June 1,

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS Vol.

XLI No. 47

The House met at 2:00 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Lush): Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Social Services.

MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a few

moments of the House's time to congratulate the St. John's Maple Leafs on their

outstanding season this year.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. GULLAGE: I was asked to attend the final game and to

be present on the ice when the Calder cup was presented. I was acting for the

Minister of Sport, so I did see the final game, Mr. Speaker, and indeed, it was

quite a contest and was won really in the last period - very competitive.

They have had a terrific season, Mr. Speaker, and I think

this team really has fans all over the Island, it is not really just the St.

John's team, even though Corner Brook is now pursuing an American League team

themselves. At the moment, we have only one team and, Mr. Speaker, I think they

have fans, as I said, throughout the Province and that was evident at the games,

and at the games throughout the year. So, congratulations to the Leafs and the

organizers, the people involved with the team and indeed, congratulations to the

Mayor and the Council of St. John's for a fine effort in putting this team

together. Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

Extern.

MR. PARSONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Certainly, Mr. Speaker, I support the sentiments of the hon.

minister. I know that I and every other Newfoundlander and Labradorian certainly

appreciated the play of the Leafs this year and we were also, I suppose, a

little bit disappointed that they didn't take home the bacon. They put it in the

pan but it just didn't fry, but, Mr. Speaker, that is this year. There are a lot

of years left and with the new facilities coming up, God knows; maybe next year

will be our year.

I would also like to take the opportunity now, Mr. Speaker,

to congratulate Joy Burt.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. PARSONS: I think she was perhaps proclaimed the

strongest lady in the world -

MS. VERGE: Strongest woman.

MR. PARSONS: - strongest woman in the world and to that,

Mr. Speaker, what can one say? Newfoundlanders have accomplished it all and

certainly, Joy Burt is no slacker, when it come to accomplishments. I think, Mr.

Speaker, it would be improper of this House, if we did not send congratulations

to Joy Burt. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I think all Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have every

reason to be both impressed and proud of the accomplishments of the St. John's

Maple Leafs in its first season here.

In addition to the sports enthusiasm that was generated, and

the economic spin-offs, I know from listening to the comments of people in the

media who have attended games in the other cities where the AHL has

representatives, that the knowledge of Newfoundland and this Province and this

city is spread throughout the AHL teams in New York and other cities where they

operate. I think it is a great accomplishment, and they ought to be

congratulated.

I would also, while I am on my feet, join in the Member for

St. John's East Extern's suggestion that the House offer congratulations to Joy

Burt for her personal accomplishments as a world power-lifter.

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I don't know whether I am in order or not, but I am sure you

will tell me right away if I am not.

You will recall that on Thursday I made a statement regarding

this week being Environment Week. I believe I called it Education Week, but it

is Environment Week - twenty-two years of lifetime habits die hard.

I wanted to add to that, if I could today. Is it appropriate

for me to do so at this time?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MS. COWAN: It is simply to say, Mr. Speaker - I have

permission from the Opposition. Is that alright? May I go ahead?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member may go ahead.

MS. COWAN: Thank you.

We have today some items to distribute to you, hoping that

all will be good ambassadors for Environment Week. Items will be distributed to

you shortly and will help you draw the attention of your constituents and others

to the many concerns that we have in the environment.

I know that the Opposition share the concerns we have, as a

government, because of the questions that were asked me during Committee

hearings on the Budget, and that everyone will be doing their part to promote a

more healthy world for all of us to enjoy and to live in.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Having been preempted by all sorts of

other statements, I can now take the opportunity to inform the House that a writ

has been issued for a by-election in Ferryland District, to be held on the same

day as the by-election in Naskaupi.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER WELLS: As hon. members know, we were unable to

announce it on the day when we announced the by-election in Naskaupi because the

Member for Ferryland, of course, was still sitting in the House, and that would

have been inappropriate. We have now taken the decision, and I am confident that

the electorate in Ferryland will exercise good judgement in the matter.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, we welcome the announcement,

obviously. We have been looking for it for quite some time, and I understand why

the Premier couldn't announce the by-election for Ferryland on Thursday, but I

can't understand why he didn't announce it after the members resignation took

affect at noon on Friday. But I suspect they have now had an opportunity perhaps

to have a look at what the results might be over the weekend, and they have

decided now to instead of calling it four days later after Naskaupi they might

as well do it and get it over with because they know what the results are going

to be.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. DECKER: You shouldn't take people for granted.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to inform

members of the hon. House and the general public of the Province of the coming

into force today of the revised statutes of Newfoundland 1990.

The revised statutes consolidate all the statute law of the

Province passed during the legislative sessions held between 1970, the year of

the last revision, and December 31, 1990. As a result of the coming into force

of this revision, those needing to know what the law says will find it easier to

locate and easier to read.

The consolidation of the statutes eliminates the need to

search through the annual statute volumes for amendments to the law as well.

provisions have been divided into shorter, more comprehensible ones.

Those wishing to obtain copies of the revised statutes may do

so through the office of the Queen's Printers.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I welcome this

announcement. It culminates years of work initiated when I was Minister of

Justice.

MR. SPEAKER: Hear, hear!

MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this

opportunity to thank the people responsible for producing this consolidation of

our provincial laws, first and foremost our Clerk who was chief legislative

council, senior legislative council throughout most of the project, as well the

other legislative council and their staff. Also I would like to acknowledge the

financial contribution of the law foundation, funds generated from lawyer's

trust accounts.

As the President of Treasury Board indicated the

consolidation of the statutes will make it possible for the people of the

Province to research provincial laws much more easily than is now the case. The

last consolidation was done in 1970. That being so I would urge the government

to make available copies of the new consolidation of the statutes to the large

public libraries in the Province at no cost to the public libraries because

their acquisitions budget was reduced this year from what it has been

previously, and because of the effect of inflation, the public libraries aren't

able to afford to buy sufficient copies of

the new consolidation of the statutes for the large public

libraries in the Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oral Questions

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister

of Environment and Lands. I refer to the fact that she announced just a few days

ago that this is the beginning of Environment Week. To quote from her own

statement, I think, in part, she says: "If we don't take care of it, we stand to

lose valuable resources that may never return and possibly do irreparable damage

to our air, water and land. Protecting the environment is indeed 'up to all of

us'." That is a quote from her own statement of last week.

As the minister would know, governments from all over the

world, indeed, governments of the Third World countries, who are in desperate

need of jobs and development, have rejected from time to time economic schemes

that have involved the disposition or disposal of imported domestic garbage and

industrial waste on their soil. I would like to ask the Minister of Environment:

what is this government's policy on that question? Are you for or against

bringing large loads of garbage into this Province from other parts of the world

- the United States, New York, or wherever it might be - for the purpose of

starting an industrial development project? Can you tell us what your policy is?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I really have nothing

to add to what I said a week or so ago when I was asked the same question. We

have not had anyone register a proposal in this Province for bringing in garbage

from outside to destroy it. If and when that time comes, we will take a thorough

analysis of the situation, taking into account the pros and the very

considerable cons of such an event. Scientists and people with more expertise

than myself or the Leader of the Opposition will examine every aspect of such a

project, and then make a decision as to whether or not it is an environmentally

viable project for this Province.

MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, the hon. the Leader of the

Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I am not asking

the minister about the registration of a proposal for - I am asking the minister

- I mean, it really does not take much study, I suppose - is the government - I

am simply asking her - does the government, does her Department, does she, think

that it is okay to have New York garbage dumped in this Province to use to start

industrial development? Surely that does not take a lot of study. Can she answer

the question?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: First of all, Mr. Speaker, may I remind the

Opposition that my personal opinion is of no interest to them at this stage. I

am not a scientist. I do not have an expertise in such areas. I have heard all

the things. The same people who have brought the Opposition information have

brought it to me, and I have read it all. I am in no position to evaluate it. I

hear many conflicting things. So if and when, if and when I say again, this

project is registered with us, the proper people will be brought in who know

about such things and they will go over it with a fine-tooth comb, and if it is

not appropriate for this Province then it won't go ahead. But we don't know if

anybody even wants to do such a thing now.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, I have heard it all now.

I am trying to ask the minister if she can answer the

question: Does the government have a policy with respect to the dumping of

garbage, bringing garbage into this Province for the purpose of industrial

development? That is what I am asking. Do you agree and support that policy? It

has nothing to do with whether or not you have an application to do it. I am

asking you: What is your policy? Do you have a policy on it? Do you agree or

disagree with it?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: I find the self-righteousness of the

Opposition quite amazing under the circumstances, when they have left this

government with litter scattered across this Province, Mr. Speaker, that is

absolutely horrendous.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS. COWAN: On Saturday afternoon I had the experience of

being taken by helicopter, with one of our wildlife officers who is very well

respected throughout this Province, to be shown litter that was left in the

Salmonier River, that beautiful, beautiful river, one of the treasures of this

Province. Mr. Speaker, when I saw what that Opposition had left this government

with, how we will ever clean that up, how we will ever change the attitudes of

people towards litter - these are the people who allowed Newfoundlanders to

consume 80 million tins of coke per year and throw the can in the ditch. Then

they have the gall to get up on their feet and ask me what our policy is towards

garbage. I would like to know what their policy is towards garbage.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Her last statement said she would like to know what our

position is on importing garbage. I can tell her that I absolutely oppose it,

and we made that clear today.

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

MR. SIMMS: I am surprised that the minister didn't blame

the federal government. She blamed the previous administration for all the coke

cans in the Province. I mean that is her answer to a serious question. Will the

minister stand in this House today, tell the people of the Province: Do you

agree with the importation of industrial waste and garbage for the purpose of

industrial development in this Province? Do you agree with that policy or do you

not? Can't you give a straight answer to the people?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a member of a

government that does not on whim dismiss or embrace projects. We are going to

analyze the thing if we ever have it registered. The very fact that this group

can make a decision of that nature without the proper scientific evaluation

shows me, Mr. Speaker, that they are not fit to govern.

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

MR. SIMMS: Well, Mr. Speaker, we made our decision based

on listening to the people of the Province. That is the difference between us

and that government.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: That is right.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: And I am glad that the Member for Mount Scio

just interjected, Mr. Speaker, and asked if we had asked the federal government

to withdraw their funding. In fact we have. We wrote the minister this morning

and asked him -

AN HON. MEMBER: This morning?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, this morning when we made our decision,

and we have asked him to withdraw the federal funding for the feasibility study,

Mr. Speaker. We made our decision today. So will the minister on behalf of her

government do the same thing and ask the funding to be withdrawn?

