VOL. 3 NO. 96 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 2:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. TUESDAY, JUNE 20, 1978

June 20, 1978 Tape No. 4622 NM - 1 The House met at 2:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in the Chair. MR. SPEAKER:(Dr. Collins): Order, please! PRESENTING PETITIONS: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Windsor-Buchans. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, I rise to beg leave to present a petition on behalf of 3,122 persons from the areas - SOME HON. MEMBERS: How many? MR. FLIGHT: 3,122, that makes 10,000 now roughly over the past four or five days. MR. STRACHAN: Liberals? MR. FLIGHT: No Liberals, people against the spray. MR. MURPHY: And that is 240,000 votes for the - MR. FLIGHT: And, Mr.

Speaker, the petition comes from the areas of Corner Brook, the Bay of Islands area, St. Anthony, Bale Verte, Jackson's Arm and there is a letter so I will read the letter and then I will read the prayer of the petition. CAPTAIN WINSOR: MR. FLIGHT: the petition first. CAPTAIN WINSOR: MR. FLIGHT: Read the prayer of the petition first. WellIthe member says read the prayer of You cannot be particular when you (inaudible). So I will read the prayer of the petition first. "The spraying of Canadian budworm infested forests has not eliminated or even controlled the spruce budworm.

Egg mass counts, the traditional measure of budworm severity, have increased in the annual sprayed forests of New Brunswick and Quebec. In Nova Scotia and British Columbia,where governments rejected the pressures of the pulp-chemical industrial complex and refused to spray,the egg mass counts have decreased drastically. We therefore submit the following petition to Premier Frank Moores." "Whereas aerial insecticide spraying has proved ineffective in controlling budworm epidemics, and

whereas long term forest management provides the only solutions to budworm / e e

Tape No. 4622 NM - 2 June 20, 1978 MR. FLIGHT: epidemics and a provision for sustained forest yield, and

whereas aerial spraying of insecticides diverts millions of dollars annually from long term forest management, and

whereas aerial spraying of insecticides pose serious hazards to human health and the environment,. and

whereas federal laws prohibiting the spraying of homes, farms, livestock, water.supplies and areas of human habitation are routinely violated in aerial spraying operations, we the undersigned, urge that you immediately call a moratorium on all aerial application of poison to combat the spruce budworm." Now, Sir, that is the verbatim prayer of the petition. As I say the petition 'is signed by 3,122 people, bringing to a total over the past four or five days, 10,000 people who have indicated their concern with the spray programme as it is being practiced by this administration. And, Mr.

Speaker, the reasons why the people in this Province are concerned has been talked about this past three months. One, of course,their concerns with the little research done on matacil, the little knowledge, the fact. that we do not know. Research has not been done into the long term and short term effects of the chemical matacil either on the total environment or on human well-being.

And a greater concern may begat this time, the unbelievable decision by government to spray water supplies, headwaters of rivers, spray blocks that have communities on the immediate perimeters of the spray blocks and thereby creating a danger that spray would drift into communities and children and everything in that community would be therefore exposed and, again, not being aware of what the characteristics or the effects of matacil might be. There is a great feeling, a great fear amongst our people as to just what

June 20, 1978 Tape No. 4622 NM - 3 MR. FLIGHT: they are being subjected to. . Now, Mr. Speaker, this debate reached an all time low I thought yesterday in the Question Period when the Minister of Health stood up and said that he answered some questions, what he .could, there were some he could not'answer and he indicated that, "I do.not know. It is not my programme. " It is not his programme. He inferred of course that,he had to be inferring that it was the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture's programme and that he did not appear to be that happy with the programme.

He emphasized, "It is not my programme." Now there has been some attempts, Mr. Speaker, to drag politics into the spray programme but I have seen, as far as I am concerned, a blatant display of politics in the last few days, when the Minister of Health used his political position to increase the buffer zone between Gander Lake and the sprayed lot. Now why, Mr. Speaket? How about the people in Port Blandford who sent the first petition in?

How about the other people in Newfoundland living in 'the environs of the sprayed blocks, people whose water supplies will be sprayed/ Were they not entitled to the same consideration as the people of Gander? And when the minister rises to speak I want him to address himself to the - I cannot believe that - I want him to address himself to that position.

When has a Minister of the Crown, or as Cabinet they decided to increase the buffer zone around the Gander Lake; why did that not apply to all the areas in Newfoundland that have indicated concern because their water supplies and their communities are in the vicinity where there is a danger of spray drift? Why just Gander Lake? That is a blantant political

June 20, 1978 Tape 4623 DW - 1 MR. FLIGHT: decision where5Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health used his political position to bring about something that would keep his constituency happy and was not too concerned about the feelings of people in other areas who have been represented in this House with other petitions. And why not a buffer zone around other areas and other water sheds in this Province and communities to which there is a great danger of being exposed to drift? Mr. Speaker, I cannot believe it!

The five minutes have gone and I have to sit down, but I want to say I want to lay the petition on the table of the House and refer it to the. department to which it relates. Mr. Speaker, I whole-heartedly support the petition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for LaPoile. MR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I support the petition, Sir, presented by my colleague on behalf. of 3100 citizens in the Western part of the Province especially in the greater Corner Brook area. .Bay of Islands area. Mr. Speaker, the reports that we have so far on the spray programme are not very good at all.

Some of the people whorl met in Central Newfoundland over the weekend and in Western Newfoundland have a feeling somehow or other that the RCMP have been instructed to lay off Conair,to take it easy on Conair. Now personally I do not think that is true.I would like the Minister of Justice comment on it. But I would like to know, Mr. Speaker, if the RCMP cannot enforce the regulations under The Newfoundland Pesticide Act,thenwho does enforce the regulations? Is it the representatives of the Department of Consumer Affairs and Environment?

Could the minister tell us if his officials enforced the Pesticide Act? :If the RCMP does not do it, then who does it? Do the people themselves --have-to call in and report violations of the Pesticide Act? And if so, how long would it take then for a complaint to be prosecuted? The spraying programme will be over.

Tape 4623 DW - 2 June 20, 1978 MR: S. NEARY: I heard the minister this morning on radio saying, "Well,anybody that has a complaint should process it through the proper procedure." Well what is the proper procedure and how long will it take? Is not the proper procedure the law enforcement officers of this Province? Or does the minister have his ,:own investigative staff that can go out and look into any violations ofthe Pesticide Act? It is a very serious matter, Sir. When I came through Gander on Sunday evening the three Conair aircraft were over loading up the matacil and not a thing anybody could do about it.

The people in Gander were all set to go out with their placards and surround the little isolated part of the airport where they were loading the matacil on board. But is pathetic, Sir, it is really pathetic. People are frightened, scared stiff in this Province and yet there is not a thing they can do. It is like Bill 50.The government says they are going to ram it down the throats of the people whether they want it or not. And we have the same thing with the spray programme. - AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. S.

NEARY: — two of the most unpopular measures brought before this session of the Rouse, the spruce budworm spray programme and Bill 50. And yet the government, Sir, is so arrogant that they will not listen to anybody.The people say they do not want it and yet the government decides that they rare going to go ahead and squirt this dangerous poison around the Province anyway. It is a frightening situation, Sir. There are a lot of groups now planning to go out in the countryside, Beavers:and Cubs and Scouts and Guides and Brownies and 4-Her's and they do not know what to do.

