VOL. 1 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD 3:00 P.M. - 6:00 P.M. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 1979 NO. 49 _;

~cernb e r 12, 1979 Tape No. 1800 AH - l ; The House met a 3 p.m. !4r. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) Order, please : Statements by tl;_nisters. The ljon. the Premier 14R. NEARY: (Inaudiole) by-election PP.EMIER PECKrORD: I do not know where. If the hon. member is going to resign his seat in LaPoile I will call a by-election tomorrow morning and we will win it. SOME HOt; . MEMBERS : Hear, hear~ NR. SPEA.'<ER: Order, please~ MR. NEARY: I will resign if the hon. gentleman will resign and we will go down and have it out. PP.E:1IER PEC<FORD: That is righ t. Sure. Any day of the week. MR.

SPEA.'<EP.: Order, please: STATEME;:-.;Ts BY MINISTERS The hon. the Premier. PP.EJ.IIER PECKFORD: Hr. Speaker, rather than do it out l> ide ,_ this House I L~ought I would wait until ~~e House opened to do it: I want to table a r e sponse to the comments made by the Federal l1inister of Fisheries (M. R.McGrath) yesterday while he was in St. John's here. I thought I should do it through the medium of the House, seeing the iiouse is open, with respect for the institution and the members, including the member for L2Poile (!tr.Heary).

The points in the statement, I will just briefly review them for hon. members, which obviously they can read. I think I should highlight a number of the comments because I am sure they are of interest to all of us. My first point in L~e statement that I am now releasing in response to what the Federal Minister of Fisheries (l1r.McGrath) had 'to say is the current controversy over the harvesting of No~~ern cod stocks does not represent a challenge by this government to the constitutional authority of L~e Goverrunent of Canada to manage the 45:33

December 12, 1979 'I' ape No. 1800 AH - 2 ?REi1IER PECKFORD: fisheries. Rather, this government was trying to influence how the Govern~nt of Canada actually manages the Northe~n cod stock. Point number two, the key issue is ~o•hether the existing Mainland wetfish trawler fleet should be allowed to be replaced by a more powerful, semi-factory freezer trawler fleet whiCh could use existing unrestricted groundfish licenses to fish the Northern cod stocks. Thirdly, that the current difference that every- body knows about is not a personal attack on the Federal Hinister of Fisheries (Mr.

HcGrat.'l) , that there is no inference t.'l.at Mr. McGrath was anything less than a Newfoundlander because he, as Minister of Fisheries, adopted a policy different from that of the Province. I note in particular that my statement to the House of Assembly did not use or infer tl'1e words '..thici1 Mr. HcGrath alleged I said, 'outright betrayal of tbis Province to ti1e Mainland corporate interests', which he used in his speech yesterday alleging that I had said this, which I did not.

Point nwnber four, you have it in my statement here a couple of days ago, that it would be in the best interests of all concerned if the establishment of the total allowable catch, the deterrr~nation of guotas for inshore and offshore catching effort and the licensing of all offshore trawlers and the replacement of wetfish trawler effort by freezer trawlers were subject to the public hearing process.

I note that I had made this proposal on December 11 and felt that this could clear the air insofar as inshore fishermen:.are concerned and bring a better understanding of the relevant interests of tile different sectors of the fishing industry insofar as 4534

December 12, 1979 ·rape 1801 EC - 1 PRElHER PECKFORD: the tlorthe:!:"n cod was concerned, Point number five, this government was not attacking Nova Scotia or Nova Scoti~~ fishermen, but merely defending ~~e historic right of the fishermen of the ::.lortheast Coast of Uewfoundland and the coast of Labrador to harvest Northern cod unaffected by distant water trawler fleets. I feel sure that when this is explained to tile people of Nova Scotia and to ~~e people of Canada in general that the Province will not lose any prestige in Confederation or any economic or political advantage that it presently has.

SOME HON . :~EBBERS: MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) PRENIER PECKFORD: Oh, oh~ Order, please~ ?oint number six, it is not the policy of this government to ensure "~'lat all the fish around the shores of Newfoundland should be reserved for Newfoundland processing COPPanies along," rather, as I have indicated both on television and in o~'ler statements, that traditional and historic rights are at tl•e foundation of our contention that we should have access to ~':le :-lorthern cod stocks.

That is the whole point of the matter at stake here, that if you use the traditional and historic right principle, ~'lat therefore gives us the same right to the Northern cod stocks as Nova scotia has to tl•e scallop stocks - no difference at all. So this is fully in accordance with the kinds of policies that ti1e federal government has enunciated in otl1er areas. Point number seve, ~'le 25,000 tons allocated to foreigh;countries in lSSO was a surplus to Candaian catching capacity.

It has not been shown that inshore fishermen, if given the chance, could not catch this amo~;.~t, ei t:1er with existing technology or with slightly improved tedmology. It certainly :C.as not been shown that the existing Newfoundland wetfish trawler fleet could not catch this portion of the to~al allo•able catch. It is completely out of whack to indicate or to say that this 25,000 tons ><hich is now being allocated to the foreign fleet cannot be caught by inshore fishermen or, at the very least, by the Newfou.~dland offshore effort. if in fact we agree to that kind of effort continuing. 4535 . ;

De cerr~er 12, 1979 Tape 1801 !·1Y ·.vhole premise , Mr . Speaker, in t his matter - and we will continue to pursue it wit.lt all Cilig·ence and wit.':! all aggression a.t our ciLsposal - is not in any way. as sometimes people \-IOUld like to construe it, any viciousness on our part against foreigners or mainlanee rs or anything else, a.l'ld there i.s no flag w.avi.'lg rheto ric contained here or anything more to co •with •,Jorn out or ·..:ell. \.;om cLiches.

The govern..-..e..'lt o s p olic-t is fully in keeping with the s?irit of Confeeeration, the same spirit of acknowledging vital, local interests which caused ? ri~ i'linister Clark to recognize 1:h.is Prov ince o s pre-eminent rol e in the managerr~ent of its offshore oil resources. hnd in the same way, we are asking for this Y~d of princi ple, whic'1 is the key ~ Confederation , to be ac~n cwledged, recognized a."ld fully pursuee b}· t.'1e Gove:::nment: of :::anada i.n no·w i t intend .s,wit.':l the help of the ocastal p rovinces or any o.:.'le r provi.nces 1 to manage properly 4536

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1802 SD - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: the whole question of the Northern cod stocks. So there is absolutely no difference whatsoever in the kind of approach we are taking here on the Northern cod stocks than what we have taken on the offshore 1 and we are looking for the same kind of principle and spirit to be adhere~ to by federal authorities as it has been in so many other areas, not the least of which is the Inuit or native claims by other societies in this Confederation. SOI1E HON. ME..'ffiERS: MR. SPEAKER: {Simms) MR. S. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: Leader of the Opposition. l1R. u.

JA.'UESON: Hear, hear. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. (Inaudible) cannot say a word wrong. Order, please! The hon. the Well, Hr. Speaker, I fincl it rather difficult to know how to respond to the particular statement made by the Premier today. I suppose,in one sense of tne word, we, on this side of the House, ought to be gleefully delighted to watch ~e Premier and the distinguished national 11inister of Fisheries fighting it out on prime time television. SOME HON. MEl-lEERS : Hear, hear! MR. D.

JN~IESON: I say that I suppose we should be delighted 1 but I have to say as a Newfoundlander that I find this a very, very sad episode and I think it is quite scandalous - AN HON. ME!1BER: ;~. D. JAMIESON: Hear, hear. - that we have this situation develop. Whether the non. Premier and the Minister of Fisheries happen to give, at least, superficial allegiance to the same party or not , it certainly is not in the best interest of Newfoundland for us to be having this ongoing saga.

And I must confess that I am very pleased to hear today that the Premier has, in a sense, disassociated himself from any charges that the Minister of Fisheries of Canada is in some way or other disloyal to his Province or is engaged in a sell-out. It would be interesting to see the actual words that were used. I must say that I obviously accept the Premier's statement ~ 4537

December 12, 1979 MR. D. J&~IESON: PRI>MIER PECKFORD: MR. D. Jk~IESON: MR. NEARY: i1R. ;:J • JAMIESON: Tape No. 1802 so - 2 that he did not make that stat~nent. I tabled the statement. I am not necessarily saying that - Yes, you were foarr~ng at the mouth. With respect, I am not saying that. I say I accept it, I accept the fact that he did not use those words• Obviously, he has saiu that he did not. However, whatever - PREMIER PECKFORD: MR. D. JAMIESON: SOME HON. MEMBERS : 1'1R. D. JAl1IESON: You know that I did not 1 too (inaudible). Yes.

Oh, oh: With respect, I am speaking about other statements that have been made. SOME HON. MEi'1BERS : MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) HR. D. JAl.UESON: was made in the House. PREMIER PECKFORD: HR. D'. J&'I.IESON: Oh, oh: Order, pleaso=: l'le only have t,ne statement that (Inaudible) the hon. minister (inaudible). I see, al:::ight. \-!ell, in any event L~t is by the way1 b~t I do think that it is good to have the record cleared.

I happen to have been an associate of the :Hnister of Fisheries for Canada for a great many years both, by the way, in business and in public life,and I must say that I always fauna him most co-operative and helpful in anything that I had to do with him. But I must also say that I find it unseemly if not quite inappropriate for the Government of Newfoundland to be running in the second line troops, if you want to call it that, or the hired gun to refute or to argue against statements made by the federal government. For the life of me, I do not understand why there was ~he necessity for Mr.

Cabot Martin and the Deputy Minister to be brought into this,to make statements which clearly exacerbated the situation 4538

Decerter 12, l97S !""' ... - 1 EP.. D. Jli!G:E.SOC< : -------- would. sa.y, or t·wo weeks ~1ut ·~ve ~1ave 'w-.·itnessea in tills Province. If t!1e ·gentlemen opposite want to argue ,,,ith ~.;e on this point 1 really 1 as I sai.:' 1 fro!!. our .Faint cf 'rir.w it is not our arr;urrent, it is our point. You are t:"le ones >iho are in consultation \·dt.'-1 Gttav.a. t;cw 1-1hen I saicl I c:iC: not quite know how I was soing to respond to this, I = not sure yet.

One has to ..;;ick the Lones out of the PrerrJ.er's staterrent to Soi!e •·het.'"ler it repre- sents so.rre kind of an olive branch, a palm leaf 1 perhaps 1 it being the C.~1ristr-L as .season 1 a piece of ristletoe but it roight De a piece of nLlstle- toe h1at he hc.s tieC. to t.'le tail of his coat instead of over the C.oor. I am not sure which. 50~'£ llON. ~Li!ELHS: Hear, hear! :-!R. D.

JA~'.IEfON: Sut unr.d.sta.kably 1 and I "ill leave it at t.:1is 1 I urge in the strongest possible tenns t!1at I can t.'"1at v:hate,-er tne ris!1ts or wrongs of this situation, ¥hen one sets into statistics, as th'= Premier :1imself has noted, you can interpret therr i11 a va:dety of ways . • But t:~e Least ixrportant thing fc·r ilewfounC.land is to heal this breac.'l, to negotiate and to get back to a sensiLle casis of talkin~ about it ana stop the cusiness of having it as a ni~htly serial on the television, whoever is responsible, with one side saying one t.~inc; and one saying the other a.r,d the public 1 w!1o have t.'Je !T'ost at stake in t:nis 1 and the fishing incus try, <Vhich is so vital, being the onl:: f'arty that is really going to suffer in ~,e long run if there is continuing tension berween the Fe~eral and Provincial governments.

SO!-:!E HOcl. t1EMEEP.S: Ilear, hear! ------ OP.AL QUES'IIONS ~IR. SPEi,KER: (SH~'15) The !1on. Leacer of the O!)position. :m. D. Jl'2.UESON: Thank you ver:f Il'.u~h, !'.r. Speake:..- .J.. ~.~.ave a question for the Pre!T'ier relating to last night's Budget. Obviously, as he indicated in t:1e house 1 t.~ere was sotr!e consultation in advance. l!as there been timo: or would he Le in a position - I notice t.'le ~~inister of :'inance (!:r.

Collins) has just returned and I wish I could share his glowi11g tril:utes to the Budget, ~·hich I cannot - but has the Prerr.ier hac any indication of what the various rreasures in Dle Budget are c;oin~ to co 4539

~ecercer 12, 1 ~79 :Y.·. - 2 in perce:l~at;e ;;oir.ts or an:tt hin<; of t hac natuze :' r:l!s sorret:1ing alone: those li:les been calculate~? :lR . SPE.=-'G:~: (SI:~:

S) PF'.E:,!U.R !?EC::!"ORD: T:'lc hon . the P r er-.ie.r. I !lave not seer. it yet, ·•r. S;:'eaker . : . ., are in the process no"' of rlo in; :.he ass essr: .ent. 1'here .,.ere t hree ot:1er C:.ocur.e:lts ···hich accompanied tlle aucget ~peeC::1 itself. ~:e n, first o! all t:1ere was a clocurent in ~o:~ich the 5ueget S:peec.>1 ~las ccntainet ' 1as ··•ell as c. nUI".l=er of accot'.pan~·in9 tal.:les~ t hat was one eocur-en t .

