Vo lume 3 PROVINCE OF NEWFOUNDLAND THIRTY-SIXTH GENERAL A$SEMBL Y OF NEWFOUNDLAND 3rd. Session VERBATIM REPORT MONDAY, MARCH 25, 1974 SPEAKER: THE HONOURABLE JAMES M. RUSSELL Number 31

March 25, 1974, Tape 792, Page 1 -- apb The House met at 3:00 p.m. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER: Order please! I would like to welcome to the galleries today thirty-one students from the upgrading class of the Trades School on Bell Island with their teachers,Hr. John C.Pinsent, Mr. Lester Rose and Mr. Kevin Hollohan. On behalf of all honourable members of the House I welcome you here today. PETITIONS: MR. SPEAKER: The honourable the Member for St. John's North: MR. J.A. CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, I beg leave to present another petition on behalf of some two hundred residents of Mount Scio Road, Nagle's Hill and the surrounding area. They ask this House for the second time to prevail upon the appropriate authorities to prevent the immediate closing o~ Our Lady of Lourdes School, Nagle's Hill. It has been established beyond all doubt that the enrollment of this school is growing, that there is insufficient space at nearby school to accommodate these pupils comfortably and that the standard of education there is above reproach.

Furthermore, the fact that the Pippy Park Area in which the building is located is frozen is quite irrelevant since that school area extends far beyond those boundaries. Still the Department of Education maintains that its hands are tied and that the decision rests ~ole~y with the board. I maintain that this is the sort of decision that affects us all. Shall a school of admitted excellence be closed against the will of all reasonable people connected with it? What is to become of us if decisions cannot be reversed upon further reflection?

I find it difficult to comprehend that our government which is prepared to embark on such daring initiatives as are now under consideration in .Labrador, can shrink from and be stymied by what is a mere nettle by comparison. I beg and implore the government to use all of its good offices to preserve this institution that has served so many for so long and which promises such a bright future. I therefore ask that 2436

March 25, 1974, Tape 792, Page 2 -- apb this petition be laid upon the table of this House and referred to the department to which it relatea. ORDERS OF THE DAY: MR. SP£AKfR: The honourable the Member for Bell Island: MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Mines and Energy. Would the minister inform the House if there is any word yet from Ottaua regarding the federal feasibility study of the potential of the Bell Island Mines for storing crude ·011? MR. SPEAKER: The honourable the Minister of Mines and Energy: HON. L.D.BARRY (Minister of Mines and Energy): Mr.

Speaker, the reply will not be coming from the Federal Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. Both the province and the federal govenunent are awaiting the report of the consultants who did the feasibility study. We have not yet received that report. MR. NEARY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker: Will the honourable minister assure this House that the mines will not be sealed off until they get the recommendations of the co!Miultants who are doing the feasibility study? MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, there has been much confusion raised with respect to the sealing of the Bell Island Mines, ·a great lot of it by the honourable member opposite. It has never been the intention of this government to irrevocably seal the Bell Island Mines. If any sealing is done it will be done to protect the public, for the protection of the public. As the honourable member well knows, it is highly dangerous to permit access to the public or to people who do not know the hazards of the mines. It is for this reason that we have done the sealing that we have done to date.

I can assure the honourable member that the Bell Island Mines will not be permanently sealed until we know that there is no possibility of doing things in the mines that would be of benefit to the people of Bell Island and the people of the Province of Newfoundland. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question: The honourable the 2437

March 25, 1974, Tape 792, Page 3 -- apb Member for Bell Island is well aware that public tenders were called to seal off the mines. What happens now to these public tenders? Will they be cancelled altogether? Just left in abeyance? Or what will happen? Public tenders were called. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, public tende~s were called. They were called to seal the mine temporarily as has been stated several times by the Department of Mines and Energy. Several openings to the mine have already been closed that were hazards to children and "to the general public.

The openings that remain will be sealed and will be closed once this feasibility study has been completed, if the study shows that it is not possible to immediately start some sort of industrial development in the mine. Any sealing that is done will be' a temporary seal. It will be possible to gain access to the mine at a later date and this has always been the intention of my department. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, a supplementary question: Will the minister inform the Rouse if his government have given any consideration to making number (4) mine, turning it into a tourist attraction as they did over in the Cape Breton Coal Mines in Nova Scotia? 2438

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 793 Page 1 - MW MR. !ARRY: Mr. Speaker, as the honourable member knows, I sent a letter to the Bell Island Town Council doing what the honourable member should have done in recommending that the town council apply for a LIP grant or other funding that is available from the federal government to possibly make a tourist site out of any suitable place on Bell Island, including one of the mines if that were possible. Our government have no objection in principle. Our philosophy is not contrary to the establishment of tourist sites.

It just boils down to where the dollars and cents are going to come from. We have suggested to the town council and I am sure that the very competent and capable councillors who are now looking after the municipal affairs of Bell Island, are well able to make application to see these developments are carried out, if they think it is in the best interest of the municipality. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, another matter: I wonder if the M:1.nister of Hines and Energy would inform the House if the gogernment have yet taken the decision on some thirty odd thousand dollars being held in trust that should be distributed to the people of Bell Island as a result of the sale of DOSCO assets and houses on Bell Island? MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, if the honourable member should want to placE that one on the Order Paper, it is an answer I had here about a month ago and the honourable members opposite informed me that they no longer wished to hear the answer to that question.We have the answer.

It is the same question that the honourable member asked last year. It took a lot of research to prepare a detailed response to it but when I brought the question in this year, I was informed by the honourable members opposite that they were in effect playing games. They were raisirig questions for the sake of raising questions and did not want -to hear the answers. MR. NEARY: No, Mr. Speaker, that is aot correct.

Does the honourable minister remembering telling the House that the money was being held in trust until the homes on so-called "Snob ·Hill" were repaired and then it would be decided what would be done with the balance of the money? Has this decision yet been taken? Thia is all I want to know, Mr. Speaker. 2439

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 793 Page 2 MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, not having had occasion to be familiar with "Snob Hill," as the honourable has, I really do not know what he is referring to here. I can say that there are funds that have been retained by the St. John's Housing Corporation at the direction of the then Chairman, Mr. O. L. Vardy. The instructions were that these funds were to remain with the St. John's Housing Corporation, not to be transferred to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, as other funds were, until further directions were given. Further directions have not yet been given.

We are now aware of this situation, however, and the honourable member can be assured that these funds will be transferred to the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation. The final determination of them will depend upon how long it takes and the cost of fixing up the homes that are pre~ently being administered by the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and rented to the residents of Bell Island. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question: It has taken two years for us to get this answer now but how long more will it take before we get a decision on this thirty odd thousand dollars?

Will it be next week, next month, next year, when will be it? When will the decision be made? MR. BARRY: It has taken two years, Mr. Speaker, because of the fact that this is something like probably many other unknown things that were buried by the members of the previous administration, by Mr. Vardy and other members of the previous administration. As these things are unearthed by our government, as we find out all these shocking events,~ the shocking loose ends that · are left hanging, then we deal with them.

As I told the honourable member, it was only several months ago that we did discover that this state of affairs existed. My understanding and the information given by the people of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation is that there should be no disposition of these funds made until we know just what the cost of renovations of existing homes are going to be. Once we know what the final cost is, then a decision will be made, not before, with respect to these funds. 2440

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 793 Page 3 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question: Is the minister aware that there is absolutely no connection whatsoever between the money that is being held in trust and the repair of the houses on "Snob 11111," that are occupied by doctors, R. C. M. P. and welfare officers? There is absolutely no connection. It would be improi,er and illegal to use these funds to repair these houses. Is the minister aware of that? MR. SPEAKER: Order please: I feel that the matter is developing into a debate between the Hon. Memb.er for Bell Island and the Hon. Minister of Mines and Energy. If the honourable 2441

March 25., 1974. T~pe 794 RH - 1 Minister of Mines and Energy wish to answer that supplementary question, I shall permit it but I think we should move on with other questions after that. MR. BARRY: Briefly, what the honourable member says is not my under- standing. I will get out the relevant order-in-council again and I will make them available to the honourable member opposite as I offered to do several weeks ago and my offer was spurned and rejected. A."l HONOURABLE MEMBER: ~ot by me. MR. BARRY: Well then, by your honourable colleagues. However, I will check into this and infonn the honourable member, Mr.

Speaker. MR. 'NEARY: I would like the honourable minister, Mr. Speaker, it is a very important matter, I would like to get all the facts I could. Now, Sir, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Trans­ portation and Communications in the absence of the Hon. the Prernier. The Hon. the Premier promised to give me this information the other day. He took my question as a notice of question which means that he was going to get the answer.

Will the minister inform the House if there is any move on the part of the Province or if there has been any correspondence between the Province and Ottawa to turn the Bell Island ferry operation back under provincial jurisdiction? MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Transportation and Communications. MR.~. P. RICKEY: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I can acknowledge that there has been a letter and I can acknowledge that I have talked to a couple of people with regards to the Bell Island ferry.

I can inform the honourable member that the statement he made over the weekend was totally incorrect and I said in this House some two weeks a~o, approximately two weeks ago,that one of the reasons I could not give information then was with the fear that it would be misinterpreted and, of course, I did not have to wait too long before it was. He stated that the reason there has not been a lon~-term contract with regards to the service to Bell Island was because of the fact that the Federal Government were negotiating with the P~ovince, Federal Government are talking to the Province. ...

The Province has not made any decision with regards to the correspondence received from the Federal Government. Federal Government, for their own reasons, I imagine, would like to pass this ferry over to the Province. 2d.A?

March 25, 1974. Tape 794 RH 2 Federal Govern~ent took unilateral action two weeks ago and notifyed the company that the fares for the people of Bell Island would increase and go back to the standard rate. As a result of a trip to Ottawa last week, we were able to convince the Canadian Water Committee that this was certainly uncalled for, that if they wanted to talk ferry it was certainly a very poor environment and a very poor atmosphere to discuss anything, havinp. taken unilateral action. As a result of that they agreed~ Mr. Benson and Mr. Campbell agreed to Ieave the rates as they are.

The reason there has not been a long terl'l. contract with the Bell Island ferry is because the tenders received were found to be unacceptable. An additional boat, an additional ferry in one instance was found to be unacceptable and for this reason there has not been any awarding of contract. My information is that until further study is doae and further searching is done with regards _to a second ferry, that a long term contract cannot be awarded. However,the service will be maintained on a month to month basis until such time as the whole catter can be resolved. I think it is fair that I should say now, Mr.

Speaker, for the benefit of the Bell Island people,that it looks very much like the "Kipawo"might well have to be used again, at least for a short time, while the"John Guy"is undergoing refit. At least this is the information I have. The matter, Sir. is under federal jurisdiction, the Province has very little control except to make representation. We have made that representation in the strongest terms and I am happy to report that we have accomplished something at least with regards to the ferry rates. MR.

NEARY: A question; Is the minister prepared to table the corres­ pondence to which he just referred,from Ottawa? Will the minister table it so that we can all see, including the people of Bell Island, what is in that correspondence? It is not a private matter between the Province and Ottawa. It is a public matter and the people have the right to know what is in that correspondence. 2443

March 25, 1974. Tape 794 Rlt -:- 3 MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: MR. HICKEY.: MR. NF.ARY: MR. HICKEY: MR. NEARY: Order, please! Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask - Mr. Speaker, may I answer the question? I am leadin~ up, I a~ going to ask another question. ••••• (Inaudible) .... one question. Mr. Speaker, will the minister, will the minister inform 2444

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 795 NM - 1 · the House what steps his government has taken to implement a promise made in two provincial elections, once on Bell Island,in October, once in St. John's,in March, by the Premier,that the ferry service between Bell Island and Portugal Cove would be made a part of the provincial highways systems if the Premier former the government? What is being done about that? MR. HICKEY: Mr. Speaker, I will answer the last question first because that is very simple to answer. The honourable gentleman places a certain

interpretation_on the statement made by the honourable the Premier, His

interpretation and mine are entirely different. I recall the Premier saying that the ferry to Bell Island should be part of the provincial road network, I totally agree. Does the honourable gentleman disagree with that? That is all I have ever heard the Premier say. The Premier feels as strongly about that today as he did when he made those remarks. I know of no promise > nor commitment nor any such thing. I assure the honourable ;~entleman that the promises made by the present Premier will certainly not go unnoticed as a lot of them have in the past.