They do not know what minute the spray plane is going to appear overhead a couple hundred feet from the ground. I have a young fellow myself who is scheduled to go out in the Terra Nova Park on the 23rd.I do not know if I am going to let him go or not even though I paid his registration.

Tape 4623 DW - 3 June 20, 1978 HR. S. NEAR!: Ana that is not politics. People are very concerned about the health of the innocent children and from what we can gather, Sir, so far the various reports that are coming in, and some of them are contradictory,that the waters that run into water supply in the Glenwood area and in Gander have been sprayed. They have taken

June 20, 1978 Tape 4624 EC - 1 MR. NEARY: samples in the bottles and they were pure red,just like blood and yet, Sir, we are told, Oh, there is nothing wrong with matacil, matacil is alright. I heard one of the Open Line hosts this morning arguing with a lady, saying there is no proof that matacil will injure your health. Well, there is no proof that it will not injure your health either. Just imagine, Mr. Speaker, the people having to prove that it will not injure your health.

It is up to the minister and the government, and the Minister of Justice should take criminal action against his colleagues for going out and squirting this poison around. It is up to the minister to prove that it is not dangerous, not up to the people to prove that it is not going to harm the health of their children if they go out in the countryside. And how will you know? You will not know for a year or two maybe whether it has injured the health of little innocent children or not. A very, very serious situation, and Conair Could not care less. They are ripping off the Public Treasury and what do they care?

They have their contract; they are going to make their killing off this and they could not care less. They will get the 'planes off the ground and the minister says, 'Well, they will not spray if the wind velocity is over five to six miles an hour: Conair says, 'Who cares about the minister? We will go out and spray anyway.' And we heard the other day where the air traffic controllers and the people who know about the velocity of the wind in Gander said that they were spraying over the limit that was laid down by the minister.

And yet there is nothing the minister can do about it expect go over to the Holiday Inn where he can hide away from the spray. And, Sir, I say it is a

June 20, 1978 Tape 4624 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: scandalous crime and I think it is time now to call it to a halt before any more damage is done in this Province. MR. STRACHAN:. Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: (Collins) The hon. the member for Eagle River. MR. STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, I hope the Minister of Forestry in reply to this petition will answer three very basic questions. First of all, yesterday in the House here the Minister of Health stated quite clearly that the spray programme was not his programme and therefore he should not be questioned on it.

I wonder if the minister considers that loyalty, loyalty , from Cabinet. Could the minister tell us when he replies whether it is a Cabinet decision or an administration decision or whether it is his decision alone, because the Minister of Health has stated it is not his programme and he should not be questioned about it; it has nothing to do with him. The Minister of Consumer Affairs and Environment also has stated previously that it is not his programme either and in fact has refused to answer questions. MR. PECKFORD: MR. SPEAKER: MR. PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. A point of order.

If I am not mistaken, Sir, both the present speaker and the previous speaker are violating one of the Standing Orders of the House and that is Standing Order No. 97, "There shall be no debate on a petition, " and,obviously, the previous speaker was, and now the present speaker is getting into the business of debate as to whether it is a government decision or whether it is a ministerial decision. He is actually de1ating the prayer of the petition and the whole spray programme rather

June 20,'1978 Tape 4624 EC - 3 MR. PECKFORD: than relegating his remarks to the prayer of the petition. So therefore I think that should be considered. MR. SPEAKER: (Collins) Order, please. In presenting petitions, those commenting should confine their remarks to the material allegations, to the number of signatures on the petition and also the statement of support given by the person presenting the petition, but not engage in other areas related to the petition that might get into an area of debate. The hon. the member for Eagle River. MR. STRACHAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Three thousand two hundred people have signed their names to a petition and they are wondering whether the Minister of Forestry, since it is his programme and only his programme, whether he is prepared to reconsider it, whether he is prepared to change it in view of the fact that it seems that other people do not want to have anything to do with it. So basically we are asking what the current situation is with this spray programme, and these 3,200 people,obviously, are asking for the same reasons.

I wonder also if the minister could explain in his answer here the whole question of the buffer zone and whether he could let us know whether there have been changes in the programme ; whether the one mile buffer zone for Gander, for instance, will also be applied to other areas ; whether other areas can submit requests to the minister and have the zones changed, have the whole situation changed, the watershed area, lakes, water supply areas whether other gioups

June 20, 1978 Tape 4625 PK - 1 Mr. Strachan: other than Gander itself can have this ? Esopriallv People on the West Coast who are very concerned since last year. There was spraying on the West Coast which had some very had results,at least the people could see there were bad results.

Whether they could feel the effects then or whether they have got to wait a number of years down the line before they feel the effects at least they could physically see some very bad results from the spray programme on the West Coast, and I am sure they are very concerned and want to know whether the buffer zones could be changed for the West Coast.

And lastly,the minister probably in these questions, and obviously the petitioners are worried about it, they are worried very much about whether the limits to.spraying, obviously the limits to spraying whether the people are, the Conair, or the group spraying are spraying in extreme weather conditons from a point of view of spraying. Obviously they are spraying in twelve and fifteen mile an hour winds, and the minister has stated before in the House here that this is not allowed. His regulations state five miles an hour is the acceptable limit.

And I wonder whether the minister could stand and reassure us that they are meeting these limits, and whether the people in Gander or the West Coast are correct in petitioning that their concern that these limits have been exceeded possibly in the buffer zones, and also in the wind conditions under which they are spraying? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. W. ROWE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise, Sir, to support this petition signed by, what is it? 3,100, over 3,100 names of people from a wide variety of areas in Newfoundland, Mr.

Speaker, from the Bay of Islands area, Jackson's Arm, all up around that area. I do not know if Your Honour has ever tried to gather for any purpose 3,000 names on a petition. I was involved in some petitions years ago, Sir, and I can tell you it is a massive job, a massive job trying to gather these names together, and it indicates the dedication of the people who are trying to combat the spray programme

Tape 4625 PK - 2 June 20, 1978 MR. W. ROWE: as it presently exists, and the interest of the people themselves to have penned their names to this petition. Now, Mr. Speaker, we know who is looking after the interest of the paper companies. We know that the Minister of Forestry is looking after the interest of the paper companies.

We know who is looking after the interest of the government from a PR point of view, because we only need to turn on the radio and look at the paid political advertising campaign that is going on, paid for, by. the way, out of your funds and mine, on the radio trying to support a programme which cannot support itself on its own merits. Mr. Speaker, the question I would ask, Who is representing the interests of the people of this Province? Two or three weeks ago I directed a question to the Minister of the Environment; he made it quite clear that he could not care less about the programme. MR.

HICKMAN: On a point of order. MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): A point of order. MR. HICKMAN: Your Honour has already ruled that with respect to petitions any hon. gentleman has the right to support the petition to confine himself or herself to the facts contained therein, but there shall be no debate. And the hon. the Leader of the Opposition has had two minutes of outright debate in absolute violation of that rule. MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): In petitions, in commenting on material allegations, the remarks - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: (DR. COLLINS): Order, please! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): Order, please! Order, please! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): Order, please! Order, please! In commenting on the material allegations, remarks of those

Tape 4625 ' PK - 3 June 20, 1978 'Mr. Speaker (Dr. Collins) supporting the petition should not stray from the statements in the petition. I understand that the petition being discussed now relates to concerns as to the effect of the spray, and concerning health aspects, and if my memory serves me correctly the beneficial effects of the spray. So remarks related to concern in those. areas I would say are quite in order, but they should not be put forward in an argumentative fashion. I think ■ that is what one would have to say. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR.W. ROWE: Thank you, Sir.