I think t:1erc v:ere t :~c or three ot her co cuments - .ti-..ree ot:ter eocur-ents , ! t.:U:-J:, accc:rfanyin<; it as ·~ell . 1\e are hav i nc; th;::t asse ssee :::ight no'' anc -,;e '"'ill L-e in c; ;?OSitio :'l in the next ea}' o r tt.·o 1:0 responc1 in a Jrore su.l=stantive way t,o so:re of che r.-easures •.•hie:: •··ill affect nec;ativel :· o r positivel)' New- found land . I N.ght say, :tr.

Sj:eaker, t!:.:Lt : ar ~:aitir.c; no1• nor.:entarily !or cop ies of the iluc1.c;et ;;peech to ~e ;,:::ouc;!lt UV frcr r:, cf~ice to r.is tril:u te to all :re..,..l:ers of t he House of i'sse:o-~ly . r had th~:- copieC: anc they should l::e 'here rore:: taril y so t:-.at at: l>~ast t:te s::eec."' :>art of it: 1 if it is not alr~aC:y in the !lanC:S o! llvery hon . "e~ber, will Le l or:.entarily sc t!lrt part of that Budget process in Ottawa wiJ.1 be availal:le to a ll t:'e:-l:.e:::s of this hon . tcus e. P?.i::'I:::ll ?EG FO?D : respond without interruption? :-UL EPLA.~P. : in s iler.ce, (1naudlille). Mr.

Speaker, if I may conti:'lue t:o The hon . Premier should be heard 4540

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1804 NM - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: I will ensure that if the han. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) gets up to ask a question or to speak that I will be silent and I would expect the same in return. so to respond in substance will take another day or so,to assess the tables and a lot of the specifics of the speech and we should be in a position to do that very shortly. MR. SPEAKER (Simms) : Opposition. MR. JAMIESON: A supplementary, the han.

Leader of the Also to the hon. the Premier in his role as Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, a few days ago the Minister of Mines and Energy .in commenting upon the gas pipeline to Atlantic Canada,indicated there would be no opposition provided there was not, and I am paraphasing, some unequal advantage given to gas users as opposed to those of us in this Province who, as I believe he said, would not be able to benefit significantly.

Given the fact that there has been a very marked change in the strategy of the federal government to encourage the use of gas, putting it at something like sixty per cent,as I recall,of other forms of fuel, or certainly of fuel oil, has the government had the opportunity to assess whether this does in fact constitute an unfair, or 1 if you like,unreasonable bonus for people who are or can be potential consumers of gas as opposed to gasoline, and the situation here in Newfoundland, that is where we are still going to be dependent upon fuel oil? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Obviously, Mr.

Speaker, we have not had time to assess 1~hether that kind of differentiation in price that the federal government wants to pursue in the active participation of more Canadians in using gas over oil, for obvious reasons, we have not had time to assess that yet. But I think the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Jamieson) might be aware that over the last two or three years in studies that have been done by a number of companies, that the chief opposition that we have to this Q and M pipeline would be that,given the policy yesterday or last night being one thing, but even before that 4541

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1804 NM- 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: policy was articulated, when gas was even cheaper, the studies that were done showed that a fairly substantial subsidy, either at the wellhead to the producer of the gas or somewhere along the line would have to be put in place in order to make that pipeline a viable pipeline into the Eastern town­ ships of Quebec and on into New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

And it was that kind of unfair advantage to which we were referring at that time, and before the announcement of last night, h~ether this particular policy now enunciated by the federal government meets as much as that unfair advantage that we had thought about in a subsidy directly to the producer,is one that we would have to assess.

My own, off the top of my head assessment of it would be that it would not be enough to make it, that there would still have to be additional subsidies and additional things done by a federal government in order to make that Q and H pipeline a viable alternative as it relates to energy. And then one must not only do it as it relates to energy generally 1 but,as the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr.

Barry) has said, as it relates to whether in fact this would in any way inhibit or negate the going ahead or the movement towards a project on the Lower Churchill getting off the ground in 1980, and that would be our major thrust there, and our major opposition, that it should in no way impair incentives, encouragement by the federal government in getting one of our projects off the ground. MR. SPEAKER (Simms): the Opposition. MR. JAMIESON: A supplementary, the han. Leader of Well, Mr. Speaker, the Premier gave an off the top of his head comment, Hy off the top of my head comEent i:s that I think he is 4542

December 12, 1979 Tape 1805 PK - 1 Mr. Jamieson: going to find when he gets into this that in fact the new emphasis on gas in the present scheme of things, and the very real difference that has been introduced here,is going to make quite a significant difference for us in Newfoundland. But I would hope that at some point he might be able to either table or in some other way give us the particulars.

I would also like to ask him another supplementary reflecting his own, I believe, comment today and that is the question of the super write-offs or the extra write-offs for frontier exploration, where the Government of Canada has now indicated that as of, I believe it is the end of next year,these are no longer going to be in existence. Given the fact that these have been by the government's own admission or comment very significant in terms of increasing the amount of exploration offshore, has he had an opportunity yet to examine what the implications might be?

Perhaps I could phrase it this way; does he know what the Government of Canada is going to do about that super depreciation in terms of the very general comment which the Minister of Finance (Mr. Crosbie) made last night? MR. SPEAKER (SIMMS): The hen. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: No. I have read the Budget Speech, and I have not seen the details of how they intend to change it. Now, number one, I think it should be clear that from the Budget Speech the Government of canada has not said that it is going to eliminate the super depletion allowance it has set for frontier exploration and production.

It has said it is going to modify it. And they are going to modify - MR. JAMIESON: They are going to cut it down, I mean that is the impression (inaudible). PREMIER PECKFORD: MR. JAMIESON: PREMIER PECKFORD: the incentive, They are going to reduce the incentive. Right. They are not going to eliminate they are going to reduce the incentive. And as the 4543

December 12, 1979 Tape 1805 PK - 2 P~~ER PECKFORD: Leader of the Opposition knows,or should know, and I have said publicly on a number of occasions, a number of oil companies have been able through this very small 1 1 1 liberal policy of super depletion allowance, been able to take some of their drill ships and some of their semi-submersible rigs and have them repaired under this programme, to charge off some of their things, and use the repairs to drill wells 1not only in Newfoundland 1but off Nigeria and Indonesia and venezeula and off the Gulf of Mexico and so on.

So it has been a very, very lucrative kind of incentive to the extent which, I think it can be demonstrated in a number of cases 1 where they actually got back 102 or 103 cents on a dollar. They actually made money on the super depletion allowance in a number of cases. So that therefore this is the kind of thing I understand that the Federal Government is trying to eliminate while still providing some incentives.

Hopefully with the discovery rate etc. that we have 1 that it is now attractive enough to the oil companies with less incentive and is presently in place and that therefore it will have no adverse advantage or adverse affect upon the ongoing exploration activity off our shores. Whether that is true or not remains to be seen. I will want to see the detail as to just how they are going to change that and modify and reduce that incentive. And so that is why I reservedmy comments on it last night and this morning, and why I continue to do because I am not sure of the specifics of the reduction. MR. JAMIESON: MR.

SPEAKER (SIMMS) : of the Opposition. MR. JAMIESON: A final supplementary. A final supplementary, the hon. Leader Mr. Speaker, there are so many questions on the Budget that I think I could occupy 4544 :

December 12, 1979, Tape 1806, Page 1 -- apb MR. JAMIESON: the whole time,but I will certainly yield to my colleagues.

But there is one that is quite important and vital, and this is to the hon. the Premier, given the reiteration almost ad nauseam last night that there is going to be a cut-back in federal spending and L,at the whole thrust of the budget is to reduce federal spening, given the fact that, just, again,off the top of my head, Newfoundland is seeking some $91 million in DREE, plus a renegotiated Trans-Canada Highway, plus 1 pres~ahly, and I will leave out the energy projects because there are questions about that and the energy bank which I will not throw in today, but there must be on the shopping list that the hon. the Premier will be having in his bag when he goes up on Monday, a very, very considerable increase in federal spending in Newfoundland hoped for in 1980 on which, I guess, some of the labour figures that were quoted yesterday and the unemployment rate must be based.

Now, has the Premier received any assurance that 1 given this belt tightening, he is likely to get this very significant increase in federal spending, under DREE agreements and the like, from the government in its present position? MR. SPEAKER(Simms): PREMIER PECKFORD: The hon. the Premier. Number one, Mr.

Speaker, as I understand it, and as some of the negative criticism on the budget last night comes in from various sectors of the economy, and as I read and listened to the budget speech last night, there is to be a 10 per cent increase in the spending of the federal government over the next while and there are a number of people in the business sector who have criticized the Government of Canada for continuing to expend at this rate of 10 per cent, given that one can talk about inflation, of it being 6 or 7 or 8 per cent, but there has been a fair amount of criticism today in the press from the private sector and other people saying that this is still too much.

So it is in that context that I put the 4545

December 12, 1979, Tape 1806, Page 2 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: Leader of the Opposition's questions and opinions as they relate to what the federal government is talking about. I do not have the figures before me to show whether what we are not proposing before DREE and in other ways, through transportation agreements being negotiated or whatever, whether we are asking for over 10 per cent increase in the revenues forthcoming to the Province through these agreements than was true in 1979 or not, so that therefore I would have to bow until I got that. MR.

JAMIESON: (Inaudible) PREMIER PECKFORD: The Leader of the Opposition makes the comment that we are looking for A, B,C,D and E, and leaves the impression that this is ten times or fives times as much as we had last year. Well, I do not know if that is, in fact, that kind of impression is a valid one to leave in the minds of anybody.

So all I would say is that we have legitimate agreements that have passed through all - the NORDCO agreement, the forestry agreement, the coastal Labrador agreement and so on, which are ongoing under the general development agreement and for which I see no reluctance at all on behalf of the federal authorities to approve. on top of that there are other renogitiated agreements that we are looking for and I do not see in anything in the federal budget anything to indicate a slackening of their effort as it relates to regional 4546

December 12, 1979 Tape 1807 EC - 1 PREMIER PECKFORD: development,and given the fact that their overall expenditures will increase by 10 per cen~ leads me to believe that no great reductions on these kinds of things will occur. They will occur on other things hopefully through the additional UIC contributions from employer and employee, There are some savings there for the federal government whicil will help, and in many other ways which will help offset it.

But I do not perceive in how I read the Budget Speecn, any kinds of reductions ~~at will in any way inhibit our ongoing initiatives to sign agreemen~s which really lead to job creation in this Province. l·!R. SPEAKER: (Sili1In5) The hon. ~~e member for LaPoile. PREMIER PECXFORD: If I can, Mr. Speaker, I will table the Budget Speech for all members of the House. I have copies of it here and I ask ~~e Pages to come,if I may be allowed to take up five seconds to do that. I have ther- , all copied for all hon. members. M.~. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for LaPoile.

HR. i:'<EARY: I have a couple of quick questions for the Premier in connection with the Budget last night.

First of all, I would like to ask the Premier about the special assistance for people who live on fixed incomes and on low income in the Atlantic Provinces and in ~~e poorer provinces of Canada,When ~~e Premier of this Province was kissing the cheeks of Premier Lougheed in Alberta and they were agreeing with the increase in oil to bring it up to world prices - and we heard it again in the Budget last night- would ~~e hon. gentleman tell us if the machinery, if the procedures have been worked out whereby the assistance to the people on fixed incomes and low income to help to cushion the blo~: of the increase, especially in heating fuel and gasoline and so forth, if the machinery has been worked out for ~~e assistance for this Province? &>d how much in the way of assistance can this Province expect to get?

MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) The hon. the Premier. 4547

Decem0er 12, 1979 Tap e 180 7 J:;C - 2 P REMIER PEC:-a'ORD : 'Ihree points, ~:r. Speaker, on the question from the hen. the meooer for LaPoile (Mr. Neary). First of all, I am extremely proud that we were able to, as a government, negotiate such a good deal with the Province of Alberta as it relates to money that we are receiving from them. It is the best deal that any government ever negotiated to borrow funds outside of t.'"lis Province since we were a Province. SOI-!E HON. MBHBERS: Hear, hear! AN HON . ME}IBER: (Inaudible) • P RE..'UER PECKFORD: Ever.

It will save over t~e life of that loan agreement close to ~10 or $12 million which we would have to spend if we went to New York or Paris or anywhere else, so it is an extremely good deal for the Province of Newfoundland. And I, for one, as one Newfoundlander, am proud to have had something to do with the negoti a tion of that agreement to keep money within Canada and to see it flowing from West to East. And one of these days, hopefully, we can see it flow the other way, from East to West. And t..'"lat will not take as long as the hen. the member for Lafoile would like to t..l-tink. That is number one. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PREMIER PECKFORD: Number two, if the member for LaPoile is so well versed in t..'J.e Budget Speech of last night as to indicate when I said that I am tabling copies that he already had copies of it, his question would be completely unnecessary, because if he read the Budget Speech, he would know the answer to the question that he just asked. But seeing he does not, I will try to inform him a little bit more of it so that his reading material tonight can be far more noteworthy and he can then absorb a lot more and understand the Budget Speech a little bit better.

Number one has to do with an energy tax credit which applies to all families who make $21,000 a year or less, so it helps the middle income Canadian who hithertofore has very often been paying all the taxes in t..'J.is country and has not been getting very much back from either t..'J.e provincial governments or the federal government. is an energy tax credit which comes into place. 4548 So there

November 12, 1979 Tape 1807 EC - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: Secondly, there is a ~easilre in ~ere which was argued for by this government vociferol.lsl~r/ by ci:= :ovcrn:: ·= :-~t 4549

Dece~ber 12 , 1979 Tape rlo. 1808 AH-1 PPEMIER PFCKFORD: and the government of New Brunswick and the government of P~ince Edward Island to say that if you are going to increase oil prices in this country,why do you not linr it, in Eastern Canada especially, to the high amount of oil that we now have to purchase to create electricity, to generate electrici tv?