With regard to tabling the documents or the letter that I referred to, the answer is absolutely no, I am not prepared to table any documents in this House. Is the honourable gentleman insinuating that I am not giving the full story? Is he questioning my infonnation1 He is in the habit of distrusting people. He is in the habit of reading things into statements and so on. Mr. Speaker, when we are in a position and when this matter is concluded either to a successful conclusion one way or the other, I will be more than happy to table all relative corresoondence with regards to the matte·r.

Until such time as that I am not about to have the opposition and particularly the member for Bell Island beat this issue around and make a political football out of it. It is too important, Mr. Speaker, · and the honourable gentleman should feel more strongly about that than I, the member for Bell Island,becauae it concerns his .constituents. 2445

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 795 NM' - 2 . MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to bore the House, Sir, but I just want to get this straight, Am I interpreting the minister correctly when he says that negotiations or discussions, as he put it, have been opened up between the Covermnent of Newfoundland and the Government of Canada as to whose jurisdiction the Bell Island ferry service will come underl This is basically the whole question.

Am I right in interpreting the minister's answer as saying that they are not going to make an issue out of this but that .the Government of Canada is going to grant a subsidy and they are asking the province to participate in improving the Bell Island ferry servicet Now will the minister tell us if this is so? Will the minister tell us if the provincial government is making any effort to find a replacement for the "Kipowa"? Why should we be stuck with the "Kipowa" again this year? What is the province coing about it? MR.. HICKEY: Mr.

Speaker, because we are not in the ferry building business and we cannot wave our magic wand like the former administration could of course from time to time and pull one out of the air, does the honourable gentleman know where there is a suitable ferry? If he should, I got a sale for one right now. MR. NEARY: Would you buy it if I find it? MR. HICKEY: Is it suitable? MR. NEARY: Sure it is suitable. MR.

HICKEY: Well you know we would have to look at it but if the honourable gentleman shouJd know there is one, I am sure the federal people will be more than happy to look at it in conjunction with the people who wish to tender. Now, Mr. Speaker, if the honourable gentleman wish, I can go into a little detail and tell him about the Bell Island ferry, He wants to know if there are negotiations going on. There are no nep:otiations going on. Negotiations, Mr. Speake·r, do not start until this administration makes a decision that; (

a) they are going to take over the ferry (

b) they are interested or what have you. There are purely discussions going on. 2446

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 795 NH - 3 We are not like some people I know or some administrations that I have been aware of, we are not ~repared when somebody says, "We would like to talk to you," we do not close the door on them. We do not say, "No, we are not going to talk to you.• We certainly do not do that and the fact that I am on behalf of the government discussing with some federal people the Bell Island ferry must not be misconstrued that the province has made a decision that in fact it should come under provincial jurisdiction. The fact' of the matter is, Mr.

Speaker, if the honourable gentleman wish to do something for his constituents he should make the strongest representation to the federal government to maintain the commitment which was made by the · ·•· Tory Government when they took over the Bell Island ferry, it was the Tory Government under the honourable Mr. Diefendbaker that got the federal government involved in that ferry and rightly so.on behalf of the people of Bell !~land. Now we have a Liberal government which is prepare d to kick it back to us. Well, Mr. Speaker, we are not going to rush into anything like that • .

We care a little too much for the people of Bell Island for that matter and we are not about to rush into any arrangement with the federal government to take over a ferry which, as far as we are concerned,to all intents and purposes and by precedent · .. 2447 r

March 25, 1974 Tape 796 IB-1 it has already been set and they settled for responsibility. There aay be a difference of opinion but the fact remains that the Federal Government has operated, continues to operate it until such time as this province acknowledges that we are responsible. As far as I am concerned there is no taking over of that ferry. MR. NEARY: Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to pursue this matter any further but it is awfully disappointing to have the news come out that we will have to use the'Kipawo"again t~is year.

Sir, I wonder on another matter, Sir, if the minister would inform the House if it is the intention of his department to extend the time for the purchase of license plates because it is my understanding that it is impossible for all the people who have not already gotten their license .plates to ·get them between now and the end of the present month. Is it the minister's intention to grant an extention of time? MR. HICKEY: No, Mr. Speaker, it is not. I have made a number of releases.

I have appealed to the general public, to those who are required to license their vehicles, on a number of occasions,that the time was running out and my staff were not as busy as they could be, that they should get to Motor Registration and get their licenses. I have no p~ans at this time and the government, as far as I know, have no plans of extending the time. We have already gone part of the way by approving the working of my staff in the night on Thursday, Friday, all day Saturday and Saturday night,up until nine or nine thirty, I am not quite sure.

We have also extended by a few days the mail service for all applications received by ~otor Registration, Up until closing time today, they will have their licenses issued by the deadline. Beyond that we cannot guarantee anything. My staff are prepared to work just as hard as they can. Even today, Mr. Speaker, my staff are not as busy as they could be. They are not handling the numbers that they could handle. Therefore, at this time I have no intentions or no plans to extend the time. 2448

March 25, 1974 Tape 796 IB-2 MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to my old sparring partner over there, the Minister of Finance. Would the minister infom the House if Treasury Board has yet taken a decision to either pay or not to pay hospital workers and other public service employees for . time missed during the recent storm, snow storm when Dorothy Wyatt declared a state of emergency in the City of St. John's? MR.

CROSBIE: ~- Speaker, I do not know whether or not Treasury Board has the last word on that because there are also involved the hospital associations and the hospitals which operate under their own boards. There is hopefully a meeting of Treasury Board tomorrow. If that question is still to be desired, it could be decided then. Other than that I cannot say any more at the 1110ment. MR. NEARY: Well, Mr. Speaker, could I direct a question to the Minister of Provincial Affairs, Sir? I presume that the matter of retail clerks and people outside the government service would come under the minister's jurisdiction.

Has the minister had any complaints from employees who are working for private enterprise, complaints that they have not been paid for this d~y that was missed when Mayor Wyatt declared the state of emergency in St. John's? Have there been any complaints and if so, what has the minister done about them? HR. W.G. DAUE (MlNISTEF OF PROVINCIAL AFFAIRS 4h'D ENVIRONMENT): No complaints to me. MR. NEARY: Well, where would the complaints go? Would they go to the minister's department or the Department of Labour? ·PE:!haps the Minister of Manpower could tell us if his department has had any complaints? No?

No complaints? ... MR. TIIOMS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. Could the minister inform us if his d,partment has taken any steps to offset the recent and the latest increase in milk prices in the province? If so, what are these steps? HON. E. !1AYNARD (MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTS): I would assume, • I 2449

March 25, 1974 Tape 796 IB-3 Mr. Speaker, that the honoural>le member is asking about a subsidy. · Is that a correct assumption? No. we have not taken. any steps to offset: the recent increase in milk prices by a subsidy. The federal government applied a small subsidy last fall on milk,which did not work. 'They were asked to supply another subsidy,which was not done,instead an increase in 1t1ilk prices was allowed by the federal government who control it. If his point were for the 2450

March 25, 1974. Tape 797 RH - 1 Provincial Government to consider a subsidy on the cost of milk or the cost of milk to the consumers - of course, we do not control the import costs and the production of milk. The only way to keep the cost of milk or any other food product down, Mr. Speaker, is to have price controls all along the way, not only from the standpoint of feed and fertilizer but even the steel that goes to the farm tractors that have to work on the farm. Provincial Governments, this one or any other one across Canada. have no way of controlling this,because it is a national problem.

It can only be controlled by the Federal Government and certainly it has been evident in the past that they are not about to make those controls. So, therefore it seems that consumers are going to have to suffer because the Federal Government will not move on this particular issue. MR. THOMS: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could ask another questi~n to the minister.

Could the minister infol"l'.I this House if under the community pastures that we have around the Province and under the new regulations that his department has issued, will the price per head of cattle for keeping cattle on these pastures, this corning summer, be cheaper than they were at last summer? Are the prices per head down? MR. MAYNARD: No, Mr. Speaker, they are up very strongly because it costs quite a bit more to keep cattle on the pastures in sutmner than it did last year. MR NEARY: Row much? MR.MAYNARD._: I do not have the figures here - I could supply the figures. What is the total cost going to be?

I do not have the figures here with me, Mr. Speaker. If the honourable member should want to put that on the~ Order Paper, I could supply it at the appropriate date. MR. NEARY: Mr. Soeaker, a supplementary question: Obviously, the minister is not aware of going,on in his own department. MR. MA~JARD: I do not have the figures with me. MR. NEARY: Will this increase, will this increase in any way affect the cost of beef or the cost of milk in this Province? Can the minister tell us that? 2451

March 25, 1974. Tape 797 RH - 2 MR. MAYNARD: What the exact increase in costs on the pastures, I know there is an increase in costs and there is a different formula for keeping animals on the pastures, Mr. Speaker. It is an increase in cost to offset some of the tremendous loses that are realized on regional pastures. It should not resolve in any increase in the end product. We have analyzed it very thoroughly and we know the profit margin or the gain in weight that is realized by keeping animals on these pastures. It is substantial and there is no reason why the end products should cost any more.

The exact figures I do not have here with me and I am sorry I do not remember them right off hand but I do know that there is a change of formula. I have a basic idea what the change is. It is so much per head per day rather than the seasonal thing.I do not see any reason why there should be any impediment to the growing of livestock on our pastures. MR. THOWMS: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker: Could the minister inform us as to what percentage of costs, say, it is going to take the department to run these pastures this year over last year?

Is it ten per cent, fifteen per cent or twenty per cent more than last year? MR. MAYNARD: Again, I do not have the exact figure but I understand the escalation in cos~ is around twenty per cenr which is pretty well an escalation which has been realized in all phases of every industry.

I think the revenue derived from the pasture prograi:I111e last year was $11,000.00 compared to some $600,000.00 it cost to maintain them,which shows and this year I believe the revenue may be up around probably $100,000.00 and the cost will probably be aroWld $700,000.00, so we ~ are certainly not taking the farmers to the cleaners by any means. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I can help the minister. Would the rate now be ten cents a day instead of five dollars a .year as hereto­ fore, ten cents a day : MR. MAYNARD: It depends on whether it is sheep or cattle. MR. NEARY: Sheep or cattle.

I am talkin2 about cattle, beef cattle or milk cows. Would it be ten cents a day,and that would be triple compared what it is now? 2452

Mar ch 25, 1974. Tape 797 RH - 3 MR. MAYNARD: cattle. Yes. The rate is chan1ed to ten cents per day per head of MR. NEARY: Would the minister then inform the House what the increase will mean as compared to last year. Will it be double? Will it be triple? What will be the increase? Now that he knows what the formula is, will he tell us what the increase is? MR. MAnlARD: Put it on the Order Paper. MR. NEARY: What do you mean on the Order Paper? MR: MAYNARD: Mr . Speaker, this is getting a bit · , 2453

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 798 NM-- 1 · ridiculous. I do not know how many days any one head of cattle was kept on a regional pasture. It obviously was ten cents per head per day, to keep him on it for five days was fifty cents and if he was on it for fifty days it was five dollars. That is a very relative matter and it is one that cannot be answered. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, is the minister aware that the average head of cattle is kept on a community pasture for five months which would mean now that the owner will be paying $1S as opposed to $5 as heretofore. of 300 per cent1 Would this not be an increase Mr.

