer is "yes, with some revision." I might add, I do not think they are complete as yet. Question No. 20~, I am not sure whether I have answered it or not. The hon. gentleman asked would nursing schools be established in Central and Western Newfoundland? Well the answer, of course, there has been in Western Newfoundland for at least two years, Mr. Speaker. MR. MARSHALL: I got knowledge of that a little while ago. MR. ROBF.RTS: Yes.

Well, I must admit it was a little dismal, the hon. gentleman has not done his homework really carefully. MR. MARSF.ALL: What about Central Newfoundland? MR. ROBERTS: Central Newfoundland, at present there are no plans completed for a nursing school in "Central Newfoundland. How is that? · MR. MARSHA~L: Would th~~hon. minister then advise us whether the Government . is going to comply with the manifesto of 1966, which talked about these parlcular nursing school? MR. ROHF.RTS: Of course, Mr.

Speaker. everythlng that was in the manifesto represented the policy of a certain political or~anization, which received the support of the party. I said.that there were no plans completed. I might add, nursinr. education, well we will go into nursing education when we come 1775

April 22, 1971 MR. RnRFP.TS~ to the estimates. MR. '!ARSHALL: Inaudible. MR. ~onERTS: Oh, at least, yes. Tape 355 PK - 3 I think, I have answered Question No, 208 orally, Have any requests for prosecutions under the Newfoundland Medical Care Insurance Act been made by the ~inister? The answer, of course is "none.'' The hon.gentleman from St. John's t·!est has a question that is a liftle closer to reality, but I do not think I have a full answer yet. Question No. 212 has been answered. The hon. gentleman asked for question No. 213 which has been answered.

And then he asked me subsequently• on the Order Paper of April 14· , to table the reply to part (2) of Question No. 213. I thought I had already answered that. But the answer is "no." The question was;have any preparatory steps been taken to effect the closing of the Come-by-Chance hospital? "no, of course not." Question No. 214, Mr. Speaker, Monday, March 29, in the name of the hon. the member for St.

John's East,asked me if I would table a list of the resettlement.Be asked me to list the resettlement areas where improper sewerage disposal caused problems requiring the attention of the Health Inspection Division in 1969 and 1970? The answer is as follows: St. George's - well I will table a copy of the liet. There is no need to have all of them marked down. St. George's, Stephenville Crossin~, Robinson's, Bide Arm, in my own consituencyi Forester's Point and Pigeon Cove, in St.

Barbe North; Seal Cove on the Baie Verte Peninsu~a; Englee in my o~m constitcency; Port au Choix, Lmnsden South, Arnold's Cove, Happy Valley and Cartwright. The hon. gentleman also asked me to state the Health Inspection Division's appraisal of the de~ree of danger to health as a result of such improper sewage disposal? Mr. Speaker, I am unable to answer the question. ~y officials make no such Sil appraisal as to the degree of dan~er to health in any individual case. It is obvious that any improper disposal of s~~erape creates a potential, if not an existing menace to proper health •. Well one more, Hr.

Speaker, I will mark it off for today. 17'76

April 22, 1971 Tape 355 MR. CP.OSBIE: You are tablin~ that list are you not? MR. ROBERTS: Yes, I will table that list. PK - 4 Question No. 215, Sir, 6n the Order Paper of March 29, in the name of the hon. the member for St. John's East,asked me under what conditions can the Hospital Insurance programme be utilized for capital expenditure? The answer is that provision of equipment in a hospital or other facility recognized under the Hospital Insurance facility, Hospital Insurance Plan, which of course, is a joint plan of this Government and the Government of Canada. We will take a rain check on the rest of it, Mr.

Speaker. HON. E. DAWE: (?iIJITIST'ER OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING): Mr. Speaker, I would beg leave to table the answer to Question No. 2531 asked by the hon. the member for St. John's Centre,on the Order Paper of March 29. I would like to point out,for the infol"lllation of the hon. member,that he will note considerably decrease in the amount shown for 1969-70,as compared to 1970-71. In 1969-70 the complete vote for water and sewera~e subsidies and the emergency a_ssistance was combined in one vote.

In 1970-71 estimates the vote was separated and the emergency assistance applied to eMergency assistance for each of the conncils,and water and sewerage subsidy was shown as one separate vote. And I would like to table the ~uestion No. 411,on the Order Paper of April 13, asked by the hon. the med>er for Bonavista North. I will table the answer to Question No. 411. MR. SPEAKF.R: Further answers to questions. BON. E. JONES: (~INISTER OF FINANCE): Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have the answers to several questions which I propose to table, all the answers which are very full and complete and leughtly.

I am quite sure the hon. members will rather have time to read them at their leisure, rather than to have me read them here now. MR. CROSRIE: We ~ot it in baby talk now. So we can understand it. 17'1',

April 22, 1971 Tape 355 PK - 5 !l'R. JONES: The answer to Ouestion No. 257 asked by the hon. the Leader of the Opposition on the Order Paper of - AN HON. ~m!ER: Inaudible. MR. JONES: Will I continue or not? of March. 1971. On the Order Paper of the 29th. day The answer to Question No. 259 on the Order Paper of 29th. of March in the name of the hon. the member for Burin. On the Order Paper of 1st. April, the answer to question No. 389 in the name of the hon. the member for Bonavista North. The answer to Question No. 416 in the name of the same hon. ~entleman on the Order Paper of 13th. of April, 1971.

The answer to Question No. 494 in the name of the hon. the member for St. John's West on the Order Paper of 16th. of April, 1971. The answer to Questioa No. 496 in the name of the same hon. gentleman on the Order Paper of the 16th. of April, 1971. MR. CHALKER: That is mine. Do not give him mine. That will keep hi111 busy for the weekend. St. George's Day. There lll118t be four or five more speeches here now. ORDERS OF THE DAY .... MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, before we get to Orders of the Day, i would like to move a ~.otion.

I beg leave to make a Motion for the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance. And that matter is, Mr. Speaker, to discuss the fact that only ~430 or fifty-six percent of the 2,543 persons employed at Churchill Falls, in connection · with the Churchill Falls Project in Labrador 1 as of March 1, 1971,are persons born in this Province,are pel'1!1anent residents of this Province as compared to the 713 persons e1ffT'loyed at Churchill Falls who have ~oved into the Province from outside of the Province 1 to work on the said Churchill Falls Project.

Including the fact that only ].13:J"'or sixty-eight pe-rcent of the hourly paid workers are from Newfoundland as compared with 512 workers from outside of Newfoundland, and only 293 or thirty-three percent of the salaried 1778

April 22, 1971 Tape 355 PK - 6 ""R. CPOSBIE: employees are from Newfoundland as compared to 601 or sixty-seven percent of the salaried employees from outside of Newfoundland, and to discuss the steps that should be taken by the Government to increase the number of persons employed at Churchill Falls in this Province. ' And to ensure that employment at Churchill Falls is restricted to workers born or permanently residents in this Province ,-!Xcept for such worker employed in skill occupations.where such workers are not available in this Province.

And the necessity for a Commission of Enquiry to proceed immediately to investi~ate the employment suitation at Churchill Falls with respect to the number of workers employed there from this Province and with respect to the adequacy or otherwise of the protection given to workers at Churchill Falls, by the unions at Churchill Falls and by the representive of the Government at Churchill Falls~ Mr. Speaker, this is asking for leave under .Standing Order 23, The matter is urgent, the information on which this Motion is made was only tabled in this House yesterday,by t~e Minister of Labrador Affairs.

It discloses that at the present time only fifty-six percent of the people employed at Churchill Falls - "'1t. SPEAKER: The hon. the member has stated his - MR. CROSBIE: Yes, now I am addressing myself,as urgent. MR. SPEAKER: Me ia not nc,,,., to make a speech in connection Yi.th this until it has been detided whether he has leave to present it or not. MR. CROSBIE: I am quite aware of that, Mr. Speaker. I am now addressing myself to the urgency of it, but at this moment only fifty-six percent of what is workin~ - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I have to tell the hon. member that he state briefly the 111Stter of urgency, then it is passed from the Chair, but he is not to make a speech in support of the 1118.tter of the urgency, ~hat will be done. if the Motion is accepted. MR. CFOSBIF.: Right, Mr. Speaker, I agree with this, Mr. Speaker, a hundred percent. The urgency is AN HON. ~~ER: Inaudible. 1779

April 22, 1971 Tape 355 PK - 7 MR. CPOSBJF.: The hon. the minister does not mind me speakin~ on the urgency. Does the minister want ~e to sit down and not say anything? The urgency is, Mr. Speaker, that the ~_a.tter cannot be discussed at the present time except throu~h such a Motion, as this. The Motion does not revive a discussion on a matter which has been discussed in this session previously. The Motion does not anticipate a matter which has prerlo~ly been appointed for consideration by the House or with reference to which a notice of Motion has been previously given and not withdrawn.

The urgency is that at the present time only fifty-six percent of the e~ployees are from the Province of Newfoundland, so that not one day should be lost in discussing this matter upon having the Govemment take some action on it. That we have always been given the understanding that the percentage of Newfoundlanders working at Churchill Falls is much higher than this. MR. ROWE, F.W. On a point of order, Mr. Speaker ~ Your Honour ruled that the hon. gentleman had no business making a speech on the urgency, or on anything else.

In definance of Your ruling and in order to try to circumvent the rules of this House, the hon. gentleman is making a speech. When he starts to point out what the Premier said or what the Premier did not say, the Government said or did not say, he is making a- speech and he is doing what he has done a dozen times and fifty times this year and last year. He is trying to circumvent the rules of this ~~use. I will ask Your Honour to rule accordingly. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, on that so-called point of order, I refer to Beauchesne, Parliamentary Rules and Forms. I refer the hon. minister to it too.