We know that the government's interest is well protected by a $100,000 or $200,000 advertising campaign. We know the paper companies interests are being protected well by our Minister of Forestry.

June 20,1978 Tape No. 4626 Ali-1 MR.W.ROWE: We know that the Minister of the Environment is not the least bit concerned and. is grossly ignorant and lacking in knowledge of all the facts concerning the programme. PECKFORD: SONE HON.MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: being heard. HR. PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Oh, oh! Order, pIease! Order, please when a point of order is Mr.

Speaker, I submit that the Leader of the .Opposition is putting forward his support for the petition presented by the member for Windsor-Buchans(Mr.Flight) in a very argumentative, provocative way which violates completely. and categorically the Standing Order already referred to, 'There shall be no debate on a petition," That is clear and concise. Now I recognize, Mr.

Speaker, that the various elements in the prayer of the petition allow for, some flexibility on this score and as Your Honour has already ruled therefore there are a lot of areas here on health and the concern of the people on which an hon. member can support it. But he should do so, the hon. member should do so in as less a provocative and argumentative way as possible. And I submit that saying that the various ministers are lacking in knowledge or ignorant of this or that in no way corresponds with the ruling that Your Honour just made. I' would submit that the hon.

Leader of t:e Opposition if he wishes to support a petition must do so, especially a petition of this sort, in the least provocative way or otherwise he is definitely breaking the spirit, intent and literal

interpretation of that Standing .Order. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! It will be recognized of course that it is difficult often to determine when the bounds are overstepped from mere support to debate. I would say if the actions of others:are questioned this could be in the area of debate. I would think that the . hon. Leader of the Opposition should confine his remarks more clearly to the allegations.

June 20,1978 Tape No. 4626 AH-2 MR.W.ROWE: Think you, Sir. I heard yesterday the Minister of Health wring his hands like Pontius Pilate and say it is not his programme. The question I would ask is who is looking after the interests of the people in this Province? For example does the Minister of the Environment or has the Minister of the Environment even considered this point? No, Sir, because he is leaving now having spent his five minutes quota in the House today. MR. PECKFORD: A point of order. MR.' SPEAKER: Order, please!

Before hearing the point of order I think I have my own remarks in there isy a very short head. I was just going to.say the Hon. Leader of the Opposition's time has expired. Is there a point of order? MR. PECKFORD: There was a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I was up on a point of order. My point of order was,simply,comments relating to the absence or presence of an hon. minister on this side of the House in no way reflects relevance upon the prayer of the petition presented by the member for Windsor-Buchans (Mr. Flight). MR.U.ROWE: MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, Mr. Speaker. Order, please!

If I may rule on a point of order because I think the relevance of the point of order has now passed. I am ruling in regards to the point of order. AR.W.ROWE: SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR.SPEAKER: May I speak to the point of order, Mr. Speaker. Oh, oh: Order, please! When the Chair is making a ruling it is difficult to complete the ruling unless hon. members will permit the Chair to state the full case. The point I am putting forward is that a point of order was brought up in regard to the remark of the Hon.

Leader of the Opposition but the hon. leader's remarks had been terminated, because his time had terminated before the point of order was in actual fact recognized by the Chair.S0 that the point of order, having heard it one did not know what the point of order was, it could have been on any matter at all, but having heard it my position is that the point of order has no relevance now as the point in time when the point of order might have had relevance has now passed. I had to hear the point of order because I did

June 20,197S Tape No. 4626 AH-3 MR. SPEAKER: not know what it related to)but having heard that it related to the Hon. Leader's remarks which he had terminated I would say it:has no relevance. Hon. member for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support this petition and in doing So I want to pose a couple of questions to the minister,who is no longer in his seat,and to the Minister of Education as well as far as this spray programme is concerned because the restaurant owners and the hotel owners in Stephenville and

June 20, 1978, Tape 4627, Page 1 apb MR. HODDER: surrounding areas are very, very upset at the present time because I do not know what we are paying Conair to come down here and spray. They have spotter planes, they are flying DC - 7's but I would say that if they are going to take the chance of contaminating the Stephenville water supply and everything else, that they should not be living in the Bay St. George Community College and paying $2.50 a night rent. I think that, at least, the hotel owners- and eating at the Bay St. George Community College restaurant - MR. PECKFORD: MR. SPEAKER(Collins): has come up.

MR. PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. Order, please! A point of order Mr. Speaker, the question of whether people who are employed by a company who are to spray in this Province, the question of whether they are lodging or living or boarding in Port au Port or in the community council residences or on Bell Island - MR. HODDER: Department of Education. MR. PECKFORD: The Community College, the - or the Community College or wherever, has no relevance whatsoever to the prayer of the petition and hence is irrelevant. MR. HODDER: Speaker. MR. SPEAKER(Collins): MR. HODDER: To that point of order, Mr.

The hon. member for Port au Port. Mr. Speaker, I think it has a lot of relevance. These people were hired to come here and spray the forest. The chemical, matacil, is being stored at Stephenville, there were broken containers and that sort of thing; they are staying at a government institution at, I am told, $2.50 per night - not over $5.00 - but the figure that was told to me by the Restaurant Association was $2.50 per night. They are eating at the

June 20, 1978, Tape 4627, Page 2 -- apb MR. HODDER: Bay St. George Community College, directly under the control of the Minister of Education. The hotel and restaurant owners are upset but nevertheless, this is part of the spray programme and I happen to be talking about the spray programme. MR. SPEAKER-(Collins):• Order, please! The material allegations in the petition, I believe, in substance relate to concern for the effects of the material itself and the means by which it is being distributed on the forests.

I think, therefore, that the matters relating to the housing of crews and similar questions would not be related to the material allegations. I would ask the hon. member to direct his remarks to the material allegations themselves and other matters that might legitimately arise. The hon. member. MR. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, as I. have said before in the House, we have not proved, there has been no proof shown that we actually destroy the spruce budworm or do anything for the forest. These people have been brought in here at great cost to the Province.

I would ask the minister in responding to the petition, if he does, to tell us how much this particular company is being paid. Iwould also ask the minister to tell us what fringe benefits they are getting. I would also ask the Minister of Education, as I said before, to tell us when he stands up why the Bay St. George Community College is putting them up at that price. CAPT. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker. MR.,SPEAKER(Collins): The hon. member for Fogo. CAPT. WINSOR: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition presented by my colleague, the member for Windsor - Buchans. I do so, Mr.

Speaker, because I have a suspicion that there are signatures on that petition from parts of

June 20, 1978, Tape 4627, Page 3 -- apb CAPT. WINSOR: Fogo district, and I am thinking of the area around Rogers Cove, George's Point, Gander Bay and in that area. But, Mr. Speaker, it may be coincidental but just before I came to the House of Assembly I had a call from a lady down at Rogers Cove and she said, "What are the government trying to do? They are trying to choke us with dust and now they are going to poison us with spray." Now, Mr. Speaker, when you get a call like that you must feel that people are concerned.

This is from an area where most of the people in that one community derive their livelihood by working in the lumber woods. So this will indicate, Mr. Speaker, the concern of the people in that particular area. They are concerned because they are afraid of the unknown. They are afraid of what effect the spraying of matacil will have upon their lives and the lives of their children. This lady went to great length to explain to me; "Now today' she said, "school is closed and the children are out and they are up around the lake fishing and they can see the aircraft coming over spraying and they are scared." So, Mr.