Speaker, I want to get back to the matter I was discussing with the Minister of Transportation there a few moments ago, Is the minister aware that in October when I had the clipping here from the newspaper, Sir, is he aware of that? The Premier stated at a public meeting on Bell Island that all ferries operating within the province will offer free transportation if the Conservative Party forms the government after October 28? "Party Leader Frank Moores announced here Tuesday night." Is the minister aware of that? If so does he want to revise the answer he gave me to the question a few moments ago. HR.

RTCKEY : Mr. Speaker, I am aware of those things as the honourable gentleman is, I said his

interpretation and mine are somewhat different. Is that a verbatim report? Has he got a tape? AN HON. MEMBER: Yes. MR. HICKEY: Do not be talking nonsense. Whatever the Premier said, Mr. Speaker, the Premier will in all probability live up to in the course of time. He is like the honourable gentleman and a good many more, he cannot work miracles overnight. ORDERS OF THE DAY: HON. E. ROBERTS, Leader of the Opposition: In all probability I might be allowed to ask another question of the Minister of Health, 2454

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 798 mt - 2 Could he tell us what steps he is taking please to ensure that the ambulance service in Clarenville continues to operatel I ~ understand, Sir, I know he does, that representations have been made to him that the private operator is about to cease operations thus leaving the area without any ambulance service at all. HON. A. T. ROWE, Minister of Health: The answer to this is that there are two private ambulance services at Clarenville and one in Sunnyside.

One of the private operators in Clarenville has indicated that because of financial difficulties he is unable to continue to operate after the end of March but this is not leaving the community without ambulance service. The other private operator is continuing and the operation in Sunnyside will continue and as an adjunct I would say that there is no present policy in government to assist or subsidize private ambulance operators.but service will not be discontinued, because one of the private operators will continue. MR.

ROBERTS: Mr, Speaker, would the minister tell us whether in his opinion the service that will still be provided, the commercial one in Clarenville and the Lions,! believe it is Sunnyside,will provide the people of the area served by the services with adequate service? DR. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I have had no representation from the community or the council to indicate to me that that will not be so. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the minister responsible for recreation and rehabilitation.

Would the minister care to give the House a brief report on the fire at Hoyles Home there before lunch. MR. DOYLa: I will be r,lad to, Mr. Speaker. The fire occurred at approximately eight minutes to one. It was caused by a pot of tar; the roof was in the process of being repaired. The only damage done wa~ that some windows were broken on the first and 2455

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 798 NM - 3 second floor. For a period of time some of the residents from the first and second west wing had to be removed to the centre portion of the.building. There were no personal damages whatsoever and as I said, the only damage done was a few windows. On motion of the honourable Minister of Justice, A Bill, ''An Act Further To Amend The Maritime Hospital Service Association Re-Incorporation Act, 1949," read a first time, ordered read a second time on tomorrow. MR.

SPEAKER: Motion (5), I think the debate on that motion was adjourned by the honourable Minister of Mines and Energy last night. MR. BARRY: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the substance of the motion before us today, motion (5) is a motion to suspend the honourable member for Bell Island from this honourable House, not because he dared question th.e conduct of a member on this side of the. House but 2456

March 22, 1974 Tape no. 799 Page 1- MW for one reason and one reason only because the manner in which the honourable member did this was contrary to the rules of the House. MR. NEARY: MR. BARRY: Why was I not ruled out of order? I will get into that. It tended to cause the rules of this House to fall into disrespect. There was an abuse of the privileges of this honourable House and if permitted to continue, Mr. Speaker, it would make a total shambles of the procedures of the House of Assembly. Now the honourable member asks why was he not ruled out of order? Well, Mr.

Speaker, with your permission and I might add, if Your Honour will give me a few minutes to elaborate, that what I am about to say might be taken hastely as criticism of Your Honour but I think I can explain that it is not so. I submit that the honour~ble inember should have been ruled out of order immediately, without equivocation. The fact that it was not done, Mr.

Speaker, I submit, says a lot for your attempt to be fair, for your attempt to bend over backwards, to give the honourable members opposite every leeway in debate and to ' . ~ - ... ~ avoid having the Chair submitted to the abuse which some of the honourable mE!DJbers opposite have already attempted in past sittings. Mr. Speaker, I submit that it is time that you reassessed your position. I think, Mr. Speaker, you may be giving too much leeway to the honourable members. This just does not only apply to honourable me~bers opposite. MR. NEARY: Everybody on the other side too. MR.

BARRY: Yes, to everybody, that it is time to tighten up. MR. NEARY: Hear! Hear! Do not throw everybody out. MR. BARRY: It is time to tighten up discipline in this honourable ' House, Mr. Speaker. Getting back to the question asked by the honourable member opposite as to why he was not i111111adiately ruled out of order? If you check Hansard, Mr. Speaker, you will find that the House degenerated into total disorder because of the antics of the honourable member opposite. There were many attempts, Mr. Speaker, by. honourable members 2457

March 22, 1974 Tape no. 799 Page 2 here, by the House Leader for the government. I myself stood up and other members, Mr. Speaker, to attempt to have the honourable member ruled out of order and to have him be forced to withdraw the allegations that he was then making. In Your Honour's discretion, you decided that it would be better (I am not questioning Your Honour's decision) to stop all further debate and discussion on points of order or anything else arising out of the honourable member's comments.to take time to consider the matters raised.

There was really only one matter raised by the honourable member, Mr. Speaker, and that is: Whether the Hon. Minister of Finance was in breach of a privilege of this House in comments that he had made? That was the only matter that the Hon. Member for Bell Island purported to be raising. In fact he ranged far afield, Mr. Speaker, and made many irrelevant allegations, attempted a character assassination and did many other shameful things an that particular occasion. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, to a point of order: My understanding on a ruling that Your Honour gave on Friday was that no member in this House can suggest that another member had ulterior motives for what he did. The Minister of Mines, Sir, just insinuated, as a matter of fact made a statement, Sir, that my purpose in bringing in this was character assassination. Sir, I suggest that that is out of order and I ask that the minister retract that statement, Sir. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order: I would be happy to retract should Your Honour deem that it is unparliamentary or contrary to the rules of the House.

I submit that the Speaker will decide that. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that what I am saying is not imputing any motives to the honourable member. I doubt that he ever had a motive in his life. What I am submitting is that the comments made by him speak for themselves. The conments did constitute a character assassination,and that they were shameful,and I will let Your Honour rule on that point. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, to a point of order: That is not what the honourable minister said, Sir. The honourable minister stated it as if it were a fact. I think Your Honour should ask him to withdraw it and apologize. 2458

March 25, 1974 Tape 800 IB-1 To the point of order, I will say, if there is any misunderstanding, I will say that in my opinion the facts stated by the honourable member constituted character assassination. If Your Honour should wish to rule on that point - MR. SPEAKER: I would have to ask the honourable Minister of Mines and Energy to .withdraw the remarks. I think they were not at all parliamentary. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker - AN- HONOl'RABLE :1-'E~ER: Withdraw it, withdraw it. MR. BARRY: I have already said if it be deemed unparliamentary - they are withdrawn, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, a point of order. MR. BARRY: Sit down, sit down. MR. NEARY: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: A point of order, Sir. That is not good enough, Mr. Speaker. The minister has been instructed by Your Honour to withdraw the statement. _If the minister has the courage, he will withdraw it. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, the statement is withdrawn,as I have said,I think it is twice or three times now. Mr.

Speaker, the fact that Your Honour on that particular occasion, for the sake of peace and tranquility or for whatever reason,decided not to nile the honourable member out of order at the time does in no way prevent the honourable Minister of Finance from raising this. It is unfortunate that he did have to raise it himself and this is why the speedy and immediate intervention of the Speaker is so necessary. Again I say that Your Honour was giving leeway and that shows the fairness of Your Honour.

I submit that giving too much leeway is dangerous as is evidenced by what has occurred on this occasion where the honourable Minister of Finance had to come back and to protect his good name and his reputation • 2459

March 25, 1974 Tape 800 IB-2 he had to stand up in this honourable House and make a motion to have the honourable member for Bell Island suspended. niat should not be necessary, Mr. Speaker. We saw an example of what happened in British Columbia a couple of weeks ago. The Leader of the Opposition there called the Premier a liar. Now, there was no question as to whether or not what the Leader of the Opposition was saying was correct. That is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the breach of a privilege of the House.

If a member calls another member a liar, what he is saying may be true but he still has to withdraw that remark, in fact he should never have said it because it is contrary to the rules of this House to make such a remark. Now, in British Columbia what happened was that the Speaker - the Premier did not get up and make a motion to have the member ejected - the Speaker rose in his seat and said, "nie honourable member is using unparliamentary language and he should withdraw." The hon~urable member did not withdraw and the Speaker named him and this immediately meant his ejection from the House. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the same thing should have happened on the occasion _that the honourable member from Bell Island was going on with his dribble. It did not happen. That is correct. It did not happen because the honourable members opposite 11Lade a shambles of proceedings on that particular occasion. Members on this side of the House got up and attempted to have points of order debated. Honourable members opposite just made a complete and utter shambles of parliamentary procedure. Your Honour decided that the debate was getting too heated and said that the matter would be considered on the following day.

On the following day Your Honour made a ruling,as was Your Honour' prerogative,and the only ruling that was necessary, name-ly as to whether the member for Bell Island had made a prima facie case for breach of privilege of the House. Your Honour decided there had been no prima facie case established ·. Now, Your Houour that had nothing to do with the question of whether the honourable member from Bell Island was out of order in making the serious alleRations that he had made against the Minister 2460

March 25, 1974 Tape 800 IB-3 of Finance. So, when the Minister of Finance returned to protect his good name and reputation he had to get up and he had to take the initiative himself to make a motio .n suspending the honourable member for Beil Island. MR .• NEARY: What about an investigation? Why suspension? HR. BARRY: Now, Mr. Speaker, there was no need for an investigation. The facts speak for themselves. The honourable member for Bell Island made an al.legation that was unparliamentary, that had attacked the conduct of a member. HR. NEARY: I was the accuser. He was the accused- HR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, I am getting into the points ralse'd by the l)~mour­ able member for Bell Island. I will show that what we are debating here is not the conduct of the Minister of Finance. That could be the subject of a motion made properl-y by the honourable member from Bell Island or anybody else on the other side, but what we are debating here - 2461

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 801 Page 1 - MW MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. PECKFORD: The Hon, Minister of Mines and Energy has the floor, Mr. Speaker, and from time to time in the last five or ten minutes, the Hon. Member for Bell Island has been continually interjecting while he is sitting in his seat. Mr. Speaker, I would like for you to rule tha~ the Hon. Member for Bell Island be quiet while the Minister of Mines and Energy is speaking,because he has the right to be heard in silence. MR. SPEAKER: Order please!

I am sure all honourable members are aware that when a member is speaking, he does have the right to be heard in silence. I would request that the Hon. Member for Bell Island let the Hon. Minister of Mines and Energy continue with his speech. MR. BARRY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It does not bother me a bit;- Nothing of substance ever came from the other side. Mr. Speaker, the question we have before us now is whether it is proper to have the Hon. Member for Bell Island disciplined for his failure to observe the rules and procedures that should be observed in this honourable House. Now, Mr.

Speaker, why are the rules important? Are these just legal technicalities that we get up here and quibble about? Are they unimportant so that we can ignore them when it suits our fancy to do so? Mr. Speaker, I submit that the rules of this House are here to prevent things happening vhich outside this House would lead to individuals landing up either in hospital or in the courts because, Mr.