Secondly, let me ask her this question. She would know that

the Province has the ultimate right to approve or reject any kind of development

in the Province. This is, after all, our jurisdiction not the federal

government's jurisdiction. I want to ask her did the federal government consult

with the provincial government, any department before providing the funding for

the feasibility study? Did they consult with them at all? Was the Province even

aware of it at all? I would like her to answer those questions as well.

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It really amuses me

that they are writing a letter after the money has been spent.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS. COWAN: But anyway....

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MS. COWAN: But I guess when you are in that position in

the polls you will do anything to cover your... posterior. Mr. Speaker, as far

as the federal government approaching our government prior to this, I do not

have that information. If it did it took place during my illness. I do not know

the answer to that question. I can look into it.

MR. SPEAKER: Final supplementary, the hon. the Leader of

the Opposition.

MR. SIMMS: Final supplementary. Mr. Speaker, perhaps the

minister, since she is so knowledgeable on the amount of funding that has been

spent, can tell us how much money has been spent under that project? Since she

seems to know all the answers to all the questions. My suspicion is that not

very much has been spent. Not a lot of it has been spent. Also, what I want to

ask the minister is whether she is prepared to state in this House of Assembly

here today, categorically, that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador

rejects the Long Harbour incinerator project?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: I wonder about this environmental process. Was

it that past government that put it in place? They have such little faith in it.

Why didn't they change it while they were there? I find that mind boggling. Here

we have what appears to be a good environmental process. I think we need a bit

of changing in it. Certainly we are looking at it, because of the fact that

everything must be updated from time to time. But it has served the Province

well to this stage. They seem to have forgotten about it.

It is a process, Mr. Speaker, that provides for a tremendous

amount of public input which we, if and when this project is registered, will

welcome. We will be delighted to get it. There are all sorts of time frames

built into it which can extend it over any period of time. So that again we can

give it the in-depth analysis - any project - can be given the in-depth analysis

it deserves. That is it. We have their environmental process which I guess they

now figure is useless. I am saying to them, as a compliment, it is not that bad.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The former PC

government might have brought in the process but we also turned down the

Kitts-Michelin mine because we thought it was the wrong kind of industrial

development for our Province. My question is for the Minister of Energy. The

first Budget brought in by the Minister of Finance cancelled the $30 million

subsidy to the rural areas of this Province. It has already cost us one

particular rate increase, and a recent one was turned down by Cabinet for rural

areas. Is the minister and/or the government willing to go along now with the

advice of its consumer advocate and reinstate that subsidy for rural

Newfoundland?

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

DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, the subsidy has been phased out

and it is gone. We are not about to go back to it.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay.

MR. HEWLETT: I would ask then, Mr. Speaker, of the

Minister of Finance, would he be willing to cancel the payroll tax and guarantee

fees applicable to the hydro corporation which drives up electrical rates in

this Province?

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

DR. KITCHEN: No, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

is to the Premier. A number of months ago there was a public meeting held in

Davis Inlet, which included a number of representatives from this government and

also from the federal government, with respect to the relocation of the

community or the residents of Davis Inlet to a new location approximately eight

to ten miles northwest. Would the Premier advise if his government has supported

this particular relocation? If so, could he advise what it is estimated it will

cost the taxpayers of this Province for such a relocation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker, there is no decision to

support the relocation. What is in process at the moment is an assessment of it

being carried out jointly with the Innu Nation, and in particular, with the

leadership of the community of Davis Inlet. As a matter of fact, as the hon.

member probably knows, they are coming in to see me this afternoon. Many of

those items will be discussed during that meeting later this afternoon.

What we are doing, with the consent of the federal government

and with the consent of the Innu nation and the community of Davis Inlet, we

have agreed that certain housing actions that would otherwise be taken, the

water and sewer project that would otherwise have been undertaken, and certain

other things have been put on hold pending the making of that decision. We don't

want to go into Davis Inlet and spend a lot of money only to find that the

long-term interest of the community really dictates that the community should be

moved. If that is the best and most suitable course of action and it can be

reasonably achieved, then I have no doubt that is a conclusion to which all

three parties concerned will come and action will be taken to do it.

As to what the cost will be, at this moment we don't have any

knowledge of the specifics of the cost. It would undoubtedly be fairly

expensive. But if we can't work with the Innu community and the Innu Nation to

aid them in building a sound, secure community for the future, then whatever the

cost may reasonably be the two governments may have to provide for it.

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

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

I listened with interest to the comments the Premier just

made, saying that water and sewer and any further housing development would be

on hold until we come to some decision.

Is the Premier aware that six compact houses that were

delivered in sections last year to Davis Inlet by an arm of his government have

now been moved to a new location and are ready to be constructed at the new

location without any water and sewer infrastructure talked about at the new

location?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not aware. I am not

even aware that it is, in fact, so.

The hon. member has so many times in the past made

allegations that have turned out to be unfounded that I am not prepared to

express views on the basis of that at this stage. I will take a look at the

situation and see what it is and whatever factual situation I find I will deal

with tomorrow.

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

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

I would ask the Premier: If he doesn't believe the comments I

just made, why doesn't he call a couple of the employees of this government who

are presently living and working in Davis Inlet and ask them that question?

Maybe he might believe them.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have an important question for the Premier, as the head of

the provincial government. I am asking this question bearing in mind that the

provincial government is the largest employer in Newfoundland and Labrador, and

bearing in mind that the provincial government is an important provider of

public services, as well as public housing.

My question is: Has the Premier directed that government

departments and agencies not discriminate against gays and lesbians?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: I am not quite sure what the hon. member

is saying, Mr. Speaker. I don't give day-to-day detailed directions to

individual employees. The departments concerned and the President of Treasury

Board do that. But, from my point of view, nobody should be discriminated

against unfairly, nobody, no matter who or what they are. There should not be

discrimination. So I would give that as a general direction, there should not be

discrimination.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Would the Premier give a direction that no department or

agency of the provincial government discriminate, particularly in areas of

employment, provision of public services and public housing, on the basis of

sexual orientation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the government will deal with

issues as they arise. I will not stand in the House now and give a specific

direction to government merely because the hon. member wants it done. I have no

idea where that may or may not lead, and I have no desire to be irresponsible in

any way. But I would direct people generally not to discriminate against any

group, no matter who they are. There is no justification for discriminating

against people because they are of a certain race, colour, origin or on any

other basis. So no, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to issue the direction the hon.

member speaks about.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East, a

supplementary.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am trying to get the Premier to address precisely the

question of prohibition of discrimination against gays and lesbians on the basis

of sexual orientation. Will the Premier issue a directive that no part of the

provincial government discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Will the Premier initiate an amendment to the Province's

Human Rights Code to extend protection to gays and lesbians by prohibiting

discrimination in the areas covered by the provincial Human Rights Code on the

basis of sexual orientation?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: Mr. Speaker, the policy of this government

in respect to that matter is precisely the same as the policy followed by the

former government when the member who just asked the question was Minister of

Justice. The policy that she supported this government continued, and we have

not altered it in any respect.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

What about real change?

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER WELLS: We have effected it where it really

counts.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I did not hear you

with all the noise.

I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries. The

situation in the Town of Belleoram, where they have been trying to get some

activity at their fish plant, I believe they are entering into their third year

now without any processing taking place at the plant. I am wondering, and I am

sure the minister is aware of the situation; could he inform the House of what

the situation is regarding the fish plant at Belleoram? I understand there is a

lease/purchase arrangement with Daley's in place with the plant. I think that is

causing some problems with getting another operator. Could the minister inform

the House what is happening there?

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

MR. CARTER: Yes, Mr. Speaker, there is a lease/purchase

arrangement in effect with the Newfoundland company; an arrangement, I should

add, that was put in place I believe by the previous administration. It has and

is still causing some problems with respect to attracting a new operator for

that plant.

We have had several discussions with potential operators. I

do not know just how serious they were, but certainly they have taken the

trouble to come in and talk it over. In each case it appears that the potential

operator has been unable to effect a satisfactory arrangement with the company

concerned.

There are many other problems, of course, with respect to

that plant. I guess probably the most serious problem is having to do with the

shortage of resource. There is not much fish available to that plant, and given

the fact that there are plants operating in close proximity to Belleoram, that

is making it all the more difficult.

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

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

I am told there was some two million pounds shipped out of

the area, I think. The winter fishery is the big fishery there, as the minister

knows.

The company has the lease/purchase arrangement with the

minister's department, as I understand it. Apparently it is in effect for

another five years. Is the minister or his department considering looking at

addressing that issue of the company having the facility tied up for another

five years without any real intent to operate? Is he looking at that with a view

to possibly breaking the lease with Daley's so that the town or the development

association might do something else there?

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, the best advice that I have

gotten from the legal people, the Department of Justice, is to the effect that

it is not that simple a matter to break the lease. For example, in the lease I

think it is agreed that the company would be reimbursed for any leasehold

improvements to the property. I am told that the company is alleging that they

have spent I believe in excess of $100,000 on that plant. I am told as well that

the only way that the government could again get possession of it would be to

negotiate a deal with the company, in which case then we would have to not only

pay for other considerations, but certainly we would have to reimburse the

company for the leasehold improvements that they claim they have made to the

operation.

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

MR. MATTHEWS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Could the minister then confirm for the House that there is a

request from the community of Belleoram and the development association, Fortune

Bay, North Shore Development Association, I guess to more or less get ownership,

or a right to operate that plant? Is his department considering that, or is it a

dead issue? What does the minister have to say to the people of Belleoram who

are interested in having their plant reactivated so they can process some fish

and create employment? Is there any chance that lease/purchase deal between his

department and Daley's can be worked out or corrected so that the people of

Belleoram can be given some meaningful employment? That is the question for the

minister.

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

MR. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, I will need some time to check

this out, but I seem to believe that maybe that lease arrangement was entered

into by the Town of Belleoram with the former operator, the Daley Company. I

will check it out and I will report back to the House tomorrow, but it seems to

me that, that is not an arrangement; certainly not entered into by the

Department of Fisheries since I have been there. There are many problems, Mr.

Speaker, as I said a moment ago with respect to that plant. Several operators

have moved in up there and stayed for a short period of time without too much

success and it is not going to be an easy plant to re-activate. I do not want to

create any wrong impressions this afternoon, but at the moment I do not see too

much hope for it. Now that might change but for all of the reasons that I have

stated here this afternoon, I am not aware of anybody at this point in time who

is really interested in re-activating that operation.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Environment and Lands and

also responsible for Wildlife in the Province.

I wonder if the minister could inform the House as to the

health of the stocks of Ptarmigan or more commonly known as Partridge, in the

Province, this year?

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: I think I heard him correctly. He is wondering

how the stocks of Ptarmigan are this year as compared to other years, was that

the question? Again, Mr. Speaker, let me check that out and bring the answer

back to the hon. gentleman.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The

Capes.

MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate the minister's commitment to check into it but I

would say to the minister, that over the last few years the stocks have

decreased tremendously as we know, and I ask the minister if she will consider,

in areas where the hunting season is prolonged, if she will consider shortening

the season. That recommendation basically comes from avid hunters, that southern

Avalon for instance, where, I believe have from September until December, most

people recommend that a thirty-day or a one month hunting season would be much

better and certainly much better in order to protect the stocks. I wonder if she

would look into adjusting the season rather than decimating the stocks.

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

Lands.

MS. COWAN: Again, Mr. Speaker, it is extremely difficult

for me to hear a question as there is so much noise in the House. I believe his

question was in the interest of conservation of Ptarmigan, and let me assure the

hon. gentleman that that is first and foremost in our wildlife department, and I

do appreciate what he says and know he says it with all sincerity. If there is a

problem with decreases in Ptarmigan or any other wildlife that we ascertain then

of course steps will be made to do whatever is necessary for that to regenerate

itself.

It is quite possible, Mr. Speaker, that human activity can

have an impact as well and of course having a look at ATV legislation and

changes there I think, would probably be beneficial to all wildlife in the

Province, and we are undertaking that at this time.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West.

MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a question for the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, my old poll captain.

I would like to ask the minister, Mr. Speaker, if he can,

being familiar with the Burin Peninsula, tell me who owns the road from the Salt

Pond Grand Bank Highway through the community of Winterland and to the airport?

Can he tell us who owns that road and who maintains that road?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know how many times the hon. gentleman

intends to raise this allegation that I was his poll captain. Although -

MR. TOBIN: You were.

MR. GOVER: No, no. That is not correct. I did spend a

couple of years on the Burin Peninsula, at which time I had occasion to be in

the hon. gentleman's company and his hospitality was much appreciated, but I

never did assist him in any way, shape or form in getting elected to the House

of Assembly. I was not a poll captain at all.

AN HON. MEMBER: Everybody is entitled to one mistake in

his lifetime.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) than anybody else.

MR. GOVER: I would hate to think, Mr. Speaker, that I am

responsible for the hon. gentleman's seat in the House of Assembly, that I was

that good a poll captain, but in any event, Mr. Speaker, to the question.

Offhand without checking with my officials, I would say that

the road that he describes is owned and maintained by the provincial government.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia

West on a supplementary.

MR. MATTHEWS: A major breakthrough.

MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the minister.

Does the government intend to operate and maintain that road again this year to

the Winterland airstrip?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation.

MR. GOVER: To my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, any road of that

nature and that length on the Works, Services and Transportation inventory,

which is under maintenance, has not been removed so I would assume that it would

be maintained.

MR. SPEAKER: Question Period has expired.

Notices of Motion

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

MR. WARREN: Mr. Speaker, I move that on tomorrow:

Be it

resolved that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador immediately reject any

industrial development project that involves the importation for the disposal of

garbage and industrial waste from any jurisdiction outside of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

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

MR. HARRIS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that I

will on tomorrow move the following resolution:

Whereas the prospect of shipping household garbage from the

Eastern Seaboard of the United States of America for incineration in this

Province leaves Newfoundlanders and Labradorians worried about the health,

environmental, and political consequences, and the risk to the future of our

Province's tourism and wilderness potential; and

Whereas already substantial public funds have been committed

to the process of assessing the Long Harbour incineration project with the

prospect of further expenditures before a decision is made; and

Whereas it is desirable to resolve any uncertainty and

reassure the people of the Province that such projects will not be approved;

Therefore

be it resolved that the House of Assembly go on

record as opposing the importation of garbage and other wastes into the Province

for incineration, and, in particular, direct the government to inform the

proponents of the Long Harbour Waste through Energy incineration project that

the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador will not approve their project to

import and incinerate garbage.

Further

be it resolved that the government be directed to

place before the House of Assembly a comprehensive policy and program for solid

waste management within the Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

Answers to Questions

For which Notice has been Given

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

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

point of order.

MR. WINDSOR: While we are on Answers to Questions, two

weeks ago the Minister of Development promised to get some information related

to Enterprise Newfoundland. Could he advise us when?

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

MR. FUREY: Mr. Speaker, I have most of the information.

All of the regional stuff has been compiled. I think there are two or three

missing from Central and some from Eastern. I am just waiting for the Western

region to send in the concluding companies and I will have it all compiled. Then

I can give all of that to the hon. member, no problem.

AN HON. MEMBER: Could you give us what you have?

MR. FUREY: Yes, I suppose I could do that. I will do it

tomorrow, sure.

Orders of the Day

MR. BAKER: Motion 6, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Finance to introduce a bill,

"An Act To Amend The Liquor Control Act, 1973, and The Liquor Corporation Act,

1973," carried. (Bill No. 34).

On motion, Bill No. 34 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 7, Mr. Speaker.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Health to introduce a bill,

"An Act To Amend The Welfare Institutions Act," carried. (Bill No. 33).

On motion, Bill No. 33 read a first time, ordered read a

second time on tomorrow.

MR. BAKER: Motion 5, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the President of Treasury Board.

MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This motion was

necessitated by a tribunal report that is required by legislation, and the

conditions leading up to the bringing in of this motion are stated in the

whereases. I am not going to go through these again, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to point out what we are suggesting be done in

the 'Therefore

be it resolved'

section of the resolution. "In light of the

provision of the Public Sector Restraint Act, 1992, it is recommended that the

House defer consideration of the recommendations of this report until the expiry

of the restraint period provided for in the Act."

Mr. Speaker, we have brought in restraint legislation that

applies to the rest of the public service in the Province and we are simply

putting the judges in conformance with that particular restraint legislation.

"It is recommended that the House accept or vary the

recommendations of the report - this deals, Mr. Speaker, with what happens after

the restraint period - "within 30 days of the expiration of the restraint

period, or if the House is not then sitting, it is recommended that the report

be considered and accepted or varied within 30 days of the beginning of the 1st

sitting of the House immediately following the end of the restraint period."

That deals, Mr. Speaker, with what happens to this report after the end of the

restraint period when there will be, then, still two years left in terms of the

recommendations.

Finally, Mr. Speaker: "It is recommended that the report as

then accepted or varied be implemented within 30 days of acceptance or variance

with effect from the 1st of April, 1994 for the then unexpired balance of the 4

year period contemplated by the report and the Provincial Court Act, 1991." Mr.

Speaker, that, in

summary, is what we are suggesting, that we defer

consideration until after the restraint period and then setting the conditions

under which we would, then, either accept or vary the report at that point in

time.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Mr. Speaker, this resolution follows the

procedure laid down in the Provincial Court Act consistent with the principle

that the judiciary be impartial, consistent with the principle that the

judiciary be removed from any direct connection with or any perception of

connection with the political arm of the government. This is a process that we,

in the Opposition, approve of.

In the case of public servants, the government has violated

collective agreements and, by legislation, rolled back increases and benefits

and decreed wage restraint. We have objected to that on principle because of the

violation of collective agreements. In the case of provincial court judges, who

are independent, we would support the principle that judges be subject to the

same wage and benefit restraint as others paid out of the public purse.

Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we support this resolution. We

support the process that necessitated this resolution, which recognizes, as I

said, the independence of the judiciary and we support, through this resolution,

the government subjecting provincial court judges who, though being independent

of the political arm of the government, are paid out of the public purse,

subjecting judges to the same wage policy as others paid out of the public

purse.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Is the House ready for the question?

On motion, resolution carried.

MR. BAKER: Order 2, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER: Order 2, the continuation of the Concurrence

Debate.

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

MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the Government

House Leader.

MR. BAKER: My understanding is that at the last sitting

day we ran out of time on the Social Services Concurrence Motion, and it is

still listed on the Order Paper. I wonder if Your Honour could check into that?

MR. SPEAKER: Government Services.

The hon. the Member for LaPoile.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR. RAMSAY: Just briefly, Mr. Speaker.

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

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just briefly, to

introduce the concurrence motion on this. I acted on behalf of the Chairperson

of the Government Services Estimates Committee, the hon. the Member for Humber

West, who was exercising -

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

May I interrupt the hon. the Member for LaPoile? The motion

was not put to adopt the Social Services. We haven't done that so we would now

do it.

On motion, Report of the Social Services Estimate Committee,

carried.

The hon. the Member for LaPoile.

MR. RAMSAY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Committee

handled the Estimates for a variety of departments in the Government Services

sector. The Department of Finance, under the stewardship of the hon. minister,

was very interesting, albeit the somewhat brief session we had with the Minister

of Finance. But the Minister of Finance has become known as a man of few words,

when few words are required. He put across the variety of initiatives of his

department, doing so in a very forthright and solid manner. The Opposition, I

don't think, had much in the way of opposition to his specific Estimates.

Therefore, that was passed in Committee without amendment.

Furthermore, we had the hon. the Minister of Works, Services

and Transportation, a new minister to that portfolio this year. The minister

handled himself very ably in the deliberations with Committee. He was very

straightforward in his provision of information to the Committee members, both

Opposition and government members, did quite a remarkable job of taking the

reins of his department in such a short period of time, and is in no doubt, in

charge of that department. The Budget Estimates for that department were also

carried without amendment, I might add.

The Department of Employment and Labour Relations, the hon.

Minister of Employment ad Labour Relations, the MHA for Exploits, was also

extremely forthcoming with information provided to mainly the Opposition, in

that debate. He provided the information willingly and answered the questions,

some of which were fairly difficult questions. I give the Opposition

commendation on their difficult task. Of course, the questions that they did ask

were very forthcoming and pointed; equal answers to the questions were provided

by the minister, and it did clear up some problems that the Opposition had.

Those Budget Estimates also were passed without amendment.

I might also add that the Department of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs was a department which I did not chair. The Department of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs, I also understand, on reports from the

Committee members involved, passed the Budget Estimates without any amendments.

I might add that it was handled in a very prompt period of time. I did attend

the meeting with the Department. Also, I might note that Newfoundland and

Labrador Housing, a very important part of that minister's department, was also

passed without amendment.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all members

who filled in for other members who were absent from Committee for a variety of

reasons. The variety of members all co-operated, including Opposition members,

who filled in for their own Committee members at times.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Jack Harris (Inaudible).

MR. RAMSAY: No, Jack wasn't on this Committee.

The other thing I might add, Mr. Speaker: I would like to

thank the Clerks at the Table and the Deputy Clerk of the House for providing

the assistance that they did. The scheduling at times was difficult but members

did co-operate, along with the Opposition and the officials concerned. We

appreciate the co-operation on having gotten this important part of the Budget

process passed, and look forward to new and better opposition in the future.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

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

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

MR. RAMSAY: I am told by the Table you don't have to go

three hours.