And the Governrr,ent of Canada has , in this Bucget, recognized ~'lat argument and have said that if oil goes up more than ~2.00 a barrel per year , then we will subsidize the amount of oil that you bring into your province over and above that if you are using it for generating electricity. So we will have monies flowing to the provinces as a result of this Budget which will help imp~ct against the larger increases in electricity that would have otherwise happene d here had not ~'e had this kind of subsidy in place.

So there are t~1o specific measures in the Budget , as well as others 1 ~1hich do help address the kind of concerns that the 'f!on. mell'l:-er for LaPoile (Mr.Neary) has . MR. NEARY: A supplementary question,Sir. A supplementary. The hon. member for LaPoile. HR.NEARY: I would love to be able to debate ~'lat with the hon. gentleman. I am well aware of the $80.00 and $30.00 over a ~,·o year period but that .is not what I was driving at. I was driving at the subsidy on a barrel of oil coming into Atlantic Canada.

My unrlerstancl.ing 'N"as, ~rhen the hon. gentleman was out kissing various parts of Premier Lougheed's anatomy, that that was going to be either reduced or wiped out altogether. The hen. gentleman has not answered my question. How much will this Province get now,or Atlantic Canada,to soften the blow on the increase of oil in Eastern Canada? Can the hen. gentleman answer the: question? DOes he know or will he have to wait until he goes up to the Premier's r.onference to find out? The hon. the Prend.er. PFEMIER PEC'KFORD: Mr.

Speaker, one thing that the hon. meiPber for LaPoile (l,'.r.Nearyl a.nd perhaps ot.lJ.er nembers opposite, I do ·-· I 455/0

Dece~r.~r 12,1979 Tape No. l80fl AR-2 I'"J;;lHEP. P:SCY~ORD: not kn01,·, I can only speak for t.~e han. member for LaPoile (l'.r.Neary) 1 has to uncerstand and has failed to understand in the last number of years, is that t.~e people on this side of the House 1unlike t.~e people who inhabited this side of the House previouslY, kiss nobody's anatomy, any part. We negotiate sound deals and do not have to bow do~ m to anybody. SOI'ffi EON. l'ffii'-BERS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER PFCKFORD: The han. member for l ·aPoile (c·1r .Neary) might not like to hear that and hon. members opposite might not like to hear that, out if the hon. member for LaPoile (1-'.r.Neary) wants acne­ way or a two-way ticket to Edmonton to try to scroff up some information or some data to show t.~at this government or the l'~nister of Finance (Dr.Collins) or the Premier or anybody else who negotiated that deal took anything l:'ut a businesslike approach to it, I 'l'lill pay his ticket over and back. SOI'.E HON. HEHP.FPS: Hear, hear!

PREMIER l?ECKFORD: The han. metiber for LaPoile(Mr.Neary) might have gray hair now but he will have none by the time he tries to dig up anything to show anything but a responsible attitude by this ~ove~ent when we went to negotiate $150 million with Peter Lougheed in Alberta. AN HON. MEMBER: PREMIER PFCKFOP.D: You are frothing at the mouth again. So I challenge the hon.me~~er for LaPoile to demonstrate and to prove and to put before this han. House some evidence to show that we did anything but be responsible in how ~~e worked out that deal.

Now on the other point, the least substantive of the points that the han. member made, all he has to do is know a little bit arithmetic and a little bit of mathematics. Find out - here is pow you go about it . ~r. Speaker. It is a v£ry simple matter; here i~ how you go about it~ You leave the han. House and you go out,

r::ecerrber 12, 1979 Tape ::o. 1809 o;; - 1 PP.EHILR PECKFOP.D: you take up your phone and you call ilewfour.dland and Labraccr I:y~rc- the nllr.'ber is in the i;ook, it is a rublic utility- and you ca~l t.l-)at nurriber and you nsk. the nul:'ber of the !=echnicia'ls ''ho ···ork for NewfoUl'lc:land ' Hydro, How rr.uch oil do we spend or do we J:.uy e-".d1 year to generate electricity 1or how much die lve last year alid and ~'ho>.t is your projection for ne:;:t year?' 1<.nd you tcJ;.e that nuxr-ber - that nUillber, whatever it is, tnat many barrels-and then :,rou use an arithrnetirr.atical kind of formula called mu!.tiplication and you multiply it '.Jy how much you :9roject oil to be risinq over $2 per baril!'el for the next year 1 and out of t.i-}at you •.,•ill g~ t a fir;nre .,,hich '~ill sl::ow you how r.ar.y collars subsic'y ~Till CO!"'e frorr Ott:r ·r,: to th~s Province as a result of this prograrr~.

SOME l::ON. r~::BE!'.S: Hear, hear! i'L'l.. 5 • :lEARY : A final supplerr.entary, 1~r. SpecJ:.er. MR. SPEJ.JGR {SUI!'.S): A final supplementary, the hon. r-er·lcer fer LaPoile. !1R. S. ~:EA PY: V.~ just saw, Sir, t.he type a~ display en the part of t!le Premier that we are becominc;: used to in this Province no>: - •vile- e_yed, fan3tical, fr~thing at the r:cout.'l.

I -.·oulc1 like to ask the hon. gentl e - nan what ircpact the incraase i:1 fuel tc.x and c:;asoline tax is going to have on t!'le cost of living in this Province? ~:e just hearc about an announce- n'ent of a 10 fer cent increase on the East Coast ferries. l·iow w:'lat inpa=t is t.'lis going to have if ~·ou ace it on to the already announced increase of 10 per cent? And will the hon. gentleman tell the P.ouse 1 if he knows,.,·hether or not the Newfoundland F.c.ilway will be considered as a part of public transportation and t.'ley will be able to get the rebate that was announced by bully-boy Crosbie last night:?

LR. SFLhKER: The han. the Premier. PRE.'IIER PECKFORJ :_ Those ~~o points, Mr. Speaker, as I have !•centionec in response to the questions of the Leacer of the Opposition, are now seing assesse d as a result of the supplenents tnat accor.pa.nied the Budget Speec.'l itself and as soon as that assessment is done 1so that we can give some realistic figures of percentages, we 1;ill table them in this !1on. House. 4552

Decerze r 1Z, 1979 Tare :o;o. 1~09 0!: - 2 ':he hor... t e!".be ~ !cr ':'err a ~:ova. HR. T . LUSl:: ~!r . Speak er, I war:t t<' c'i rect a qua stion to the !'!iniste r o! Lal:our ar:o ~anpa.:er (!<tr . Cinn).

I realize it :-.i:;ht ~e a little -early to e~qci re about details anc specifics relati~~ to last evening's Eluciget, but in view of this Province • s sick <md uqly une~ploy- :rent problem , ane assur>ir.g t.'tat t.l-te linas o: =n-1: ,\uca::ion e•e stil l and in vieu of the fact that the I".inister hac a weeting '"'it~ tl:e hon . ::on Atltey just recently, I ~-or.eer if the rinister can ineicatP just "'hat the arulounccl!'ent l::y !·'r. Crosr ie relntL"'lg to the creatior. of 100,000 jobs j·Jst. to- .;:,:; t.!l't <ill N!e.n to ':el-'founclanC: ?

I c;~:ess s;:.ecificall:; ! ar asi<inc:; t.'1e cir.ister if he is a-...•are of any fo=.ula t hat is croateC: for the distril':ution of these jo!:'s, ..:hethe:-, for exar.ople ,it will t.e clone equally all acr0$5 the canaea or whethe r t here wil.l be special consideration to t<e"·~ounc lan d ? l an- s•1re t.'te rrin~ster listenee eaqer!y ant> was loc.ldng rather lon9inc;!y at titat 100 ,O~C jots . So I. ar. st.:re t!te t'inister ll'Ust have looked in~ it , so could he tell us jus:: wr.at t:tis \>'ill rear. -::o tc.is ::-rovince? 4553 ...

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1810 NM - l MR. SPEAKER (Simms): The hon. Minister of Labour and Manpower. MR. DINN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, with respect to the hon. member's question, first of all I would agree with his

preamble that we do have a very serious unemployment situation in the Province. MR. NEARY: No doubt about it. MR. DINN: Not as bad as it was last year, not as bad as it was the year before. MR. HODDER: What about Port au Port? MR. DINN: As I indicated to the hon. member yesterday, that we have improved the unemployment rate from 1977 through 1978, to 1979, from 17.9 per cent, to 14.6 per cent, and we think that this is - MR. HODDER: 80 per cent of what it was. MR. DINN: - quite an improvement. And we have done something in Port au Port also.

The hon. member, if he were to check with his constituents, would find that we have done something in Port au Port with respect to CES and other programmes and we will hope to continue in that vein. With respect to formulas, we have not worked out the detail of all the formulas for the employment programmes that have been announced and also the programmes that have been announced with respect to training. We will be having a training programme that will involve something like 120,000 youths in Canada and that was as a result of meetings with the hon. Mr.

Atkey, with respect to our unemployment in the age range from fifteen to twenty-four. We will have private sector employment. We have not worked out the detail on that but that will be worked out with respect to tax credits to the private sector. We will have employment programmes in the National Youth Service Corps areas. There is some money allocated for that. We will have Summer youth employment for next year. We will have a continuation of programmes under LEAP, Local Employment Assistance Programme. We will have, as I said 1 in the training areas, pretty well 4554

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1810 NM- 2 MR. DINN: the same money as last year, increased a little for inflation and the cost of training days. We anticipate that that will,for Newfoundland 1be somewhere around $14 million, For CMITP, which is ~anada Manpower Industrial Training Programmes; that will increase this year to something like $2,807,000. We have not got all the detail yet. We are working and attempting to work out all the detail. When I do get the details of all of the employment programmes and training programmes for Newfoundland, I will let the hon. member know. MR.

SPEAKER (Sili1IIIS): A supplementary, the han. member for Terra Nova. MR. LUSH: Again, Mr. Speaker, in view of the seriousness of our unemployment problem, and in view of the fact that we have two ministers who are very concerned about Newfoundland in Ottawa, and in view of their previous public stat~~ents about the unemployment level in this Provin~e, has the minister made any representation on this Province's behalf to ensure that we get special treatment with respect to the allocation of these 100,000 jobs? MR. SPEAKER: MR. DINN: The han. Minister of Labour and Manpower. Yes, Mr. Speaker.

As a matter of fact, the detail has not been worked out on a special programme for Eastern Canada which will include the Province of Quebec, the Maritime Provinces and the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. The detail of that has not been worked out as yet. When that is worked out1 I will also inform the hon. member of the details of that programme. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary, the hon. member for Terra Nova, followed by the han. member for Torngat Mountains 1if time permits • MR. LUSH: Again, Mr.

Speaker, in order to allay the fears and the frustrations of the 30,000 unemployed Newfoundlanders, and in view of the various announcements about job creation programmes in this 4555

Decembe~ 12 , 1979 Tape No. 1810 NM- 3 MR . LUSH : Province, the minister indicated yesterday that the 40 , 000 jobs that the government previously annoWlced that they were going to ~eate were going to be of their own creation. - Now on · top of this we have many other "federal progra..unes coming into effect . can the minister over the next few weeks indicate by means of a flow chart o~ so~ othe~ means, just what jobs are going to be created in tni.s Province - SOM.E BON. MEMBERS : ADd where. MR . LOSS : - just what all of these p~ogrammes are going to mean to this Province and precisely and where over the next year o~ so? ~!R . FLIGHT : No, he cannot do that. 4556 = ·-

December 12, 1979 MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) l1anpcwer. MR. J. DINN: Tape No. 1811 so - 1 The hon. Minister of Labour and Mr. Speaker, the numbers of prograrrmes that han. m~~ers will ~ecome exposed to in the next four or five years - SOME HON. MEMBERS : i>ffi. J. DINN: Oh, oh! - as a result of work done by the hen. the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. L. Barry), the hen. the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. c. Brett), the hon. the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. J. Goudie) and the other resourse ministers will astound even the hen. members opposite. l1R. SPEAKER: MR. G.

WARREN: The hon. member for Torngat Mountains. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier relating to last night's budget also. I understand that the federal Minister of Finance (Mr. J. Crosbie) had tne opportunity of wearing a pair of Labrador sealskin boots when he presented his budget; he did take something from Labrador to present such a fantastic budget.

However, due to the fact that he did announce an 18 cent a gallon increase in gasoline 1 and at the present time residents in Rigolet and other communities are paying now - yesterday - ~1.95 a gallon, on top of 18 cents that is $2.13 for a gallon of gasoline 1 d~, · this government have any plans of assisting Labrador residents through this difficult Winter ahead of us where they have to rely on gasoline for the operation of their snowmoLiles as the only means of transportation and for gathering wood and oil and so on to live through the Winter? AN HON. MEMBER: Hear, hear. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER PECKFORD: One has to be fair in any kind of pclicy decisio~ that would have to be made by government and therefore the price that citizens of Newfoundland and Labrador pay for gas varies as one gets away from the major centres. So, to be fair to all Newfoundlanders and to be totally demoncratic,one would have to put in a system which not only improved the situation of the people of Rigolet or Hopedale or Makkovik or Postville or Nain or Happy Valley_ 4557

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1811 SD - 2 PREMIER PECKFORD: Goose Bay or Hud Lake or Northwest River or Cartwright or any place on the Labrador coast, you would have to do the same for Cape Onion, you would have to do the s~~e for Raleigh, you would have to do the same for Gr.i:quet and St. Lu."lair, you would have to do the same for St. Anthony, you would have to do something much similiar for Conche or Croque, you would have to do the same for La Scie and so on so that you would have to phase in some kind of a system which would be fair and demoncratic to all parts of the Province. SOME HON.