Speaker, I think the government should take a good hard

June 20, 1978 Tape No. 4628 NM - 1 CAPTAIN WINSOR: look the seriousness of this spray. They may be gone too far to stop its but surely they must take into consideration the concern of parents especially, and as my hon. colleague there mentioned when he supported it, the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary), that he has a son going out to the national park, and he is not the only one. There are many parents today who are anxious to get their children out in some park for relaxation and enjoy the outdoor life.

But, Sir, they are now so concerned with this spraying that they are giving thought to whether they should send their children out or not. So this is one major concern I should think of the government. I certainly support the petition, Sir, and I do not know what the government can do but certainly they should take another hard look at the spraying. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Baie Verte - White Bay. MR.. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, I rise to say a few words in support of this petition presented by my colleague from Windsor-Buchans (Mr.

Flight), in behalf of more than 3,000 residents of the Western and Central part of the Province. I notice that there are a number of names on the petition from the Baie Verte area and Jackson's Arm area in the White Bay part of the Province. Mr.

Speaker, those three thousand-odd names must now bring to close to 10,000 or so the numbers of fellow Newfoundlanders who are so concerned with the government's spray programme that they have seen fit to sign their names to one petition or another, half a dozen or so in the last week or ten days, and sent to this House in an effort to have the government reconsider this spraying programme. Now, Mr. Speaker, that must indicate to the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, and to all the ministers, to the Cabinet, that there is a grave concern, a very great concern among

Tape No. 4628 NM - 2 June 20, 1978 MR. RIDEOUT: the residents of this Province about the spray programme that the government has embarked upOn. There are so many unanswered questions, Mr. Speaker; and there appears to be no effort, or very little effort by the government to provide the answers that people are looking for so as to allay the fears that exist, justifiably or not. The fears are there. The people are concerned and I think the onus is on the government to provide the people with the information that they are looking for, and the government to this date just haVe not done it. Now, Mr.

Speaker, the philosophy that was so adequately expressed here yesterday seems to be the philosophy behind the spray programme, that 'you are going to get it done to you or not, whether it is.good for your or not we are the ones who will decide that and you will put up and that seems to be the attitude. Now, Mr. Speaker, there is no evidence, there is absolutely no evidence that has been brought before this House or brought before the public of this Province, that this spray programme actually works.

If we had some reason to believe that it was the only alternative, the only way the government could go was to spray the forests and that it would work, that something would come because of it, then maybe we could take a different attitude and look at this programme a little differently than we have. But we know, Mr. Speaker, that there are other options. We know that there are hundreds of unanswered questions related to the chemical being used in this spray programme, the chemical matacil. We know also from experiences in other parts of the Mainland of North America that the spray programme just does not work.

So, Mr. Speaker, I think the people of this Province are asking of their government, and justifiably so, what are we doing it for? If we do not hope to achieve anything, if the spray programme has

• Tape No. 4628 NM - 3 June 20, 1978 MR. RIDEOUT: not worked in other parts of Canada and in other parts of North American, what is so different about it down here? What makes us belieVe, what makes us really believe that this programme is going to work and do any good for the forest. So, Mr. Speaker, there are so many unanswered questions. I am very concerned •as I move among the people in my own district asking questions about the spray programme that I just cannot answer.

Those questions have been asked in the House of Assembly and the Minister of Health, who has sloughed off the programme as not being his responsibility and other ministers have done the same, there are just no answers to give those people. So I think their concerns are justified. Their concerns are so adequately expressed in the prayer of this petition, Mr.

Speaker, and I have no hesitatancy in supporting it and I would hope that the government would seriously consider the alternatives, the options, They have not done that either, even though there has been no evidence of this programme will work, even though they have not adequately answered the questions posed to them, they have not given any serious or given no evidence that they have given any serious consideration to the options to a spray programme. So, Mr.

Speaker, I whole-heartedly support the prayer of the petition and those petitioners in the Baie Verte area and Jackson's Arm area of White Bay who signed i t.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4629 A EC - 1 MR. SPEAKER: (Collins) The hon. the member for St. George's. MRS.. McISAAC: Mr. Speaker, I rise too in support of the petition. When you see another approximately 3,200 names coming in today on the petition it certainly makes you stop and think that the Opposition are not the only people who are against the spray or concerned about the spray. There is nothing, we have seen no evidence, as has been said here several times, and if there is any evidence why has it not been produced? We have not seen any evidence that matacil is harmless.

If it is harmless and the government knows it is harmless why do they not produce the paper work or the evidence to confirm it? We have people in this Province who are scared to send - of course, they are not sending their children anywhere; they are scared to let them out through the door now. They are keeping their doors and their windows closed because they do not know what is going to happen.

And people are scared to death, and it is evidenced by the number of people who are petitioning, but yet on goes the spray, and of course, there is no way in the world that anyone will convince me that the water supplies are not going to be contaminated. It was on radio yesterday - I cannot verify that it was contamination, but I can certainly verify that I heard on radio yesterday morning that there were traces of it found in the water in Gander yesterday. AN HON. MEMBER: Where did you hear that? MRS. McISAAC: It was heard on radio.

I say I cannot confirm it, but if there are traces found in the water and nobody knows whether or not it is harmful - and if it is harmful,well then people are going to drink it.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4629 EC - 2 MRS. McISAAC: And who would have thought ten years ago that we were going to have trouble in Baie Verte and all those other places? That was laughed at too first when it came out, but until we have proof and proof positive that matacil is harmless we certainly should not be tampering with the lives of human beings; I will not even mention the wildlife anymore. But I. know that right in St. George's where the spray is going to be conducted there, it is going to cover the watershed area, the three ponds that feed the Dribble, and that is our main source of water supply.

And there is no reason in the world for me to think that that is not going to be contaminated. If it is not contaminated - well, if matacil is harmless it is not going to be contaminated, but there is no way in the world that you can prevent it from getting into the drinking water at St. George's and the same right across the Island. And why should this government make any commitment to do something against the will of that many people? And all the petitions are not in.

I am told that there is a petition being circulated in my area to come in, and I would venture to say that before this week is out that we will have probably four or five more petitions with probably as many names on it as was presented today. I cannot see for the life of me why they are so determined to spray this chemical, this unknown chemical, this chemical that has not been confirmed as harmless. I cannot see why they are going to spray it.

And if it is harmless then tell us and produce the evidence that it is harmless and we will sit down and say, 'Go ahead and spray it if it is harmless.' But from all the evidence that I have it has not been proven harmless, and it is too late when we have people here in this

June 20, 1978 Tape 4629 EC - 3 MRS. McISAAC: Province in the same condition that they found people in New Brunswick, affected by the matacil spray. Then the government is going to have to answer and maybe it may be too late for the government then and much too late for the people. I am not concerned about the government. If they are foolish enough to do it without knowing what they are doing, well then, that is fine, stand the consequences. But the thing about it is it is the people that I am concerned about. Wildlife - what about wildlife? Wildlife is one thing but human life is something else.