MR. MATTHEWS: You don't have to go three hours? No, you

don't have to. Once we do not get up and speak and the question is put that will

be the end of it, which won't be too long, I say to the member. The Member for

LaPoile seems quite anxious to get this through. We want to have a few words on

the Estimates of these departments as we have on the others, the resource

departments, the social departments, and now, I guess, the services departments

that we are debating here today and talking about.

It is quite interesting to hear that the first one the Member

for LaPoile mentioned was the Finance Department, he said, under the capable

stewardship of the Minister of Finance. When he was saying that the Minister of

Finance was over there going on as if he were swinging a baseball bat. Of

course, we saw the pictures where the Minister of Finance was down to the

baseball field to open up the tournament or something and he struck out. The

Minister of Finance struck out on the ball field as he struck out directing the

financial direction -

AN HON. MEMBER: Four swings.

MR. MATTHEWS: Four swings was it? Well, he has had four

Budgets now so he has the equivalent number of Budgets as he has had swings

trying to hit the baseball, I say to the Member for LaPoile. I don't know what

that means. Whether he will hit a home run next year in his Budget I don't know.

Whether he will be around to bring in another Budget remains to be seen.

The Member for Menihek is so anxious to speak on this that he

is interrupting me. He can't wait to get on his feet because he has so much to

say about the Minister of Finance and the way he is leading this Province

financially and fiscally. The Minister of Finance wasn't listening to me but I

am hoping that when he brings in another Budget, if he gets that far for one

reason or another, or whether the Premier will have him moved out of his

portfolio or whether the people will remove him from the portfolio, or whatever,

that we will see a little change in direction of fiscal policy for the Province

because it hasn't worked with the payroll tax that the minister has applied to

the resource industry and which is hurting, I say to the minister very

seriously. It is hurting the fishing industry and the forest industry.

We have had a lot of correspondence from fish companies

around the Province, from FANL, that fisheries association of Newfoundland and

Labrador that have some very serious concerns about the payroll tax being

applied to the fishing industry. We have concerns from companies, small

businesses around the Province because of the lowering of the ceiling from

$300,000 to $100,000, that it is affecting them in a very negative manner.

These are some of the concerns that are being expressed as a

result of the minister's last Budget. I am hoping the minister will listen to

the concerns of those people. We know there is probably very little he can do.

Maybe there are some things he can do now to address them but when he starts

putting together some projections and changes in direction for the new Budget, I

am hoping the minister will take the very real and legitimate concerns that the

people are expressing to the minister and to all members by telephone calls,

letters and so on. I am hoping the minister will do that, take a look at that

when he prepares for the next Budget.

Employment and Labour Relations - of course, what can we say

about that? The minister has not undertaken much employment generation this

year. As a matter of fact, the biggest increase this year we see is in the

number of people going on the social assistance rolls of the Province,

tremendous increases. Of course, we haven't felt the full brunt of what is

happening out and about the Province yet, because with what is happening in the

deep-sea fishery now and with the uncertainty with Fishery Products

International, and National Sea, with the couple of plants they have left

around, we really haven't seen all the problem. It hasn't fully unfolded yet

because we don't know what the future of a lot of those fish plants will be.

Then there are a large number of our people who are on unemployment insurance,

receiving unemployment insurance benefits that are going to expire in the next

short while. As a matter of fact, last week there was some kind of demonstration

somewhere on the Northern Peninsula, I believe, where a number of people had

exhausted unemployment insurance benefits and were wondering really how they

were going to survive and get by. Their only recourse is to go visit the welfare

officer.

The Minister of Health wrote something once, I believe, a

little book. Was it a book he wrote, the Minister of Health? What was it called?

AN HON. MEMBER: 'The Welfare Officer Will See You Now'.

MR. MATTHEWS: 'The Welfare Officer Will See You Now' - a

very interesting piece of work, I must say. There are going to be more and more

people up in the minister's district over the next few weeks who are going to

wait outside. They are going to be waiting out in that office - waiting for the

word that the welfare officer will see you now.

A lot of those people all over the Province are very, very

reluctant to go visit the Social Services office. A lot of people with a lot of

pride do not enjoy that very much, and are very apprehensive. This year we will

see thousands of them who will have to go visit the welfare officer for the

first time in their lives.

I have not experienced it yet, and I pray to God that I

won't, but who knows? Maybe, one of these days, it will come down to that, where

you will have to go and put your pride aside, swallow your pride and go in and

knock on the door and say, 'I am down and out. Can you help me?' But there are a

lot of people in this Province who are already at that stage, which the Minister

of Social Services has been talking about over the last couple of weeks, the

drastic increase in the number of people who are now receiving social

assistance, and the thousands more who, over the next few short months, are

going to have no other recourse but to go visit the Social Services offices

around this Province.

It is very, very sad that we have reached that crisis. The

Minister of Employment and Labour Relations is probably the one minister who

could do something about it if he took his job seriously; but he doesn't take

his job very seriously, because if he did, he would be listening to every word I

am saying now. But the minister is over there cracking a few jokes with his

pals, telling a few jokes and laughing and smirking. And here I am, trying to

give him a message on behalf of the unemployed in this Province, telling him

that it is his responsibility, as the minister responsible for employment, to

come up with some money for employment generation for the Province.

The more I say that, the more the minister laughs, so I don't

know if he has the money in his pocket that he is going to announce later on

this afternoon when he speaks to this. Perhaps he has another $25 million or $30

million that he is going to announce for the people of the Province, and he

thinks it is funny that I am up here talking about this, not knowing what he is

going to announce.

AN HON. MEMBER: Perhaps he doesn't care.

MR. MATTHEWS: That is the other thing, maybe he just

doesn't care about the unemployed of this Province.

I say very seriously to the Minister of Employment and Labour

Relations that we have a crisis in this Province. We have a crisis. It is going

to get worse over the next number of months, and it is incumbent upon the

minister to have his officials, particularly in the Employment Services

Division, I believe it is called -

AN HON. MEMBER: The Minister of Development doesn't care

either.

MR. MATTHEWS: The Minister of Development hasn't

developed very much, I must say. I thank the member for reminding me. The

Minister of Development hasn't developed too much in the three years that he has

been Minister of Development. He hasn't developed too much. The thing he has

developed most, I would think, is an extensive travel itinerary. the Minister of

Development puts a lot of time into that.

AN HON. MEMBER: Expensive (inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, expensive and extensive, I say to the

minister - an extensive and expensive travel itinerary that takes him all over

the world.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Oh, he certainly couldn't have been - not

that member. He could not be, not travelling enough. Well, all I say to the

Minister of Development then, is we won't see him at all if he ever gets to

travel enough, if that's the case.

I realize that with that particular portfolio there is a

significant and substantial amount of travel required. You look back over the

years of Development ministers and they are, of the Cabinet minister, the most

travelled or certainly in the top number of travelled ministers.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: For the most part. The minister over there

now is talking about having to go to Ireland.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: A project for Port au Port.

MR. MATTHEWS: A project for Port au Port in Ireland.

Well, that is good. That will be development, and he is going to take the member

with him.

AN HON. MEMBER: To grow french shamrocks.

MR. MATTHEWS: French shamrocks, yes.

Anyway, these are some of the things that we want to talk

about. Municipal and Provincial Affairs, you could speak for hours on that if

you wanted to, and what has happened to that department; the hardship that the

department has imposed upon municipalities throughout this Province, and

consequently, upon taxpayers, with the downloading scheme they have put in

place. They have changed the grant structure of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs. Communities out there now are being literally strangled financially by

the actions of the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs.

I am sure members opposite realize how serious it is; there

are letters coming in, as well, from all over the Province from municipalities

that can't make ends meet because of the drastic change, particularly in the

debt restructuring formula, where, a lot of communities went in - getting

particularly water and sewer systems and projects based upon 20 per cent of

fixed revenues, and then the department changed that very quickly and radically,

and now, a lot of those communities are left with partially installed systems in

the ground and need millions more dollars to finish it and it has caused a lot

of hardship. With property assessments, increased poll taxes, increased property

taxes, a lot of those communities are unable to make the budgets balance to take

care of the debt charges they had to pay back to government.

So these are some of the problems that are being encountered

about the Province, Mr. Speaker. I am going to sit down. I will have more to say

about this later on because it is a very important topic. There are a lot of

problems with finance, a lot of problems with employment in the Province, a lot

of problems with the municipalities, Municipal and Provincial Affairs, Works,

Services and Transportation, with the minister not sure if he is really

responsible for that road leading to the Winterland airstrip and other things,

the Burin Peninsula Highway, that we are looking forward to having some

improvements done, I say to the minister, and I am sure we will.

As a matter of fact, I was going down over it yesterday; I

drove back down to Fortune yesterday, and a gentleman with me, we were doing a

little bit of bouncing around and he said, 'It is almost as bad as on the Grand

Banks, isn't it Bill?' and I said, 'Yes, it probably is, and I say there is just

as much fish here too,' was my comment to him. So I say to the minister, the

highway is in bad shape. It has gone back a bit now because the frost has come

out of the ground, but it gets worse every year and there is supposed to be some

twenty-eight kilometres I believe, of upgrading done this year in the worst

section of that road.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: What's that?

AN HON. MEMBER: You need a new Liberal federal minister

(inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Yes, another Don Jamieson. Who was that, by

the way? I ask the Minister of Finance. Who was that? Who remembers now? Who

really remembers?

As a matter of fact, I drove to Swift Current this morning, I

say to the Minister of Finance -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: What is the man pointing his finger about

over there? Thank God, for Don Jamieson.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: Mr. Jamieson was no doubt - good members.

They are all overthere now, Mr. Speaker, trying to convince me that Don Jamieson

was a good member. Now, can you imagine, they are all over there trying to

convince me that he was a good member.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) know that already,

(inaudible).

MR. MATTHEWS: The Minister of Education says I know it

already. Yes, he was a good member. He was a good Member of Parliament for our

area of the Province. That is what I was saying, I drove to Swift Current this

morning and, of course, the sign for Kilmory and I looked at the Jamieson

property and I thought about Mr. Jamieson, you know, and all the good things he

did, particularly for our riding in the Province. He had great influence in

Ottawa, as we all know, and looked out for his riding but, of course, what you

have to remember is that you reflect - and I am just saying this to reminisce a

bit; because you look back at the 1979 election when he came back and led the

Liberal Party provincially in that election, the rest of the Province didn't

feel the same way about him obviously, as we thought about him in Burin - St.