MEMBERS : PREMIER PECKFORD: kind of programme - MR. SPEAKER: (Simms) PREMIER PECKFORD: Oh, oh. I would hazard to guess that that Order, please! - to do any kind of subsidy meaningfully would mean a fair number of dollars and at this point in time I do not think that the Government of Newfoundland is financially fixed in such a way as to continue the programmes they are doing and trying to expand them and at the same time to make some meaningful kind of dent into that kind of problem that the hon. member just mentioned. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Time for Oral Questions has expired.

PRESENTING REPORTS BY STANDING AND SPECIAL CO~~ITTEES MR. SPEAKER: MR. F. STAGG: The hon. member for Stephenville. Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to present to the House the proceedings of ~~e Standing Committee on Government Services. These are the Estimates for 1979/1980 fiscal year. These Estimates were considered from July 31st to August 7th of this year.on five sitting days of the committee. They comprise 457 printed pages and I must say that the Hansard staff in reproducing them did an excellent job.

I will make one suggestion for next year, that in the report the Sudget Estimates actually be reproduced into the report itself because in reading through it becomes somewhat difficult to follow unless one has the Budget in front of one. So, ~~. Speaker, on behalf of myself, 4558

Oecember 12, 1979 Tape No . 1811 SD - 3 :·lR. F'. STAGG: the member for Stephenvil le, che member for Kilbride (Hr. R. Aylward), the mer.~ber for St. Geo rge's (Mr. R . Dawe) , the member for Bay of Islands (~lr . L . iloodrow), the member for Terra Nova (Mr. T. Lush), who was t.'le Vice-chairman, t."te member for Bilrin - Placentia t~es·t (Hr. D. Hollett) and the member for Eag l e River (l·tr . E . Hisco ck), it gives me great: pleasure to table this report . ORDERS OF THE DAY •!R. SPEAKE:R: (Simms) :.feti o n 2 . The non . member for Baie Verte - tvhite Bay . SO HE nON . ~!E~!BERS : Hear , hear . 4559 ~-

December 12, 1979 Tape 1812 PK - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, when I placed this Private Member's Resolution on the Order Paper back in July, while we had some indication then of the energy problems facing the country as a whole, and the Province in particular, I did not realize that I would stand to introduce the motion itself today after the shock that we received in the Federal Budget last night.

If ever any of us were complacent and choose to ignore the energy situation facing Newfoundland and Labrador,then certainly we should have been brought to our senses by the sock in the pocketbook that we received only last night. The motion itself now is obviously a timely one and one that we ought to give serious consideration to. The motion, Mr. Speaker, is very simple.

All it says is that a select Committee of the House be appointed to investigate, consider and report upon the feasibility and the desirability of the several proposals to develop the water power resources of this Province, including in particular those of the Churchill River and other waters in Labrador, and to investigate, consider and report upon the prospects therefore. There are a couple of other

Whereas clauses that just apply to the mechanics of doing that. I put the motion on the order Paper, Mr. Speaker, really for two reasons. I did it first of all in the faint hope, sort of a small hope, that the government might support it. I would not be too surprised if they did not, but I put it down in the hope that it might be the kind of motion that we could receive support from both sides of the House for. It is not a partisan motion, y,·. ::pe:~ker. I do not think that anybody can read" the motion, the resolution itself and find anything in it that can even playfully be construed as being partisan.

It is not that kind of a motion. It is not a motion that is critical of the government in any way. That is right. 4560

December 12, 1979 Tape 1812 PK- 2 Mr. Rideout: The motion itself, I think, Sir, is a very positive motion. It is a motion that provides an opportunity really,for a large cross

section of the people of this Province to be able to voice their opinion, to be able to tell as they see it what ought to take place, what kind of energy strategy ought to be developed for this Province in the years ahead as we move into the 1980s. I believe that it is imperative if we are going to develop a proper energy policy, a proper energy strategy, especially now in view of the circumstances and the events that we have had over the last number of months, especially the last day or so, I believe it is important and very imperative that the voice, the opinion of the people be allowed to be heard.

I think the time has gone wherewe can make those kinds of decisions in vacuum and I will have more to say about that a little later on.

Well,that is the first·reason why I put this Resolution on the Order Paper so that, it is not a· ·critical resolution by any means, but so that we might be able to tap the vast experience and expertise that is out there among the people and be able to come to a sort of general consensus and a general agreement about the energy strategy or development of an energy policy for this Province after listening to all of the various factors, to all the various opinions, after listening to all of that, be able to as a Legislature, as an Assembly, to put forth concrete recommendations to the government and hope that the government will see fit to follow them. the first reason why I put down the resolution.

That was And secondly , the second reason I put down the resolution, and if nothing else is accomplished, if the first reason is not even considered, if the government have already made up their 1;..inds that they are not going to support this non-partisan and very positive resolution, if they have already done that, then the second reason is that at least, at least the members of this House will have been provided with an opportunity to debate the formation and formulation of an energy policy for this Province over this Wednesday and hopefully next Wednesday.

At least we will have that kind of opportunity, whether 4561

December 12 , 1979 Ta;;>e 1812 Pl< - 3 Mr. Rideout: the 9overnment chooses to defeat the motion or not, whether the select Committee never gets off the ground or not , at least there will be two days, two sitting days of this session, this present session allocated so that a proper debate can take place on all facets, all phases of development of an - SONE HON . ~IBERS: Hear , hear! NR. RIDEOl iT: -energy policy for the Province. I think that in its.elf is reason enough to have the resolution placed on the Order Paper, so t.hat we cal'! have an opportunity to do that. And really, ~lr. Speaker, other than questions .in Question Period , there .has not been the kind of 4562 --

Decel!'.ber 12, 1979 Tape 1813 J:.C - 1 MR. RIDEOUT: opportunity to do that in this particular session ~~at I would like. We had a day or so at it when we gave approval to t.f}e LCDC bill some IrOnths ago. We had some crack at it in Corranittee when we did the estimates of the Department of Mines and Energy. But there has never been an opportunity in this session so far.

Critical as an energy policy is, there has never been an opportunity in this session so far when there was a time, an opportunity, for all members on both sides of the House to be able to present ~'l.eir views to ~'l.e Legislature so that ~~e government may have the benefit of listening to those views and hopefully finding something constructive and positive that they could take from them in the development of an overall energy strategy for the Province. So the two reasons are simple.

I hope the government accepts the resolution in the non-partisan, very positive way that it is put down - it is not critical of anybody or anything. If that does not come about, then at least, we will have had an opportunity to debate energy potential and the development of energy for the next day or so. Now, !1r. Speaker, the meat of the resolution, I think, is very important for the future of the Province.

There ought tc be, I feel, the broadest possible concensus from the public on how the vital energy resources, hydro resources that this resolution refers to - how they ought to be developed and utilized for the overall good of the people of clewfoundland and Labrador. The resolution, itself, I think is sufficiently broad and sufficiently wide-ranging to consider all aspects of hydro development in any part of the Province, be it on-island sites or, be it in Labrador, itself.

So the debate, itself, need not be limited or the discussion, itself, the speeches, themselves, need not be limited to just the discussion of the larger, more easily to identify projects like the Lower Churchill and that kind of thing. There is a whole broad range, really broad, sufficiently broad so that the whole development of hydro potential on-island and in Labrador itself can be discussed. 4563

December 12, 1979 Tape 1813 EC - 2 HR. RIDEOUT: There is provision - it is simply broad enough to consider the r esource potential of on Island sites as well as the Labrador potential, and I ~'link it is important that we do that. Also, of course, the resolution itself is sufficiently broad so that we can have room within the bounds of C.ebate to be able to talk about an inter-tie that there has been some passing reference to but never very much dabate on in this Legislature, an inter­ tie between the potential of Labrador and the Islana itself.

Now, the more I look at H~~sard and public utterance, the more I am convinced ~,at basically, in this Province, in the development of an energy strategy, we are sort of still in ~i.e study stage. There seems to be the reference every time you ask a questioP-, that, 'We are studying this, we are looking at that.' we are still, I think it is fair to say, basically in a study stage. The Hinds Lake development is off the ground and it is going. The Upper Salmon is Leginning to go.

There are still serious questions regarding the Upper Salmon and people are beginning to raise, now, I suppose, more than ever, some of the questions related to that project. But these two projects are out of the study stage, as I refer to it, and they are at least proceeding, or about to proceed on schedule. But there is no public indication of where we stand on o~~er on-island sites. I have not heard any public indication, for exan1ple 1 of where we would stand with what Hydro considers to be the next suitable on-island site, which would be Cat Arm.

I have not heard any public indication of how far down the road that might be. I have not heard any public indication of a number of other sites that Hydro has identified. And in order to develop an overall energy strategy for this Province, then I think we have to begin to look, not only as the projects are about to come onstream, Sir, but to look down the road now to see what we have to bring onstream in ano~i.er eight or ten or twelve years if we are to ensure energy sufficiency in this Province. There is still a great deal of potential on Island. There is still a great deal of 4564

December 12, 1979, Tape 1814, Page 1 -- apb MR. RIDEOUT: hydro potential on island that has not - it is not fair to say, seriously looked at, but it certainly has not been seriously looked at in the public forum so that the people in the areas concerned, and the people in the Province as a whole can have an opportunity to voice their opinions 1 not when the crisis comes but before we reach that stage. The public, I believe, should be given a chance to voice that kind of opinion and to voice it now while we are in the planning stage rather than when we reach the crucial stage.

We should not have to object and to make objections after the fact. I think the time has come for us to start the planning now. I think th.e time actually, Sir, has come for Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and for the government of the Province to stop secret planning when it comes to what hydro projects are going to be developed in this Province. The time has come for us to stop planning in a vacuum, to let the people in, to let the people in on the planning, to let the people have a say in what direction we should go with regard to developing on-island hydro ' potential now, not later on.

What has happened, Sir, in this Province, the present pattern, is that people get a chance to say their piece about specific hydro developments only after the panic button has been pushed, when the project is so far advanced that you cannot do anything about it. When environmental impact studies and hearings are being heard then some people in some areas get an opportunity to voice their opinions on that particular development·.

What I am suggesting is that we should do it a little different than that, a sele~t committee of this legislature to work with hydro, what has already been developed, so that the people of the Province as a whole will be able to have an opportunity to voice their opinions and to voice them now not after the panic has been pushed, not after the decision to go ahead has been made, not after, in many cases, millions of dollars have been spent and we are too far in to get 4565

December 12, 1979, Tape 18~4. Page 2 -- apb MR. RIDEOUT: out, but to have a look at it now before we reach that stage. And I see no conflict whatsoever between the principle of this resolution and the present activities, for example, of LCDC, the Lower Churchill Development Corporation. I see absolutely no conflict between the principle of this resolution and the activities of that corporation whatsoever.

I understand that LCDC is presently carrying out feasibility studies for the development of the Lower Churhill and on the potential of the Lower Churchill, the feasibility of developing that potential and that is fine. There is no problem with that and there ought to be no problem between that activity and the principle of this resolution. I must say in passing that I found it interesting in listening to the federal budget speech last night that I do not believe there was any specific reference made to hydro development whatsoever.

There was a lot of talk about oil and gas, and there was talk about ~e super depletion allowance, and there was talk about all those kinds of things, but in specific terms I do not believe there was any mention whatsoever of developing the hydro potential of Eastern Canada in general and the hydro potential of Newfoundland and Labrador in particular. MR. FLIGHT: Non-renewable resources were not mentioned. MR. RIDEOUT: I am not sure about that but I am sure there was no reference whatsoever made to hydro as an alternate energy source in this country and I find that very strange, Mr.

Speaker, becaus~ the previous a~ninistration in Ottawa,I believe it is fair to say,had, after tough negotiations and after a long time, given its blessing to the concept as envisioned in the LCDC agreement, and once the feasibility studies were complete and so on, I believe there was some kind of commitment by that previous administration to channel funds into the development of the potential of the Lower Churchill depending, of course, on the 4566 ..

December 12, 1979, Tape 1814 , Page 3 - apb MR. RIDEOUT: studies themselves. outcome of the feasibility I find it passing strange that there was no reference made in ·the budget last night to that concept. I find it passing strange indeed and I wonder if that is a fore­ bearing note of what might come of the negotiations for th.e development of the Lower Churchill potential. I understand that the LCOC feasibility studies ought to be soon completed and we are going to be at the stage over the next number of months when we are going to have to get firm commitments from 4567

Dece~ber 12,1979 Tape No. 1815 AH-1 MR. RIDEOUT: the Government of Canada with regard to the development of that huge ; hydro potential. ~Dd as I say, I find it strange that L~ere was not any mention of it at all last night. But what I started of to say is that I do not think there is any conflict whatsoever between the principle of ~;is resolution and any current activity that LCDC may be involved in.