Perhaps, he can leam something about Parliamentary Procedure. Beauchesne, Mr. Speaker, on Pages88 to 90,discusses such motions, and on page 89 it says, '' the difinite matter of urgent 178~

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 356 NC - 1 MR. CROSBIE: public importance for the discussion of which the adjournment of the House may be moved, must be so pressing that public interest will suffer if it is not given immediate attention. That is what I am trying to establish.

MR, SPE,AKER: I am of the opinion that.the hon. member is anticipating that leave will be denied to put this matter forth,and he is now. arguing the Point of Order in anticipation of the Order not being permitted, Now this is the argument that he is now putting forth, Now if we will continue with the business of the House, I will give my ruling within a very short time as to whether this motion for leave will be accepted by the Chair or whether it would be a matter .that we put before the House.

We will continue on the other matters, hat is what I would prefer to do now and I will decide whether this 1110tion to move the adjournment of the House, whether leave will be granted or no~ and we can interrupt the proceedings at any particular time in this present litting,within the hour, to move the adjournment of the -debate. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, can I finish my remarks as to the urgency of the matter? These matters are moved in Ottawa constantly and a member ia permitted to speaker on urgency. The question of urgency, I.am being denied the opport1D1ity to speak on the urgency of the question.

Mll ROWE: Your are breaking the rules. MR. CROSBIE: Just listen to it. Simple 11indedt HR. SPEAKER: I must deny the hon. member the ript. He is now debating the urgency of the matter and I will decide. The Chair will decide whether the matter ~s urgent or not or whether the necessity of urgent debate, immediate debate, is necessary, Now that argument comes after I have given that rulinR, May we continue with the other matters Ihe next Order before the House, which is Orders of the Day,and I will give my ruling as to whether the plea to introduce this motion will be granted or not. 1781

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 356 NC - 2 MR. CROSBIE: On Order of the Day, I wish to address a question to the Premier. Is the Government ioing to carry out its promise to the hospital workers who are working in non-Government hospitals in the Province 1made last year, that they would get an automatic salary increase of five per cent in this present fiscal year? It is reported that the hopital workers at Grand Falls are upset because they have not received their five per cent increase. Will the Premier tell us what the decision is on that? MR. SMALLWOOD: I know of no such promise made by anyone. MR.

CROSBIE: It was made in the House here last year. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Health,A Bill, "An Act Respecting Mental Health,"read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Health, A Bill,"An Act To Provide Por The Management And Operation Of Hospitals in the Province", read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Health, A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Newfoundland Medical Care Insurance Act," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

On motion of the hon. the Minister of Health, A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Dental Care Act of 1968," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice, A Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Securities Act," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice, A Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The District Courts Act," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 356 NC - 3 On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice, A Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Evidence Act," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice, A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Mechanics' Lien Act, 1970," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Justice, A Bill, "An Act To Repeal The Act 9 Ed. VII Cap. 2 Entitled "An Act To Incorporate The Newfoundland Board of Trade, And For Other Purposes," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow.

On motion of the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Agreement Ratified By, And Set Forth In The

Schedule To, The Canadian Javelin Limited (Agreement) Act, 1966,And To Make Certain Provisions Relating to That Agreement," read a· first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, A Bill,"

An Act To Amend The Agreement Ratified, Confirmed And Adopted by And Set Forth In The

Schedule To The Commodore Mini~g Company Limited (Agreement) Act, 1968, And ~o Make Certain Statutory Provisions Relating To That Agreement," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, A Bill, "An Act To Amend The Agreement Ratified, Confirmed And Adopted By And Set Forth In The

Schedule To The Big Nama Creek Mines Limited (Agree~ent) Act, 1966-67, And To Make Certain Statutory Provisions Relating To That Agreement," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. the Minister of Mines, Agriculture and Resources, A-Bill, "An Act To Authorize The Govemment To Enter Into An 1783

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 356 NC - 4 Agreement With Robin Hood Multifoods Limited (formerly Robin Hood Flour Mills Limited) Which Would Further Amend The Agreement Ratified, Confirmed And Adopted By And Set Forth In The

Schedule To The Government - Robin Hood Flour Mills Limited (Agreement) Act, 1963, And To Make Certain Provisions Relating To That Agreement," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. Minister of Finance, A Bill, "An Act Further To Al!lend The Social Security Assessment Act," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. Minister of Finance, A Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Gasoline Tax Act, 1962," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon.

Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation, A Bill, "An·. Act Further To Amend The Workmen's Compensation Act, 1962," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. On motion of the hon. Minister of Education and Youth, ~ A Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Education (Teachers' Pensions) Act, 19621 " read a first time 1 ordered read a second time on tomorrow. Motion second reading of a Bill, "An Act To Amend The Department Of Comm.unity And Social Development Act, 1966." MR. ROWE·'(W.N.): Mr.

Speaker. this is a fairly minor Bil1 1 not much to it, It merely, as the explanatory note says,amends the principal Act with respect to the agreement-making powers of myself with other people or agencies. The Act of 1966 1784

April 22nd, 1971 Tape 357 PK_I - 1 MR. ROWE(W.N.): the Department of Co11U11unity and Social Development Act, as far as the Minister was concerned~gave certain powers to enter into a~reements with the Govenunent of Canada and with other institutions or agencies of that Government or with institutions or agencies or persons not associated with any Government. It was found, Sir, during the course of the last two oz three years, that while there was a definite necessity to retain the section,

section nine (9)(1),with respect to the minister obtaining the approval of the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council, with regard to entering into some of the larger agreements, for example, the DREE agreement or the ARDA agreement or si~ilar agreements concerning many matters on which many millions of dollars were involved. But, Sir, there are many other agreements, whic~ I enter into, as Minister of Community and Social Development, which do not entail or involve much money and which sometimes have to be entered into fairly quickly in order to get the greatest efficiency from them.

Therefore, Sir, this Bill, Section (2) of this Bill, would repeal Section (9) of the old Act, keeping, ''the necessity of the approval of the Lieutenant Governor- 1.n-Council for the lar~er and bigger agreements." But doing away with the necessity for the Minister of Co1111111.mity and Social Development to get the approval of the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council for such agreements as research, progrmmies of research and investi~ation with the Government of Canada or other agencies or the necessity for approval of the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council for such agreements, we say, universities or educational institutions and municipal..authorities.

Last year some delays were suffered by myself and by the department, because, perhaps, a week or two would go by before the Lieutenant- -Governor-in-Council could give the necessary consent to that type of agreement. Therefore, Sir, the Bill would, I submit, make the operations of the Department of Cmr.munity and Social Development more efficient, if the Bill is passed into Law. I do not think. there is 1785

April 22, 1971 Tape 357 PK - 2 MR. ROPr~(P.N.) anythini;? I need to say about it, other than what I have said. But, I will certainly answer any questions, when I close the debate, if hon. members would like for me to answer some. MR. CROSBIE: ~r. ~~e~ker, there is nothing earth shakini;?nor world shatterin~ in this Bill,that the minister said. But, it is a Bill that amends the Department of Community and Social Development Act, and it is a Bill that deals with joint undertakinrs by the Government of Newfoundland with the Government of Canada or any agencies of the two of them.

A project for Community or Social Development in this Province: Payment to the Province of contributions in respect to the cost of any of those projects! These were the agreements to assilt the development of income under employment opportunities and improving the standard of living in the Province and so on. I would appreciate, Mr. Speaker, if the minister could give us some information on the kind of a~ree~ents he is working on. All that we ever see in this House,from the minister,is once or twice during the session, particularly this year,of course, Election Year, last year was possibly an election year.

All we ever see in the House from the minister is a long statement of construction contracts entered into by the Government.with the Government of Canada, where they are payin~ the cost of roads, or advancing loans for water and sewerage and the rest of it. Without any disclosure.and there was one particularly obsecure document tabled here last year, hundreds of pages, I think, it was, at least one hundred, the greatest J;?Obbly-book in the world, sociolo,ical language,or language anyway that is used by sociologists and university types, which is supposedly a plan for the development of the Province.

It was like going to the dentist, to read the thing. I mean it gave you a pain right in the tooth. I would not say where else it could give you a pain to read that document. Now the minister is bringing in t~is amendment dealing with the power to enter into agreements with the Government of Canada. Could the minister, just in ordinary baby talk, as the Premier and the hon. the 1786

April 22, 1971 Tape 357 PK - 3 !-ffi. CRO~BIE· ~inister of Social Services and Rehabilitation, ~aby talk such as they speak, could he tell the Pouse now when he answers, what are some of these agreements he wants the power to enter into? MR. ROWE. W.N. Is that in order, Mr. Speaker? l-'R. CROSBtE: Yes, that is definitely in order under the Rill. Do not worry about it. I wl'>uld not mention it, if itwerenot. AN RON. MEMBER: Inaudible. l-'R. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, also, we are continually hearing about the five year ~lans that the minister is going to enter into.

Nm~ we all know that Prince F.dward Island does have a ten year comprehensive development plan that was entered into several years ago. New Brunswick has tvo plans, 1 think. quebec has a plan. But, Newfoundland, we have yet to see the Newfoundland plan. We saw some scrambled egg language of an alledged plan here last year. But, as far as I knOII, the minister has not entered into any five year plan or any ten y.ear plan forthe development of the Province. Or if he has it is not certainly very well known.