Georges.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

I want to remind the hon. member that his ten minutes are up.

MR. MATTHEWS: I am sorry. I will speak again.

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

AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear!

MR. A. SNOW: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to see the Minister responsible for Employment

and Labour Relations applauding my standing to speak and giving a critique on

his particular department and their lack of delivery of programs to this

Province that is going to create employment.

Of all the departments that have been a dismal failure in the

Wells Administration, I guess you would have to point to the Department of

Employment and Labour Relations as the biggest failure of any particular

department, and, I mean, that is quite an accomplishment for a former labour

leader, to be in there and now he is perceived as one of the people most lacking

in support of the labour movement, who has viciously spear-headed the attack

against the labour movement, in contract promoting, contract stripping, freezing

wages, and it has done absolutely nothing with regard to job creation while he

has been minister.

His attack on the ordinary working individual through Workers

Compensation where there has been absolutely no concern whatsoever given for the

right of the worker in the workplace. It has all been given to the employer, and

to blame all the ills and the failures of the Workers Compensation system or the

board on the injured employees, the people who have been injured and killed in

the workplace, Mr. Speaker. The same minister who would not respond to a day of

morning on April 28, a memorial to those injured and killed in the workplace.

Mr. Speaker, his department has been a terrible failure of

this administration. That is quite colossal when you think of all the failures

that has been over in the Wells administration in the last three or four years.

The down loading of provincial responsibility brought on by

Municipal and Provincial Affairs has affected every taxpayer in this Province,

and the fact that this government has passed along responsibilities that were

ordinarily incurred by the Province have now been passed on to the

municipalities. We have seen that example come forward here in St. John's with

the amalgamation issue and the tremendous tax burden that has been passed on to

the municipality to pay for the increased service cost with regard to

fire-fighting and the delivery of other municipal services to regions that were

amalgamated in St. John's. Now the Province is expecting the St. John's

municipal taxpayer to pick up this burden.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the voters out there are

going to be reminded in the next provincial election in St. John's that what

caused the high taxes is the fact that this administration and what they are

going to be doing is showing their distaste and dissatisfaction -

MR. DUMARESQUE: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: The hon. Member for Eagle River is saying

that ten people have decided to vote Liberal in Naskaupi.

But, Mr. Speaker, those two departments have been dismal

failures with regard to the delivery of services and assistance to people with

regard to what governments have been doing in this Province for years and years,

Mr. Speaker.

The Minister of Finance, who should be by now accustomed to

delivering a budget that would outline a path of recovery for this Province out

of the economic doldrums that we are in, instead of that, he has made countless

mistakes with regard to bringing in a budget. The only thing in the last budget

that you could see that was of any positive light whatsoever was the fact that

they did away with some fees, the cost of issuing fees, Mr. Speaker. We find all

that is applicable this year, it is next year they are going to be done away

with. So even the good news is postponed for a year, Mr. Speaker.

The fact that they have increased the taxes, a 4 per cent

increase in individual income tax announced in the last Budget, and a 2 per cent

increase announced in the previous Budget. That is 6 per cent increase when

every other taxing jurisdiction in this country led by the federal government

have been suggesting the complete opposite. What should be done is that taxes

should be lowered on individuals and corporation.

As a matter of fact the Premier in his speech on Friday

suggested that is what this government should be doing. Yet, in the four Budgets

that have been brought down, they have increased taxes on corporations and

individuals and paper burden on corporations. The complete opposite of what the

Premier is out telling the business people of this Province. When speaking to

the Newfoundland Manufacturers Association representatives, I believe, on Friday

he suggested that is what this government should be doing. They should be easing

the tax load on companies and easing the tax burden on employees, on individuals

because that would create more economic wealth out and about, if you will, that

would create more money within the economy.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance didn't see fit to put

that in his Budget. What he did was the complete opposite, he raised the taxes.

Increased the paper burden, increased the corporate tax, increased the personal

income tax and that is one of the reasons why this Province finds itself into a

depression rather than a recession that is occurring in other places in this

country.

Another department that government services encompasses, Mr.

Speaker, is Works, Services and Transportation, a department that really should

be out there providing an infrastructure to allow more economic activity.

Without any communications, without roads, railroads, highroads, without the

method of communicating or transporting goods and services around this Province

you cannot do business. If you measure the economy of any area you will see that

they are very much related to how effective their transportation system is. If

you tie the economy in East Germany, if you look at that as an example, to how

efficient their transportation system was in Eastern Europe or in Eastern

Germany, compared to that of Western Germany, you will see that they are very

directly related.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. A. SNOW: There are going to be enough people

parachuting into Naskaupi as it is. We will not be looking for a parachute

candidate from the air force. There are enough parachuting candidates coming

into Naskaupi now. Mr. Speaker, I am hoping that that parachute candidate will

have a very rough landing when he reaches the ground in Naskaupi.

Mr. Speaker, our Department of Works, Services and

Transportation has been a dismal failure, too. I can remember asking the

minister responsible for Works, Services and Transportation about Winter

maintenance on the Trans-Labrador Highway.

AN HON. MEMBER: (inaudible)

MR. A. SNOW: He is the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation, the deputy minister, I think. Mr. Speaker, that minister

suggested that he was going to give the town council in Happy Valley - Goose Bay

$400,000 to do the winter maintenance on a highway that is 600 kilometres long

across Labrador. Now, can you imagine how naive, no wonder the people in

Naskaupi district are laughing at the minister. He was thanked today for being a

poll captain for the Member for Burin - Placentia West. The Member for Burin -

Placentia West thanked the minister responsible for Works, Services and

Transportation today because he was one of his poll captains in a previous

election. But, Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Minister of Works, Services and

Transportation for helping out the Opposition parties, because of his

dereliction of duties he has helped out both parties in Naskaupi, in his coming

in and offering the town council in Happy Valley - Goose Bay $400,000 to do the

winter maintenance on a highway. Can you imagine the audacity, the simplicity of

a minister to come in and offer a town council that?

By leave?

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

AN HON. MEMBER: No leave.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member does not have leave.

The hon. the Member for Harbour Main.

MR. DOYLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am pleased to have a few words to say on the Estimates. I

was not a member of that committee, Mr. Speaker.

MR. TOBIN: You should have been.

MR. DOYLE: I would have liked to be a member of that

committee because I heard some of the answers that some of the ministers were

giving were not very forthcoming at all. I did go to one of these committee

meeting, as a matter of fact, and questioned extensively the Minister of

Municipal and Provincial Affairs. While that is a very big department of

government, and while we kept the minister fairly busy during these committee

hearings, I cannot say that we received a great deal of information from the

minister. There were some very, very important issues discussed with respect to

that department.

I was expecting, as a matter of fact, to see the Minister of

Environment and Lands at the Municipal Affairs hearings, because I know there

must have been dozens and dozens of questions that she had to ask about the

municipality of CBS. So I was expecting to see her there, maybe to ask some

questions on cost recovery in Conception Bay South.

I asked a few questions on her behalf, as a matter of fact,

about the cost recovery -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Well the minister did his best to offer some

information. I cannot say that I got a great deal out of it. I questioned him

extensively, as a matter of fact, on the cost recovery program for Conception

Bay South as it pertains to the legality of that whole cost recovery program

that Conception Bay South has. There seems to be some disagreement, as a matter

of fact, as to whether or not the cost recovery program is legal. I have been

trying to get that information now for quite some time because I am given to

understand, and maybe the Minister of Environment and Lands, who is undoubtedly

better well versed in this whole process than I am, because she is a member of

the Cabinet, maybe she can get the information for me. Maybe she can give me the

information, because there are several constituents from the minister's area who

have been in to see me, as a matter of fact, on this particular issue as to

whether or not the cost recovery program - pardon me?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) spends so much time

(inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Well, that is what it is to be a popular

member. I mean I represented the Bell Island area, and reams and reams of calls

- the reams of calls that I get from the people of Bell Island is just

phenomenal, asking me to help keep their hospital operating; asking me to get

their transportation system upgraded, which I did, of course, before I left that

area, as the Minister of Transportation, put in place a pretty decent but yet

not perfect transportation system for the people of Bell Island.

I am glad the member mentioned that, because I was grappling,

as a matter of fact, to try to think of something to say with respect to the

transportation department. Now the Member for Bell Island has given me a full

hour to talk about the Bell Island ferry system, and that is a very, very

important thing to the people of Bell Island. I will not dwell on that quite

yet. I would still like to pursue, with the Minister of Municipal and Provincial

Affairs, through the Member for CBS, the cost recovery program for Conception

Bay South.

I have not been able to get a great deal of information on

that, as to whether or not that whole process is a legal one. I remember when

the cost recovery program was put in place, I believe the Department of Justice,

or the Department of Municipal Affairs, said it was not legal. The council wrote

back and asked the minister for a ruling on it, and I do not believe he has

given his ruling - yes, I believe he has. I think he got back to council and

told them that it was legal but they were waiting for some information from the

Minister of Justice.

Now unfortunately the Minister of Justice is not sitting in

the House of Assembly, and quite possibly will not be sitting in the House of

Assembly for a long, long time. This is the type of information that the Member

for CBS should be getting for the Town Council of Conception Bay South so that

they will not have to put up with this continuous uncertainly about whether the

cost recovery program is legal or is it not. Recently I had a couple of the

member's constituents come in to see me with regard to that program. Of course,

I could not really give them an accurate reading as to whether or not the

program was a legal one. Simply because I did not know. The council are waiting

for the Department and the Department of Justice to get back on it, but I do not

know if the Department to date has gotten back to council on it.

So these were some of the thing I was hoping that the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs might be able to tell me, but he

wasn't -

MS. COWAN: You supported the council (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: No, no. I did not.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Did you? Did you? You forced it on them,

sure.

MR. DOYLE: What I said to the people of Conception Bay

South, and I think my remarks are on the record, was that while nobody wants a

cost recovery program in CBS, that the town really has been forced over the last

couple of years in particular, because of the downloading of responsibility from

the government on to the council, that they are pretty well backed into a

corner. We were hoping that the Minister of Environment and Lands who represents

that area in Cabinet might have been able to get the $1.5 million. That is how

much Conception Bay South, that is how much their funding has been reduced this

year, $1.5 million.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: No no, I am talking about on current account,

not capital account. On capital account they got $3 million for water and sewer.

I am saying, on current account their funding, because of the downloading of

responsibility -

MR. R. AYLWARD: She doesn't know the difference.

MR. DOYLE: - the debt charges that they have to pay -

MS. COWAN: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: No, what I am saying is, that the government -

MR. R. AYLWARD: What you are after doing to them has

caused this. Don't you understand that? It's your government that caused this.