Speaker, the abuse which is raised here, which is contrary to the rules, if it were permitted, if it happened outside the House would see either.members or individuals coming to blows or it would see them going to their respective lawyers and ending up, if they could restrain themselves long enough, in-the courts. MR. NEARY: There is nothing over there worth defending either inside or outside the House. AN HON. MEMBER: Keep quiet. 2462

March 25. 1974 Tape no. 801 Page 2 HR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, that is the typical. uncivilized attitude of the Hon. Snow-White Member opposite. MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Stagg): Order please! I would like to draw to the attention of the Hon. Member for Bell Island that a point of order was sustained earlier that his remarks and inte~jections are certainly out of order. While the honourable member may think it is humourous to interject or he may want to clarify them, these interjections are not going to be tolerated indefinitely. I would ask the honourable member to keep that in mind. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR.

BARRY: Thank you. Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, one member is not permitted to take a libel action against another member for statements made in the House,so resort to the courts is out with respect to conduct within the confines of this honourable Chamber. Are we then to see events occurring whereby an honourable member can get up and abuse another honourable member without the intervention of the Speaker? No, Mr. Speaker.this is where the rules of this House come in. These rules were developed over centuries.

They were developed because it is obvious, it is common sense that in heated debate, if you do not have some means of preventing abuse, preventing insult. of preventing character assassination, then you are going to see honourable members not being able to restrain themselves. You are going to see, Mr. Speaker, outrageous, shocking and shameful behaviour occurring in this House just as you would see it happening down on one of the streets downtown, if you had two honourable members engaging in verbal assaults on one another.

There is only so much that reasonable, civilized people, as reasonable and as civilized as they mar be, can stand. That is why, Mr. Speaker, there are rules which prevent an honourable member from getting up here and insulting and assaulting and attacking the character and reputation of any other member. Mr, Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition alleged that the Member for Bell Island was acting in good faith. Now let us just consider that. 2463

March 25, 1974 Tape 802 lB-1 If the honourable member opposite were acting in good faith, if he had a genuine question, if he genuinely felt that he had been misled or the members of this House had been misled by what was said by the Minister of Finance, then, Mr. Speaker, I submit that what we would have seen happen, what would be the common sense thing to do would be for him to get up and ask a question.

If that question were not answered satisfactorily, to give notice that he would be proceeding further whether by way of a motion for disciplining the Minister of Finance, whether by way of a motion to have an enqiry set up to go into it, by whatever procedure. That, Mr. Speaker, would have been evidence of the honourable member's good faith, What happened? Did we see that?

No, Mr, Speaker, we saw the honourable member opposite get up and in the guise of alleging that the Minister of Finance had misled this House and therefore was in breach of a privilege of this House, in the guise of this ~e see the honourable member for Bell Island going on and alleging matters such as ~onflict of interest, alleging that there was an abuse of the privilege of office by the honourable minister for his own personal interest. Mr.

Speaker, now I ask you, consider what does that have to do with the point of privilege raised by the honourable member from Bell Islandl His point of privilege was that the House had been misled. What did all these other scandalous statements have to do with that point? They were totally irrelevant. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a point of order. Your Honour some time ago ruled that the word 'scandalous'was unparliamentary and was not to be used in this honourable House. Would Your Honour now ask the minister to withdraw that word' scandalous', Sir? MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order.

I withdraw the word 'scandalous', I submit• shocking' - these shocking statements, terrible and disgusting statements made by the honourable member opposite. Mr. Speaker, it boils down to the fact that there is a right 2464 ~

March 25, 1974 Tape 802 IB-2 way and a wrong way to bring up matters such as the honourable member attempted to bring up. We had the member for Hermitage alleging that for somebody to vote on this motion would be to in effect mean that members would not be free to get up and question the conduct of ministers or the question of conduct of other members. Mr. Speaker, that is pure, Wladulterated rubbish. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: WI-at is that? I did not hear you. MR.

BARRY: Pure rubbish, I am saying. to assume that voting for this motion is to create any restriction whatsoever upon a member getting up here and questioning the conduct of any other member. All it does, Mr. Speaker, is infringe upon the freedom of any member to get up and abuse and insult another member and well it should. I say, Mr. Speaker, there is no freedom now for one member to get up and abuse another member, to attack another member's character or reputation. MR. NEARY: The Minister of Finance is an artist at that. MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, the proper thing for the honourable member opposite to have done would be to have first, as I said, raise a question and next to have given notice of a motion, the notice as explained in"May"- MR. NEARY: Like Joey got when they raided his house. MR. BARRY: Where the - MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAGG): Order, please! I draw the honourable member's attention to the - this is the third intervention. One was brought about by the member for Green Bay when he rose on a point of order which was sustained.

This is the second intervention by the Chair since the honourable the Minister of Mines and Energy has had the floor. The honourable member should be here. This is a matter under which his earlier statements are under scrutiny. I sympathize with ... him in that he may wish to clarify certain remarks. However, he has certainly taken an attitude that is far beyond that which is accorded the ordinary member. 1 suggest to him that his tether is getting rather short. 2465

!-'arch 25, 1974 Tape 802 MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I suggest that you do as everybody else in Newfoundland is doing and that is just ignore the honourable member opposite. Mr. Speaker, as. l say, the proper procedure would have been, 2466 18-3

March 25, 1974. Tape 803 RH - 1 just as a matter of courtesy if nothin~ else.to have given notice to the Minister of Finance as to the substance of the matter that the honourable member wished raised. That was not done. Instead we saw the shocking exhibition of a member of this House being attacked in his absence, in his absence,when he was not prepared or in a position to defend himself. Mr.

Speaker, it is as the honourable member from Placentia East pointed out: How do you unco the damage to a person's reputation fol­ lowing such bile and slander as we saw come out on that afternoon in question, the afternoon that is being debated here today. A,.>q HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. SPEAKER: The honourable Minister of Mines and Energy. MR. BARRY: I got carried away, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Maybe the honourable minister - AM HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. SPF.AKER: I need no prompting from the member from Bell Island or anybody else.

I ask the Minister of Mines and Energy that he might rephrase his remarks as the two words'bile' and 'slander',as I suggest, are unparliamentary and maybe he mi~ht wish to rephrase them. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I will rephrase to substitute for "bile and slander" the word "libel" which I think is permitted, since this is the very substance of the motion that is being debated. So, on the afternoon that we saw this libel perpetrated, we had a situation where the member opposite was not in a position to defend himself. MR. ~TEARY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.

The honourable minister,~ Sir, has charged me with libel. I submit, Your Honour, that this matter should be put to the test before the minister makes a charge and Mr. Sneaker, I ask - MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Stagg): make a speech. The honourable member is not permitted to MR. ~F.ARY: No, Mr. Sneaker, I am on a point of order, Sir. I am asking 2467

March 25, 1974. Tape 803 RH - 2 that the minister retract that because that has not been proven, Sir. That statement of libel is not true and has not been proven, Sir, and unless the minister is prepared to put it to the test, he should with­ draw it. MR. BARRY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. I am submitting it is a libel and it is going to be for this honourable House to determine whether it is or not,which is absolutely correct,and I fail to see what the point of order is that is beinp, raised by the honourable member. MR. NF.ARY: Mr. Speaker, to that point of order. Mr.

Speaker, I did not libel the Minister of Finance in any way, shape or form, Sir. The Minister of Mines and Energy has a - MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Stagg): Order, please! Order, please! The honourable member ,- The subject matter of this motion must be considered at some time or other. The honourable the Minister of Mines and Energy•~ sub­ mission that the matter is a libel is, I would think, in order at this time. He is attempting to make a point in argument; it is certainly not abusive nor insulting language. It is a valid, legal term and I suggest that he is in order. MR. NEARY: On a point of order, Sir.

It is my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that there is no such thing as libel in a legislature, MR. SPEAKER; (Hr. Stagg): Order, please! The - honourable member is disputing the Speaker's ruling whether he knows it or not and I suggest . now that we can get on with the honourable Minister of Mines and Energy who has the floor. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I have been referring to the shocking conduct of the honourable me~ber for Bell Island.

It really was not shocking ~ because it is what we have come to expect from that honourable member, but what has been shocking to me is the way that other members of the Opposition have attem~ted to obscure the issue raised by this motion by discussing and debating in depth the irrelevant allegations made by the member for Bell Island, allegations which had nothing to do with the question of whether or not the Minister of Finance had misled the House,which was the sole subject of the so-called point of privilege raised hy the member for Bell Island. 2468

March 25, 1974. Tape 803 RH - 3 Now, Hr. Speaker, the point is that whether or not the facts that the mer.iber for Bell Island were raising were true and I submit it is evident and obvious that t hey were not - A."I HD~lOURAllLE M~?-IBER: Inaudible. MR. RARRV: What I am saying is that whether or not they wer e true the honourable member should still be suspended because of the irrespon­ sible and improper way in which they were raised. Unless the honourable member is suspended, Your Honour, I sub~it we t:1ay as well forget about getting any kind of serious debate in this Rouse of Assembly.

I think we have seen over the last month the depths to which this House can sink and I have to confess that I am as much to blame at times as other members. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. BARRY: I have ~otten carried away but I have never, Hr. Sp~aker, sunk to the depths of the member opposite. Mr. Speake-r, I submit it is no excuse for the Leader of t he Opposition or any other membe-r opposite 2469

March 25, 1974 Tape 804 to say that the member for Bell Island was acting in good faith because the facts just do not bear that out, "That dog cannot hunt" Mr. Speaker, as they say down south,"that fish does not fry." The honourable member opposite, if he were acting in good faith, he would have first raised a question and then placed a notice of motion. Another excuse and I say and I underline and I reiterate.'excuse 1 being raised by the members opposite,because they recognize, Mr.

Speaker, that they have to find some excuse if they can, if they possibly can for the conduct of the member from Bell Island,because they know that the people of Newfoundland are sick and tired and fed up with the conduct of that member. Another ex.cuse they are using is the same, Mr. Speaker, it is obviously well rehearsed because every member opposite has gotten up and tried to make the same point, that ~twas merely the style of the honourable member from Bell Island that caused him to act as he did. ·Mr. Speaker, this went far beyond any matter of style.

This went far beyond any style of debate of any member of this House. The members opposite know that quite well. Mr. Speaker, the honourable members opposite, at least some of them, are fairly clever as far as the rules of the House are concerned. But, unfortunately,there tends to be a certain artificiality, a certain lack of sincerity, a ce~tain hypocrisy about the way they conduct themselves in this honourable House at times. We have seen examples of devices used. You get up, Mr. Speaker, and you say now if such and such a thing were not unparliamentary, well I would use it, Mr. Speaker.

As the honourable member for Hermitage, that still vacant seat, got up the other day and used the device, "Now, if it were not unparliamentary to call this a kangaroo court, I would call it a kangaroo court but since it is unparliamentary I will not use it." A very clever device, at times even humorous. Mr. Speaker, it shows the lack of sincerity of the members opposite when they flout the rules of this House in that manner. Mr. Speaker, I might say that there is no way that Your Honour 2470

March 25, 1974 Tape 804 IB-2 can enforce the rules if the members are not prepared to in good faith try to enforce them. Mr. Speaker, the members opposite are like rotten mackerel in the moonlight, they both shine and stink. Their cleverness, Mr. Speaker - MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a point of order, Sir. Is this parliamentary language, Sir? ¥R. SPEAKER (1-!R. STAGG): Order, please! I must draw the attention of the people in the gallery that they come here as observers and not as participants in any humour that may take place within this chamber. I ask them to restrain themselves at all costs.

To the point raised by the honourable the Minister of Mines and Energy; This is one of these matters where under the veil of humor occasionally unparliamentary remarks do get into the record and certainly abusive and insulting language is a general catchall phrase which causes the prompt intervention from the Chair. I must intervene and ask the honourable member to rephrase these remarks. I am sure that he will.

I ask all other honourable members who may wish to capitalize on precedents of this type that they should first consider their remarks whether they are unparliamentary or not instead of trying them on and asking for a ruling from the Chair. I call upon the honourable member to rephrase his remarks. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, yes I withdraw the word 'shine•. Mr. Speaker, what I was referring to, of course was - I withdraw unparliamentary reference that I might have made - I was referring to the cleverness with which some of the henourable members opposite are able to flout the rules of this honourable House.