Re spoke in the House several days ap;o and said that, I think he said, that the agreements to be entered into this year, iz going to be for a year. A year for certain, but it is going to be very flexible. MR. ROW, W.N. Four year.flexible. MR. CROSBIE: Flexible is a great word in this House, ~r. Speaker, we heard about flexibility yesterday in connection with finances. We are suppose to gut the Audit and Revenue Act to give the Cabinet all the power the Rouse used to have, so the Government can be flexible in approaching problems of borrowing money.

Now, we hear about the flexibility that is needed in the Department of Conununity and Social Development to enable that department to do its thing. Well, I do not mind the department doing its thing, but I would like to understand what the thin, is that the department is going to do. What is this thing? •what is this thing called love?" That is what the members of the Cabinet sini;i: every day, when they sintt "Night and Day," '"You Are 'the One. •·and then they sing, ''What is This Thing Called Love." What is this thinp; called the five year prograll!ffle? 1787

April 22, 1971 Tape 357 PK - 4 ~- CP.OSHTE: DPEE, it used to be called FRED. It used to be something else. I would like to see the minister give us some news on that. What agreements have been entered into so far, if any, for Community or Social Development? This is apart from water and sewerage jobs and roads, we all want those. I do not care where the road gets paved, if we can get them all paved, grand. Water and swwerage is good everywhere, Mr. Speaker. The accessroad into St. John's is good. These are all grand things.

But, what kind of agreements have been entered into,would the minister tell us,for Community or Social Development? Has he negotiated any of those yet? What agreements? Are there any agreements dealing specifically with the development of income and employment opporttmities? Apart from the p.rants that they may give towards the creation of industry here, ~hat are the programmes of research and investigation? ~-&ild the minister give us some example of what programmes in research and investigation he is undertaking in co-operation with Canada. Or, if there are none yet, could he tell~ what they are workinp, on?

What kind of research? I remember seeing one fascinating study, it was a study or an' investigation into the in-structure of the people in Caplin Cove or something or other. Some fantastic study, the minister doubtless read it. I do not think he acted on it, if he did he would be awarded the Minister of Health now, in at here Majesty's Mental Hospital. How does that go, H.M.M.H? Is that the new wording for it? MR. ROWE, W.N. H.M.N.D. MR. CROSBIE: H.M.N,D. MR. ROWF., W.N. Inaudible. MR. CROSBIE: Oh, he is excellent today. Yes, the minister is doing a powerful job.

What are these apreements in Section (3) the minister mentions, agreements with Universities, F.ducational Institutions, Municipal Authorities' So I would like, Mr. S'peaker, for the minister to give us, when he replies,some information, forget for the moment the announcements for pavin,i;.roads, we have got those. Forret for the mo111ent the announcements 1788

April 22, 1971 tape 357 PK - 5 MP. CROSBIE: about installing water and sewerage, we had those last year. Last year you could not dig a grave on the island, there were going to be so much water and sewerage pipes laid. MR. SMALLWOOD: That was right. MR. CROSBIE: There was not ~oing to be a six feet of space left to put a body. That programme was killed getting started. Forget that. Forget the contracts for the accessroad. Forget the more spectacular and just tell us the real things that might count here in the future. What are these a~reements the minister is working on?

Give us some examples. :He wants powers to enter into these agreements on his own without the consent of the Lieutenant Governor-in-Council. Let us here what these are. What is he working on? Behind the spectacular facade, which is mostly to be used for election purposes, the great sums of money that are going to be spent.we hope this year and the following years, what real detail stuff is being done for the development of the Province for increasing the el!IPloyment opportunities, increasing the standard of living generally, improving community development? This is what I would like to hear him tell us.

I am quite satisfied for the minister to have the power he asked for, Mr. Speaker, in this Bill. But, I would like to ask him now to give us a run down, and it will not take so long I apart from the spectacular expenditures of money, just what is his department doing? That department originally, when it was originally conceived, and I was a,member of the Government when it was conceived, one of the conceivers, that department was suppose to be a staff department, not a lion department. It was ,-oing to be a department . of perhaps, six or ten or fourteen people, who were going to do planning and co-ordination.

And all the actual work was goin~ to be done by the lion departments by Public Works, by Hi~hways, by Municipal Affairs, and the other departments of Govemt!lent. Hell thltt concept got changed, the department got involved in resettlement, the department now has, I have not got my estimates, but 1789

April 22, 1971 Tape 357 PK - 6 HR. CROSBIE: it must be well over one hundred employees. It is gettin~ to be quite a gigantic department. And all we ever hear about is the water and sewer contracts and the road contracts, yes and schools, construction of schools. So, if the minister·could just,when he answers, just tive us, we have no objection to his having this power, but what else is he doing besides these thinJ1;s that we hear mentioned that are popular? What are the other kinds of things that are ,oing to improve the Province, we hope; that he wants permissico to enter into? MR. EARLE: ?-'r.

S~eaker, just very briefly on this Bill, agreeing with 'llf.Y hon. friend,the member for St. John's West, I think, it is very confusing the langua~e, of course, of this particular department is probably the moat confusing used anywhere in Government. I think the people of Newfoundland are becoming even more confused as to what the actual activity of the department means. It does appear to the average citizen that there has been tremendous amounGof money expended on research and inve~tip.ation and all that sort of thing. Well is that going to be the do-all and end-all in creating jobs?

Is everyone in Newfoundland J?Oing to be a researcher and an investigator and an examiner, or are we going to produce some practical results? The minister outlined a few days ago a progrmmne which 'l>'as largely a repetition of something which was promised last year. And, similarly, we were told last year, very definitely,that this agree111ent was to be SiJ?ned, I believe the date was almost named,July something or other, one of these many agreements was to be si~ed and everythinr was going to hum fro~ there on. Well, this is nearly July of the year following, and the a~reement has not still been signed.

The suspicious is bei~g aroused in some of us over here and. I think, in the general public that perhaps the flexi~ility which the 1":l.nister is askinr for in his delllinrs with Ottawa is not a flexibility at all but a restriction, insofar 11.s Otta~•a is taki.nl" a seconrl look at a lot of these thin~s. th .Perhaps are usin~ tatics of delay, which are covererl hv a very hir.h-soundini;? word such as. surveys and exarninati nm; 1730

April 22, 1971 Tape 357 PK - 7 MR. P.A~LE: and so on. This type of thing to cover Ul) their unwillinr,less in a sense to enter into some of these ap.reements. Now if that suspicious is conect, and it is not merely a matter of investigating thin~s to the point of being absolutely sure of. what we are undertaking or what has been undertaken in this Province, this is the sort of thin~ which, I think, the minister should clarify in his answers.

It is also puzzling and confusing that we hear of ar,reements, we hear of all sorts of the highly qualified employees lookin~ into this, that and the other thing, what are they lookin1 into? What types of a~reements are they P-Oin~ to produce? What is ~oing to come from these agreements?

Surely, after these years of work in this department,the minister must be in a position to outline some real activities and not,as my collea~ue just said, a programme of road construction, water and sewer and so on, which is largely, I have to agree, election bait, particularly when this same sort of a thing was predicted last year and it did not come to pass. The expenditure last year was very, very much below what had been predicted in this House, which would give 1791

April 22 1971 Tape 358 page 1. everyone to think or lead everybody to think that perhaps tlte expenditures which are predicted for this year may in a similar vein be very much less than they are now. This kind of double talk which is in essence beclouding the issue and fooling the people is leading to a great deal of concern all over the Province, l-n this amendment to the Bill or this Bill the Minister says he is asking for more flexibility to enter into these agreements.

What is the pul!ppse of the flexibility:'Js it to speed them up, is it to make them clearer, is it to make them more understandable by the , people or is it to further cloud the issue and to cover up on activities which are contemplated, announced that it is going to be done and finally disappear into a veil of secrecy under some sort of survey or examination which just seems to peter out7 Now, I can well understand,with the history of the expenditures of this Province,that Ottawa is not going to just enter into a blanket agreement and let everybody down here spend money on projects, pet projects all. over the country, on what they think is best,without really trying to find out if thes~ things are of value.

Possibly this may be the reason why Ottawa is becoming super~super caut~ous on this end, demanding more and more agreements and more and m,)re inv~stigations. But there must be an end ct this vicious circle somewhere,because what it has developed into now is jast a continuing circle of examinations and agreements and so on, without an awful lot materializing. Kewfoundland and Newfoundlanders just cannot afford to sit back and wait for people to do these surveys and examinations without seeing concrete results.

If this year the same sort of thing is repeated as transpired last year,I think there will be a great loss of faith in these so-called agreements. These,Mr. Speaker,are my only comments on the Bill because · I do think that to the public generally and certainly to us in this l:louse,what has been attempted and what is 1792

April 22 1971 ,,Tape 358 page 2. going on is a complete blanket of secrecy.We have no idea.We are not being given the information and all we see is sometimes a list of projects which the minister says will be carried out which,if we look at the history of last year,may very well not be carried out. MR.W.ROWE: Mr. Speaker, some of the remarks made by hon. members opposite of course · are more properly for the budget debate or 017 the estimates of my department when they are brought in.

This Bill merely asks this House to allow the minister of the department to sign certain, to enter into certain minor agreements, minor in terms of the amount of money expended and minor in terms of their scope, with other agencies or government. In other words,it merely changes the power of the minister to do this without the approval of the Lieutenant-Governor in CounciL I have had no objection,when the time comes,to talking about many of the matters which hon. members have mentioned. There was one valid point which the bon. member for St. John's West brought up, just what type of agreements are envisaged under

Section 3 (

a) and (

b) and

Section 2 (

b) of

Section 9. of the amendmentr The types of agreements we are talking about are research agreements with the Federal Government and with say the University and other consulting groups; For example, there is a need in certain of the special areas or prospective special areas in the province.under the DIEE Agreement, a need for studies for additional townsite development and infrastructure needs in these special areas. There is a need for .. certain agreements with regard to economic opportunities an infrastructure needs and a need for certain community development projects - AN.