And if we do not get it directly from the spray we are going to get it indirectly from eating wild meat or from drinking the water. And certainly there are three departments of government that should be more than interested in it and should certainly have all the evidence that they can collect from wherever or whoever possible before they do it. And if they have done that then why not produce it? I have not seen it.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4630 PK - 1 MRS. MCISAAC: I have not seen the evidence that it is harmless. I still have a minute. I do not need it, I think I have said all that I had to say, except that I am concerned about the St. George's area. The member for Gander (Mr. H. Collins) went to the Minister of Agriculture apparently or went to Cabinet or went somewhere and asked to have his area changed, the boundaries on the area in his district that was to be sprayed changed, so why can we not all do that? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MRS.

MCISAAC: Now I am asking right now to have the area that is going to be sprayed in St. George's changed, because the spray is going directly into the three Dribble ponds that feed the Dribble, our water supply. And if the Minister of Health or the member for wherever he is, Gander, can have his area changed then why can I not have mine changed. I do not want to see the ponds that feed the St. George's water supply get contaminated. MR. F. ROWE: They are trying to poison the Liberals. 'MRS. MCISAAC: his are - MR. F. ROWE: MRS.

MCISAAC: — SOME HON:'MEMBERS: My people are not second class people any more than They are trying to poison the Liberals. - and I want my area changed. Hear, hear! . MRS. MCISAAC: And this is the request right now, wherever the minister is - he never stays in the House long enough to ask him a question. So I cannot ask him if he will change the zoning, but I am certainly going to find him this afternoon and ask him. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): The hon. the member for Conception Bay South. MR. J. NOLAN: Mr.

Speaker, I rise to support the petition as submitted in such a forceful,sympathetic, and compassionate manner by the member for St. George's (Mrs. McIsaac). AN HON. MEMBER: Windsor-Buchans.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4630 PK - 2 MR. NOLAN: AN HON.'MEMBER: MR. NOLAN: - or Windsor-Buchans (Mr. Flight) rather-- And supported by St. George's. -and supported by St. George's , of course. The situation now is one that has caused some wide concerns, People now are afraid to let their children go out into the woods camping with the various. Guides, Brownies, Cubs, Scouts, and so on.

It is a situation now where we have, as anyone will know,throughout this Province many bodies of water that are utilized, many of them by gravity feed to cut down on the economic costs involved, water supplies for the areas in this Province. I can whole-heartedly sympathize with the people in Gander, and I certainly support the fact that the spray has been moved back from what was the original intention. But as the member for St. George's (Mrs. Mclsaac) mentioned, how can you make chalk of one and cheese of the other?

Surely no one,especially the people in Gander,would suggest that their children or their family are more important than,say,the children of the families in Port Blandford, or in St. George's or anywhere else. So there has to be a very clear and definite statement of policy on it and the time is now in regarding water supplies in the spraying of this Province. It is nothing to tangle with. Right now there are hearings going on this very day, I believe, either in Nova Scotia or New Brunswick regarding Reye's Syndrome. There are meetings going on this day there.

There is great concern, but what do the people have to do? Apparently the Leader of the Opposition poses some very pertinent and important questions as requested by people in this Province, parents and so on; he is ignored, laughed at, jeered, - AN HON. MEMBER: Put down. MR. NOLAN: - put down . MR. PECKFORD: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): A point of order. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER CDR, COLLINS): A point of order has come up.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4630 PK - 3 MR. PECKFORD: The hon. the member for Conception Bay South (Mr. Nolan) is debating; he is debating the issue as to whether the Leader of the Opposition should be ignored or not when he poses certain questions as it relates to the spray programme, and that surely is totally irrelevant, number one. And number two, the hon. member is debating the issue when he is suppose to be supporting the material allegations contained in the prayer of the petition. MR. NEARY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): The hon. the member for LaPoile.

MR.NEARY: This afternoon, Sir, the hon. the member for Green Bay (Mr. Peckford) has become a constitutional expert. MR. PECKFORD: Thank you very much. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, there is no point of order. My hon. friend is completely relevant. He is not debating, Sir. It is a very serious matter that involves the health of our people. My hon: friend is merely raising points of order to try to drag out the time, so time will. run out. He is not interested in the health and welfare of the people of the Province. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): Order, please!

In an emotional issue one would have to take that as being an emotional issue perhaps it is easy to stray beyond the restrictions or strictions laid down. I would ask the hon. member if he would confine his remarks to the material allegations. MR. NOLAN: Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. I have stood in this House and I have seen some leeway allowed on various important issues in the past. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NOLAN: I did not see people jumping up on points of order. I am talking about human lives. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. NOLAN: Is that not important? SOME HON. MEMBERS: oh., oh! MR.

PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): Order, please. A point of order. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. PECKFORD: A point of order. The hon. gentleman is not only questioning your ruling, Your Honour, but he is also - MR. NOLAN: MR. PECKFORD: SOME HON. MEMBERS: No he is not. - starting the debate all over again. Oh, oh! MR.'NEARY: Cannot the Government House Leader get you under control? ' MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): Order, please! The time is limited in speaking to a petition. I would ask the hon. member if he wishes to conclue his remarks? SOME'HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oht June 20, 1978 Tape 4630 • PK - 4

June 20, 1978, Tape 4631, Page 1 apb MR. NOLAN: Mr. Speaker, again I attempt to appeal to all sensible, rational people who are in this Legislative Assembly or without to do anything possible to stop this spraying programme. It is not enough to experiment on the lives of people in this Province, particularly young children or anybody else. Thirty-one hundred people are not to be sneezed at, and if it were only five it would be equally grave. This situation is one that needs the immediate attention of everyone who is even casually concerned about this situation.

I am sorry to say, and I hope I am wrong, that by the time we find out just exactly what the effect of this matacil spray will be, it may very well be too late. But there is no forgiveness for those who have remained silent' on this particular issue and the Hansards of this House will prove it. Why is it that members opposite are not standing up to support this petition? How can they sit there like Legislative lumps? MR. SPEAKER(Collins): Order! Order, please! MR. NOLAN: MR. SPEAKER(Collins): Bay de Verde. MR. F.B.ROWE: I support the petition. The hon. member for Trinity - Mr.

Speaker, I should like to speak in support of the petition presented by my friend and colleague from Windsor - Buchans, Sir, on this spray programme. Sir, I would like to raise a number of questions to the - to whom? Which minister? The Minister of Environment is not here, Sir. The Minister of Forestry is not here, and'the Minister of Health is not here. Sir, there is nobody over there. The Premier is not here so there is nobody here, Sir, to really address the questions to. So I would assume that the hon. House Leader on the government side will take note of the questions.

June 20, 1978, Tape 4631, Page 2 -- apip MR. NEARY: The Premier has given up. MR. SIMMONS: If you shout loud enough he will hear you. He is down on MacDonald Drive. MR. F.B.ROWE; Probably so, Mr. Speaker, MR. NEARY: Hanging on to a light pole. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER(Collins): Order, please! MR. F.B.ROWE: Mr. Speaker, there is a curious thing which happened with respect to this spray programme. One, we were trying to find out what the policy was, and that was pratically impossible except we knew that the government was going to spray with matacil.

Then when the policy started to be implemented, we found that there were little changes occurring here and there. • The government is-obviously yielding to political pressure from one specific area in the case of Gander. MR. STRACHAN: To save the Minister of Health. MR..F.B.ROWE: As a result, presumably, to save the Minister of Health's political hide. Now, Sir, the government either has a policy or it does not have a policy. It sticks to a policy or it does not stick to a policy. We had trouble identifying the policy.