When we were in there this problem was not in Conception Bay South. It is only

since you got in there that this happened in Conception Bay South.

MR. DOYLE: I do not know if the Member for Conception Bay

South is aware, and I am not being critical of the member at all -

MS. COWAN: (Inaudible)!

MR. DOYLE: What I am trying to say to her -

MR. R. AYLWARD: Be critical, be critical, I'm telling

you, be critical. It's their fault.

MR. DOYLE: - is the new grants program that the

government has brought in, meant in terms of dollars and cents for the Town of

C.B.S., $1.5 million per year. That is on current account. When it is per year.

I am not talking about the capital account. I am talking about the current

account of CBS., it has gone down by $1.5 million.

Now what the town was hoping, and what everyone was hoping,

is that that policy would be reversed for CBS so that they would not be forced,

which they have been forced by the government, to bring in this cost recovery

policy. Nobody wants a cost recovery program in CBS I do not want to see a cost

recovery program, the council does not want to see it, the minister who is the

member for the area is on record as saying she does not want it. We're all on

record as saying we don't want it, but still, nobody is on record as saying to

the Town of CBS: look, this is why you are not going to have to do it. We are

going to reinstate the $1.5 million that we have taken from you. That's the

whole problem with the cost recovery program.

This can be multiplied many times over with other

municipalities in the Province. That the Department, that the government, has

downloaded so much of its responsibility onto the various towns that they are

being forced to come up with some very draconian measures.

MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The hon. member's time is up.

MR. MATTHEWS: By leave.

MR. DOYLE: They are being forced, Mr. Speaker, to come up

- by leave?

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

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

MR. SPEAKER: By leave.

MR. DOYLE: They are being forced to come up with some

very draconian measures to try and make ends meet in the town. In the various

towns around the Province.

AN HON. MEMBER: Draconian measures.

MR. DOYLE: Yes, draconian measures, is what they are.

Here we have CBS., which is currently the largest town in the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador, CBS has now become the largest town in the Province

of Newfoundland and Labrador. It cannot cope with what is happening.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Well, a few people more, yes. It cannot cope

with what is happening.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Mount Pearl.

MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, so it is time that the government

had a very close look at that policy because it is extremely difficult for the

towns to live within their budgets.

I am really surprised when I think of the Member for Fortune

- Hermitage who is the former President of the Federation of Municipalities.

MR. MATTHEWS: No he was not.

MR. DOYLE: Well he was a member when I was minister.

MR. MATTHEWS: He was a member, yes. He was a member but

(inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: He was a prominent member of that -

MR. MATTHEWS: No, not prominent.

MR. DOYLE: - and the member for Carbonear who was

president of that federation.

MR. MATTHEWS: Who?

AN HON. MEMBER: Vice-president.

MR. DOYLE: You were vice-president.

AN HON. MEMBER: Who was president?

MR. DOYLE: The Member for Carbonear -

MR. MATTHEWS: The most expensive president they ever had

too, Art Reid.

MR. DOYLE: - was the president of the federation. I am

surprised that these people have not spoken out a little bit more forcefully

than they have with respect to what government is doing because I believe one of

the platform planks of the government in the last election campaign was that

municipalities have to be treated more fairly, Mr. Speaker. That was one of the

platform planks, that municipalities have to be treated more fairly. Instead

what we are seeing is municipalities are driven to the ground because of the

policies of this government, Mr. Speaker.

You know it was the smaller municipalities in the Province

that were supposed to benefit more because of new structure, because of new

grant structure it was the small municipalities that were supposed to benefit

most from it, and here we find exactly the opposite has occurred because the

smaller municipalities in the Province, have had their funding reduced by 13 per

cent. By 13 per cent they have had their funding reduced.

You know, Mr. Speaker, at least the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs did say one thing which gave me some encouragement that

morning when we examined his estimates. He said one thing that gave me a great

deal of encouragement, if he follows through on it, and that was that he has a

committee in place who are currently looking at that whole grants structure.

Quite possibly it could be scrapped. I think, hopefully municipalities if it

will be scrapped -- well it would have to be an improvement anyway because the

funding to the various small municipalities in the Province has been reduced to

such an extent that they are finding it very -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: I am wrong?

I am being quite sincere in what I am saying here. I am just

not trying to make any political points on this. I am trying to be as sincere as

I can about it. Small municipalities in the Province are being driven into the

ground because of this change in the new grants structure, and I think that is

common knowledge even though some members opposite are shaking their head and

saying no. But I think it is common knowledge.

I think that the federation -- well the federation has made

its views known on this new grant structure. I don't think they have been strong

enough. I don't think they have been strong enough in their criticism of the

government and in their criticism of that grant structure. I believe they have

to stand back from this for a few minutes and reassess what they are doing. I

think they have to be a little bit more strong because when times get difficult

financially in the Province, very often it is the municipalities who will

suffer. That is not good enough in my view, Mr. Speaker, given the fact that the

town councils, while they receive an awful lot of criticism from people, are the

people who are on the front lines.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Pardon me?

MR. R. AYLWARD: You are stalling. You don't want to vote

(inaudible).

Are you withdrawing leave?

MR. MATTHEWS: You are stalling.

MR. R. AYLWARD: Are you withdrawing leave?

MR. DOYLE: Well I will only be another half an hour or

so.

MR. MATTHEWS: You really don't want the (inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, these are the people on

the front lines -

MR. R. AYLWARD: I think I am going to withdraw leave.

MR. DOYLE: - and they deserve some consideration from the

government and they deserve to be recognized for the fact that they are

volunteer people who receive an awful lot of criticism. They receive more

criticism very often than the government members or the opposition members do,

because they operate right in the community, so I believe it is incumbent upon

the government to recognize that and to do what they can to make life a little

bit easier for the town councils who are finding it so very, very difficult to

operate right now.

As I said, the people who should be defending the

municipalities in the Province, people like the Member for Carbonear, who is the

former president of the federation; the Member for Fortune Hermitage, who served

for a number of years on the federation; these are the people who the federation

looks to to make their case for them, to support them, just as they would look

to the Member for Exploits, just as the NTA and the teachers would look to the

Member for Exploits to plead their case on occasion - which has not happened,

incidentally. The smaller municipalities in the Province are finding it very,

very difficult to live within their means today.

Also, another area of concern that I brought up to the

Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs was the whole amalgamation process.

Quite a number of amalgamations, groupings, in the Province are still up in the

air - have not been dealt with yet. That is very, very important, that some of

these groupings be dealt with. Up in my own area, in Avondale, Harbour Main,

Conception Harbour, Colliers, Chapel Cove and Lakeview, these people, these

municipalities, are still wondering what the amalgamation process will do to

them, because nobody, even though the public hearing process has gone on, and

gone on, and gone on, and the recommendations made to the minister, still no

decision has yet been made. The Minister of Development should be looking into

that, as a former resident of Avondale.

MR. TOBIN: Who?

MR. DOYLE: Mr. Furey. He and I were born in Avondale.

MR. R. AYLWARD: What?

MR. TOBIN: He is not from Avondale?

MR. DOYLE: Born and raised.

MR. TOBIN: I thought he was a mainlander.

MR. DOYLE: As a former resident of Avondale, he should be

looking into what is going to happen with the amalgamation process in Avondale

and Conception Harbour and Harbour Main and those areas.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Yes, he should.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: To the what?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: To the cross in Holyrood? I would imagine the

Minister of Development, who has a brother living in Holyrood, will want to look

at that issue as well.

MR. TOBIN: Does his brother support you?

MR. DOYLE: Oh, he is a big supporter of mine.

MR. TOBIN: Good.

MR. DOYLE: Yes. He said he will be campaigning for me in

the next election, in fact.

MR. TOBIN: If I had a brother like Chuck, I would

campaign for you too.

MR. DOYLE: The people up in that area are wondering what

is going to happen with respect to the amalgamation issue, because it has been

up in the air. The public hearings have been held. The minister, the former

minister, who is now the Minister of Social Services, went out to Avondale and

met with people out there. We had the public hearing process. All the

recommendations have been now made to the minister months and months and months

ago.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: The department included those groups of

communities in there in the amalgamation process, and did some public hearings a

year ago. They still do not know what is going to happen, because the minister,

the former minister and the present minister, have yet to tell the individual

councils: Look, you are going to be amalgamated; you are not going to be

amalgamated; we are leaving you as you are.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: It is Avondale, Harbour Main, Conception

Harbour and Colliers. Those four -

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: The department included that grouping, and

went out there and had some public hearings on it. We all presented our briefs

on it and what have you.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: The reaction -

MR. R. AYLWARD: Fifty/fifty.

MR. DOYLE: - was fairly positive. The reaction was fairly

positive.

AN HON. MEMBER: To do it?

MR. DOYLE: To do it. The councils, for the most part,

agreed. There were some members within individual councils who did not agree so

I have been after the minister to make a decision one way or the other. Say to

them, look, we are not going to amalgamate you, and that is fine if they do not,

or say, yes, we are going to.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. DOYLE: Exactly. That is the question I have been

asking now for a year. I could not say with any degree of accuracy that there

are 100 per cent in favour of it. I do not know what the percentages are.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. DOYLE: Sure. The towns could have maintained their

own identity. But I have been asking now for a solid year for somebody to tell

me. I went to the minister and I have gone to his officials. I have gone to this

minister and asked him to simply make a decision: Look, if you do not want to

amalgamate them, that is fine, they can live with that. They will be quite happy

if you do not amalgamate them. I say to the Minister of Development, just for a

second, they would be quite happy if you did not amalgamate them. A lot of them

would be very happy if you did amalgamate them but the problem right now is that

the various individual councils do not seem to be able to make decisions on

anything simply because it is governed by - well, we could be amalgamated

tomorrow or we may not be - so they are in a state of flux right now. They do

not know, they are in limbo. I have been after the minister for some time to

make a decision and I cannot get to first base on it. I am not asking him to

amalgamate them or not to amalgamate them, I am saying simply to make the

decision.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible)

MR. DOYLE: About thirty-five minutes now. That is all I

have been asking him to do, is to make a decision so that they will be in a

position to get on with their lives. That is all we want and if it happens one

way or the other we will live with it but it is very, very difficult to do

anything when you do not know. I would appreciate it if the minister would check

on that because I have not been able to get to first base on it. I have been

dealing with the former minister and his officials, and now the current minister

and it is just frustrating trying to deal with the issue. I questioned the

minister about the amalgamation issue back during those public hearings and

again I have not received a whole lot of information on it.

The capital allocations were of concern to me as well, Mr.