HON .HE~!BER: (inaudible) ~-!R.ROl>'E: Job opportunities, what types of things can be entered into ..;..ither -with the help of DREE grants or with the help of ARDA r,rants to set up various projects in various areas and in special areas and 1733

April 22 1971 Tape 358 page J. otherwise to make it more economically viable for people to live and remain there. There is a study, for example, which i.-e entered into already and which we will continue to enter into on the needs for post-secondary education in the province.

This will be done in conjunction with the Department of Education but because we will get half or more of the cost of such studies from Ottawa, from OREE,and because this department,Community and Social Oevelopment,is the department which OREE enters into agreements with primarily,as a co-ordinating department 1 it is thought necessary that I or the minister sign the agreements and act as a coordinating department with all the other departments.

So on this study in the works for a post-secondary education needs in the Province 1 last year we entered into an agreement with two pEofessors at ttemorial University, Education Professors, to study the primary and secondary education in the Province of Newfound­ land and Labrador.

Not a massive survey but a study in which they would take advantage of their o~~ experience and opinions in that area and draw upon other resources in order to advise the department,which I hap~en to be the Minister·of,and to advise the department of Education,in that case, to help us to have more background when dealing with Ottawa and also to help make Ottawa see our point of view in certain cases. Also, in many cases it is not a matter of confrontation between ourselves and Ottawa.

It is a matter of both governments wanting the benefit of certain expertise and ~xpert opinion and advice on certain relatively small matters affecting future OREE programmes or ARDA A;greemeil.ts or forestry agreements, for exarnj,le, or mineral dev,!lopment agreements. There is another study rossibly in the works.concerned about the po-tential for tourist development in certain areas of the Province. :;o\,; that would appear to be a funny area for my oarticular department to be getting into but I must stress that it 'loas entered into, by my derartment

April 22 1971 Tare 358 page 4. as the co-ordinator between say the department of Economic Development and OREE in Ottawa. OREE acting as the co-ordinator for the other federal departments in Ottawa. The function of my department, the Department of Community and Social Development,is to act not as a line department,except in certain areas, for example, resettlement and well-drilling and that sort of thing.

But the primary function of the Department of Community and Social Development is to serve as a focal point for all the departments of this government in our negotiations with DRE£ in Ottawa,and the primary function for DREE in Ottawa.besides funding the program~es which we enter into and the agreements which we enter into,is to act as a focal point and a co-ordinator for all the other Ottawa departments which might be interested in various develop­ ments in the Province. This has~I would submit,Your Honour,has the benefit of getting rid of duplication of effort.

It has the benefit of allowing programmes and plans to proceed more efficiently more quickly and with more departments with more knowledge as to what is going on than has been the case hithertofor. There is another small agreement in the worlts,for example, which is concerned with the potential expansion of large scale fishing,fish processing. in various places in the Province,on the Burin Peninsula for example or on the North East Coast of Newfoundland or the North West Caast of Newfoundland or on the South West Coast of Newfoundlan4.

Again this is not to be taken as a usurpation by the Department of Community and Social Development of the functions ordinarily dealt with or undertaken by the Department of Fisheries in Newfoundland or a usurpation by OREE of the functions of the Department of Fisheries ot Environment in Ottawa. All it means is that we, the two depart- ments mentioned,DREE and ~onmunity and Social Development,are acting as coordinators in order to make sure that the most efficient channels of communication, raost efficient channels of action are entered into 1795

April 22 1971 Tape 358 paii;e 5. at the beginning and that we can proceed with the programme as quickly as possible. I do not have a list of the various minor contracts wbich we have entered into to date, with the University or with consulting groups but I would be more than happy to supply the hon. member with such a list. I was under the impression that I had tabled a list in the House last year for the information of the members,if I have not I will~chec~ that point, if I have not I will make certain that I will in the future and that the member for St.

John's West particularly will get a copy delivered to him by hand. MR.CROSBIE: Would the minister pemit a question? Would the Minister tell the House whether his department or the Government of Canada is having a study undertaken in the Province at the moment to do with political matters by one Melvin Goldfarm, political study is now going on at Placentia, Clarenville and St. John's and around the island or is it that this Provincial Uberal Farty is having that study undertaken?

MR.RmJE: The question to my mind is beneath contempt.and I must say that I have no, absolutely no knowledge of what the hon. memu·er is talking about. On motion Bill read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow.

Item 22, A Bill, An}ct Further To Amend The Memorial University (Pensions) Act." MR.CROSBIE: I moved a motien,that we debate a matter of urgent public importance. \ohen is that point going to be dealt with if the afternoon goes and it is not dealt with.the motion that I have moved,that we debate a matter of urgent public importance.' yet from the Chair for some reason. 'lhere is no decision MR.:mEL That matter is in the hands of the Speaker and I understood that he informed the House that he would consider the matter and give his rulin~­ someti.me durin~ the session this afternoon. 1796

April 22 1971 Tape 358 page 6. ffil.F.tJ.ROWE(Education): Mr. Speaker, this is one of these formal amendments that the House is frequently called on to make in t!-,e interest of changing conditions or in the interest of elaboration or modification, necessitated by the development of events. The House is well aware of the fact that we have a Public Services (Pension) Act in fact we have a Teachers' Pensions Act and we have a University (Pensions) Act, the University has its own Pensions Act and,to a great extent,these Acts and indeed the Pension Acts of other semi-government bodies are inter-related.

They are in respect of the Teachers pension and the public services pensions, what we refer to normally as the Civil Service Pensions Act. They are reciprocal or the next thing to it, there is reciprocation. Thus if a teacher becomes a magistrate, as frequently happens,and he has fifteen years of pensionability he carries those fifteen years over into the public service, lf he then teaches for another fifteen years er works as a magistrate for another flfteen ~r twenty years.he then is entitled to his full pension. This thing works both ways. ln resoect of the University,hm.•ever,it is not fully reciprocal.

If a person from the University comes into the public service he gets credit for his years . as a teacher or a professor But,I understand that in the Memorial University (Pensions)Act there is no provision whereby someone in the public service can revert to university work and get credit for that. In other words,to use a concrete example, a very good example , the present deputy ~!inister of Education, Mr. lianley.was atone time a professor at Memorial and when he transferred over to the Department of Education, as a superi~to:ndent, as a civil servant. he brought his years with him.

But if today he were to go back into the University,which is a theoretical possibility,and I doubt in his case because he has not many years left before r"'tirerneut, but it could apply in his case and certainly in ti1e case of other professional men in tbe department of education.for example . 17!)7

April l2 1971 Ta,e 358 page 7. U Kr. llanl.ey were to go back to the University.under the present University Act il.e would not 1tet any credit for the years he has spent u Deplity-illi.nister of Education. This.of course, it was not the ,a,rernment. ay,:parently it was an oversight in the framers of the original University Pensions Act and certainly it was no design of this House ciof the government.~ %his Bill simply rectifies _that omission there ao that the University Pensions Act will enable pers .ons working in the public service.who go into the Universicy service~to carry their yea"rs of service with them. I move second reading. 1798

A-pril 22, 1971 Tape 359 PK - 1 MR. EARLE: A couple of questions under this, Mr. Speaker, I am wondering if this goes all the way up to nine, dcies this apply also to perhaps ministers of the Crown who have been in the service, as ministers or public serv&nts,a11d then that man would retire to the Vniversity,~oes this allow the pension to carry on? And would the Minister answer this when he replies al9~, just for a matter of information to the House, are the teachers at the Vocational Technological Schools ci'ri.l servants for pension purposes or are they teachers?

Do they come under the teachers pension or under the civil service pension regulations? MR. MURPFY: There is just one question that I would like to ask, which is this: 1ake the case of, the minister mentioned Mr. Henley, he has accumulated years of service here, naturally enough 1 should he retire, I presume his accmnulated pension would _~e due him at the age of retirement? And then his years at the University, he would accumulate another pension. AN RON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. MURPHY: He would not,he is too old? AN HON. ?-'EMBER: Inaudible.

J.1-fR. ~HY: The point that I all trying to make is this;, say he was due his pension here after many years of service, the Government w~uld pay him a pension, and then he would go, it could be to any other job, where he could accumulate another pension, you know, so that is just a question, he would not be done out of a pension for forty years say, if he served thirty here and then get ten years at the University? The only thing. he would be getting two checks, one from the University and one from the Provincial Government. That is not the fact,is it? MR. ROWE, F.'-!. ~r. Speake;,if no one wishes to speak. MR.

SPEAKF.R: We will close the debate. "MR. ROWE, F.W. In answer to the question raised by my hon. friend from Fortune Bay~ members of the House of Asserbly; MY recollection is that, they are covered under a completely serarate Act, not under tie Civil 1739

April 22, 1971 Tape 359 PK - 2 MR. ROWE, F.W. Service Act. Number one, I do not think, this would apply here, I am quite sure the service in this House would not count, if one went over there , to the University as it were. Take a concrete example~ if I went over to the University, I could not get any credit for it. And in any case. out of curosity, I have no plansnor ambition. The other question raised by my hon. friend, the second question was what about Vocational Teachers? Vocational Teachers are not covered in , the Teachers Pension Act. The Teachers Pension.