And now, Sir, that we have identified the policy of indiscriminate spraying - that is the only way you can call it - we find out that the government-has decided to change it here and there to accommodate certain districts. Now, Sir, I suggest - this may sound foolish, but just to make the point - that if the government are not prepared to poison a P.C. districts,they might give some consideration to not poisoning some Liberal districts in this particular spray programme.

Sir, I submit that the problem with this whole spray policy was this, that this administration decided before it got the information.and the research and the

June 20, 1978; Tape 4631, Page 3 -- apb MR. F.B.ROWE:. . data to contract an aircraft company to do the spraying and they bought the. chemical matacil. Now they were locked into those agreements and there was no way the government could get out of them. I have yet to hear, Sir, whether or not tender. calls were put for the various aircraft companies for the purposes of spraying. Sir, the curious thing'is that it seems to me, Mr.

Speaker, that all of the information, it all related to the spray programme, the effect that this chemical might or might not have on water, on insects, on the forest itself, came after, but not during, the time when we were presenting petitions and asking questions about it and debating it. Sir, it came from and through a government sponsored advertising programme on T.V. and radio and presumably in the newspapers,

June 20, 197S Tape No. 4632 AH-1 MR.F.ROWE: paid for, Sir, out of the taxpayers pockets. Now, Sir, I would submit that if the government had in fact the information, that the information pertaining to this spray programme could have been brought to the attention of the people of this Province through the press via the House of Assembly, if the various ministers informed had saw fit to answer the questions that were put to them during Oral Question Period and during the presentation of the petitions.

But no, Sir, they would not answer the questions and now they have the spray programme going in - AN HON MEMBER: No notice. MR.F.ROWE: - no notice,Sir. What happened to the twenty- four hours notice that was suppose to be given? I have not heard anything about that. But, Sir, the sadness of it is this, the government refused to answer questions and have now embarked on an expensive advertising campaign to sell the spray programme and, Sir, I will predict that the egg mass count will go down from this year to next year.

And you know something, Sir, this hon. crowd over there will try to take credit for it through the spray programme. I will tell you now, Sir, that the egg mass count of the spruce budworm is goingLt0 go down naturally anyway through normal predators. It has already started, Sir, and we will hear the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, the Minister of Health and the minister of what have yoU getting up and talking about the great success of the spray programme and that the egg mass count has eone down.

Sir, if it goes down it will be by nature's course and if it does not go down, Sir, I will submit it is because of the fact that the spray has killed off the natural predators of the spruce budworm and that in fact could increase the egg mass count. So, Sir, I give my wholehearted support to this particular petion. .MR. SPEAKER: Hon. member for Burgeo-Bay d'Espoir. UR. SIMMONS: Mr.

Speaker, I want to rise in support of the petition from 3,100 people from various parts of the Province-Corner Brook, Pasadena , Stephenville, Benoit's Cove, Lark Harbour, York Harbour, Silverdale, Langdon's Cove, Springdale, Little Bay, Kings Point; Baie Verte

June 20,1978 Tape No. 4632 AH-2 MR. SIMMONS: LaScie, all over the Province, the Western and Central part of the Province, dozens of communities, a good cross section. And put together with the signatories on the other petitions we had,it represents a very sizable consensus on the part of the people who are directly concerned about and affected by this budworm spray. And why the government is not listening I do no know. How large a sledge hammer, Mr. Speaker, do they need ? How large a sledge hammer do you have to whack them with before tey get the message?

Now I suppose half the problem is that the minister concerned is not here.and he was not here yesterday. The Minister of Health says it is not his problem, the Minister of the Environment suggests that it is not his problem. IR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Again so as not to encroach on the order of the House,I should remind the hon. member that comments should be confinded to the statements made by the petitioner or petitioners, those involved in the petitions and the allegations arising out of the petition rather nen the conduct of hon. members or hon. ministers or other aspects of the question. The hon. member.

MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, nobody is talking about the conduct of any of the ministers; that is not parliamentary to talk about their conduct. Now the fact is, Mr. Speaker, if I am going to address myself to the moratorium which this calls for, if I cannot refer to the minister, Mr. Speaker, I quit here. And if the member for Grand Falls (Mr.Lundrigan) is going to yap today let him do it from his plaee, Mr. Speaker; enforce the rules on both sides of the House. SOZM HON MEMBERS: SIMMONS: MR. SPEAKER: Hear, hear! Now, Mr. Speaker, a few words about the petition. Order, please!

Interjections will not help the presentation of the petition so I would encourage hon. members to give the hon. member speaking his due silence. MR. SIMMON: Mr. Speaker, I have a letter here from a person who is concerned about the issue. I checked to make sure that his name was

June 20,1978 Tape No. 4632 AH-3 MR. SIMMONS: on the petition and sure enough it is there so I guess this is in order. He says to me in part;'I am sorry to hear that the debate on this controversial issue was stopped yesterday"- he is referring to that infamous day when the sometimes-member for St. John's East (Mr.Marshall) moved his infamous motion, and he wrote me on the subject. He sent me a number of questions, Mr. Speaker, and I would like to raise them for the House, He has

Tape 4633 DW - 1 June 20, 1978 MR. SIMMONS: will the spray destroy the natural predators? He says, "May we ignore the warnings on the matacil containers concerning by-stander danger from the spray mixture since the need for buffer zones in only psychological.' Is it true that the company who tested matacil for registration on behalf of manufactures is under investigation by the United States Government with a view to prosecution?" MR. S. NEARY: That is right. MR.

SIMMONS: "Is it true;he saysfthat the company - 1 Sorry, the next one 'to our geographical and topographical features differ so much from those in New Brunswick that'we cannot accept their experience of addiction will not apply here?" He asks7Is it reasonable for us to disregard the reasons why Nova Scotia and B.C. have decided against spraying?" MR. W.N. ROWE: Good question. MR. SIMMONS1 Then he says, Mr. Speaker, he names one of the members of the House who is his member. He says, "Will Mr. Peckford invite his colleagues'children for a camping holiday in his buffer zone'!" SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

SIMMONS: Now, Mr. Speaker, if the member for Green Bay (Mr. Peckford) had been less busy with points of order today and had raised his questions because they were really sent to him with a copy to me,but he did not ask those questions, Mr. Speaker. He did not ask them. Now, Mr. Speaker - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. PECKFORD: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order. MR. PECKFORD: Now, Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to debate the spray programme or any other issue that government is No,you are not. involved in in this Province. MR. SIMMONS: AN HON.

MEMBER: Chicken:

June 20, 1978 Tape 4633 DW - 2 MR. PECKFORD: I understood, and I have been up on my feet on several occasions already this afternoon as it relates to relevancy and to debate on the support of petitions as is the wont of all hon. members when one sees that a number of rules of the House are being broken. Now I cannot stand by and watch the hon. member for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir get into,obviously,debate on the whole question of the Spray programme and then to question why I did not raise these questions that this hon. person who wrote the letter and sent a copy to the hon. member,that I have not raised them. M.R.

SIMMONS: MR. PECKFORD: Aha: Now this is debate on the petition which has-nothing particularly to do with the petition,and to raise letters that were written to me with copies sent to the hon. member for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir in a way to support a petition presented by the member for Windsor - Buchans (Mr. Flight) in my view is not in order. Now if the hon. member for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir wants to bring in a resolution in this House, wants to debate with me outstde the House at some public gathering,I will only be too happy; to do so. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR.