The people should have an opportunity to voice their opiniond and the opinions should be open with regard to the options of L~e Lower Churchill and with regard to other options that we may have in this Province in regard to hydro potential. To concentrate for a moment or so on the Lower Churchill development: You know there are four or five options. The Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr.Barry) has referred to them in this House in L;is session. Previous Ministers of Mines and Energy over the years have referred to them.

There are a number of options that are open to us when we consider the development of that resource. One of the options , for example, is should all ~he power from the JJOwer Churchill, should all that potential power for a limited period of time be sold Westward? That is an option. It may not be an option ~~at some of us would like and it may not be one that a number of people would wish to conside~but in considering options it is an option.

For a limited period of time 1 should ve be content with selling all the potential development of that project to the West?or a second option is1 should we be content with only selling a portion of the development of that hydro Westward for a limited period of ti~e? Those are two options that are open to us.

There is a third one,of course, and that is should options one and two, that is sell all of it Westward for a period of time or sell a portion of it Westward for a limited period of time, should options one and two be discarded altogether and should we develop wit~ a view to L,e tota~ usage of the potential of the.Lower Churchill in this Province? I must say that is an option that I personally am more interested in than the other two but my personal interest and what is feasible and practical economically are two different things. But it is 4568

December 12,1979 Tape No. 1815 J'.H-2 !>!P .• RIDEOUT: certainly another option that I Y:now the ·government has given consideration tc and, I a1~1 sure, Newfoundland Hydro. Now,if that third option, that is the utilization of the full potential of the power potential of the Lower Churchill development, if that option is ~~e way we want to proceed- and as I say that is1 personally , the one I favour-how do we go about utilizing that block of power once it is developed?

In order to develop it,federal government support or no federal sup~ort, we have to have some indication that that huge chunk of power can be utilized by industrial consumers or by the present - Mr. Speaker, I thought you had h1enty minutes introducing - MR. SPE~ (Butt) MR. FIDEOUT: nineteen minutes? AN HON .MEMBER: MR. RIDEOUT: want to say yet. SOME RON .!-!EMBEP.S: AN HO~l. ME~!BER: MR. RIDEOUT: Yes. Twenty minutes. You mean to tell me I am gone Yes. I have not even got into what I Oh, oh! By leave? Well,I will just ~ake a minute or so, ~~at is all, I would like for other people to speak on it.

But what I am saying, Sir, is that if we are going to do ~~at,then in order to ge~ the money to de'-'elop that potential -.•e have to have some users, we have to have sotre markets. I think it would be interesting to find how the people of this Province feel in regard to ~~at rarticular situation.

This debate has been going on ,.. well, I have been, a~rare of it since 1972 and I ~~ink it is probably fair to say that the debate has been going on many years before that. ~~at I am really asking, really the soul searching question is are we any closer to a decision, are we any closer to a final decision now, in 1979, and as we head into the 1980s, and as it becomes more anp more imperative for us to develop that resource for our own use or for export for a limited period of time, as that becomes more and more imperative are we any closer.in final terrns,to a decision now than we were back in 1972 when this debate started going in the first 4569

December 12,1979 Tape No. 1815 MR . RIDEOOT : place? 1 am not really sure that we are a.'\d ll'aybe this kine of c=U ttee 11ould : c ab le to ade some i.n,petus, would be able to add some direction, would be able to supplement and ·complill' .ent the efforts made in that direction already by the government of the .Province and by NewfoW1dland anc La!>rador F.ydro .

N~·, Sir, I had a numr.er of o~~er ar!!as ~!}at I <4anted to get into but I understand t.\}at if the r.cuse is still in session I •,rill have an opportunity to clue up the cebate so, therefore , the other remar ks that 1 have , I guess I have no choice but to save thero for ~~at ~e sin ce ~ time has expired. ~EA.ra:~ .. :_(!:!uttl lo!R. NEAR':': 'r.\an}; you . Mr • .Spea'<er . The hon. ~ember fer LaPoile. z.:r. Speaker, if t:.e ho:1. !1inis 1::er of :1i:"'es and E:nergy (l-!r. Barry ) «ants to a.nst-;er my friend I 1•ill gladly yield provicing I can - :·l!t.

SA?-".Y: speak afterwards . ~IR. ~IEhRY: tvny do you not go aheac t{lere nov1, I will That «ill be fine. 4570 --

December 12, 1979, Tape 1816, Page 1 -- apb MR. NEARY: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I again have to congratulate one of my colleagues for bringing in a private members' resolution that gives members on both sides of the House an opportunity to talk about a matter that is of major importance to this Province, namely, energy. So far,we have had discussions on the fishery, and various other topics that ordinarily would not have been raised.

Government, for some reason or other, seems to sidetrack, sidestep the real issues in this Province and very rarely in this session which, in my opinion, has been a ve1y non­ productive session of the House - I do not mean that we have not had a bit of action but non-productive in the way that none of the items, none of the matters that are of major importance to the people of this Province have really come up for debate.

The only way that we seem to be able to generate debate in this House is - obviously, the government is not going to bring in as government business energy, unemployment and cost of living and so forth so we have to, the responsibility falls on the shoulders of members on this side of the House. So my colleague brought in a private members' motion that gives us an opportunity to have a wide-ranging debate on the energy policy in this Province which is non-existent. Mr. Speaker, the energy policy is non-existent.

The present minister who used to be the Minister of Mines and Energy before he went down to a resounding defeat, carried the energy policy around in his vest pocket, then left the House for awhile and then came back and tried ito pick up where he left off. In the meantime, a number of ot· .er ministe:o:-s had had a stal· at it and did not do very much with t, including Mr. Crosbie. Now, Mr. Speaker, let us go back to 1972, let us just refresh hon. members' memories of 1972, when the government changed. When the government changed, Mr.

Speaker, it was possible to develop the Lower Churchill - for what? - $600 or $700 million. I believe it was $500 or $600 million. It was 4571

December 12, 1979, Tape 1816, Page 2 -- apb MR. NEARY: possible to develop the Lower Churchill at that time, say - just to be on the safe side I will say $600 or $700 million. MR. STAGG: One and a half billion. MR. NEARY: No, Mr. Speaker, in 1972 it was not more than $700 million. It was somewhere between, I believe, $600 million and $700 million. Now, Mr.

Speaker, what is the cost today, the present day cost of developing the Lower Churchill? $3 billion, almost five times more than in 1972. we have procrastinated so long in this Province, and stalled and used excuses and carried out so many studies that now it will cost upwards of $3 billion to develop the Lower Churchill in total.

Now the Minister of Mines and Energy recently shifted his ground again and said, Well, maybe we will not develop the Lower Churchill in total, we might just go ahead and develop the Muskrat Falls and maybe bring that over to the Island of Newfoundland, or bring some of it over if we can. Now, Mr. Speaker, .back in 1972, again, so I am given to understand, when the proposition was put to this government to develop the Lower Churchill and to carry out any hydro development of that magnitude, you had to have a customer.

I am told that there was a customer at that time and the customer was not, as bon. gentlemen have been leading us to believe, Hydro Quebec, the customer was an aluminium company, the customer was one of the most notable aluminium companies on the face of this earth who were prepared to go in to Labrador, and that is what we have been talking about, Sir, all along, when we are talking about development of Labrador Hydro, when we are talking abo ·ut trying to lea,·e as much of that hydro 4572

December 12, 1979 Tape 1817 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: electricity in Labrador as we can. I am told, Mr. Speaker, tb.at BRINCO - and there should be an investigation, an inquiry into t.'lis - t..'lat BRINCO had the customer, that BRINCO "'as prepared to put down side by side to that development on the Lower Churchill an al~~num factory that would employ several thousand Newfoundlanders. The hen. gentleman looks at me. The hon. gentleman cannot deny that as being a fact.

I said that BRINCO, who wanted to develop the Lower Churchill bac~ in 1972 for $500 million or $600 million or $700 million - I t..'link it was $600 million - What is t..'le hen. gentleman hanging his head for? , ~~- BARRY: You are not tellinq us that we should have another Upper Churchill now? MR. NEARY: No, the hen. gentleman surely was not listening. I was just saying something to the contrary. I said t..~at BRiaco had a customer for the power and the custorrer was an al=i.num company that was prepared to go into Labrador a~d put an aluminum factory side by side to that development.

And this government kicked out BRINCO, nationalized Churchill Palls - MR. BARRY: 'T'Pll us a li ttJe hit-. ilhont- t-h"' nTi ,.,. • t:F•ll "''what- +-ho ~>=~~~<"""!-as <;oing to get out of it. HR. NEARY: The Province was going to get a major industry in Labrador. The Province was going to get 3,000 or 4,000 or 5,000 jobs, because, as the hon. minister knows, aluminum factories or mills, whatever you want to call t..'lem, generate a large number of jobs. And if you used the multiplier effect, Sir - MR. BARRY: How were they going to get t..'leir product out? MR. NEARY: How were they going to get their product ~ut?

That was their problem, getting their product out. Is the hon. gentleman admitting that that proposal was before the government? HR. BARRY: We have aluminum compan:i,es now that have proposals before government. MR. NEARY: ~ne hon. gentleman tells us t..~at we now have aluminum companies' proposals before government. \-/ell, that is exactly 4573

December 12, 1979 Tape 1817 EC - 2 HR. NEAP.Y: why my hon. friend put down ~~at motion. MR. BARRY: It is no secret. HR. NEARY: It is a secret, Sir. That is the first we heard of it. Now1 that I have drawn the han. minister out - and I had to draw hi·rn out by making a positive statement, by making a statement of fact, that this government - MR. BARRY: it. MR. NEARY: that I heard of it, Sir. MR. BARRY: MR. NEARY: MR. RIDEOUT: MR. NEARY: AN HON. ME~ER: MP. NEJI.RY: things - MR. BARRY: about it. :1R.

NEA.~: Everybody else in the Province knows Every knows it - well, it is the first I have said it on radio, on television. ?id my hon. friend know about it? Never heard it. Did my hon. colleague know about it? No. Mr. Spea'·er, these are the kinds of Everybody except the Opposition knows These are the kinds of things that we want to know, and that is why my han. colleague put this motion on ~~e Order Paper, to travel around the Province, to hold public hearings, to find out how people feEl about these proposals. MR. BARRY: You are going to have more information this afternoon than you will know what to do with.

MR. NEARY: Well, I am glad now, Sir, that I spoke before the han. ~entleman. But ever since that blunder, that goof, was made of kicking out BRINCD, which was one of the best corporate citizens we had in this Province, and nationalizing the Churchill Falls Corporation at a cost of interest alone, I am told, of somewhere in the vicinity of $35 million to $40 million a year - and that is more revenue than we are 4574

i::ecerni>er 12, 1!:179 Tape 1817 r:c - 3 ta.!dng i:1 from tile Upper C.'1urchill : tilis year. They :"\ave been blundering their way along ever si:1ce , !J.r . Speaker , and we have no energy poliC)' i.n this Province at tie moment. They are f yi.ng by the seat of their pants . i-lnatever way th.e minister feels when he is ~r.aring his ~ speec.'1 to &>t.ary or to this one or 10 t:.'lat one, however :.e feel s at: the t.ime, >~hatever Ls 90litica ly e.x;:.eeient to say at the til:'e, t.llen t.l:lat is t."rle government • s policy .

He Cid not do ba.cil yesterday, did •.;e? '!'he minister says t.'ley did r.ot cio baoly yesterday. \.;el l, ow Cid they do yesterday? How dio they fare ofi yesterday? ! eio not: !lear too much about: hyclro in the uciget Speech last night. 1 heard quite a bi t about oil . 1-tr. Speaker, the fact of t.'le matter is , whet.'1er we like it or not, whether the minister l.ikes it or not:, whet.'ler Your iionour l.i.lces it o!:' not: , be!:ore you can develop t:.,_,e i.o"2 r Churci1ill you have to • ave a c:IStomer. 1:-'le customer ;.·as t."lere a:1d they kid:.eci h.:. ou"t . ; ow, .. e have t:o find a customer .

And the hon . gentleman can ge;: up 4575

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1818 NM - 1 MR. NEARY: and say, "Well the customers are the people of Newfoundland, the consumers of Newfoundland. " I say balderdash! Go to the money markets of the world 7 go out to the money bags of North America and Eur.op~ and say the cm;+comers c.re the consumers in Newfoundland and they will laugh in your face. You have to show something a little more concrete than that.

You have to show a little more proof to these people that you have customers that can use at least seventy-five or eighty per cent of that electricity before they will give you the money, $3 billion to develop that project. Mr. Speaker, ERCO is a case in point. ERCO. Even though the Government of Canada had a programme at the time where they would give financial assistance to the Province, to the Atlantic Provinces, to develop natural resources in the Provinces­ what was the name of that? Not APEC, not ARDA. AN HON. MEMBER: FREDP MR. NEARY: FRED, no it was not the FRED Programme.

But it was one of these giveaway programmes that they had ·at the time when the Bay d'Espoir development took place. But in order for the Province, Mr. Speaker, and let this just sink in for a moment in hon. gentlemen's heads, in order for the Province to go ahead, to borrow the money it needed to carry out the Bay d'Espoir hydro development we had to have customers. And the government of the day advertised in newspapers a11 around the world for customers and only received one response, one only, and that happened to be ERCO.

ERCO was the only company in the world that responded and they were big users of electricity, and they were given electricity at a certain price here in Newfoundland. But if ERCO had not responded you may not 1ave had a Bay d'Espoir development. MR. BARRY: Not so. Not so. 4576 --

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1818 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: Well, I read the ad MR. BARRY: The first phase was started before there was any arrangement made with ERCO. MR. NEARY: The first phase of the Bay d'Espoir? Well, Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that the Bay d'Espoir development in its entirety could not have taken place if there were no customers. MR. BARRY: You are wrong. MR. NEARY: The hen. gentleman is saying that is wrong.