Act covers only the teachers in the ordinary schools of the Province. The Vocational teachers are covered under the Public Service Act. they are covered under the Civil Service Act. Now take a case such as Mr. Henley's, which is a very good case, because it is a concrete exlllllple •. Ee is not covered at all under the Memorial University Pensions Act. He was a professor at that University for some years, but when he came over to the Civil Service he brought his years with him. This has always been possible under the Civil Service Act.

I had, speaking personally, I had fifteen years of pensionability under the Teachers Pensions Act. I then became a Depot~ Minister,on which I illllllediately became a civil servant, and I brought my fifteen years of service there,and they would have been added had I remained a civil servant, they would have had been added to my years as a civil servant. In Mr.

Henley's case, for example, when he is pensioned in, I think, three years time, his pension will be based on his years as a teacher, his years at the university and his years as a civil servant.up to the maximum number permissible under the Act, which I think is thirty-five years. ~peaking from memory, I think it is thirty-five years. But, now this would protect persons in reverse, that is , ~f Mr. Henley, for example, were to go back into the University service, he would not lose the years he acculumated here as a public servant.

He would take that over to the university and when he retired,in three years time, he would automtically get credit for the years that he carried over to the University plus the years that he spent at the university. 1800

A~ril 22, 1971 Tape 359 Pk - 3 MR. ROUE. F.W. Mr. Speaker, I mi~ht say that when this is in committee, if there is any other question on it, we could always deal with a specific question. I move, second reading. ~otion: ~econd readin~ of a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Memorial University Pensions Act," ordered to a Corrunittee of the Whole House on tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER: Before proceeding further: As I had advised the House a little earlier, I would give the decision on the matter of the adjournm~nt of the House on a matter of urgent public importance.

May I quote, first of all, from Beauchesne,Page 90, wub-section 3, •~.,urgency within this Rule does not apply to the matter itself. But it means urgency of debate when the ordinary opportunity provided by the rules of the House do not permit the subject to be brought on early enough and public interest demands that discussion take plaee immediately.

" Secondly, let me quote to you as well, from Sub-section 5, •· The adjournment of the House cannot be moved with reference to critical conditions generally prevailing in certain parts of the country." Our own Standing Orders also state (1) that when the 1110tion is made for leave to adjourn the House, the person moving it · hands a written statement of the matter proposed to be discussed to the Speaker, who, if be think it in ordet and of urgent public importan:e, reads it out and aske whether the member has leave of the House or not.

The responsibility of the Speaker is to decide whether it is in order and if the debate on it is•so urgent that it must be gone into immediately." Sub-section (2) of

section (f),on Page 15 of our Standing Orders, •tates as well - th~y have a number here on page 15, ''the right to 1110ve the ad1ournmenc ·of the House for the above purposes is subject to the followin~ restriction: I will just read one of them. "The right to move the adjournment of the House fot the purposes.is subject to the following restriction. And I say I will just read one of these restrictions. ''Not more than one matter may be discussed on the same motion; Taking all 1801

April 22, 1971 Tape 359 PK- 4 'HR. SPEAKER: these matters into consideration, and I know that the matter itself is probably urgent. I think the rules provide for an~ the Orders of the Day provide for that it will not be very long before we are into the Budget Debate. I do not think, therefore, the urgency of debate exist in this instance. Furthermore, that it is dealing with a

section of the Province and,thirdly, that there are at least three items, three separate subjects named in the motion itself. For these reasons, I cannot accept the motion for leave to adjoum the House to discuss this particular matter outlined in the motion. MR. MURPHY: ~r. Speaker, if I may, I do not know what my position is, I aaybe entirely out of order.

But, I have heard these motions so many times moved and the Speaker delivers his rule, as he does today, and I would just like to know; how can we debate at any time a matter of urgency in this Housel All the rules seem to preclude, you know, on this particular matter and I just give him my thought on this, where a certain ratio of employees are set up in Labrador City. MR, SPEAKER: I will reply to the hon. member in this way. To begin with it is not in order to discuss the ruling, and I know that the . hon. member has pointed out that he was not 9iscusaing the ruling he was asking, which is still not in orde~.

Ke is asking a hypothetical question that the Chair is not at liberity to answer. I will say this •much that there are occasions, a number of occasions, when the House c~ be adjourned to discuss a matter of public importance. It has been done and there are situations in which the urgency of the debate is present, but I do not think that it is present in this instance But there are certain times when it is present, and when it is present and the Speaker feels that it is, then he _puts the question to the House, as to whether the hon. the member has leave to make the motion.

Even after the Speaker accepts it, It is up to the House to decide whether the hon. member has leave to make that motion or not. I think, that the hon. member tmderstands that. Plus the fact that in this instance, at least 1802

April 22, 1971 Tape 359 PK - 5 'HR. SPEAKFP.: there were three different subjects in the same motion. Orders are clear, you cart onl.y discuss one,on a matter of urgent public importance. Could we go on to number forty. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to appeal the ruling, because I do not agree with either. The debate is urgent. It affects the whole Province, because everybody who works at Churchill Falls comes from the wh~ e Province. And the only subject is employment at Churchill Falls. MR. SPF.AKER: The hon. the member is appealing the ruling.

The motion that I have- to put to the House is : 'lhat the Speaker's ruling be sustained. Those in favour of the motion, please say "aye", contrary minded, •·nay"• I declare the motion carried. MR. CURTIS: Number forty. Motion: Second reading of a Bill, ''lul. Act Further To .~end The Annual Vacations With Pay Act of 1969." (Bill No. 40) HON. E. M. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, as ury colleague the Minister of Labour,in whose name this still stands,is absent from Newfoundland, as Your Honour is aware,he is in Ottawa, as the ~..inister of Labour,attending a meeting of the eleven Ministers of Labour from across Canada.

As he is away I rise in his behalf to move that this Bill be now read a second time. Mr. Speaker I have a choice, I can either go on· for some considerable time and talk about the Vacations With Pay Act or I can talk very briefly abeut the purpose of the amendment, and I ~ill take the latter. 'HR. ROBERTS: I will try and explain it, if I understand it, and if not perhaps a combination of a reply in closing the debate on second reading and then subsequently at the COlllft1ttee stage.

Basically, as I understand,the purpose of the amending .Bill is to, in effect, Sir, to plug so~e loopholes that have been discovered to exist in the administration of the Vacation With Pay Act. The Vacation With Pay Act itself, of course, is a fairly straight-forward piece of legislation. lt puts into effect the principle,in the world in which we 1803

April 22, 1971 Tape 359 PK - 6 ~- P-OBERTS· live,a person should be entitled as a ri~ht to, or by statute law,a certain amount of vacation. !hat is set by the principal Bill as bein~ four percent of his annual earnings or rou~hly two weeks a year. In effect then, Sir, under the principal Act, any person erployed within the

definitions of the Act must receive either two weeks pay or four percent of his annual salary in lieu thereof. Now in administerin~ the Act my collea~ue and his officials have discovered some defects. They are not terribly substantia+ they are relatively minor, I believe, but they are attempted to be set straight by the amendments in this Bill now before us. Amon~ then, Sir,(and they are set forth in the explanatory notes) is a provision to amend the definition of total wage lhe effect of that is to exclude the re- muqeration in respect of overtime work and so on.

In other words the four percent of his annual ~alary is the four percent of his regular annual salary and not such thinrs as overtime work, to exclude that and to put back in the words '·to expand that,exclud-tn 2 ti'PS and other gntuit- ies and bonuses voluntarily provided and excluding the remuneratio. in respect of overtime work that he performs, Sir, for his employer. In other w~rds, Sir, the exclusion of overtime is made a little broader . the exclusion of overtime is broaden by e~cluding and dropping, if Your Honour is still witl me, tips and other voluntarily bonus. The principle is quite simple.

Sir, the vacat:f .on with pay, the four percent principle applies only to the regular annµal salary. For example, if the hon. the Leader of the Opposition where subject to this, I do not believe, he is, but his sessional indenmity being(what is it?) $6,600, he would only be entitled to four percent of that and not four percent of any tips or overtime he might ~et from any other source. That is one of the thinJ1;s that this Bill does. It also, Sir, says the minimum e1'1Ployment period, the minimum employment period is set as being seven days. That to me seems fairly reasonable.

If a person is employed for less than seven days, really I mean it is pretty hard to maintain he is entitled to vacation pay.

April 22, 1971 Tape 359 PK - 7 MR. ROBERTS:_ There are a ccuple of other minor changes again in administration, a redifinition of rer.ular working hours, a restatement, by ameildment,of the point in time at which the vacation pay or separation is to be paid. The other thins: that the Bill does, Sir, and there are a number of consequential amendments, but they are very straight-forward, is tQ repeal and substitute the provisions for collection of the · pay that is not paid, the administrative provision. And we have found the present p.rocedure to be a little cumbersome and so we sugy.es~ that the present procedure as set forth in the latter parts of the Bill before us now. 1805

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 360 NC - 1 MR. ROBERTS: I am sure hon. members will study this with closeness and great care. Briefly then, Sir, we think The Vacations With Pay Act is a very good piece of legislation. I might add we are looking at another point entirely that is not on the Bill, the present Act does net apply to trawler fishermen and it is a matter that we now have ve~ much under study,whether or not we shoul~ extend the principle so that it does apply to people working on our trawlers.

In some cases, companies have granted this voluntarily,in agreements they have worked out with the unions representing their employees working on trawlers. Ve think there is a case for making it mandatory and we are now looking into that. In any event Sir, it is a very simple Bill although it is rather complicated in its wording because when we lawyers get hold of these things Mr. Speaker, as your Honour is aware, we do tend to try copper-fasten1.lig and that is another way of saying we do tend to take a great many more words than ordinary simple men of business would need.