PECKFORD: But as far as doing it here under the guise of a petition presented by another hon. member ,I think is unfair and completely out of order. MR. SPEAKER: (Collins) Order, please! My understanding is that the hon. member raised a number of questions that related to the effect of the spray and so on which clearly,' think would be in order but it would be out of order. then to expand that into enlarging,using that to enter onto an area of debate in regard to another member's actions. • •• • • --• • •• MR. SIMMONS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The member for Green Bay served his purpose, served his purpose very well but I still have a few seconds left, Mr. Speaker, The letter, writer goes on to say to me and to the member for green Bay. that this is not a political matter but one of survival, Mr. Speaker. The issue we are talking

June 20, 1978 Tape 4633 DW - 3 MR. S/MMONS: about is one of survival. Now I am not concerned about the letter to the minister. He will respond to this one like he does to other letters, Mr. Speaker, with his usual poison pen fashion but that is not the issue right now, Mr. Speaker, The issue instead, Mr. Speaker, - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. PECKFORD: A paint of order. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order has come up. MR. PECKFORD: The hon. member for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir is again referring to me as one hon. member relating to the kind of letters that I write to individuals around this Province.

And I say that the kind of letters that I write to individuals around this Province has no relevance at all to the material allegations contained in the petition presented by the member for Windsor - Buchans) number oneithere is no relevance and number two,it is a debatable and argumentative issue and on both counts the hon. member for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir once again for about the one thousand and one hyndredth time in this session has been out of order. MR. LUNDRIGAN: Three today five yesterday. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: As hon. members are aware,I was • coming into the Chair and the hon. member for St.

John's South (Dr. Collins) was going out at the time, so if hon. members will excuse me it was very difficult for me to have followed the point so if we can leave it there, if not I will review the Hansards and make a decision later on. MR. PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I would like for you to review the Hansards.The point at issue here is that the hon. member for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir was casting - AN HON. MEMBER: Aspersion. MR. PECKFORD: - aspersion on me as it relates to letters that I write to individuals around this Province and in so doing was being irrelevant to the material allegations contained

Tape 4633 DW - 4 June 20, 1978 MR. PECKFORD: in the petition that is now under discussion presented by the member for Windsor - Buchans,number one• and number twoin so doing he was in the area of debate which is also

June 20, 1978 Tape 4634 EC - 1 MR. PECKFORD: disallowed under the Standing Orders, and therefore I would ask Your Honour to review the tapes in due course and to make a ruling as it relates to this point of order. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir. MR. SIMMONS: To the point of order, the member for Green Bay (Mr. Peckford) has finally succeeded in stating it in terms that the Speaker of the House can understand. What I did, Mr.

Speaker-and I think this is permissible - the letter I have in front of me is addressed to me: "Dear Roger," signed by a first name, a good friend of mine, a constituent of the member but a good friend of mine, a lot in that category down there, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. PECKFORD: (Inaudible) the back door. MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, I would not dare come to the front door because I would not find the member at the front door. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I must ask the hon. gentleman not to interrupt when someone else is speaking. MR. SIMMONS: Mr.

Speaker, I did make a brief reference to a letter I had from one of the signatories of the petition presented here today and to which I am speaking. I read a number of questions and in passing, Mr. Speaker, I submit purely in passing, because anything more than a passing reference to the member for Green Bay would be completely unjustified and a waste of words, in passing, Mr. Speaker, I made a reference to the fact that the member also got a copy of this same letter and

June 20, 1973 Tape 4634 EC - 2 MR. SIMMONS: in passing only, Mr. Speaker, in about ten words, I intimated that I fully expected he would reply to this letter as he had other letters in the past, and the House is well aware of his record on that point, Mr. Speaker. I submit my reference was purely in passing. I submit also that the member has achieved his purpose, I think he has risen on nine points of order today so far since this petition came up, and let the records show that he is deliberately delaying, using the tactic of points of order, Mr. Speaker, to obfuscate and delay the pusiness . of the House.

And this is most unfortunate. What we are talking about here, as my letter writer says, Mr. Speaker, is a matter of human survival, and it is that issue I want to address myself to if I could be given a moment to do so, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! On the point of .order• I have the arguments of both hon. gentlemen. I will review Hansard when it is available and give a decision at that time. I do understand that the hon. gentleman's time is up. MR. SIMMONS: If I could just have a few words, Mr. Speaker, to clue up - HR. SPEAKER: Does the hon. member have leave? SOME HON. MEMBERS : No, no MR.

SIMMONS: - a sentence or two to quote further from this letter to the member for Green Bay which I fully expect he will answer in his usual poisonous fashion. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! I understand the hon. gentleman does not have leave. MR. PECKFORD: SOME HON. MEMBERS: • MR. SPEAKER: Mr. Speaker, on the point of order. Oh, oh! Order, please! On that point of order, I have heard argument from both hon. members.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4634 EC - 3 MR. SPEAKER: I will see the Hansard when it is available and give a decision at that time. The hon. the member for Bellevue. MR. CALLAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition, a petition of 3,100 petitioners in the Bale Verte - Jackson's Arm area of this Province, who are protesting the spruce budworm spraying programme presently in progress, I suppose is as good a word as any, by this government and in particular, of course, the Department of Forestry and Agriculture. Mr.

Speaker, I was not here when the petition was• presented; however, I did go to the table and read down through the prayer of the petition. It was in the form of a resolution somewhat. It read, 'Whereas' and 'We therefore protest'. Mr. Speaker, in supporting this petition, I want to say first of all that what the people here are protesting more than anything else, I believe, is the fact that the spray programme is being carried on in close proximity to communities and towns where people live and also in close proximity to water supplies, watersheds and so on, Gander Lake.

The Appleton - Glenwood area was mentioned yesterday as examples of that. Mr. Speaker, other speakers and the statistics show that the egg mass count is down. The little budworms have not been laying this year as they should have been because of the cold weather, the weather which is unsuitable for us but very suitable as far as destroying the budworm infestation. I do not know why, Mr. Speaker, in view of these things and other facts that we have heard from other provinces - the fact that the egg

Tape 4634 EC - 4 June 20, 1978 MR. CALLAN: mass count is down in other provinces as well where they have not carried on any spraying whatsoever - why the government are intent on carrying out the spray programme in spite of

June 20, 1978 Tape No. 4535 NM - 1 MR. CALLAN: all the information that has been presented and much of it scientific information that has been presented. MR. W. ROWE: He has come up against Maynard. R. CALLAN: It is a good question. Why is the government so intent on carrying out this spray programme, especially with a chemical,matacil,which we have heard from authorities has not been tested adequately and leaves them a number of questions in the minds of the people who are being affected in one way or the other by this spray programme. A former speaker this afternoon, Mr.

Speaker, asked a question, Why is it that the employees of Conair, who have a lucrative contract with this government to carry out the spray programme, why is it that they are being housed in the Bay St. George Community College when hotel operators and others are protesting this fact? This is a question I think that needs an answer. Why? Mr. Speaker, we have heard of some of the actions of this government being questioned and being televised and so on. We have seen it on the national news, we have seen it in local news, and I think, Mr.

Speaker, we have now hit a new low when the actions of a government is described in the weather forecast, I think we are hitting a new low and this is where we get the forecast for the spraying programme. I was watching it last night on the news. It was part of the weather forecast, the forecast of what spraying would be carried on today, weather permitting and where. Mr.