Well 1 then 1I read the ad the other day and I read the letter that ERCO circulated to their employees and I have also discussed it with various and sundry other people who had something to do with the negotiations and I am told that that is so. And I am also told, I do not know if it is correct or not and I seemed to get a rise out of the minister the other day when I mentioned this, that ERCO is now voluntarily agreeing to renegotiate their electricity agreement based on the cost of production of power .at Bay d'Espoir.

And the government are trying to force ERCO into contributing or paying for the cost of generating the electricty at the thermo-generating plant in Holyrood. Now perhaps the minister can confirm that or deny it7 but that is my impression. AN HON. MEMBER: That what? MR. NEARY: That ERCO is prepared to voluntarily renegotiate the cost of the price of their electricity based on Bay d'Espoir power only. The minister did not deny that the other day.

He got up and tried to give me a f-9\~ political flicks that did not work because I am coming back again looking for information on this particular matter because I think it is very significant. I said the other day that the strategy of the government seems to be, "Issue ultimatums." The Premier is becoming wild-eyed and fanatical and is continuously frothing at the mouth, attacking Ottawa, issuing ultimatums to ERCO and various 4577

December 12, 1979 Ta pe :-lo. 1818 NM - 3 HR. NEARY: and sandry othe~ people. T~at seems to ce becoming the policy . And then now, today, we s aw him use wease 1 words . He is backing down from t·lcGrath. And pretty soon he will call a news conference and say , "We have had a major victory with ERCO. " Major victory . I can s ee the news conf erence now. They knuckled under 1 when ERCO I am told is prepared to come to th e barg aining cable , open up the agreement , and volunteer t o change the terms and conditions of the agr eement as far as the price of electricity generac ed at Bay d 'Espoir is conce r ned . 4578

Dec~~er 12, 1979 Tape 1819 PK - 1 ~lr. Neary: So, Mr. Speaker, I got a little bit sidetracked there for the ~ornent ,but the point I was making w.as that you have to have a customer for that power in Churchill Falls. We would all like to see it used in Labrador, every kilowatt of it used in Labrador if that is possible. I doubt very much if it is possible or even feasible, ~. Speaker, But I would like to know what has happened now - MR. BARRY: And what do you want to do as far as the consumers on the Island are concerned? MR.

NEARY: Well 1 that is what I am going to ask the han. gentleman~ what has happened to the government's policy of building a tunnel underneath the Straits of Belle Isle to transmit that power1 some of it to the Island of Newfoumdland? MR. BARRY: Under your scheme you do not need a tunnel, you are going to le~ve it all in Labrador. MR. NEARY: Well,sure, Mr. Speaker, I would like to see it all used in Labrador, if not in Labrador, certainly in Newfoundland and Labrador. MR. BARRY: ~1R. NEARY: MR.

BARRY: Brinq .in industry however - If possible bring in - - beneficial in Labrador and let the consumers on the Island rely on petroleum. MR. NEARY: Oh, Mr. Speaker, I am glad the han. gentleman raised that, because when I was talking about Bay d'Espoir I should have raised it myself. That thermo-generating plant up at Holyrood was not built to generate electricity on a permanent basis~ _it was only put there to generate electricity for peak periods, to take care of the overload. MR. JAMIESON: did not operate (inaudible) years. MR.

NEARY: And this government were so lax in their energy policy that they had to bring it into production twenty­ four hours a day, and therein lies a story, ~. Speaker. When they 4579

December 12, 1979 Tape 1819 PK- 2 Mr. Neary: should have been out developing the Lower Churchill back in 1972 , and developing the hydro here on the Island, and trying to get industry back i~to this Province and generate new dollars for economy, they took the line of least resistance, they went over and they just did not have any imagination or any initiative of their own and they said, Okay1 let the thermo-generating plant in Holyrood take care of our needs. That is what they did. It was never meant to do that, it was standby power only.

But this government through lack of initiative, stupidity, and blunders now have it producing twenty-four hours a day and that is what is driving up the cost of electricity in this Province. MR. R. MOORES: That is right. MR. NEARY: In the meantime 1 we have rivers, river _&'- I hear so much in this House 1 it makes me sick,about our wonderful natural resource that we have down in the Lower Churchill, that wonderful natural resource. Well 1 what good is it? How wonderful is it as long as it is flowing out into the ocean? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR.

NEARY: And how good are all the rivers we have on this Island that can be utilized to generate electricity,unless they are developed~ You know, I am amused sometimes by the Premier ranting and raving~ He thinks he is the only one in Newfoundland that can be patriotic.~e says, "We have the most fantastic resources) we have the biggest storehouses of natural resources left in the war ld . " And I can make that statement and I have made it, the Premier -makes jt, the Premier before him made it, the one before him made it, but what is the good of it all if we do not do anything about it? 7 SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NEARY: And that is the weakness in their policy. They like to go on crusades,they like to get on the white horse, and they like to talk about all the natural resources, all the wealth-we have. 4580

December 12, 1979 Tape 1819 PK - 3 it is all talk no action. ~. NEARY: Now, it is al.l talk and no act:1on, they do not: do anything about it, M.r. Speaker. I wish I had more time , I am just getting in high gear now, but I will have to take my seat and let the hon . minister have his say. But I hope the hon. gentleman when he gets up today will not: express his own personal views or blah, blah, blah, but will lay out a blueprint:, lay out a plan for the next five or t:en years in this Provin ce, and then agree with my hon. colleague, the member for Baie Verte (Hr.

Rideout) , agree that the people of this Province should r.ave some input in that blueprint, in that Dlaster plan, if there is one available, and go around the Province, have your environmental impact studies, get the views of t.he people on this and tha~, a~ on the major decisions that have to be made in connection with energy in this Province . I.Jh.at is wrong with that? It is a :easor.able resolu tion. It is a good motion and 4581

:· ece1~Ler 12, 1"79 the r.ouse ~; ill supp ort it. SO:.fr: EOi'i. 1ffiHBEF.S: }1R. SP:EH:ER: (E.<'.IRD) f1R. L. 3AP.RY: I :1ope t.':at r..erd: .. e r s on bo th siC.es o f Lear, hear! The hon. t!inister of ~-lines and £nergy. l1r. sr-eaker, I have to oppose this r:otion I ~ 1ave to oppose it pri~,arily on the ~asis that it is prer.-ature. It is pret:'ature, 1!r.

Speaker, because vJe have at this very noi"-ent a larse scale effort uncer,,·ay which is nearing corr:pletion fer t.'le preparation of detailed feasibility studies dealing v;ith the Gull Island. site, t.'le !'u.skrat ralls site, t.'le questi ·'?n of a La.DraC!.or/Island hydro tie 1 ,.·hether it be by way of sul:.marine cable or J:.y a tunnel crossing. And, ~lr. Speaker, ~-o·e e:xpect to have this inforrr .ation-and I wil:C s-i•;e a C:et.ailed report in a rr.or.-.ent as to how tr.is ••ark is proceeding ar.d as to the til:'.ing - in e. I!IOre or less col:lpletec form in our hands "::>y February.

The final report will be ~!arch/ i.pril l:y the tine they put it together anci tie it in a nice little i.:o,,· and p ass it in1 but we ~ill have the essence of the report before ~~at tir:e. At that tire, flr. SpeaJ.:er, vo1hen ,_.,re i1ave recei vee~ the report 1 I = prepare C. to take another look at the possi.bili ty of having a full-scale del:.ate in the House and I"-aybe •,:e \,·ould ask the her.. rrcerr.ber tc look at a sir:'ilar type rootion as he has on the Order I·aper toc!ay at that tire. l..nd ~;·e will keep an open rrind, ~!r.

Speaker, we will keep an open mind as to the extent of inquiry and investigation that should Le carried out. :Jut •.ve have to keep in mind. also, 1\r.

Spea}:e:r, that the:re ,;ill be a tirre fra."le '''i thin which decisions ~: ill have to be rrade an C. it vdll not Le sensible, it •.cculc not be expedient fo:r governr-tent to set up an ongoing inquiry 1 by a Select Col!'oll'ittee or other,..ise 1 on an ongoing basis that would delay a start on the :::'inal project. r:overn~ent has to govern, government has to make decisions, ~~ese decisions should Le on the tasis of ~~e fullest possible participation by mei!'bers of this Eouse, by !"er-bers of the general public. nut, Mr.

Speaker, I am anazed that ~'le hen. member, in refer:ring to the neec for input by rr.ernbers of the general public,did not bother to mention the fact that, I suppose, the Lower Churcilill project has been the first project of its kind that has actually gone out, held 4582 ,-

l): , - 2 :;r. Speaker, I ···ill refer you to so::-e o! c.~e ,;~<lees . · ;:o .. ·,t.~is to·as only a few I!'Onths ago . T!1ey ;,a c. neetings in J,a_,;?y Vallo'//C-oose :::ia;r. ~li:Jiter±er 24th .; Forteac, Se;;>te::U:er 2St..'l.) Flo~o.er's :::eve , ~e1,-te=!:er :<5th . ; :::aniel's ~arJ:,our, Se?t el!'le r 27t.": .; Granc Fal ls , Septe!l'ber 2!?th .; St . John's .

Octc~e r lst . l.r.c at t."lese :reotinc;s ·a larse paci;age of infon'atio!'l rela~ng to tl:e alternative o£ Gcll lslc.."ld ami :!uskrat Fco.lls, as up to O:ate as t!'le in!omation ..,·a s a t that tine 1 n\s p r esented to any!:.ocy "'no •'<'S inte:estec enou<;>h to core out to t:lc :reetinc; . ::ot only t..'lat, !.t ·.~as not just a Irattcr of feeclinc; inforr::ation , it ~as ne>t just a one - -:ay !lo'"· of info=ation 1 the LC" ... ·er O:urc:1ill t"8velopr ent Cort:<:>ration 45 83 ,- :'

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1821 NM - 1 MR. BARRY: at the same time sent out questionaires, distributed questionaires to anybody who attended the meeting, has questionaires available for distribution around the Province and I will just, Mr. Speaker, point out the sorts of things that the corporation is looking for. It is headed, "Lower Churchill Development Corporation Attitudes And Concerns Questionaire." It gives a brief description of the Lower Churchill projects, Gull Island and Muskrat Falls and asks that members of the general public fill out and supply the following information.

Okay, what community do you live in? How long do you live there? What do you like best about the area in which you live? Do you feel that this will be affected by this development? If you do feel it will be affected,which aspect of the development concerns you? Is it the damn, the transmission line, the Strait crossing? MR. WARREN: MR. BARRY: MR. ~;ARREN: MR. BARRY: (Inaudible). I cannot hear you. How many replied from Northwest River? How many replied from Northwest River? I will get the hen. member the information. I am sure everybody replied.

It asks what are your prime activities in the area that would be affected) is it residential, hunting, fishing, trapping, hiking, nature appreciation, other? And approximate number of days per year that the activity would be carried out in the area of the project. It asks, do you feel that these activities would be affected by the project? If so explain. Are you expecting any benefits from this development? If so explain. Do you have any additional concerns about any aspect, any aspect of the development? Explain. Then it asks age, sex, marital status, number of people in 4584

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1821 GH-2 MR. BARRY: a household, occupation, and so 0 n. It goes on on the last page, "If you are interested in receiving furtner information on the proposed development, please fill out your name and address in the following space and mail it - give it with your mailing address- and the information would be supplied". Now, Mr. Speaker, I ask you, is that or is it not getting and encouraging public participation? Does this government not go out to the people and invite input from the general public? Has that ever been done, Mr. Speaker, when that other hen. crowd were in office?

Did ~nybody here see any such questionnaire? Did anybody see any such questionnaire, Mr. Speaker, before the ERCO plant went in or before the Upper Churchill contract was entered into? MR. FLIGHT: Will the minister permit a question? MR. BARRY: How much input did the general public have into those great Liberal schemes, Mr. Speaker? SOME HON. MEMBERS : Oh, oh! MR. BARRY: Now let me have, let me have a little bit of political debate while I give you all this information, for God's sake. It is too dull to give without having the occasional political flick. MR. ROBERTS: The hen. schoolboy debate is at it again . MR.

BARRY: Certain gentlemen believe that we are all schoolboys. MR. ROBERTS: Certainly the member is evidence that they are all schoolboys . MR. FLIGHT: Would the minister permit a question? MR. BARRY: Is it going to be a nice question or a nasty one? MR. FLIGHT: A nice question. MR. BARRY: A nice question, okay. MR. FLIGHT: I wonder if the minister would indicate why he did not feel it necessary to do all the things he just referred to re the Lower Churchill development, with regard to the Upper Salmon development? 4585

December 12, 1979 HR. SPEAKE.~: (Baird) MR. BARR'i: Tape No. 1821 GB-3 The hon . member for !1ount Scio. Mr. Speaker, the hon. member begged the question with his qu.estion. In fact, the same public pa.rticipaeion was invite<i with respect to the upper Salmon project. In fact, Mr. Speaker, ; not only eid Hydro make themselves available to supply information, I have been supplying information , ~tr. Speaker , continuously , on a conti .nuous basis to the people of Conne River, to people of Bay d'Espoir, to people of Buchans. Mr. Speaker, I went up to what I could only cescribe as a less than impartial discussion at the university. 4586

December 12, 1979 Tape 1822 MB - 1 MR. BARRY: It was called -I forget the exact name of the group now - a group to support the Inuit and native people of L~e Province, wnich is a very admirable objective, but it is laid out-~asically they were supporting the position that had been taken by - MR. ROBERTS: They were no~ there to examine the position but rather to advocate it. l-IP •• BAP.RY: That is right. They were advocating a particular side and basically a side opposing w~e project. Now, that is their right, their privilege, and there is nothing wrong with t.~at.