My colleague, the Minister of Public Works, with perhaps his twenty-two years of experience behind him,has said we could tangle it up so that nobody else will understand it. He is not quite correct,Sir. another lawyer will understand it, and that is sort of why we do it, because we then need another lawyer to untangle it. In any event, Mr. Speaker, I now move the -~cond reading of the Bill. MR. EARLE: Mr. Speaker, just a question to the hon. Minister, it is actually a repetition of a question I asked on another Bill,the other day,which did refer to this vacations with pay.

Am I clear in the understanding,in reading thi9t that any employee that works for as little as seven days is entitled to vacation pay and if he is dismissed in any period immediately after seven days, he is entitled to four per cent of what he was paid in that seven days? ?his is as I read the Act here. If that is so, did this 1806

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 360 NC - 2 MR. EARLE: not apply under the old Act? Was this applicable under the old Act or did the employee have to go for a longer period Possibly several months before he became entitled to vacation payl These are questions I should like the Minister to answer. I mentioned a particular case the other day,which came to my notice,and if an employee is employed on a weekly basis and for reasons claims that he was ill,without producing a doctor's certificate, but he does stay off, can he contend that he worked for ninety per cent of the time? How is this sort of thing determined?

Is it the case of an argument with an examiner or somebody who would dispute this or is it a downright ruling by the Department that a man is assumed to have worked for seven days and1therefore,he must get four per cent of his salary? MR. ~r~RPHY: Mr. Speaker. there is just one question I would like to uk. With all these Acts dealing with labour, how closely does Government work with labour unions on thi type of thing?

Is it an on-~oing thing1 When we decide to bring in some labour legislation, do we sit down with labour unions or Confederation of Labour and discuss this or do we just copy it, without consultation with any labour authorities? My feeling is;quite frankly, that if we are going to preserve peace with labour, that there should be more of an on-going consultation with labour authorities and try to foresee and perhaps avoid some of the labour unrest we have had.

One direct question I must ask is that when the Government decides to bring in something like this, like perhaps the teachers, I think they consult with teachers of whatever area, usually some advise is sought in the framing of legislation, just how closely is the Department of Labour, as such, working with organized labour whether it be a representative of one particular union or the whole labour body- Perhaps when the Minister answers he may or may not be able to give me this but I think it is so essential that I think any labour legislation we 1807

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 360 NC - 3 MR. MURPHY: draft should be in consultation with, perhaps not at the direction of, but in consultation with labour representatives as a 'la"hole. MR. _SPEAKER: I have to advise the hon. Minister if he speaks now he closes the debate. Mll._ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, with respect to the question raised by the hon. member from Fortune Bay, I cannot answer him but I will undertake to have the information for committee stage, I have the 1970 ammendment to the Vacation With Pay Act here and it does not give me the information I need. I will have to get the 1969 Act.

He asks further, ·that was the first part, does the four per cent apply to someone who works say twenty-eight days. He asks, secondly,in effect who settles the argument as to how long a man has worked 1 I think if the hon. gentleman l:ooked at Section.· 29 as it will be amended, that probably gives the answer. In essence, Sir, it is up to an inspector, an inspector being a Government official, to make the determination and there are appeal provisions set forth for appeals from the rulings of the inspector. With_respect to the point made by the hon. gentleman ~ho leads the Opposition, the member for St.

John's Centre, I, as he will appreciate, cannot answer in. detail, I can,however, say that my ID\derstanding and my knowledge is that on most Bills effecting groups, the Government, in au informal way, do consult with the groups conceTI1ed. Sometimes I believe the actual draft of legislation are submitted and sent out. I have done this myself on occasion, indeed for example, Mr.

Speaker,• Bill which today the Hn11!!e read for the first time.on The Newfoundland Medical Care Act, I have discussed with representatives of the Medical Association and with representatives of The Dental Association, two of the groups affected. I believe my colleague, the Minister of Education, on occasion has done it. 1808

April 22, 1971 Tape No, 360 NC - 4 MR, ROBERTS: I do not know, sometimes we do it by means of draft legislation other times by means of a discussion of the principles involved. I cannot Jpeak specifically on these pieces of legislation, I can say however, a.id while I am speaking from memory I am fairly certain on the point,Sir, we do each year receive a brief from the Federation of Labour,which is the largest single organized labour body in the Province.

I suppose it represents one-half to two-thirds of the organized labour, but it is the largest single body that one can find, but we do receive a brief from them. We also receive a brief from the Legislative Committee of the Railway Brotherhoods, Senator Duggan for many years was their spokesman, now he is gone to the Senate he is no longer as active in that contextJbut there are other gentlemen~ of course,who have succeeded him.

These briefs, which are usually.made public,I believe, by the bodies 1after they have been presented to us, inevitably Sir, contain requests and suggestions for various bite and pieces of legislation and in many cases these Bills, and ,! suspect the Bills in question here, and the Bill now before the Committee is one such Bill, if that is so we would probably go back and check the legal drafting. But generally~Mr. Speaker, the policy is where a group ia particularly concemed to seek viewsjoften on an informal basis, lt would cause difficulties obviously if legislation were to be flogged around on a formal basis.

On occasion,of course,we have used Select Committees of the House when people present views in detail, But in any event, Mr. Speaker, I feel confident that this Bill is one that would be acceptable to any employee in the Province as it improves somewhat the employees' rights, makes them a little clearer and thus a little more certain. I think that deals with the hon. gentleman's 1809

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 360 NC - 5 MR. ROBERTS: question. Then, Mr. Speaker, that being all I have to say, I will sit down. Thank you~ On motion a Bill, ''An Act Further To Amend The Annual Vacations With Pay Act, 1969," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of the Whole House on tomorrow. Motion second reading of a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Wills Act," Bill No. 43. MR. LEWIS: I have been asked by my hon. colleague, the Attorney General, to move the second reading of this Bill. I do not know why it has been assigned to me. It is certainly not evidence of his timing.

The Bill itself is a simple one and yet it is a bit revolutionary. It has the effect, Sir, of changing basic principles of Common Law and of ancient heritage. The first feature is. that it purports to amend the provisions of the Wills Act, as it now stands, since it provides for the ratification of a will . upon marriage, Under this Amendment, a will is not revoked per se by marriage, if there is a declaration to the contrary appearing in the will that it has been made in contemplation of marriage.

That is an amendment of rather far-reaching importance, but it stems from the study that has been made by the Commissioners for the Uniformity of Legislation in Canada and is one of the recommendations, I understand, made by the Commission headed by Dr. Gushue, which made a study of the changes in Family Law. The second and by far the more far-reachin1 effect is the legitimization of bastards, insofar as the right of inheritance is concerned.

Now, as the House well knows, a bastard child is a nes nullius under Common Law and in fact that principle has its roots in Roman Law and in the Ecclesiastical Law and even in the Laws of HU111111urabi. A bastard child could not inherit. 1'810

April 22, 1971 Tape No. 360 NC - 6 MR. LEWIS: Under this proposed amendment, an illegitimate child of a mother is legitimatized insofar as the mother is concerned but not the father. The reason advanced for recommending this partial change in the basic law, is the fact that the establishment of parenthood, so far as the mother is concerned, would appear to be a matter of no doubt

whereas the same does not apply from the standpoint of the father, the parent on the male side. AB I say the amendments proposed are revolutionary but are supposed to be in keeping with the philosophies and thinking of today, the present day. It seems to be directed towards changing principles, legal principles, that have been established over the centuries. Rightly or wrongly, I move second reading: MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the changes and I think that they are very welcome changes.

As a matter of fact, I just had to advise a party,two weeks ago, who was getting married and wished to do a will in contemplation of marriage that under our Wills Act, that ia before this amendment passes now, that it did not matter if his will said that he was making it in contemplation of marriage, it would automatically be revoked the minute that he got married to the girl he is going to marry and that there was no point in making the.will now.

He would have to wait until the night of the honeymoon, Since he was leaving the Province the next day, he would have to spend the night of his honeymoon working on his will. 1811

April 22, 1971 Tape 361 PK - 1 MR. CRO~BIE: I suspect, Mr. Speaker, that perhaps the draftsman of this amendment has been forced into that position himself, that he had to spend the nir,ht of his honeymoon- doing his "1111. not be done in comtemplation of marriage. But, it could Obviously, ?Ar. Speaker, if a will declares that it is being made in comtemplation of a man's or woman's marriage, it should be valid, that amendment has been passed long ago in England and in other provinces.

It should certainly be passed here and I support it wholeheartedly. / I feel the change with respect to illeritimate children is necessary.

I am sure there have been cases of hardships where a man or woman I made a will leaving a certain amount of money to his children, knowing that he had an illegitimate child or perhaps they were all illegitillate for some technological reason, Thinking that by using the word children, that these children although legitimate would be included, only for them to discover,after his death ,that under the Law as it applied the word child in a will did not include illegitimate children.

And, obviously, this is a change that is necessary, then if a person has illegitimate children that he does not want to include in his will, he can instruct his lawyer that he does -not want· t'o include them. But . . . there has been a lot of hardship caused by the fact, when people use the word children, then actually referred to all their children, whether legitimate or illegitimate. AN HON. MEMBER: Known or unknown. MR. CROSBIE: Well, the unknown they may not be referring to The known in any event. So, as I see it, it is a welcome step forward in legislative:reform.