They remind me at times, Mr. Speaker, of a flock of weasels. I suppose weasels flock, do they? The way their weasel words come out where they insult and still attempt to keep the good graces of Your Honour in the Chair,show that there is a total lack of sincerity, Mr. Speaker. They will use any 2471

March 25, 1974 Tape 804 · I:8-3 device that they can to obstruct the proceedings of this House, to keep this House from getting down to the serious business at hand which the people ~f Newfoundland elected us to consider and which I submit is high time we got around to considering. Mr. Speaker, I can understand why the honourable members opposite get up and oppose the penalty which is the subject matter of the motion before this honourable House at this time. Well, I submit, Mr. Speaker, that there is no excuse.

It is unforgivable, it is 1.mpardonable for them to condone and to aid and abet the honourable member opposite in the allegations which the member for Bell Island has made against the character and reputation of another member of this House. Mr. Speaker, I am not going to go into the substance of the allegations raised by the member for Bell Island because they have nothing to do with the motion before this House. AN HONOURABLE ME!-(BER: Oh yes, they do, MR. BARRY: Mr.

Speaker, they can be the subject of another motion properly put to be debated in this honourable House but what we are asking now is whether another honourable member is allowed to get up and - AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Mr. Speaker, would the mini~ter permit a question? MR. BARRY: No, I will not permit anything until I finish - whether another member is permitted to get up and abuse the character and reputation of other members of this House. Mr. Speaker, the rules say that he is not. This is not the first time that the honourable member opposite has done this. We have all been here. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, a point of order, Sir. Mr. Speaker, I gather from what the minister has said that I had been accused cf on previous occasions breaking the rules of this House. There is nothing in the record, Sir, to indicate that I ever broke a rule of this honourable House and I ask the minister to withdraw and apologize. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, 1 will withdraw and apologize. To that point of 2472

March 25, 1974 Tape 804 IB-4 order,if I may, Your Honour, for a second - I will withdraw and apologize if the honourable member be willing to assure me that going back through Hansard we shall not find instances of where the honourable member has been ruled out of order, MR. NEARY: Yes, Mr, Speaker, I am quite prepared. I will,yes. MR. BARRY: We will not find instances? MR. P!EARY: No, you will not. You will not. MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAGG): Order, please!

Not wishing to participate in the debate,but I recall on three occasions this afternoon in which I have personally interrupted the honourable member for Bell Island saying that he was out of order. He has a · conveniently short memory to say that he has never been out of order. However, the honourable the Minister of Mines and Energy may proceed with his debate if his remarks are such that - if they are provocative of course, they may renerate certain exchanges across the House. AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: They have never been provocative. MR. BARRY: Thank you, Mr. Speeker.

I will try and not provoke the honourable members. The truth obviously hurts. Mr. Speaker, one thing that,without going into the substance and the allegations made by the member for Bell Island, one thing that I am interested in is where he got access to the documents that he presented before this House because, Mr. Speaker, these are documents of a somewhat confidential nature,I would assume, I would submit that either the honourable member opposite is being used by Mr. Doyle in his attacks on the Minister of Finance,as we have evidenced many times in the past. We have seen evidence of it many times in the past.

The honourable member from Bell Island was either being used by Mr. John C. Doyle in his corporate conniving& or else the honourable ·member opposite is trafficking in stolen confidential documents. Now, these are· the only two explanations that I can give. Maybe the 2473

• March 25, 1974 Tape 804 IB-5 honourable member opposite is prepared to give another explanation. HR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, a point of order, Sir. That was a pretty serious charge that was made by the honourable minister, Sir, inferring 2474

March 25. 1974 Tape no. 805 Page 1 - MW that I had received stolen documents or that I was acting as an agent of John C. Doyle. Sir. both of these statements are incorrect. untrue and I ask that if the minister has any decency in him to withdraw them and to apologize. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker. really. I hope that I can be in a position to withdraw them and I will sincerely apologize to the honourable member as soon as he can give me some indication of how else he could get the documents. MR. NEARY: I will tell you where I got the documents. MR. BARRY: If the honourable member should wish to tell me.

I can assure Your Honour that I shall apologize and withdraw them immediately. MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Stagg): Order please! The Hon. Minister of Mines and Energy may be making a point but at least one of his statements has suggested that the Hon. Member for Bell Island is trafficking in stolen documents and the import of these words is quite clear. at least to the Chair. and they are certainly unparliamentary and again the honourable minister has gotten them into the record, not unlike honourable members on both sides who make unparliamentary remarks and get them into the record and then withdraw them.

Maybe this House will have to consider in its debate upon rules whether or not unparliamentary remarks are going to be tolerated at all or whether honourable members once having uttEred them ~ill have to take the consequences of having said them ratheTI than having the convenient device of withdrawl. I would suggest to the Hon. Minister of Mines and Energy that the remark was unparliamentary and that ~he Member for Bell Island not having spoken in this debate may indeed disclose where and how h~ did get the documents.

The honourable member may ask the question -where he got them and so on but certainly not to impute dishonesty on the part of the honourable member. MR. BARRY: Mr. Speaker, I think I would agree with your logic. I withdraw the statements that I made and I am sorry that they appear on the record of the House. I will say. Mr. Speaker, that I raised them 2475

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 805 Page 2 in all sincerity because I do want to put the honourable member opposite on notice that I believe (I think this is the only way we can do ~

t) that this House should know where the honourable member got access to these documents. MR. NEARY: Set up the enquiry and I will gladly help. MR. BARRY: It has nothing to do with an enquiry, Mr. Speaker. I raise the only inferences that I as a somewhat rational man, rational at times anyhow, can come up with. If the honourable member should wish to give me any other inferences, I shall be only too happy to_ well. I have already apologized. ?-tr. Speaker, to a certain extent I can understand the inability of the Leader of the Opposition to control the members opposite.

The Leader of the Opposition is at the top of a rather greasy pole I submit. Mr. Speaker. There are many ambitious y~ung men in the wings,from reports I have heard. We have had the previous leader of that party expressing many desires and casting many envious looks at the position now held. the unstable position now held by the Leader of the Opposition.and, therefore. I can understand why that unstable leader may not be able to control the honourable members to the extent that he otherwise might be able to. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR.

BARRY: I understand we have the Member for Hermitage in that still vacant seat - I understand that he has expressed some inclinations in that direction. MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Stagg): Order please! The honourable member is drawn to two rules, the rule of relevancy as far as this debate is concerned and I would suggest he is wandering rather far afield. His expression concernin ·g the Member for Hermitage that "still vacant seat" is one that comes within those unparliamentary phrases which are pointed out in various references. although that exact phrase is not pointed out.

I would suggest that the honourable member should either rephrase, 2476

March 25, 1974 Iape no. 805 Page 3 preferably rephrase it or if not retract the statement concerning the Hon. ,Member for Hermitage and the status of his seat. MR. BARRY: I will refer instead to the vacant utterings of the ambitious Hember for Hermitage, if I may. Mr. Speaker, this is a serious motion that we have before us today. It grieves me that I have to find myself in support of it because I have to say that ninety per cent of the tim~ I get enjoyment from the antics of the Member for Bell Island. He livens up debate.

He has a certain technique for going to the juggler and going to the gut issue in debate, Mr. Speaker. I think all members of the House will agree that more so than any other member (this again is my opinion) the Member for Bell Island has been responsible for the unruly, to say the least, procedure which we have seen occurring in this honourable House since we came back to start this session. Mr. Speaker, I have to say that I unfortunately find myself in support of this motion. Mr. Speaker, if I could just before I close, with the liberty of Your Honour, just referring back to the remarks I made a moment ago.

I see where I had another note jotted down, with respect to the unstable position of the Leader of the Opposition. It reminded me of the situation Woodrow Wilson found himself in, where he had a senator friend of his die while he was still the governor of one of the northeast states,(! forget the exact state) but before they had time to bury the senator another acquaintance of the governor called up and asked Mr. Wilson 2477

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 806 NM- - 1 · if he could take the senator's place and Woodrow Wilson said, well, if it were all right with the undertaker it would be all right with hin. and Mr. Speaker, I say the same to the Leader of the Opposition, if it be okay with the undertaker it would be all right for us for the honourable member for Hermitage or the previous leader to take his place. But, Mr.

Speaker, I submit that there is no question that the member for Bell Island was abusing the privileges of this House when he went into the diatribe and tirade that he went into on the afternoon in question and I submit that all members of this honourable House should support the motion that has been presented by the Minister of Finance. Thank you. MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAGG): The honourable the member for Bonavista North. MR. THOMS: Mr. Speaker, first may I correct a statement made by the honourable Minister of Mines and Energy when he spoke about the - MR. SPEAKER (MR.

STAGG): Has the honourable member already spoken on this debate? AN HON. MEMBER: No. MR. THOMS: When he spoke about the instable position that the Leader of the Opposition is in. AN. HON. MEMBER: Unstable. MR. THO?-'S: Unstable or whatever it was. Mr.

Speaker, he was not exactly very relevant to the motion and I must rebut him and state that if the Leader of the Tory Party in this province were as solid a leader as he should be, as the Leader of the Opposition is, we would not have any problem• in the Province of Newfoundland today, ~e would riot find problems all over this province in every community that should have been taken care of long ago and have not been taken care of and are not being even reco~nized by the present government. MR. PECKFORD: The honourable member for Bonavista North is beinr, irrelevant to the motion presently under discussion, Mr.

Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAC.C): That is so. The honourable member is 2478

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 806 NM - 2· out of order as far as relevancy is concerned. I am allowing him a certain degree of latitude in replying to the remarks of the honourable the Minister of Mines and Energy, Although the Minister of Mines and Energy was interrupted by the Chair, saying that he was out of order, I ask the honourable member if he might make his point quickly and go on to the main point of the motion. This of course is not to be construed as a precedence whereby the Chair is going to tolerate irrelevant remarks indefinitely. MR. THOMS: Thank you, Hr. Speaker, for your ruling.

I am glad that you have ~iven me the same latitude as you gave the Minister of !-tines and Energy. To illustrate my point a little further, Mr. Speaker, I would refer the honourable minister's attention to a conference at a college, a good Liberal college,which we had in Corner Brook less' than two weeks ago,and in that college he received the unanimous support of every member of that college. MR. MORGAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The speakers in this debate, I sincerely hope that they will stay relevant.

We are not debating the Liberal college in Corner Brook and we are not debating the leadership of this party or the other party. We are debating a motion to have a member expelled from this Assembly. I would ask Mr. Speaker if the sp.eaker could be asked to be relevant. MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAGG): Before the honourable member gets into a long winded speech or a speech of any kind, I suggest that this matter has already been brought to my attention and I have asked the honourable member to be through with his remarks as soon as possible.

I would sug8est that the honourable member has now made his point and ask him to go on to remarks that are relevant. MR. THOMS: Mr. Speaker, I was interfered with by the member for Bonavista South on the second time I tried to make this point and I declare, Mr. Speaker, that I should be able to make my point without any interference whatsoever. MR. MORGAN: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, may r 2479

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 806 "" NM - 3 MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAr.G): The honourable members will all resume their places. Maybe the honourable members need a little time to assess their respective positions, get themselves under control. I su~gest that the honourable the member for Bonavista North can now proceed with his speech. He does have considerable ti~e in which to make his points but he has not yet begun to make any points that are relevant. I suggest that he now make his points that are ·relevant. MR. THOMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, but I must make my point because I - MR. SPEAKER (MR.