I am just saying that it was not a totally impartial approach that was t~~en. I went in there, l1r. Speaker, I spent the whole evening debating the issue - MR. ROBERTS: It is like having your head hit with a hammer, it is nice when it stops. NR. BARRY: and it keeps you on your toes, Mr. Speaker. I think all of us should from time to time- MR. ROBERTS: to support t.~e association? MR. BAR.~: AH liON. ME!olBER: ~!R. ROBERTS: \'las the minister asked to give a grant descend into similar arenas. No public hearings.

Was the minister asked at that point to make a grant to support the association or did that request come subsequently? MR. BARRY: The request for my donation came· later I believe. Now, Mr. Speaker, if I could have - I think that that establishes that we have had considerable participation by the general public in what is proposed for the Lower Churchill project. To give hon. members just a brief updating of where the investigatJ .-,n «t-«nds right now - MR. ROilERTS: interesting too . HR. BARRY: MR. ROBERTS: That is more to the point and more You like this? More interesting, a~d more to the point. 4587

Dece~er 12, 1979 Tape 1822 HB - 2 MR. BARRY: The LCDC study ·..,as initiated in May, 1979. Their actual formal target date for completion was the end of April, 1980. That is what they started with, but as I said before, L~c essence of the report will be in prior to that time, prior to the end of March, I would hope by mid-February. ~~ey are looking at the technical and financial feasibility of Gull Island and/or l1uskrat Falls. Now,just to look at it step by step.

Engineering feasibility: T'nere they are looking at all project components, Gull Island transmission system, Strait of Belle Isle crossing, and :1uskrat Falls, developing capital cost estimates and construction schedules. As far as Gull Island is concerned the basic information was already in place since 1975, and it <~as merely an updating, Hr. Speaker, of construction schedules and capital cost estimates, with sene slight m::ldification in basic design to take account of improved technology.

This engineering review has now been completed, and the definitive capital cost estimates will be available later ~>is month. So by the end of December we will have the capital cost estimates fox ~~e Gull Island project. MR. ROBERTS : Does L~e engineering - If the minister ;.;ould permit, does ~'le engineering revie\v touch upon the question of whether or not - We will give ti1e minister so~e Rare time if he needs it. Did tile engineering review touch upon L'le question of how the power is to come across the Straits M?.. BARRY: !•!R. ROBERTS: I am getting to L'lat now. ukay then.

Because that is not part of what the minister taL~ed about to date. Okay. MR. BARRY: Now, transmission, as '"ith the Gull Island project 1 th~ nain emphasis has been to update the 1974-75 figures that is the transmfssion line itself. I will get to the crossing in a moment. Line rerouting has been investigated to avoid areas of heavy icing and so on in the Southern Labrador area and across the Long Range Mountains. The engineering review for the the high voltage direct current 4588

Pecembe:::- 12, 1979 Tape 1822 !18 - 3 ~lR . 3ARRY : ~~ansmission system - ~~o 800 megaw a t~ de li::~es are no•,.. com?leta the engi:~ee ring :::-eveals 1 and cost and scheC.ule L'1forrnation is also expected later this =nt.l-t , by the end of Dece!'\b er. The concept of one t ra11smission line had not bee n looked at in C.et ail p r eviously and this is now being i:west.igated . "ow you migh t ask , why not just divide by two to g;;!t: ::..i:te cost of buildi:lg a transl!'..issi o n l ine? MR.

ROBE~S : :·Lll.. i>ARRY: ~o , it does not work that way at all. !t is not tha t simple becaus e you have similar costs for one or two lines . :·!R. ROBERTS : fifty ~'1it hotel . HR. FLIGliT : MR. SARRY : A hundred unit !lotel costs n10r e cit an a (inaud..ib l

e) schoc. lboy (inaudible) Di d t.'te ho n . trembe :::- from 3~chans );lurp or was me r e soml;lthing les s of a s uggestion the re? 1'-R. FLIGHT : (I:taud..ibl?) MR. ?.DSER'!'S: The ori ginal 'ooncept. was t:"'o 800 mega- watt line s to move me !1usk r at ~we r or the Gull Isla: ld po\~er? To oove t.'lte Gul.l. Island pO',.;er . 'i'he one line would be all ~ t.'1at would be neec!ed 1 cne 800 :nega• .. att line for Huskra:: Falls , if that were t.'le ·~ay to go . >!R. ROBERTS : point . 1/.R. BARRY: So that is t..'le diseoonomy of scale, t.:'\at That is the diseconomy of s cales I mentioned pre viously which result.s in a highez cost 4589 !

L'ecerr.ter 12, 19 79 '!'ape tio. 1823 D'.-, - 1 ~~-. L • BARRY : per kilo~:att hour for ~'cuskrat in 2'.11 prol:ability. The alternating current transnis::;ion intPrtf:e Le~·een Gull Islanc and C~urchill Falls has been confirMec as a single circuit 735 KV line and sirrilar studies are no"K in progress to cetertrine "'hat would be neeced for an intertie betl.;een the Upper ancl !1uskrat 'to identify - !!R. E. ROBER'IS: 'I11at is assurring there is recall po•,;er to be r'Oved over - MR. L. BARRY: Partly for recall po,.er lJ·..lt also because you have to operate both sites - 1·!F.

L • FOJCERTS : You have to synchronize the systen. !1R. L. Blo.RRY: You nave to synchronize their operation and you need an intertie in order to do that. !~R- E. POBERI'S: But would it be proposed to ~eve po"Ker from either cf t.'le Lower churchill sites l.:acJ:: tc r.1pper Churchill? :rs:.. L • BAF.P.Y : ------- CnGer certain conditions, yee,that ~i~ht ve feasil:le. ~1F. I:. ROBI:RTS: lihat for 1 to r:.eet the contractucl coMmitMents going West? Well, you could save on water by using the sarre water twiee 1 i:Jasically 1 and avoid spilli;;g more water out of the upper C1urchill.

If the den· an C. was not on the I.ower site at the time you would just - MR. E.. FO.SELrr'S : The o;.;ater ~:ill be usee b.·ice an;,·,,.;ay, once r,;oin•;r through the upper Churchill turbines and once through - maybe three tirres. !'R. L. BARRY: If we c;et t:•ree sites co~;n ir, t.':ie Lo1;er Churchill, yes 1 it could De used three ti~es. But in any event 1 you have to have this intertie for technical reasons to co-ordinate the flow of ~later anC. the systems have to J:.e i.ntert~rinec.

The Straits crossing., the hon. r.:err.ber asked about. one of the =st intensive engineerinq ar::tiYities of the LCDC has been assessing the feasiblity of crossing the Strait of Belle Isle >~ith a tunnel underneath the strait or with the installation and 4590

Decerrber 12, 1979 'I a;oe llo. 1823 n;- 2 MR. L. EA?.P.Y: suitablco. protection o!' sub!"arir :c cables on the sea !:otter .. ·The tunnel Get:lod was extensively studied in 1974/75 and like Gull Island and the transmission line1 an engineering review has been completed. For the submarine alternative a rrajor rr.arine survey prograr:·rr.e ,,·as initiatec in June of this year anr1 completed. in early Septerrber.

And they gathered data such as sea bottom profiles of various cable routes, ocean currents, tiees, ~ave hei~ ts, depths of overburden, all of which are required to fully assess the implications of laying and protecting submarine cables. They have had active discussions ~ith manufacturers of hiqh voltage subrarine caoles and with corpanies ~~at actually have these installed in 6ifferent places arounc" the world. Significant progress has l:een mace, ll:r.

Speaker, I think it is worthy of note 1 significant progress has been made and LCDC is quite optirristic about the feasibility of installing submarine cables across the S~rait of Belle Isle ar.d placing themLin rock trenches in areas know"!l to be frequentee by icebergs. Apparently, 1'-r. Speaker, they have this little device - we all knew for sorr>e tirre t.'>at it was possible tlo build trenches to lay oil pipelines, say, in rnucdy tottoms, they just ~0 in --·it'1 a high pressure jet and they excavate a trench. In fact, in the English Channel they have, ~!r.

Speaker, C.eveloped a device to lay a power cable between England and France ,,·hich is like a little D-9 tractor. It goes ant on u1e seabed and there is little picks anc it digs a trench al::-out b•o : feet wide throllgh soli<" rock. Now the rock in the Strait of Belle Isle is harder than the rock in the En~lish c'c3.nnel and it is still not certain that the device can ceal >~ith rock of that hardness.

But scientific studies are uncerway rig:1t new to C.etar­ mine this and conceivably ,,.e could have a little trench filled in1 completely buried in solic ·rock with great protection of the cable and mat would save considerable money and avoid the necessity of a tunnel. Sut that is still up in the air and further inforration will J::.e brought to the House vlhen available. <iR. E. ROBEFTS: There is still no (inaudible). 4591

Tape :;c. !.823 )l!!. . L . 3." RRY' iUl of J:.hese i'!ctivitie s will culn:inate with e report on tbe engineering ~P.asi ~ ili~/ o f t r.e suo~arine cable crossing , w ic!l the:: · inc.i=te will e c.vailabb i n .. arc!1 '980 . Now, I -- l:eli eve that ·,;e ;,•ill ha ve the r e s sence of t.'le re;;>ort durin g Febr::ary bt: t t !ley are sa ·ing ~!arc.'"l !.980 for t.'1e fin ~l :report on t.l)is . ···e heve a lovely - h.:!s t he ll'i:tister been up in eich er of t he towe r s at Savage Cove c;r - !·!R . L . 3..

AA'i : --- ----- ! · ave not t;one back uc fo r ~a sons oi nostal 9ia I \;i ll' t,ave to C:o it o e of these ca~·s . ~'? . E . l'<CEE.RTS : ·:ell , ! "~< ill g\..arant- e t.'l.e inister safe passage . h.,. can _et a =st n<~ rvelous vie'' of the straits. I ; c.ve b ee:1 up i each of t:.er. .

I v.ill cake t he :1or. . :-e re r up- on t:-... t i'.s : revious stuc i.es on :-:us.: r at: r ..!ls h a · only reacbe(. tne level of p r e -:aasi::: i llty, · .. e na ve. , , ;:. ~ t.o consi (.«ral.:e engineeJ:"L,g input on that particular site. hl1 ince pth .fJ.eld investic;at l.on J:"e<;rarrL-e ~o.· as concuctec c=ing the past SUMrer I :.lr . S?eaker, investi ~ <.::ir. g the geo-tec hni cal and c;eolo s ic ~l . .as · eCJ;s of ;,: ~.;si.:rat Falls . · ou : ;;c oi g",':; contracts; access roa e , ciar¢nd crilling , to~o~ra?.ic ~ap?ing , seismic work, all o!' "'hi ch ·..tere co:: f letec in :.;ovember .

Til e :ie lf p rogra.I:l<le ~>.·a s r:ece.S<;art because o:e knew, 4592

Decerrber 12, 1979 Tape 18 24 EC - 1 MR. BAP.RY: ~tr. Speake~, t~at ti;ere was marine clay in ~,e site which could be unstable and could be risky for the construction of a dam. Ar.d 1<1e had to look at ways that this !llarine clay could be stabilized. The engineering report on L,is will be available by the end of January, with the information on the cost and the

schedule by February 15, 1980. The prelimir.ary information thil.t I have is that the marine clay instability should not prove a tec,nical barrier to the development-:- or an economic barrier, for t.>J.at matter - to the development of the Muskrat Falls site, and that looks as if it could be a go. MR.

ROBERTS: Did the hon. gentleman (inaudible) book called The Path Between the Seas, which is the story of the construction of the Panama Canal, a fascinating book on a fascinating subject, and there t.>J.ey have t.>J.e same kind of clay condition - the clay does not bind one part to the other and whole mountains slid and filled up the - they dug it three or four times, in fact. }!R. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker~ I think everybody is aware of the risks inherent in dealing with that type of material, but we have had L,e best of scientific brains looking at it, and they indicate to us that first of all, the problem did not turn out to be as serious as had been feared, but secondly - one gentleman must have earned his day's pay because he came up with an idea of tackling the question of draining the water. Apparently the problem is one of getting the water out of the clay. ~. ROBERTS: It is fluid. HR.

BARRY: And the water it turned out was not actually coming from the river, which was what was feared, but was from a couple of lakes adjacent to the river. They had one proposal for actually building a tremendous concrete .~~! t~ block the flow of water from the lakes to the dam area and ti1is gentlema.<, this scientist, said 'No, I have a cheaper way.' And he suggested that you put a tunnel underneath the clay and you let t.>J.e water drain down into the tunnel and you pwnp out the tunnel. So that appears to be one way of proceeding. All of L,is, Mr.