And this is the kind of thing that is a result of the Gushue Commission, which is good. But it is a kind of thing that the Law Reform Co!llfflission should do when it gets going. AN BON. ME'l-fBER: The nine months hoist. MR. CRO~BIE: There are some Bills introduced in this House, that should get the nine months hoist, all'~i~ht. MR. STRICKLAND: These are the ones that are illconceived. 1812 {

April 22, 1971 Tape 361 MR. CROSBIE· The ill conceived ones. So, Mr. Speaker, I certainly welcome this and I think it is a very ~ood step forward. ~. SPEAKER: It is moved and seconded that this Bill be now read a second time. PK - 2 On Motion a Bill, "An Act Further To Amend The Wills Act," read a second time, ordered referred to a Committee of ~he Whole House on tomorrow. COMMITI'EE OF TP.E WHOLE Bills, Items 2 to 17. t-'R. CJ~A IR!!AN: Order! MR. CURTIS: Item 2 MR, CHAIRJ-!AN: Item 2 ."An Act Respecting The Department Of Social Services and Rehabilitation." (Bill No. 13) m.

ROBERTS: Mr, Chainnan, before the Committee begins, as my colleague the minister is absent, would the Committee give leave, I will try to deal with it, but could I have the Assistant Deputy Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation sit with me, because he knows the details and I certainly do not. Would that be in order, Sir? MR. CHAIRMAlh-. All right. On motion Clause 1 throu~h 3 carried. MR. CROSBIE: Clause 4, Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the minister could tell me, the Depa~tment has a Deputy Minist~r of Social Services that is Mr. Andrews, and two assistant Deputy ~inisters. I think one is Mr. Roberts. Mr.

Hollett is it? Now the Minister of Welfare,in answering a question,said that an enquiry into the fire at the Girls Home last fall waa conducted by ~r. Roberts, his Assistant Deputy Minister. Could the Minister tell us who else was involved into the enquiry. There was an enquiry made, who made the enquiry? 'HR. ROBERTS: !-fr. Chairman, t am told that the other p:entleman who assisted Mr. Roberts, Mr. Roy Roberts, the other Assistant Deputy Minister of the Department, he was assisted by a person from the University and by other departmental officials. I would assume, speaking from my own knowled~e 1813

April 22, 1971 Tape 361 PK - 3 ~. POBERT~: ~f the way that the department operated, such people as the Director of Institutions and the other senior staff would sit with him and advise him and go with him, but apparently it was an internal eiquiry, ba~ with the assistance of a person from the University, faculty work, social work, or the faculty of social work at the University. On Motion Clauses 4 throu~h-7 carried. ~-• CRO~BIF.· Clause 8, ~r. Chairman, I wonder would the minister explain for us, this clause gives the minister power in connection with the adoption of childr~n.

There has been quite a controversy lately raised privately and not publicly, in connection with an adoption of a certain child. Does the minister, what does he actually do in connection with adoptions? Is there an adoption board that handles that and the minister just goes by their decision? Or does the minister make the decision himself? How does the adpotion work? ~. 'ROBERTS: }fr.

Chairman, where the power is reserved, by le,:!islation • to the minister and the hon. gentleman knows· there are certain types of applications in respect of adoptions in which the minister has the power, and of course, Sir, he must exercise that power himself. I am sure in so doing he is guided by the advice of his Deputy ~inister and by I would think, particularly, the Director of Child Welfare. Mr: Vincent, is Dirctor of Child Welfare and he has been many years in the field and he is very well versed.

But, where the minister is by legislation required to make the decision, it would surely be very wrong, if the minister himself did not in fact take the decision, he would take advice surely from his officials. I do not know the details of the case in question, obviously there is an actual case. If I can, it may be out of order, the hon. gentleman does not want to raise it, but may~be we can p.o outside of the Chamber. MR. CPOSHIF.: Right. There is no adpotions board, the officials of the de-partment who'will decide. ?-m. ROHERT~: No, ••r. Chairman, there is a Director of Child Welfare, 'Hr.

Vincent, who is one of the senior people in the departMent, 1814

April 22, 1971 Tape 361 PK - 4 !-'R. ROBF.PT~: there is a Director of Field Services, there is a Director of Social Assista~ce, there is a Director of Institutions, there is a Director of Training. There are,I think,seven men. ntere are seven Directors who answer immediately to eaeh of them, to one of the two assistant Deputy ~inisters, each of whom in turn answers directly to the Deputy Minister. MR. CROSBIE: Well. Mr.

Chairman, my only comment on that would be this, that I would think and that it would be much better for the Government certainly much better for the minister if a matter such as the adoption of children would not be decided by the minister. I would think, myself, it would be much better if a question such as adoption of children were decided by some kind of an independent board, rather than having a political minister involved in that decision. So, in my views, I think it is a poor way to handle the adoption of children. I mean I am not going to move that this be deleted and so on.

Obviously, at the present time the minister has to have the power. But, I would suggest that the Government consider the change in that director. So, that this is not a ministerial, political minister~s decision, but rather a decision of s0111e kind of board. nie other question I had1was the minister's powers also -eatend to the administration of all laws relating to junhile deliquency within the jurisdiction of the Province? As I understand it, there is legislation before the House of Commons now dealing with a revision of the whole law to apply with juveniles.

It is before a committee of the Bouse of Commons now. Are our Government being consulted on this? And have we taken any particular stand on this legislation that the minister has to administer? MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, the Solicitor General of Canada, Mr. Goyer, who acts ~s the minister responsible for the Child Defenders Bill, I think, it is called, (nie Child Defenders Bill)has consulted me in my task as Minister of Health, and also my _-colleague, the Minister of Social Services and Rehabilitation.

Each of us in behalf of this Government have re'[il.ed, we have raised, I believe, some very strong objections to 1815

--------- April 22, 1971 Tape 361 Pk - 5 MR. ROBF.RTS: a numher of points in the Bill. I believe, the Bill now is before a Committee in Ottawa, before a Committee of the House of Commons.under their procedure. And, I understood that the representations made by our C-ovemment and the Governments of other provinces and by other bodies would be brought to the attention of the Committee. With reference to the hon. ~entleman's first remark, adoptions, of course, as he well knows,are not maae by the minister, they are made only by a court order. The normal process does not involve · the minister at all.

As I recall it, the minister is involved in adoption proceedings only when one of the adoptinR parents is less than twenty-five years older than the child proposed to be adopted, And are there any other case? I think that is probably the only one, there are several laid down by the statutes, but,generally, the Director of Child Welfare, Mr. Vincent~is the man who has the final say in the department on adoptions.

The minister, of course. is responsible,.as he is responsible for all acts, but I am quite sure have not changed and I can assure the hon •• gentleman, Sir, that in my year or so in the department, you know, I was consulted from tim.e to time, adoptions really there are so many of them, the systems works so superlatively well, there are obviously some problems. But, it works so well that the minister is not involved. It is not a political matter, it is dealt with at an administrative level. There were a total I am told of 527 adoptions processed in Newfoundland last year. MR. HICKMAN: Mr. Chaiff.lan, Dr.

Gushue in one of his projects, one of his reports, dealt with adoption, and aroused a ~reat deal of favourable comment from churches and social agencies that are involved in this type of work. It seems to me that the Gushue recommendation, all they are doing line is bringin~ the Adoption Law to this Province in, with twentieth century thinking. The time has come,indeed I suspect it has passed, for this Province to have a new Adoption Act and new concepts and new principles insofar as the Law of Adoption is concerned.

The fact that we have had 500 this year, does not mean that some undue hardshirhaa not been from time to time, hardship is not the word, agooizin~ disappointment to 1816

A}'dl 22 • 1971 Tape 361 PK - 6 MR. lUClQ,'AN: t_he prespective adopting pareni.s from time to time, had bfacome evident in this Province, it can be so easily eliminated by bringing our Law into line-with the best we find in other jurisdictions. ' 'While I am on my feet, Mr. Chairman, there is au.other point that .. 1 would like to raise 6nde:r this same section. The hon. the member for St. John's East ExteT11 asked two questions of the minister responsible for this Act this year, concerning the activities in Maeystown of a welfare office.

And, there was a suggestion that this welfare officer was disciplined, but later that he was only witnessin~ letters. Now, Mr. Chairman, I suggest that welfare officers have to be part:l.cularly careful, scrupulously careful that they do not become 1817 •·

April 22nd., 1971 Tape no. 362 Page I mrw Mr. Hickman. involved in matters other than the administration and performance of their duties under this Act. The case that I speak of involved a labour dispute in Marystown where it is alleged in the press , and the minister indicated that it was a fact,in his reply to his first question that there was a meeting in the employer's place of business where those on strike were aaked to come in ••• HR. CHAIRMAN: Order please. Does this have anything to do with this particular section? MR.

HICKMAN: Well, I understood that under the powers. functions and cities of the minister that this would include the supervision of welfare officers throughout the Province who, in the final analysis, carry out the day to day administration of this Act. And why I said, Mr. Chairman, that they have to be scrupulously careful - that this most definitely created the wrong impression.

The impression was left with those people who were on strike that when they had to come in and sign a letter or to dgn a document saying that they were no longer in ·-~ particular striking union that the impressbn was loud and clear that the welfare officer was acting in his official capacity. Whether he was or whether he Vas not, ·d.t wu certain¥

an act of indiscretion. I draw that to the attentbn of this collllllittee. I would like to hear from the hon. minister as to his views on the Gushue Report on whether he feels that our adoption laws should be updated. HR. ROBERTS: Mr. Chairman, to deal first with the second point of the hon. gentleman from Burin. I believe my colleague has dealt with some questions that have been put on the Order Paper but let me, perhaps, review the matter.