STAGG): The honourable member is asked to proceed with points that are relevant. He has made certain remarks that have been irrelevant. He is now asked to confine himself to the motion. MR. THOMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the action taken by my honourable colleague for Bell Island in presenting this to this honourable House was discussed by the Liberal Party at a campaign col.lege in Corner Broc,k over the weekend in which that campaign college gave the Leader of the Liberal Party their unanimous support, right to a man, Mr. Speaker, right to a man. Now, Mr. Speaker, Dr.

Noel Murphy was one of the persons who supported the present Leader of the Liberal Party. AN HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. MR. SPEAKER (MR. STAGG): Order please!

Honourable members are forcing the Chair to intervene on many occasions this afternoon and while it is interesting from the Chair's point of view to relieve the normal boredom maybe of having to sit and listen to honourable members make speeches that may or may not be interesting, however I suggest that it is not the place of the Chair to continually have to interrupt any honourable members, while their motives may be good and certainly there appears to be a certain amount of humour ~oin2 acro~s the floor, that the honourable member for Bonavista North be allowed to proceed with his epeec~ and other honourable members remain silent. 2480

March 25, 1974 Tape No . 806 NM - 4 MR. THOMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We only wish the honourable members across the way would stay silent for at least five minutes or so. Now, Mr. Speaker, in the matter of my honourable colleague from Bell Island bringing this matter to the attention of t;he honourable House, he was bound in duty to do it when it was brought to his att~ntion or wh~n he discovered this possible conflict of interest that was in existence. 2481

March 25, 1974. Tape 807 RH ..,. 1 He could not wait. Honourable r.1e~bers across the way were statinr, that it was a cowardly act of his to do while the Minister of Finance was out of this honourable Eouse. Mr. Speaker, if the honourable menber for Bell Island had waited until the Minister of Finance was back in his seat, he would have had to wait something like four or five days.

If he had brought this episode to the attention of the honourable House at that time, he certainly would have been out of order because accord­ inp, to the standing orders of this House~ he is supposed to bring such information before this honourable House at the earliest possible date and that is what the honourable menber for Bell Island did, just that, according to the rules. Mr._ Speaker, the honourable mer.1ber was not out of order in doing so. He was well within the orders of this honourable House and I commend him for it.

I believe that every person in Newfound­ land should commend him for doing such a fine job and for doing so many hours of research on this. I am sure it must have taken him days to obtain the necessary information . to study it, to discuss it and to properly present it to the honourable House. That is his duty and in doing so he certainly _was not lacking in his duty. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transportation and Communciations the other day spoke of his episode when he was asked to leave this House for two days and three. Mr.

Speaker, I submit that the ministe~ at that time he was a member of the opposition, at that time he had broken one of the rules of this honourable House. But, Mr. Speaker, my honourable friend from Bell Isl~nd has not yet broken a rule of this House. AN HONOURABLE MEM:BF.R: The Speaker has not ruled him out of order. MR. THO!-tS: The Speaker has not ruled him out of order. The Speaker just did not accept that he did have a conflict of interest situation, that is all. He did not break any rules of this honourable House and therefore, what is he being thrown out of this honourable House for,for fourteen days?

Everyone in this Province today is asking that same question. Why are they trying to boot him out? Mr. Speaker, there are probably a number of reasons but one of 2482

March 25, 1974. Tape 807 RH - 2 the reasons is that my honourable friend frOl'l Bell Island is one of the most capable members of this House of Assembly and continually does a good job in this honourable House and outside this honourable House. I submit that he represents his constituents better than I would say eighty per cent of the members of this honourable House and he is doing a good job for his district. Not only that, Mr.

Speaker, but he is continually probing into the affairs of the present Government which he was elected to do, which is his bounded duty to do and which he must do and Iain sure which he will continue to do whether he is in this chamber or whether he is outside of this chamber. As a matter of fact he might be a little more effective outside; one never knows. Now, Mr. Speaker, this is one of the reasons why the honourable Minister of Finance has elected at this time to bring this motion before this honourable House. Mr.

Speaker, I suspect that the motion itself to suspend a member may in itself be out of order, although . I do not question the ruling -of this Chair. Mr. Speaker, if the Minister of Finance is allowed to bring this motion before this honourable House and suspend any one member of this Assembly for fourteen days, what is to stop the honourable Minister of Finance from bringing a motion in today or tomorrow to suspend all members of the Opposition? What is to stop him? Nothing! Not a thing! I am ·sure he will get his honourable colleagues across the way to vote for it when he brings it before this Rouse.

I am sure they will follow along and clap whenever it is necessary and support such a motion. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, 1 submit that if this honourable House vote. for this motion it is setting a very danp,erous precedent, a very dangerous one indeed. Now, Mr. Speaker, the honourable member for Rell Island brought before this honourable House some very interesting facts, some very enticin~ facts. He has tabled documents in this honourable House that cannot be questioned. Indeed, the charges laid by the member for Bell Island, if these documents are correct, are undoubtedly true. Mr.

Speaker, if the member for Bell Island be suspended for fourteen 2483

March 25, 1974. Tape 807 RH - 3 days, then I· believe all members who support the member should also be suspended, but maybe Mr. Sneaker, they cannot be suspended because they have not tabled any documents. Mr. Speaker, allow me now to table the following documents. They are the sarrte documents tabled in this honourable House by the member for Bell Island and in tabling them I ask for the same treat­ ment given to my honourable friend from Bell Island. They are the same 2484

March 25, 1974, Tape 808, Page 1 -- apb statements, Mr. Speaker, the same documents tabled by the honourable Member for Bell Island. The declaration of conflict of interest as published by the various members of this House of Assembly, the letters from, the order-in-council, a letter to Bison Petroleum from the honourable }tinister of Finance, John C.Crosbie, from the ~finieter of Finance to Bison Brewing, to Mr. John C.Doyle from the Comptroller and Deputy Minister. >nother letter to Mr. John C.Doyle from the Minister of Finance, John C.Crosbie, a letter to Mr.

Dawe from the Comptroller and Deputy Minister of Finance and another order-in-council authorizing the right of the $407,000. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I would like to table these documents and I suspect that they would warrant the same attention as the documents tabled by my friend the Member for Bell Island. Now, Mr. Speaker, as I stated before, the only reason the Minister of Finance brought this motion before this House - MR. SPEAKER: I beg to interrupt the honourable member.

These documents have already been tabled once and I am sort of taking it under advisement now whether or not it is in order to table them a second time. MR. THOMS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Even though these documents have been previously tabled, the idea is the same as the Member for Bell Island's. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is no secret that members on the government side have aimed their sights at only one member of the opposition and that is the Member for Bell Island. The Minister of Finance, Mr. Speaker, and his colleagues have a passionate hatred for the Member for Bell Island.

They have a one-track, passionate hatred. They are out to get him Mr. Speaker. They will stop at nothing. They will not be satisfied until they get the Member for Bell Island. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, to a point of order. so~ HON. MEMBERS: (Inaudible) MR. SPEAKER: Order please! MR. CROSBIE: It is unparliamentary to allege that any member of 2485

March 25, 1974, Tape 308, Page 2 - apb the House has hatred for another member. It should be withdrawn. Speaking for myself, I may have a lot of things for the Member for Bell Island but hatred is not one of them nor for any other member of this House. MR. NEARY: MR. CROSBIE: MR. SPEAKER: Oh no? No, contempt. I have contempt for him but hatred - Order please! I think the honourable Member for Bonavista North should withdraw those remarks. They are impugning · motive to another member and they are not parliamentary. MR. THOMS: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will withdraw them. Mr.

Speaker, I would submit that the members on the opposite side of this House and especially the M1.nister of Finance,have a passionate contempt for the Member for Bell Island. They are out to get him and they will stop at nothing. They will stop at nothing. This, Mr. Speaker, is why I think that this motion should not be supported by any member of this honourable House. AN HON. MEMBER: Hear! Hear! MR. THOMS: Mr.

Speaker, during the last session, 1974, this honourable House discussed and passed and made law a bill, bill (27), and the bill reads thus: "An Act Respecting Conflict Of Int;erest 0 In Matters Of Public Concern." Now, Mr. Speaker, we discussed this for a .number of days. The explanatory note reads something like this: "This bill would regulate the conduct of certain persons engaged in matters of public concern in respect of their other interests which may conflict with their public duties." SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear! Hear! MR. THOMS: Mr. Speak.er, if this bill is to mean anything, then it must be enforced.

If it is to mean anything it must be enforced. Mr. Speaker, only the government of the day can enforce it. Also, only members of the government and senior civil servants can be found in a conflict of interest position. It is impossible for a member of the opposition to be in conflict of interest. It is impossible. If it be not, I would like you to bring some examples. 2486 ...

March 25, 1974, Tape 808, Page 3 - apb AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. THOMS: It is impossible, Mr. Speaker. If this bill, if this legislation, a statute of our land,is not enforced, then this honourable House wasted its time last year bringing this bill before the people of Newfoundland. We wasted our time, we wasted the money of Newfoundland and it is now becoming another "Newfie" joke. Mr. Speaker, unless this bill is enforced let ·us take it off the statutes and put it down in Robin Hood Bay where it belongs, because at the present time, Mr. Speaker, this bill is not worth one cent.

If this bill does not control the members of government, then exactly what does it control? I think the motion brought forth by the Minister of Finance to suspend my honourable colleague from Bell Island is a very bad motion indeed and he is indeed presenting a very bad precedent. I cannot for the life of me, ~rr. Speaker, see how I can support such a motion. As I stated before, I congratulate the honourable Member for Bell Island for his hard work, for his study, for the time he took in preparing the documentation that he presented to this Bouse.

It shows that he did his homework, it shows that he is keeping himself busy and keeping government members on their toes. MR. NEARY: MR. THOMS: MR. NEARY: HR. CROSBIE: I try to keep them honest. And at the same time tries to keep them honest. It is quite a job. Hr. Speaker, on a point of order. That expression i!f most insulting. It 2487

March 25, 1974 Tape 809 IB-1 suggests that the members of the opposition have to attempt to keep members of the government honest is an implication and an allegation that there are members of the government who are dishonest. It is purely unparliamentary. MR. SPEAKER: I think the point is well-chosen by the Minister of Finance. I think the honourable member for Bonavista North should withdraw that comment. He was alleging that certain members of this honourable House might be dishonest. I think that is certainly unparliamentary. I ask him to withdraw that statement. MR. THOMS: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, I withdraw that motion but I trust this honourable House realizes that it is our job to make sure that they are honest. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is very difficult for one to concentrate on making any major speech in this honourable House when one has so many people interjecting and disturbing one. Mr.

Speaker, I believe that if this motion is to be voted upon as undoubtedly it will be and undoubtedly will have thirty-one votes against it, (That is a pretty fair prediction~ - it would be a very sure bet that this motion will be carried by members of the government side and that the honourable Minister of Finance will have his way in expelling one of the most prominent members of this assembly for fourteen days. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that this motion should be voted upon in its present form because it is certainly an anti-Neary motion. Therefore, Mr.

Speaker, I would like to move the following amendment and this amendment is seconded by the honourable ~ember for Fogo; "that all the words after the word "that" be deleted and the following substituted therefor; "This honourable House commends the member for Bell Island for bringing to the attention of the House the matters referred to in his statements to the House on Monday, March 4, 1974,as recorded in Hansard,pages 1786 to 1821 • .AN HONOURABLE m:MBER: Take your time. Wait. Take your time. MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker. 2488 ....

March 25, 1974 Tape 809 MR. THOMS: Are you rising on a point of order now? MR. CROSBIE: Yes, on a point of order,naturally. MR. THOMS: Remember I am not sitting down, MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. CROSBIE: Well, if you do not sit down - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! IB-2 MR. CROSBIE: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The amendment proposed, Mr. Speaker, is certainly completely out of order . because it negatives t}:le resolution that is before the House.