Speaker, I have to confess, I do not know nearly as much about as it might appear from my glib statements. 4593 : .·

December 12, 1979 Tape 1e24 EC - 2 MR. ROBERTS: It coes not appeRr the minister knows a great deal but he nas a most interesting memora~dum there. HR. BARRY: But I find it a very interesting area and I am sure the engineers are delighting in the technical problems that they are running into. MR. ROBERTS : I am awfully glad it is Wally Reid who is president, not the minister. MR. BARRY: Thank you, than."; you. The final project report, as I have said, will be available in April. aave I gone over time? HR. ROBERTS: It just seei:lS over time. HR. BARRY: It seems like a long time.

The final report will be available by April 30th, but I hope to have informa~io~ for the House before that time. Financing strategy, 11r. Speaker, is obviously a very important aspect of the project, and this is also being looked at. Tiley have reviewed various types of credit support that might be available from the federal government and a report on preliminary financing was submitted to LCDC on October 18, 1979. I have a few comments on the effects of the Budget. They do not mention hydro specifically, but ~~ey do mention, however, the creation of an energy bank, 1-lr.

Speaker, We will have further reports on credit support by the end of December, a final report on capital markets by January 31st and a final report on ~~e total financial plan, they are looking at April, but the essence we will have before then. MR. JAHIESON: I am sorry. 1\'ould you not repeat ~at til!'etable again! You are talking January of next year, is tl1at it? MR. BARRY: No, January, 1980 - this coming January. l-1R. JAMIESON: What were the three items again, please? MR.

BARRY: Review of different forms of credit support, different types of assistance we might ask of the federal government to help make it fly, completion of a report on capital markets \~here your money 4594

::lecell'l:>e!" 12, 1979 ':'.J.pe i824 ::.c - 3 miqht be av<U.l ru.>l e and c.he:1 t:he final :report eying ti·1e whole financial ;;>nc:itage wg-ethe:r. A.·u:i the last one is April? Yes, the las t one is Aj.ril. ~virorunental stud ies - these st:uclies a.:e proceeding on schedule. We ::Ope w have all o: til~ !.n- house studie s complated by Deoewbe!" 31, l979 . A final environmental i~pact statement will be p r epared during .J an:.~ary and ·11ill be availa.Ple then for p:.lblic consideration 4595 ·;: .. -

December 12, 1979 Tape 1825 Pl< - 1 Mr. Bar.ry : sho.ct.ly after that ti.'!le. And, in fact 1 I might mentipn that there has been an Envirorunental Assessment Board which is required by the f'e.deral. Government in any project where it puts funds, that has been jrnalyzing the project from 1974, I think it is, and the bon. member opposite, I believe, has some information on that. And there does not appear to be any terrible environmental factors relating to the ~eject. Al'l HON . MEMB.ER: Yes, Sir . Yes, Sir . MR.

BARRY: Well , the hon. member may have difference of opinion, t here may be some problems, but just to compar .e, Mr. Speaker, just to give you some idea of what we are talY~g a-~ut, the scale of this project -

whereas on the upper Churchill you had in terms of flooded area, you had 10 ,02 0 square miles flooded, for Gull Island there 1\."0uld be 42 square miles flooded, for l'!uskrat Falls there would be 22 square miles flooded, j ust t o gi ve you some feel for the - MR. ROBERTS: Of course .but it all depends what they are , I mean, 10 square miles in Downtown New York is a lot more than 1, 0 00 sguare miles i n the middle of Alaska. MR. BAR."!.Y: we11 1 unless they move oowm:own New York it is going to be safe from the waters of e i ther Gull Island or Muskrat. ~ffi. ROBERTS : I have my doubts. ~m.

FLIGHT: What happened to c lear cutting propositions that the Pr o vince turned down? Are you st:ill looking at clear cutting the reservoi:.-s? ~ffi. ROBERTS: A year or so ago, remember? HR. BARM.': I have in£ormation comL~g for the hen. member on the Opper Salmon ·A•hich he requested. MR. ROBERTS: Lower Churchill? MR. l'!A.'l.R!l: No, no, but the clear cuttin g of tile The clear cutting of the Lower Churchill, I would have to get the updated position as to - 4596 ,.

December 12, 1979 MR. ROBERTS: MR. BARRY: MR. ROBERTS: Tape 1825 PK - 2 The bon. minister was at Dalhousie - ·I was away at the time when the - -elucidating constitutional theories, which I hope made more sense than some of his others. MR. BARRY: A similar environmental impact statement will be carried out as far as the transmission link is concerned, that was submitted to the Environmental Assessment Review Panel of the Federal Government in 1978.

And in March 1979 , there was a deficiency statement issued where that panel said there had to Pe additional study done on the transmission lines 1 they wanted further information. The field work is now being completed, and the fiaal reports are in preparation and we should get them by the end of this month. I have reached the end of my tether here, have I? MR. ROBERTS: The minister went considerably beyond the end of his tether sometime ago, but that is another story. MR. BARRY: Okay. If I coUld just have a moment to clue up. MR.

ROBERTS: Five minutes, five minutes. l~e will give the minister a courtesy they would not give our spokesman. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear , hear ! MR. BARRY: There has been updating of escalation projections. There are discussions of what will be needed as far as a labour agreement is concerned, a discussion of what will be needed as far as attracting customers, which the hon. member for Port aux B=:;; · ;~L"'s was referring to - LaPoile sorry - which I do not have time to go into but which I am sure other hon. members will be referring to. And, Mr.

S~eaker, generally the universe is unfolding as it should with respect to this project. Other island sites, the hon. member asked for information about on-island sites. Hydro is ~amining1 apart from cat Arm which has been mentioned - MR. ROBERTS: Hey, hold on a minute! Does the hon. 4597

-December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1825 IB- 3 MR. ROBERTS: gentleman know the Minister of Justice has returned? I just saw him in the lobby. MR. BARRY: Somebody catch that man. Are the rabbit snares set? Mr. Speaker, I could just refer to the other sites on the Island which are being looked at. These are smaller sites now. There is a site near Burgee, Dry Pond Brook; River of Ponds on the Great Northern Peninsula. MR. ROBERTS: River of Ponds or Ten Mile Pond? MR. BARRY: Cloud River near Roddickton,I think that is where they already have the mini one started and the Pinware in Labrador. MR. ROBERTS: MR.

BARRY: What about Ten - is River of Ponds - And the Pinware is being looked at as a way of getting the people of Southern Labrador off diesel generators because it will be very difficult to have the direct current transmission line -to have them tied into a direct current transmission line that might be coming from Labrador to the Island. And we can all appreciate what the people t~ould be thinking if they were there paying diesel rates and looking at a transmission line going over their heads. So we are very sympathetic to the need to get hydro development for the people in Southern Labrador.

And the Pinware has a certain potential which is being looked at in this respect. MR. JAMIESON: Has the Swift Current River got anything, does the hon. minister know? MR. BARRY: Pipers Hole, I understand, was looked at years ago 4598

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1826 GH-1 I'.R. BARRY: very, very closely. I was speaking to an old employee of Newfoundland Light and Power who mentioned that company, I think, had looked at it and I have to confess that it has not been brought to my attention except indirectly. I think it is because of environmental factors or whatever. The hen. member would be out there with his placards on that one, I am sure. Okay, Mr.

Speaker, just generally with respect- as far as the effect of the budget is concerned, I think hen. members might be interested i~when you look at the projected increase in the price of oil, you are looking at, by 1984, you are looking at oil in Canada being about $33 a barrel. Now that is high, but if we consider that internationally oil is being bought and sold for $40 a barrel today, this very day, it helps keep it in perspective. But at $33.50 a barrel, then you are talking about that being the equivalent of 55 to 56 mils per kilowatt hour, just in the burning of the oil alone. So, you can see, Mr.

Speaker, . that with this price for oil anticipated, the economics of developing the hydro power of Labrador is greatly enhanced. It is the old 'ill will blowing not everybody no good' I think I fooled that one up - whatever, Mr. Speaker, you know. A silver - MR. ROBERTS: 'Every cloud has a silver lining.' MR.

BARRY: 'Every cloud has a silver lining.' It is going to be hard on low income - the Federal Government, I think, indicated that it was aware of the impact upon lower income people, and this is why we have the energy tax rebate ~1d other steps have been taken, but it does point out that the Lower Churchill project is more economically viable today than it was this time yesterday, Mr. Speaker. I think that that it is a clearly established fact. Finally, Mr. Speaker the hon. member has suggested that we should have a complete energy policy. Mr.

Speaker, I agree, and I intend and I have instructed officials that we should have prepared a white paper or a green paper or a blue pape~or whatever is the appropriate colour, prepared on energy as soon as we have the 4599

December 12, 1979 ·rape No. 1826 GH-2 NR. BARRY: decision with respect to Labrador power, because that will have to be an essential ingredient of any such energy policy. Thank you very much, Nr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: (Butt) MR. JAM.IESON: The hen. the Leader of the Opposition. Thank you very much, Nr. Speaker, and I do not propose to take a great deal of time today and I am also not going to rethrash old straw with regard to the past and various things that have happened. I am going to try, however, to, in a reasoned way, argue for the merits of this resolution.

As I understood the minister, he again is not opposed to the resolution but says it is a question of timing. I completely agree, but I am inclined to think that the timing is now and not after a lot of other important decisions have been made, which may then be quite impossible to change. It seems to me there is always a tendency on the part of this government to look at anything that comes from this side of the House - and we had it a few days ago - and say it is a good idea but we want to put it off for some reason or other, the timing is wrong.

They do not come flat out most of the time and say we are not going to pay the slightest attention to what those Opposition members say, but they always have a reason for saying well, you know, another occasion would be better, or we are not ready, or whatever the case might be. Now, my hon. friend who moved this motion is really getting to the crux of something which, I have no doubt that the Minister of Mines and Energy (Nr.

Barry) would agree is absolutely crucial and vital to the future of Newfoundland, and I suppose it is not improper to use the cliche 'for generations yet to come', because energy, the cost of it, the strategy that we are going to employ with regard to its utilization, these things will not only affect 4600

December 12, 1979 Tape No. 1827 so - l l'.R. D. JAMIESON: the economic life of Newfoundland but they are going to have a very, very profound effect on something which I gather from earlier statements of the minister and many other members of government is dear to their hearts, namely, the life style of Newfoundland. That this is completely linked up with those two things - economic development on the one hand and how we are going to handle that economic development on the other.

I emphasize tnat I do not intend to go back over the ground that was covered so thoroughly by the hon. member, my friend from LaPoile (Mr. S. Neary), because,indeed 1 despite all of the racous responses that it generated on ~~e other side, the ~uth of the matter is that we have been talking about the LOwer Churchill for at least a decade and we have been over one route after another.

I would hate to think of how much money it has cost various levels of government and sundry o~~er organizations in order to bring us to the point where we are today which, I suggest, is fairly well-advanced in some respects but which in many other ways is still just as confusing to the average Newfoundlander and 1 indeed, I suppose it would be fair to say, even rnore confusing to the bond market and some of the others as it was a decade ago.

Now, ! want to refer hon. members and particularly the minister to the Speech from the Throne of July 12th of this year when certain basic objectives of the government with regard to the LOwer Churchill were laid out, and I do so because I believe that if the government was sincere in these particular intentions 1 there are questions which could be asked now and which could properly be made the subject of a select committee inquiry 1 in advance of the final ribboned package to which the hen. !1inister of Mines and Energy ( l~r. L.

Barry) has referred. · ' May I, in response to hir.1 on this project , and on this resolution, make the point that he made to me the other day. When I was asking about Kitts-Michelin he said that there had to be several activities going on simultaneously so that there would be at some point in time, and I recall him using the 4601

Decernb~r 12, 1979 Tape lJo. 1827 SD - 2 HR. D. JAMIESON: analogy about several balls in the air at one time, so that when the tiJ·ue came to make the decision all of the factors had been taken into account. Now, in the case of the Lower Churchill developmen~which we devoutly wish will come about as soon as possible, first of all, the Throne Speech said that it will .: be used to create industry in this Province not merely construction jobs with little long-term benefit such as happened at Churchill Falls.

That is an eminently sensible arrangement, no quarrel with it whatever, that every last kilowatt that we can generate in this Province and that can be employed for job creation in this Province obviously we ought to do so. But so far as I am aware, since t.'J.e 12th. of July there has been no public comment 1 wi:lat- ever may have been going on behind the scenes,which suggests that there is a comprehensive search underway for industrial users or for the various kinds of undertakings for which ti1ese jobs are supposed to be designed. It may be that this is happening, it may be that it is not.

To the best of my knowledge , at least so far as I am aware, there is no large entrepreneur, large industrial user beating down the door and saying, 'As soon as this power is available we are ready to rush in and fill the breach. ' It may be that one exists.

My point 1 however 1 in this particular argument that I am putting forward 1 is that we should be and we have a right, I thi~k as Newfoundlanders, whatever rights we may have on this side of the House,to know what kind of industrial development the minister who has that double responsibility and I confess I do not envy him1 what kind of industrial development is being pursued if any is and ~ow does he see it emerging?

TWo reasons for that; one is that if it is,let us say,heavy industry and it is to be locatgd on the Island and I presume from everything the minister has said in his usual lucid way that the amount of power we bring on to the Island of Newfoundland and the site that is going to be developed is going to depend to a large extent on two factors; wheti1er it is going to be on the anticipated increase in the normal load or whether 4602

DeEember 12, 1979 Tape No. 1928 FA - 1 ~R. D. JA~IESON: L~ere is a large scale industrial customer( I guess that will be one of the key considerations when we consider whether it is Muskrat or the Gull or whatever or a combination that kine of thing. A