I am told that a welfare officer (there may be more than one atlli.oned at Maryatown) but certainly an officer or the officer stationed at Marystown did witness a letter or a statement or a deposition or an affidavit or something, but he used his power to witness. Apparently, that is 1818

April 22nd., 1971 Tape no. 362 Page 2 Mr. Roberts the only thing that he did. He was not involved in any way in the matter in dispute. I gather it was a labour relations matter. The gentleman concerned, the welfare officer,witnessed that because (

a) the people involved asked him to and (

b) because welfare officers, by virtue of their role as welfare officers, are commissioners. I do not want . to go into the legal implications. I am not sure if a welfare officer, being a commissioner by virtue of being a welfare officer, would have the power to witness any document for anything other than a matter connected with the social assistance regulations and so forth. In any event the gentleman did.

I think it is the feeling of my colleague and I gather he has so instructed all of his officials throughout the Province.that in future they should refrain from becoming involved even to the very minor extent which the gentlemQn dia. I gather my colleague has already said this in the House. But even if he has not 1 Mr. Chairman, this is the position as I have it. I do not think there was any desire on the part of the gentleman concemed to become involved in any way vitn either side of the dispute. I told what happened. Somebody came with a bit of paper and said, "look, we wipnt to awear to this.

Can you witness it?" The hon. gentleman opposite diffemwith me. Re may know more than I do. I am just •• MR. HICKMAN: There was an official complaint filed by the union. MR. ROBERTS: Yea. MR. HICKMAN: It was not just one isolated instance. MR. ROBERTS: I am aware of a complaint, and as I have said my colleague has had the matter investigated and has concluded that the welfare officer concerned, as you know, there was no mens rea, to use the legal term. He acted unwitd.ngly, I gather,and not with any malice or any intent to become involved.

I gather, also, aa I have said to the committee,that instructions have been issued to all welfare officers that in future would they be good enough please to confine their witnessing statements to matters directly concerned 1819

April 22nd., 1971 Tape no. 362 Page 3 Mr. Roberts With their duties as welfare officers. Yes, that is correct. Now to come back to the hon. gentleman's first point, Sir, where he deals with the adoption legislation. I differ with him. I think that our Adoption Act is a good one. The present Act is only even or eight years old. 1 think in 1964 it was put on the books. It is a good Act. It is much in line with the rest of Canada. The recommendations of the family law study, the Gushue one - 1 am told the recommendations regarding adoption have been put into effect very largely.

I can also tell the committee, Sir, if it is in order 1 that there are a number of matters yet to come before the House, in this session, some of which we have given notice, which will embody various recommendations of the Gushue Report.

The other matter, I believe, that comes up in adoption laws is the question of adoption across religious lines and there all that I can say is that my colleague is consulting with the heads of the various denominations involved. 1 do not want to go any further for various reasons.Until the discussions have come to some sort of conclusion, it vould be most improper and most inappropriate to say anything~ But 1 can say that the matter is very actively under review and that the denominations concerned have a right. I do not know if they have a legal right, but they certainly have the right to be consulted.

They are being consulted and their views an being sought. MR. CHAIRMAN: Shall Clause (8) carry? MR.. klCKEY: Mr. Chairman, a couple of questions on Clause (8) with regard to adoptions. It has always been my understanding that an official of the department would never inform a client or an applicant for a child that he or she or they had, let us say. more than an average chance of adopting a child, if,i.e •• there were of a certain age which was beyond that age 1820

April 22nd., 1971 Tape no. 362 Page 4 Mr, Hickey peni.itted by the department, However. there are some instances where this has happened, and I am wondering why? I question, i.e .• why a worker if he would accept an application,in good faith, from a family to adopt a child that was already in their home, almost one might say, suggest that the family adopt that child.

And have those people go to the expense, have their hopes raised and go to the expense, I might add Sir, of approximately $300 which those people state they can verify, only to find that the minister or the Director of Child Welfare and subsequently the minister, refuses the application on the flimsy ground that those people are too old, Now. Hr. Chairman, those people did not age twenty years from the date of their application to maybe a three to six 111011th period afterwards. Surely, the officUs in the department were well aware of the age of those peqle. I am sure the gentleman that sits with the hon.

Minister of Health probably is well avare of the case that I referred to. The case in point is a case in Lavrenceton. two people veey upset - upset to the extent, Mr. Chairman, where they have sought advice, sought assistance from almost everyonei the clergy, lawyers, the department, the Premier himself, the minister, etc. They came into St. 3ohn?s. They are still at it, Mr. Chairman. The latet word I have from the is that ·they are going to continue.

They are going to take the case to court 1 if they do not get this child that those people raised from thirteen days old to an approximate age of something under a year. They were led to believe that they could adopt that child, as I have said, beforeth£y went to the exu~nqp snd then had their hopes tom to bits.by a decision. HR., ROBERTS: Tell us how old they are? MR. HICKEY: They are not too young. They are in their fifties, Mr. Chairman. The la!ly is fifty-six. The gentleman is fifty-nine. Mr.

Chairman, I can state categorically here from my own experience and that goes back five years, and I am sure that if I can say this - I am sure that there have been cases since then, b~cause the department has become much more 1821

April 22nd., 1971 Tape no. 362 Page.5 Mr. Hickey liberal and much more flexible in their adoption laws in the last five years and rightly ao, Mr. Chairman - rightly so. But I can state categorically that people have adopted children at that age and the flimsy excuse given by the minister ( of course, it is like something that would come from that gentleman) as to what those ?eople or how those people would handle a teenager at age seventy or age sixty-five. It is so ridiculous that it is not even funny. It is just purely ridiculous. Mr.

Chairman, people at age seventy can do a dam sight more sometimes with a teenager who might be troublesome than a lot of our younger people, fro their wealth of knowledge and experience gained down through the years. They might lack some things, Mr. Chairman, but they certainly do not lack the important things, in my view. This is one case in point and it is not with any pleasure that I bring it to this ·House. I have no alternative, because the letters, and I have received something like seven or eight of them, almost one a week, pitiful - those people h~ve gone everywhere. The only place left, Mr.

Chairman, is this Assembly. A great injustice has been done those people. There ia only one way to rectify it and that is give them that child. It 'is rather difficult to know how one could pay for the damage that has been caused, if that child is not given to them. As I have said they were led to believe that they could adopt. The application was accepted.

If the policy of the department is that people of this age cannot adopt, then why in God's name was the application accepted in the first place; I have copies of letters from clergymen, supporting and verifying the story that is told by the mother, the foster mother. The home, it seems and I stand to be corrected. I have not been in it. I have a wealth of information on it from clergymen, from medical people, from interested citizens and fro  the people themselves. It seems to be a perfect home for a child. It is a home which has been approved 1822

April 22nd., 1971 Tape. no. 362 Page 6 Hr. Hickey by the department, as a foster home, by the minister, himself, in one letter. It points out the tremendous jobs that those people have been doing as foster parents. Here we find that just because or at the age they are, they cannot have this child that they were led to believe that they could have, when the child was probably a month old: I do not know, Mr. Chairman, who is going to take the responsibility for this.

But certainly it seems to me that the decision to refuse that application was made or if it was not made initially, it must have been made on the recommendation by someone and subsequently supported by the minister who has been trying desperately, and I might say very feebly to justify his decision. It is a decision, Mr. Chairman, that cannot be justified, nowhere by anybody. I am sure that there are other hon. members in this .House who have been written by those people. I think, Mr.

Chairman, in fairness that they might have some peace of mind - if any hon. member has correspondence on this matter, they should speak now. I am not going to take up the time of the House.: To brinp it up at a later date, I lad intended to. But I felt that this was the time to do it, and I am orry that the hon. minister is not here. I am sure that we will hear from bi.a OD it at a later date. But I appeal, Mr.

Chairuum, to the minister and to his officials, which ever ones are involved,that they do some soul searching and if they can justify sticking to the decision that they have aade, then all I can say is that they have absolutely no ~onscience, because a most unjust decision. There is no way that they can they have made 1823

April 2.l., 1971, Tape 363, Pap,e 1 - apb 1-'R. HICKEY: justify it. There has been case after case where the opposite to what they have done was done, and there is just no way that they can justify it. I feel that they owe a change in decision to those people. I would suggest that anyone here who is knowledgeable in the case express their views on it. I am sure that the people concerned will be most grateful because they are at the end of the line. Prom here they go to court ••• MR..: CHAI~!AN · _ (Noel) : Order! order please!

I would like to say, that since this is the first occasion that we have been in Co11U11ittee on Bills, that there is a difference in being in Committee on Bills and in Committee on the estimates. When we are in Co!IUllittee on the estimates, then a member can raise grievances and particular cases and things of that nature. In Committee on Bills, the Chair proposes that a

section be carried, and members remarks then should be relevant to the particular

section and should tend towards either supporting the

section or introducing an amendment or something of that nature. I think we have rotten a little of the beam here, and I do not think we should convert the second reading into a situation on estimates. Therefore, I am going to have to ask speakers on this Bill to confine themselves more directly to the particular Bill which is really an administrative Bill, relating to the Department of Social Services and Rehabilitation. Clause (8) that we are on now, is simply that the minister shall have certain functions. MR. HI~~°X..!-. : Mr. Chairman, may I just say a word ••• ~- ROBERTS: }!r. Chairman, if I may ••• MR.

HICKEY: Can I rise? Can I speak on a Point of Order? MR. CHAD?~: ----· ------- There is no Point of Order unless you make one. MR. HICKEY: ~ ----· -- -- Okay, I will make one. The hon. gentleman saw me on my feet before I opened my mouth, before I had a chance to open my mouth. I ~uess I raised what is possibly a thorny issue. Hy Point of Order is this,Mr. Chairman, when I brourht up this matter I could have left it for the estimates, When I brought it up I brought it up under section (8), number (2) the adoption of 1824

April~ 1971, T