The resolution before the House is to the effect that the certain statements made by the honourable member for Bell Island - it is to the effect that the honourable member for Bell Island be suspended because of statements made by him in the House. The statements are given in the motion. There is a libel on the member for St. John's West affecting his character and reputation and that because of this he be suspended from the House,because of those statements. Now, Mr.

Speaker, an amendment is suggested that all the words after that be deleted and that the resolution may read that the member for Bell Island be commended for bringing these matters to the attention of the House. Now, Mr. Speaker, it is quite clear th~t such an amendment as that is completely out of order. It is completely contrary to the . motion and therefore should not be accepted here in the House. MR. W. ROWE: Mr.

Speaker, if you are listening to argument or - Your Honour, I would like to refer to a citation from Beauchesne,on page 170, paragraph 202, subsection (13) "An amendment to alter the main question, by substituting a proposition with the opposite conclusion, is not an expanded negative and may be moved." ... What the honourable Minister of Finance is referring to is (14) ·which is directly below that, "An amendment which would produce the same result as if the original motion were simply negatived is out of order." Well, I would submit, Sir, that this amendment before Your Honour 2489

March 25, 1974 Tape 809 IB-3 now is not negativing the main motion. The negativing of the main motion would be for example if the amendment said that the member for Bell Island not be suspended from this honourable House for fourteen sitting days or something along those lines. What this amendment proposes to do cannot be achieved, Sir,~ voting against this motion. If you vote against this motion, there is no implication there that the member for Bell Island be commended for bringing his statements and the matters that are referred to before the House.

The amendment therefore, Sir, proposed does something beyond merely negativing the main motion. It is introducing something else, Sir. Although, as subsection (13) of paragraph 202 says, although it may be substituting a proposition with the opposite conclusion, this is not an expanded negative and may in fact be moved. So, there is no substance, Sir, to what the honourable Minister of Finance has said in his point of order. I would submit, Sir, that the motion proposed by way of amendment be accepted by Your Honour and that there be debate on that particular amendment. MR.

CROSBIE: In reply to the honourable member for White Bay South, Your Honour. page 170, subsection (12) states, nAn amendment proposing a direct negative, though it may be covered up by verbia~e,,, is ·out of order." Now, if the amendment suggested be not a direct negative to the motion that is before the House, then what could be more negative? The motion asks that the member for Bell Island be suspended for these libels which he has not withdrawn, libels on a member. The amendment proposed is a direct negative of that, that he be commended for these statements and for bringing them before the House. Now, Mr.

Speaker, that is clearly out,in accordance with number (12) there. It is not an amendment that alters the main question by substituting · a proposition with the opposite conclusion. It is not an opposite conclusion. If this amendment be carried the original motion of course is completely 2490

March 25, 1974 Tlipe 809 IB-4 nullified.

Section .(14), Your Honour, "An .Amendment which .would produce the same result as if the original motion were si'lliply negatived is out of order.'' This is what this woul.d do. It is clearly out of order. MR. ROBERTS: Mr. Speaker, if I may say a word in reply to the Minister of Finance's reply to the gentleman from White Bay South replying to. the Minister of Finance. I submit that the words that the minister has used are just distorting and are complete but not deliberate misrepresentat'ion of the situation. The amendment moved by my friend and colleague from Bonavista North 2491 ..

March 25, 1974. Tape 810 RH - 1 is not a direct negative. The motion before the House, before the Chai~ is that the member for Bell Island be suspended. The direct negative of that, Your Honour, if words mean anything, unless this be like the Alice in Wonderland situation that words mean exactly what I say they are to say, the direct negative of that situation, of that motion, Sir, if words mean anything, the member for Bell Island not be suspended. That is not this motion at all, Sir. A...,_ HONOURABLE MIDIBER: Inaudible. MR.

ROBERTS: On this motion, I agree that would be clearly out of order, as my colleague had said,if the amendment using a lot of words or phrase­ ology or what had you, h3d the effect of saying that the member for Bell Island not be suspended. That is not what my colleague's amend­ ment says, Mr. Speaker. My colleague's amendment clearly puts another proposition, a proposition with the opposite conclusion. The conclusion of the amendment, Your Honour, is that the gentleman from Bell Island be commended for bringing in certain matters to the House,and I submit, Sir, that - AN HONOURABLE MEMBER: Inaudible.' MR.

ROBERTS: Not Mr. Speaker, the gentleman, the Minister of Financ;t insists upon interrupting me but the fact remains, Sir, that it does not mean the direct negative. It is a clear case falling within that citation 13 on page 170, an amendment to alter the main question. It does that, Your Honour,by substituating a proposition with the opposite conclusion. It is not an expanded negative and may be moved and there is a reference there to the Canadian Commons Journals, Volume 60, page 437.

Now, Your Honour, if those words do not mean that that ~otion is in order, then what could Arthur Beauchesne possibly have meant when he put in the sitation? This amendment is clearly in order, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: It is the opinion . of the Chair that the motion made by the Minister of Finance is one in essence to censor the honourable member for Bell Island and the amendment made by the honourable member for Bonavista North is one to conunend the Member for Bell Island; and the Chair feels that this is a direct opposite of what is meant and refers to

Section 12 of pap,e 170, which has already been quoted and therefore 2492

March 25, 1974. Tape 810 RH - 2 the Chair rules that the amendment is out of order. MR. ROBF.RTS: Your Honour, there is no need even to through a question of a vote first. It may be a waste of time but on this motion, I think, Your Honour's ruling is so, well, we wish to appeal it. MR. SPEAKER: Call in the members. DIVISION: MR. SPEAKER: The motion is that the Speaker's ruling be sustained. Those in favour please rise.

The ·honourable the Minister of Industrial Development: ·the honourable the Minister cf Forestry and A~riculture; the honourable the Minister of Tourism; the honourable the Minister of Education: the honourable the Minister of Justice: the honourable the Minister of Finance: the honourable the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing: Mr. Stagg, Mr. Dunphy, Mr. Alyward, Mr. Wells, Mr. Brett, Mr. Peckford, the hon­ ourable the Minister.of Fisheries, Mr. Carter, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Young, Mr. Evans, Mr. Morgan, Mr. Howard. MR.

ROBERTS: Your Honour, on a point of order, I cannot interrupt the devision but I submit the entire matter was improper. The clerk, Your Honour, counted the Minister of Fisheries who was not in his seat and counted the gentleman from Grand Falls. I think the gentleman from Grand Falls was not in his seat. I do not know what the situtation is. Each of them was present and is entitled to vote. MR. SPEA.T<ER: Order, please! I think the honourable Leader of the Opposition should wait until the complete division has been finished. Those against please rise. The honourable the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Gillette, Mr.

Woodward, Mr. W.N. Rowe, Captain Winsor, Mr. Neary, Mr. Thoms, Mr. F. D. Rowe, Mr. Simmons. MR. R0BERTS: Your Honour, may I now on a point of order,also note that the ~entleman fr0t:1 Labrador South apparently did not vote and I believe, I do not have the exact citation here, but under our standing orders a member in his seat is required to cast an "aye" or a "nay". 2493

March 25, 1974. Tape 810 RH - ~ MR. SPEAKER: I believe the honourable member for Labrador South did not vote and he is required to. MR. M. MAETTN: I .1ust sat in my place to vote for the motion. I was not counted by the clerk. MR. SPEAKER: I declare the motion carried. MR. ROBERTS: Your Honour, could we have a ruling on the point of order. The Minister of Fisheries was not in his seat, Sir, nor was the gentle­ man from Grand Falls. I do not argue with the right of either of them to cast a ballot but, Sir, anybody in this House can clearly see that the gentleman from the New Labrador Party did not vote at all.

That is even worse. The Minister of Fisheries was counted by the clerk, Sir, and yet the Minister of Fisheries was not in his seat at the time and if the rules of this House are to mean anything, Sir, if this is not to become a kangaroo court at the whims, then surely that situat!on should be set straight. MR. CROSBIE: I would like to point out .that in the rules there is nothing that states that a member must be in his seat. It says_ "On a division every member present in his place in the House," and the question is put, "shall be required to vote." MR.

ROBERTS: No, Sir, the Minister of Finance is negligently not readin~ Standing Order 82 (

a) which comes just above the one he read which says, "No member shall be entitled to vote in any division unless he was in his place when the question was put." I am fed up with the Minister of Finance's habit of only reading half a story, Sir. That rule, 82 (c), is found three lines above the one he just read. MR. CROSBIE: It so happens, Mr. Speaker, that I just read 83 because 83 is all I saw,whether the honourable gentleman opposite is fed up with it or not. MR.

ROBERTS~ You can lead a horse to water, Sir, you can even lead half a horse to water.in the case of the honourable minister, you cannot make him drink. MR. CROSBIE: Sit down and do not be so foolish. MR. SPF.AKER: It was noted that the honourable Minister of Fisheries and 2494

March 2S, 1974. Tape 810 RH - 4 the honourable member for Grand Falls were not in their proper places when the vote was mad.e but because, as it may, I think that we can do without those votes. The 111otion still would have been sustained. MR. RO~F.RTS: Your Honour, I know that, but is Your Honour no longerre- garding - Standin11: Orders I submit, Sir, are clear. "82(

c) No member shall be entitled to vote in any division unless he was in his place when the quest .ion was put." So the Minister of Fisheries was allowed to vote. He was not in his place. Now I call upon Your Honour to enforce the Standin~ Orders. If that be not so, we are at the place where these rules mean nothing, Beauchesne means nothing. This is not a matter of an

interpretation of a ruling 2495

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 8ll Page 1 - MW on a point. The Standing Order is crystal _clear, Sir. I call upon Your Honour ( Your Honour has been elected unanimously as our Speaker) to enforce these r:ules. Your Honour has undertaken to do so and I now call upon Your Honour to do so. MR. COLLINS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak to that point of order. I am sure that all honourable members will note that I was trying to get back to my seat and so was the Member for Grand Falls. He did not want to interfere with the counting procedure of the clerk of the House and that is the only reason we had not moved before. MR.

SPEAKER: Order please! The Standing Order is quite clear, Standing Order 82 (c): "No member shall be entitled to vote II It was noted that the two honourable members were not in their proper places and were not entitled to cast a vote in this particular debate. AN HON. MEMBER: MR. SPEAICER: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. SPEAKER: . MR. WINSOR: (Inaudible). Order please! (Inaudible). Order please! . Mr. Speaker, I suppose now is the time for all members to come to the aid of our colleague and I, in my humble way,intend to do that.

I do not intend to delay the House as long as some members but, however, I do feel that it is my duty to rise and speak against the motion put by the Bon. Minister of Finance. Mr. Speaker, perhaps more than anyone else sitting in this honourable Hous~, I have a concern with the question which is before us. It is my privilege to have served in this honourable House longer than any man sitting in this Chamber today and, therefore, I have as great an interest as any member in having the rights of the members of the House of Assembly asserted and preserved. Mr.

Speaker, if the House were to carry the motion which is now before it, we would be condoning an action to stifle debat·e in this honourable House, to mute any criticism which might be made of the honourable ministers·opposite. In other words, Mr. Speaker, we would be 2496

March 25, 1974 Tape no. 811 Page 2 denying our democratic principle of freedom of speech in the most hallowed of institutions which is supposed to be the very embodiment of this right of freedom of speech, the Parliament, the Legislature and the House of Assembly. Mr. Speaker, my colleague, the Hon. Member for Bell Island has acted nobly in bringing to the attention of the House information and documents which have come to his possession and which demonstrate that the Minister of Finance was in an apparent ·conflict of interest situation. Now I need not go into the evidence he has submitted.

He has presented it ably and my colleague the Hon. Leader of the Opposition and in fact all members on this side of the House have amplified upon them,clarifying some points and supported the case so that its merit and justification are clear for all to see. The Hon. Minister of Finance by his action in seeking to have the Hon. Member for Bell Island suspended from the services of the House for a period of fourteen days is asking the House not to sit in judgment of the Hon.