Speaker, with respect to the various municipalities. I believe one of the

questions I asked the minister was if he could make available to us some

information with respect to the amount of capital monies that were actually

spent last year by the various municipalities. The minister indicated to me, he

said: all of the money last year was spent with the exception of, I believe,

$100,000 or $200,000. Now, I am giving the minister the benefit of the doubt on

that but I think quite possibly the minister may be mistaken. I find it

difficult to believe that the $50 or $60 million that was allocated last year

was all spent with the exception of $100,000 or $200,000. I find that really,

really difficult to believe, given the fact that we had some preliminary

information which indicated that there was about $13 or $14 million that had not

been spent, and that is very, very important, if you are making capital monies

available that the municipalities you are making the money available to are in a

position to spend that money. A lot of municipalities could not accept the money

because they could not afford the repayment on their capital debt. A lot of

municipalities who received money had to give it back because they could not

afford to use it, Mr. Speaker, and that sometimes is a very, very important

source of employment in small municipalities as well.

I am concerned this year, as I was last year, about the

calling of tenders. The tenders this year - I think you are going to find that a

lot of municipalities won't be able to start their projects this year because

the tendering, again, is too late. Even though the minister indicated that we

were into early tendering, I think, again this year, it is too late. You are

going to find that a lot of the contracts are not going to be awarded until

September, possibly. Then, by the time you get started, and a lot of the

contractors are not going to want to start in September, because we have an

early winter, and you can't get the best bang for your buck from September

onward. So there must be a way. There must be a way that we can get these

tenders called sometime in March or April and have the projects ready to go when

May and June rolls around so that the construction industry can be assured of

having four or five good months in which they can get these projects started and

completed.

So, I am very, very concerned that an awful lot of

communities are not going to get their projects started, and that we are going

to wind up with millions and millions of dollars not spent again this year. That

has a lot of implications for construction companies. It is a very, very

difficult year, this year, for construction companies around the Province. An

awful lot of them are going bankrupt. An awful lot of them are not going to have

a lot of work on the go. So it is imperative, I believe, that we get as many of

these contracts out and tenders let as quickly as possible.

It is a very important source of employment for a lot of

people who are seasonally employed. We have a lot of seasonal workers in this

Province who depend on these small projects because they have no choice in order

to qualify for Unemployment Insurance. That is very, very important for a lot of

small communities around Newfoundland and Labrador. They don't have any source

of employment within their communities. Their fish plants probably will give

them five or six weeks work, and then, if you can get onto a municipal project

you will get enough work to qualify for Unemployment Insurance for the winter.

So that is a very, very important source of employment for

these people, and it should be important to the government, as well, simply

because, if these people don't get the required number of work weeks to qualify

for unemployment insurance, they will probably have to - through no fault of

their own because they will be forced onto the welfare rolls and they will

become an expense on the government, as well. So it should be incumbent on the

government to get these projects moving as quickly as possible.

I can't understand for the life of me, given the Premier's

statements a couple of months back - three months ago, I believe, when he was on

the First Minister's Conference somewhere in Atlantic Canada - making the point

that the federal government should get their tenders out as quickly as possible

so we can boost ourselves a little bit out of the recession and provide more

employment. I agreed with the Premier 100 per cent. I agree with him. This is

exactly what we should be doing, but I thought it should follow over, as well,

onto the provincial end of it, because we are not getting tenders out on the

municipal end of it as quickly as we should. By the time these tenders are

awarded it is going to be September or October and you will see council saying

to the contractors: 'No, we don't want to start it now. Wait until next spring,

because we are not going to get the same bang for the buck and we are not going

to get good quality work when you have to do it in November, December and

January in Newfoundland and Labrador, because we have a winter that sets in

very, very early.

So it is important that the government have a very close look

at early tendering, and May is not early tendering. I would say, the right time

for the government - and they don't have to wait for the Budget to come down in

order to have their capital program prepared and dealt with in Cabinet, and the

announcements made. They can do that in January. They can do it in December.

They can have the tenders called in January and February. All that can be done.

MR. R. AYLWARD: They don't want them called. All the

money will be spent then.

MR. DOYLE: You know, that is the impression you can get,

that they don't want the tenders called because they won't have to spend the

money, and we are hearing that $14 million went back to the government again

this year, because the municipalities, for one reason or another, were not able

to spend that money. Some couldn't spend it simply because they couldn't afford

to take the money, others didn't spend it simply because it was too late in the

season when tenders were finally called.

AN HON. MEMBER: How many of them (inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: How many what?

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Fourteen million dollars, we are hearing. Now,

I mean, that could be accurate and it may not be. We are hearing that $14

million last year wasn't spent.

AN HON. MEMBER: Most of those projects are starting up

again now already.

MR. DOYLE: Well, it still follows over because out of the

$50 million or $60 million that you got approved this year, tenders are so late

that you are not going to be able to spend $10 million or $15 million out of

that and it will be carried over until next year again, so it is a never-ending

cycle. That is $15 million that should be placed into the economy.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Exactly, exactly. One year, I remember, we had

a $40 million capital program, but you know times are very, very difficult right

now and people are finding it very, very hard to find employment, so every

single penny of that money should be utilized, because the $15 million that is

not spent could mean 300, 400 or 500 jobs, granted, ten or fifteen-week jobs,

short-term jobs, but very important jobs. When it comes to rural Newfoundland

and Labrador, finding that fifteen weeks, sometimes, or twenty weeks can be a

major, major problem in order to qualify for unemployment insurance, and what

makes it even more important this time around, still a lot of people are not

going to be able to qualify for unemployment insurance because of the failed

fishery and companies going bankrupt, and construction companies going out of

business, so it makes it even more imperative to have that money spent this

year, to have those capital monies spent. A lot of people depend upon that, Mr.

Speaker, and I am hoping that the government will give it some serious

consideration.

Now, I remember when I was Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs, I think one year we brought down the capital program

sometime in November or December, and we had our projects called sometime in

January, the tenders going out periodically and no big rush to do it, because

you have all winter to put them in the paper and they have to be advertised in

the paper for about a six-week period, and by the time it is awarded and the

engineers then have to do the engineering work, all that takes about a

three-month period, so it should be done and ready to move by the time May or

June rolls around.

Now another - that reminds me, and I would again say to the

Member for Carbonear, ask him if he is aware that so far, this year, not one

penny has yet been approved for the local service districts around the Province.

That water service program has not yet been dealt with.

AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Budget (inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: Exactly, and here it is, the first of June

today and we don't have - the Member for Mount Scio - Bell Island has a local

service district in his district, as a matter of fact, over in Bell Island in

Lance Cove. We all have local service districts that -

AN HON. MEMBER: Waiting for the House to close.

MR. DOYLE: Yes, because people are waiting for that

$2,000 to get the well drilled or what have you, and it is time that that was

done, time that that program was dealt with. That is very, very important, as

well.

So, Mr. Speaker, I hope the Minister of Municipal and

Provincial Affairs will take to heart some of the questions that I have asked

him, and some of the criticisms that were offered in a constructive way, not in

a destructive manner, but that were offered in a very, very constructive manner

to him. I hope he will take it to heart and do something about it, because while

we try from time to time to make political points, as we all do, because of the

business we are engaged in, I think we have to realise that the people most

directly affected, namely, the town councils, are the people who are volunteers

and doing a very, very good job, for the most part, within their own respective

communities, and we have to help.

Another department that I wanted to have a few words on - I

wanted to be at the Committee hearings but I could not be there - was the

Department of Employment and Labour Relations, which is a department right now

that is presiding over - what is the unemployment rate for Newfoundland and

Labrador right now? I think it is around -

SOME HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible).

MR. DOYLE: About 20 per cent, I guess, in most areas of

the Province. So the Minister of Employment has to be very concerned right now

about the... yes, almost a 45 per cent, I suppose, or 50 per cent unemployment

rate in a lot of communities in Newfoundland. Only for the Hibernia project up

in my own area, that great Tory initiative, I would probably have an

unemployment rate of around 50 per cent in my area right now.

Because, Mr. Speaker, we passed that Hibernia project over to

the government on a silver platter. I sincerely hope that the government is

paying very close attention to what is going on at Bull Arm. I hope they are on

top of the issue. I hope they are not just sitting back and hoping that an

investor will come along to pick up the slack. I hope the Minister of Employment

and Labour Relations is playing a pro-active role and not a reactive role. I

hope he is being pro-active, and is out and about with the Minister of Energy

looking for another investor to take over.

I would be very interested in hearing what the minister has

to say and what he has been doing, what efforts he has been expending to secure

the future of that project. Because it is a very important project for this

Province. It is not just Hibernia. It is not just an oil well out there, but

this is the beginning of an oil industry for Newfoundland and Labrador. The

security of that project, let me say to the minister, will affect an awful lot

of construction companies in Newfoundland and Labrador, companies that have

sprung up over the last two or three years simply because of Hibernia, no other

reason. They would have never been in existence if it hadn't been for the

Hibernia project. So, a lot of these companies right now are beginning to hurt

because of the slowdown at that project. A lot of these are teetering on the

edge of bankruptcy and hoping that the government is taking a very pro-active

role in trying to attract investment where the other companies have left off.

The project, as I said a few minutes ago, means an awful lot

to my district. It means an awful lot to the numerous construction workers I

have in my area. I have an awful lot of ironworkers, boilermakers, electricians,

plumbers, pipefitters, labourers and carpenters, and a lot of tradespeople, up

around the Conception Bay central area who, right now, would be in dire need of

employment opportunities if it were not for that project, Mr. Speaker.

So, I am certainly hoping that the government is taking a

very active role in trying to secure that project, because, at this time of

year, inevitably - and I guess it is the same all over Conception Bay, maybe in

most areas of Conception Bay - a lot of my constituents have to take off to

Toronto, New York, the Eastern Seaboard of the U.S. in order to get work, or out

in Alberta somewhere. Now, that project has given them a little bit of hope. It

has given them the opportunity to work close to home, which is very, very

important for people who have been travelling around the Province and the

country for years and years looking for work.

Mr. Speaker, that is very important for them, because

construction workers in my area have been leaving home for years and years. A

lot of them, actually, rarely see their own children growing up because they

have to travel so extensively looking for heavy industrial work, iron work,

boilermaker work and what have you. So they very often have to go down around

New York, Philadelphia, Boston, Toronto, Alberta and other far-flung areas of

the land in order to make a living for themselves and their families. Very often

they are gone to such an extent, as I said, that they sometimes don't see their

own families growing up around them.

So, when you have a project the magnitude of Hibernia at Bull

Arm, fairly close to home around the construction activity area of Conception

Bay Centre, when they saw that project moving it gave them an awful lot of

encouragement, because, as I said, it wasn't just the project, itself; but it

gave every indication that we were possibly getting into an oil development time

in our lives, that we would have this going on for maybe twenty, twenty-five or

thirty years. So, when you are a construction worker and you can look forward to

even a couple of years work, it is very encouraging for these people, Mr.

Speaker, that they know they can work a little bit close to home.

Very often, of course, you hear construction workers say - no

criticism of them intended, and I am sure they don't intend to criticize either.

But very often you hear them say when construction activity is down: 'Look,

whenever there is a problem in the fishery, whenever there is a problem in the

forestry sector or the farmers have had a failed crop, governments are always

moving to try to help these people out by getting projects on the go for fish

plant workers when the fishery fails or what have you, but nobody -' I hear that

comment so often from them - 'But nobody worries too much about the poor old

construction worker.' Nobody worries if a construction project is on the go that

he is automatically expected to pack his backs, jump on a plane and go to

Toronto, Alberta, New York, or somewhere in order to feed his family. Nobody

seems to attach the same degree of help or assistance to these people as goes

into the resource areas like the fishery, the forestry, farming, and what have

you.

So when you get a project like Bull Arm, Hibernia, on the go,

it offers an awful lot of encouragement and incentive to these people, knowing

that they are going to be able to stay around home for a couple of years to work

instead of having to jump on a plane and take off. Mr. Speaker, that is

extremely important and I sincerely hope that the Premier and the Minister of

Employment and Labour Relations, and the Minister of Mines and Energy are being

pro-active in securing that project. I get a little bit worried about it

sometimes because it appears to me that everything is a little bit too quiet. It

is a very, very large project. As a matter of fact it is the only megaproject

right now operating in Canada. There is not a bigger project anywhere in Canada

than the Hibernia project. It is the only megaproject that the federal

government has on the go right now and I am very, very worried that everything

is a little bit too quiet. The project has slowed down, it has not stopped, and

we have our fingers crossed that it will not stop, that it will continue on and

that additional investment will be found but it is uncomfortably quiet right

now.

You never hear too much being said and I sincerely hope that

there are investors waiting in the wings ready to come in and pick up about 25

or 30 per cent in order to secure the future viability of that project. It is a

major development in terms of employment opportunities and especially now when

you have a failed fishery, where people are being thrown out of work hand over

fist because of the downturn in the economy and the downturn in the fishery. It

is very, very important that Newfoundland has that alternate employment

opportunity, and it is very, very important as well in terms of establishing

some kind of a good industrial base in Newfoundland and Labrador because we have

very little industrial base here so it is very important from that point of view

as well, to have a new resource base, to have the oil industry operating in this

Province. We will not need incinerator projects and we will not need to take

advantage of the first cockamamy scheme that comes along. God knows we need the

employment in Newfoundland and Labrador but when you have alternate employment

opportunities like the Hibernia project then you can afford to walk away from

schemes like the importation of US garbage which we are hoping that the

government will walk away from.

Mr. Speaker, as I said it is getting uncomfortably quiet with

regard to that project. It seems that the government have - and I am hoping that

I am wrong about it, but it seems that government is taking a hands-off

approach. We do not hear too many statements coming from the Minister of Mines

and Energy with respect to that development out there and how close we are to

possibly getting investment. I sincerely hope that we are not taking a hands-off

approach and that government is making an effort to ensure that the project is

secured. I hope as well, Mr. Speaker, that we will have some further discussion

on that. I know the Member for Burin - Placentia West is dying to have a few

remarks now on these estimates. I want to thank the members of the House, the

members on the government side for giving me leave. I have been speaking now for

about an hour and I was only entitled to ten minutes so I want to thank the

government members for their consideration. I will sit down now and give it to

the Member for Burin - Placentia West.

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber East.

MS. VERGE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The same as other members in the chamber I have been

enthraled by the speech of the Member for Harbour Main. He is the strong silent

type and we have not heard him speaking in the House for quite awhile, but he

certainly made up for lost time here this afternoon.

He was, in the first part of his speech, trying to motivate

the government to make a decision on their three year old proposal to amalgamate

municipalities in the district he represents. Since we are looking at the

estimates and policies of the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs, I

would like to say something about the way this administration has approached

municipal government.

It has been three years now since the government announced

that they wanted to carry out wholesale amalgamation. The former minister

decreed that well over a hundred municipalities would be combined into larger

units. That regardless of what the people living in those communities thought,

the whole process would be accomplished before the municipal elections in

November of 1989. As we all know, since then there has been a series of

retreats, retractions, delays. The Premier actually early on cut the legs out

from under the former minister and made an announcement that no municipality

would be amalgamated against its will.

People hearing the Premier's words took them at face value.

Much later, however, after the furore had subsided, when the Premier was put to

the test he gave a rather amazing

interpretation of those words. He said that no

municipality would be forced to amalgamate against the wishes of the people

there, in the sense that the Cabinet would make no such decision in private. He

said any such proposal would be brought to the House of Assembly where there

would be open debate. The Premier really did not fool anyone. Because everyone

realises that the Cabinet - actually, in this case, the Premier, one man -

controls the voting results in the House of Assembly.

The legislation requires feasibility studies of amalgamation

proposals, but this administration deviated from past practice and I believe

contradicted the spirit of the law by appointing government officials to carry

out the feasibility study. These government officials, of course, have their

jobs at the pleasure of the Premier, so they were hardly in a position to bring

in conclusions differing from the stated objective of the Premier and the

Cabinet. Over the next couple of years feasibility studies - at least, the form

of feasibility studies - were carried out.

Some of the proposed combinations of municipalities, prior to

this administration taking office, had been proposed, talked about, by the

municipalities affected. In some cases preparatory work had been done. One such

example is Grand Falls - Windsor. Another such example, so I am told by the

present minister, were the municipalities in the district that he represents -

Placentia, Dunville, Freshwater. But the approach of this administration

basically set back progress where amalgamation was already in the works. People

got their backs up because government was setting about forcing amalgamation,

regardless of what they thought.

In many other instances amalgamation had never even been

thought about. The government failed to do any research to justify the merger

proposals, and the government to this day has failed to resolve the confusion

that has resulted. In the district I represent, the government made such a

proposal. The government proposed to combine the municipalities of Massey Drive

and Mount Moriah and Corner Brook.

It has been three years since that prospect has been the

official policy of the Wells' administration. There was a feasibility study

carried out by an assistant deputy minister of the government, along with a

nominee of the three municipalities affected. That was done in the winter of

1990. The feasibility study consisted of public hearings in Corner Brook.

At the public hearings there was no support expressed for the

amalgamation proposal. There were serious objections voiced, and the two

commissioners were left to do a report. Now, over a year later, the government

official wrote a report concluding that amalgamation should proceed. He

purported to do a financial analysis, but he completely ignored the expenditure

side of the financial implications. He made revenue forecasts, but he ignored

expenditures.

The independent commissioner, who had been chosen by the

three municipalities, while not giving a written report, wrote a letter saying

that he was not satisfied that a case had been made for amalgamation benefitting

the whole.

At the public hearings the City of Corner Brook said, in its

presentation, that the proposed amalgamation would cost a considerable sum for

the enlarged municipality. After that, staff of the City of Corner Brook did

rough estimates pointing at a net additional cost of $600,000 a year. I

understand that was later reworked, at the request of the mayor, and depending

on how you read the revision, the net additional cost might be as high as

$800,000; but there is no doubt, from the information that has been generated

within the City of Corner Brook, that there will be diseconomies of scale. That

merger would result in a higher overall cost of providing municipal government.

The reason is quite obvious. We are talking about one

relatively large municipality, Corner Brook, which has a population of about

23,000 and two comparatively small municipalities, Massey Drive and Mount

Moriah, with populations ranging from 500 to 800.

In Corner Brook, municipal services are provided by paid

staff. In the smaller municipalities, Massey Drive and Mount Moriah, the

councillors first of all serve on a volunteer basis, but apart from that,

important municipal services are also provided on a volunteer basis. Fire

protection in Massey Drive and Mount Moriah is provided entirely by volunteers.

The recreation programs in Massey Drive and Mount Moriah are run by citizens who

donate their time. There are other community functions in those smaller

municipalities which are operated at no cost to the local taxpayers.

If merger is to come about, first of all there would be no

incentive for the citizens of Massey Drive and Mount Moriah to continue to

volunteer for the fire departments. Secondly, the unionized City of Corner Brook

Fire Department would object to volunteer departments operating within the

territory of the enlarged municipality.

We are seeing something very similar in the Goulds, which is

now part of the City of St. John's.

Mr. Speaker, this is a time of economic decline, of economic

depression, in our Province. The government has adopted a host of drastic

measures to reduce provincial expenditure. The government has consistently

downloaded responsibilities and taxation burden to municipalities and school

boards. So you would think, given that situation, that the provincial government

would do everything in its power to reward the volunteer services that exist. In

this particular instance, you would think the provincial government would be

quite thankful that Massey Drive and Mount Moriah are operating so well, to the

satisfaction of the vast majority of citizens, drawing on so much volunteer

labour.

I have mentioned that the spectre of amalgamation has been

present for three years now. It is difficult in these circumstances for the

volunteers who take

part in the fire departments of Massey Drive and Mount

Moriah, to carry on. It is difficult for them to plan, it is difficult for them

to spend the required time for training and for the other functions that fire

departments sponsor, without knowing whether they will be in existence in six

months' time, twelve months' time, or a year and half's time. To the credit of

the people of Massey Drive and Mount Moriah their fire departments overall have

not suffered. People have continued to volunteer their time and energy. The

Massey Drive Fire Department observed its 10th anniversary earlier this year.

The members of the fire department, present and past, were able to note with

pride that they have had ten good years, ten years when there has been no loss

of life or personal injury due to fire, ten years when there has been no

significant property loss in the municipality.

Prior to the formation of the Massey Drive Fire department,

protection was provided by the City of Corner Brook department. In those days

there were significant fire losses in that municipality. So because of the

Massey Drive Fire Department there has been an improved service and that service

has been provided at minimal cost to the provincial government. The provincial

government has been involved in providing subsidization for the fire truck and

other equipment, but a considerable amount has also been donated by the

community for equipment. All the labour is provided without any cost to the

taxpayers.

Earlier this year as well - actually, I'm talking in terms of

school year now. It was in September of 1991 the municipality of Massey Drive

observed its 20th anniversary as a municipality. Massey Drive had a dinner to

mark that occasion, and the council issued invitations to present and past

Members of the House of Assembly, as well as Members of Parliament, and others

who have been involved in working with the municipality. It was interesting to

see that one of the politicians extended an invitation was the Premier, because

twenty years ago, when Massey Drive was incorporated, the present Premier wa