Member for Bell Island nor in judgment of himself but simply to conviat my colleague without there being an opportunity for a fair trial, as it were, to be held. Mr. Speaker, a prolonged debate in this House means absolutely nothing. It has been pointed out by members on the government side the fact that this debate has taken a long time to debate,that it is getting the attention that it deserves and more or less the members of the opposition are really getting all the opportunity that it desires to debate the motion now before us. Mr.

Speaker, it is not the government side of the House which has prolonged this debate, I would submit that it is the members on this side of the House because, Sir, I feel that if the Minister of Finance had had his way, this motion would have been put and our colleague would have been kicked out of the House one hour after the motion had been put. I feel my colleague the member for Bell Island has been or will be dealt with very unjustly. It is a lon~ established 2497

March 25. 1974 Tape no. 811 Page 3 practice in the British parliamentary procedure for such grave matters, as we are asked. today to deal with, not to be dealt with by the Bouse and by its members without recourse to all the facts but rather it is- the custom. the tradition ., the practice, the fair, the just and honourable procedure for this matter of apparent 2498

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 812 NM - 1 conflict of interest situation to be dealt with by a committee of the House or by an enquiry which has the powers to call witnesses to hear testimony, to question persons and to secure and adduce all the evidence that may be brou£ht on this matter. Mr. Speaker, it is my opinion that the government members have no intention of seeing justice done in this case. Instead they wish to try to convict and sentence my honourable colleague without justice being done. In this case they will not be convicting a member, Mr.

Speaker, they will be convicting the parliamentary system and this honourable House of Assembly. Such an abuse of rights and privileges of this honourable House and of its members should not be tolerated, not by one of its members nor by any of the electorate who voted to put us here. Mr. Speaker, for eighteen years now I have worked to uphold the dignity and tradition of this House and to establish the rights and privileges due its members, not only have I tried to contribute to this but so has each member of the House in his turn and members who proceeded us for years and decades before.

Are we now to see these rights eclipse almost overnigh~ Mr. Speaker, are we to see the House used, and this may be unparliamentary, House used as a kangaroo court by the members of the government? Why should they want to commit such a vengeful act,to have my colleague, the member for Bell Island, suspended for an unheard, an unprecedented length of time, fourteen days,or for any number of days without. first establishing the fact that the information presented to the House by my colleague was not sufficient or not enou~h'to constitute a breach of the House? What kind or how much information does one need?

My colleague presented information,documented, which,in his opinion and in the opinion of all members on this side, placed the honourable Minister of Finance in a position of conflict of interest. Mr. Speaker, it has not been proven to my satisfaction that this is not the case. The member for· Bell Island, Mr. Speaker, would not be worthy 2499

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 812 NM - 2 of the Chair on which he sits,havin~ acquired the information, bacred up by documentary confirmation, if he then failed to bring it to the floor of the House. Mr. Speaker, that is why we were elected, to bring matters such as this out in the open and to focus public attention. This is the place to do just that. Mr. Speaker, I have heard the asertions put by the honourable Minister of Finance and those put by the honourable member for Bell Island and by the Leader of the Opposition and others. I have weighed each of the arguments, Mr.

Speaker, and I stand to vote against the motion put by the honourable Minister of Finance. But, Mr. Speaker, I will be voting for the rights of the members of this House, for the privileges and traditions of the honourable House, I will be voting for freedom of speech and for democracy. I submit it is the duty of every member of this House to vote to uphold these and to vote against the motion put. Now, Mr.

Speaker, I move the following amendment, seconded by my colleague from Bell Island, let the following words be added to the main question, •that the member for Humber East, the Premier, be suspended from this honourable House for fourteen sitting days because of statements made by him in the House on Friday, March 8, 1974. A.'f HON. MEMBER: Humber West. MR. WINSOR: Humber West I am sorry. " As recorded in Hansard on page 2170 and 2176,which statements copstitued unparliamentary lanp,uage and co~prised a libel on a member .of this House, the member for Bell Island.

The said unparliamentary language and libel consisting of the following words; 'It is a matter of listening to ~he absolute bile that comes from the gall of a totally useless and absolutely incompetent individual,' which words refer to the member for Bell Island. 'He has no concern, no' decency, no soul, no humanity,' which words refer to the member for Bell Island." A.~ HON. MEMBER: Inaudible. 2500

March 25, 1974 Tape No. 812 NM - 3 MR. NEAAY: Wait a minute, wait until the page comes. Sit down and wait until the page comes. You do not own the House you know, sit down. Arro~ance and ignorance! MR. CRO~BIE: We have a new Sergeant-A~:_Arms,apparently, Mr. Speaker. MR. !'IBA.RY: You might have one before the day is over. MR. CROSBIE: Is that right? Now, Mr. Sp.eaker, page 167 of Beauchesne -of course, Hr. Speaker, this is ttot an mnendment to this question and the suggestion that some 0th.er member should be suspended for fourteen days for some other infraction of the rules 2501

March 25, 1974, Tape 813, Page 1 -- apb is not one that can be dealt with by an amendment to the present motion, it is a motion that obviously must stand on its own. If the hpnourable members opposite really and truly wanted to move that motion and we are not just engaged in a publicity device, they would not be moving it now. On page (167), Mr.

Speaker, it states: "Not more than one question should be before the House at the same time." There is a question before the House now and the cfuesft~ is the unparliamentary conduct and expressions used by the Member for Bell Island and the serious charges made and the libel made on a member several weeks ago. That is the question before the House. That cannot be amended by suggesting another amendment that some other member at some time is also being in breach of the rules of the House. Once again, Mr.

Speaker, it is an amendment that is out of order and that is clearly out of order and that has no place - page (171), Mr. Speaker, for example; "An amendment setting forth a proposition dealing with a matter which is foreign to the proposition involved in the main motion is not relevant and cannot be moved." This is quite foreign to the proposition involved in the main motion and I therefore ask ¥our Honour to rule the amendment out of order. MR. W.N.ROWE: Mr.

Speaker, I would submit.as we have submitted on three or four other occasions now, in every amendment brought before the House, that this amendment is in order, Sir • . It deals exactly with the same type of thing that the main motion refers to, namely; unparliamentary language, libel and slander on a member of the House and a penalty imposed therefor. Not only does it deal with the saI!ll! general sort of thing, Sir, but the words 'uttered by the Premier were words uttered during this very debate, based on the same substance, the same subject matter.

I would submit, Sir, on behalf of my colleagues,that it is an amendment which.is particularly relevant to the main motion and that there is no reason whatsoever 2502

March 25, 1974, Tape 813, Page 2 -- apb why the two related matters cannot be dealt with by the same motion. Sir, I therefore submit that the amendment ought to be accepted by Your Honour and that we have the debate thereon. It deals with the same subject matter, it deals with matters which have come up in this honourable House, _ the use of unparliamentary language, the use of libel and slander on a member of this House and if these two things are not related then nothing, no amendment can ever be related to a main motion in this House. MR. SPEAKER (Stagg): The honourable Member for Labrador South: MR.

M.MARTIN: Mr. Speaker, it appears to me that the issue in question here is one of breach of personal privilege, in this case against the honourable Member for Bell Island, - as I recall that I incident, that day those words were spoken in the presence of the honourable Member for Bell Island. The Standing Orders are ~uite clear that when a breach of privilege occurs that the member whose privilege is breached must bring it to the attention of the House at the earliest possible moment. I submit, Sir, that that was not done. MR.

SPEAKER (Stagg): Of the numerous points on which this is based are a couple of points brought up by the Minister of Finance with which the Chair agrees, especially the one brought by the Member for Labrador South,that the time for intervention was immediate, either by the Chair or by the member allegedly maligned. Consequently, I rule the amendment out of order. I also suggest that the amendment might be typed because the honourable member's writing is not unlike my own, almost illegible. MR. W.N.ROHE: Is there any provision that it must be typed? MR.

SPEAY..ER (Stagg): No I do not think so,but it is the usual courtesy afforded the Chair that it be typed. I rule that the amendment is out of order. The honourable the Member for Bell Island: 1'!lt. ·NEAPY: Mr. Speaker, I would suspect that the Minister of ~iuance would expect llle to say a few words on this punitive motion of his before the lllinister succeeds in getting his colleagues to have 2503

March 25, 1974, Tape 813, Page 3 - apb me removed from this House for fourteen sitting days, for breaking no rules of this honourable House. Mr. Speaker, let me point out that one or two members, two or three or four members of this honourable House have been thrown out since I have been sitting in this House for the past thirteen years.

Each one of them, Sir, including the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Transportation and Collllllunications and the ~inister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Minister without Portfolio, each one of them, Sir, broke a rule of this honourable House and deserved to be punished. They deserved to be put out of the House. I have broken no rules of the honourable House. Not a rule of this House have I broken except in the devious mind of the Minister of Finance. Mr.

Speaker, if I had broken rules of this honourable House, if I had said things that were considered .to be unparliamentary, would Your Honour not have ruled me out of order? Would Your Honour not have asked me to withdraw the unparliamentary statements? Is this not the procedure of the House, Sir? It has been the procedure since I have been here for ~he past thirteen years. No, Your Honour, I was permitted to present my case on the assumption, Sir, that I was acting within the rules of the House, because there was 2504

March 25, 1974, Tape 814, Pagel - apb no point of order. Your Honour did not rule me out of order. There was not a single point of order from a member on the other side to the effect that I had said anything unparliamentary. Believe me, Sir, it is too late. As the Member· for Labrador South justindicated, Mr. Speaker, it is too late a week later to come back in this honourable House and say that on so and so date the ~!ember for Bell Island or any other member said things that were unparliamentary. Your Honour had ruled on the case and Your Honour had stated that in his opinion there was no prima facie case.

In Your Honour's opinion it was a matter of dispute between two members. That is the ruling, Sir, that was given in this honourable House. Your Honour did not say that I, in presenting my case, had breached a privilege of this honourable House, that I had used unparliamentary language. All Jour Honour said was that the Member for Bell Island did not, in his considered opinion, have a prima facie case." What happened then? It was only a matter of a dispute over the facts between two honourable members. Then, Mr. Speaker, Lo and Behold!

The Minister of Finance then moved a motion to the effect that I had breached the privilege.of the House. I had done no such thing. Your Honour accepted the motion as being in order;and that I be expelled from this House for fourteen sitting days. How can it be a dispute between two honourable members of the House one minute and not a dispute between two honourable members of the House the next minute? M.r.

Speaker, before I get into the main part of my address to this honourable House, I am going to give the Minister of Finance, I am going to give the Minister of Finance an opportunity ... to withdraw this motion. In my opinion, Sir, it is the most dastardly act that has ever been attempted in this honourable House. It is the first sign, Sir, of totalitarian government. It is not becoming of the Minister of Finance, Sir. The Minister of Finance and myself have had some pretty hard debate in this honourable House. Sometimes 2505

March 25, 1974, Tape 814, Page 2 - apb he has scored his point, Sir, sometimes I have scored points, but I have never held it against him, Mr. Speaker. It is not becoming of the Minister of Finance to bring such a motion into this honourable House. I am going to give the Minister of Finance an opportunity because it is creating, setting such a dangerous precedent, that I am going to give the Minister of Finance an opportunity to withdraw the motion. Before I do, Sir, I ahall say this; if the Minister of .

Finance is worried about the language that I used in presenting my case, if the Minister of Finance, and Your Honour has not said it was unparliamentary, thinks it is unparliamentary and he is worried about the language, well then, Sir, I am quite prep~red, I will be a man about this, to clean up the language but I will only do it on one condition, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister of Finance would agree to have a judicial enquiry into this whole matter. Now, Sir, I am prepared to lay my head on the limb. MR. CROSBIE: A new theory. MR.

NEARY: That is not a new theory, that .is British _fair play, Sir,and common sense, It is not a new theory. So, Sir, if that is all th