Speaker, in view'of the fact that the egg mass count is down and therefore there is not nearly the danger as we thought there might be a month or more ago, in view of the fact that the egg mass count is down, why does not the government get cracking and Put a stop to this crazy scheme, which of course has been demonstrated by hundreds, thousands of people in

Tape No. 4535 NM - 2 June 20, 1978 MR. CALLAN: this Province through petitions presented in this House and many thousands that we have not heard from and perhaps will never hear from, but who are anxious and who are concerned that damage will be done, if not this year,perhaps two, three, four; five years down the road. Mr. Speaker, I support the prayer of this petition. MR. SPEAKER: MR. LUSH: The hon. member for Terra Nova. Mr. Speaker, I want to say a few words in support of the petition presented by my hon. friend and colleague, the member for Winddor-Buchans (Mr. Flight). Mr.

Speaker, it is indeed peculiar and strange that a government would embark upon such a mad and crazy programme when it is a well known fact that spraying to control the spruce budworm is an ineffective measure, being demonstrated in several provinces in Canada and in the United States, that insecticide spraying is ineffective in controlling the spruce budworm. And yet in view of that the government is still pursuing this mad and crazy course. Mr.

Speaker, it becomes much more peculiar when one realizes that in view of the large number of acreage of our forest that is infested by this spruce budworm, the large acreage that is infested, comparing that with the little bit of spraying that we are doing, this small acreage that we are about to spray and knowing that it is ineffective makes this a completely crazy and mad programme and why the government is pursuing this course against the wishes of the people, Mr. Speaker, is certainly strange to

June 20, 1978, Tape 4636, Page 1 apb MR. LUSH: understand knowing, Mr. Speaker, that the only effective control is forest management. Mr. Speaker, another offensive thing about the spray programme is the fact that the money used for the spray programme is taken from forest management; actually, the amount of increase for spraying this year is equal to the decrease in forest management from last year. The two figures are just about equal. The two figures, Mr. Speaker, are just about equal.

That is the amount of increase for spraying this year and the amoun•by which the budget decreased last year, these two figures are just about equal. MR. SIMMONS: He is not listening, he is looking out for the buck. Looking out for the buck, eh? MR. LUSH: That is right. The government should take a lesson from the Goirernment of Nova Scotia, pursue the course of action taken by that government. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. LUSH: Hear, hear!

That government realized that spraying was a futile programme, it was useless in controlling the spruce budworm and they have acted very wisely, and I only wish that this government would act like- wise. But not so, Mr. Speaker. In finishing up my few remarks,' Mr. Speaker, I want to implore upon the minister, since this petition' protests against spraying in residential areas and around watershed areas,.since the petition directs itself to that, since the petition addresses itself to these two things, I would hope that the minister would also heed the wishes of the people of Port Blandford.

Actually, the first petition that was presented in this House of Assembly objecting to the spray programme because it was coming too close to the community, because it was too close to the water- shed area.

June 20, 1978, Tape 4636, Page 2 -- apb MR. LUSH: Now, the minister has accommodated one group, of people apparently. The minister has accommodated the people from Gander and I certainly hope that the minister will accommodate the people from Port Blandford and all other people in the Province who have protested on the grounds that the spray is coming too close to their communities and too close to watershed areas. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. LUSH: I would hope that the minister is not going to make chalk of one group of people and cheese of another group of people. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

LUSH: So I would implore upon the minister to treat all people in this Province equally. And hopefully, when he rises in his place to speak this afternoon, he will tell us that the government have decided not to spray. MR. SIMMONS: Who? Who is that? Who? MR. LUSH: This is the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR. SIMMONS: He is going to need a couple of fellows to hold him up. MR.

LUSH: So when the minister rises in his place to talk to this petition this afternoon, to respond to the.wishes of the people - 3,000 was it? - 3,000 people from the West coast, when the minister rises to respond to the wishes of these people - certainly he is going to respond to that, 3,000 people - that the hon. minister will tell the House of Assembly that he intends to give the same treatment to the people of Port Blandford and the people of other areas in this Province that he accorded the people of Gander, that he is going to accommodate these people and not spray within residential areas or too close to watersheds.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I will clue up my

June 20, 1978, Tape 4636, Page 3 -- apb MR. LUSH: remarks. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. WHITE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Before recognizing the hon. member. for Lewisporte,I would like to welcome to the House of Assembly on behalf of all hon. members, a number of visitors this afternoon. Hon. George Doucette, Speaker of the Nova Scotia Legislature accompanied by his ' wife; also in the Speaker's Gallery, Sir Robin Vanderfelt who is the Secretary General of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association and Mr. Ozzie Fraser,a member of the Legislative Assembly of Nova Scotia.

I know all hon. members join me in welcoming Mr. Speaker Doucette, Sir Robin Vanderfelt and Mrs. Doucette and Mr. Fraser to the House of Assembly. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SPEAKER: MR. WHITE: Hear, hear: The hon. member for Lewisporte. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition that was presented here in the House today and signed by 3,100 people. I suppose the total - I do not know if anyone has totalled up the number of names that have been signed to petitions that have come before the House on this matter this year.

I suppose it is probably the greatest number of names of people in Newfoundland protesting any one singular act of government this year. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. WHITE: With the exception of electricity. With the exception - of course, my hon. colleagues remind me, with the exception of electricity.

Tape No. 4637 NM - 1 June 20, 1978 MR. WHITE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that I drove in today from Lewisporte into St. John's and I am happy to say that I got here but I did keep my windows closed all the way in because I did not know, contrary to the gOvernment's - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. WHITE: That is the truth. I kept my windows closed coming in because I did not know if the spray was going to come over and come down into the car, Mr. Speaker. That is how concerned I am about the matter and I was worried about it to that extent. And hon. gentlemen opposite, who sit in their fancy offices in St.

John's, should also be concerned about it. Mr. Speaker, I have been listening to the radio and television trying to hear the advance notices of spray programmes to be given by the government and I am not hearing them with any consistency at all. What I am hearing, Mr. Speaker, are ads on the media that I have never heard the like of in my life before. One ad even said that a survey was done showing that eighty per cent Of the stories in newspapers relating to the spray programmes were false. Eighty per cent of the stories in newspapers were false. Now this is government propoganda, Mr.

Speaker, that concerns me very, very much. I would also like to say, Mr. Speaker, that four communities in my district are having their water sources directly affected by the spray programme and that concerns me very greatly. People in those areas that I visited this weekend it was the major single topic of conversation, Mr. Speaker, the

Tape No. 4637 NM - 2 June 20, 1978 MR. WHITE: spray programme, even greater than the dust and goodness knows if there was not enough comment about the dust. Mr.

Speaker, I noticed in McLean's Magazine a couple of days ago that they were wondering about, and questioning the validity of the Newfoundland Government making a decision to spray the forests of Newfoundland when the egg mass count in this Province was down forty-seven per cent last year, minus forty-seven per cent in this Province last year the egg mass count was,yet in New•Brunswick where they sprayed and have been spraying for many, many years, the egg mass count was up by thirty per cent. So, Mr. Speaker, there is a total lack of sense in respect of this matter.

I do not know what we have to do to get the government to back down. I suppose the last resort is some kind of a civil disobedience or something like that and I hate to see it come to that in this Province but I suppose if we have to press an issue and press it strongly we will have to do something like that. Mr. Speaker, I support the petition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMONS: MR. SPEAKER: MR. J. WINSOR: Somebody is getting a rip off. The hon. member for Fortune - Hermitage. Mr. Speaker, I rise to support the petition so ably presented by my colleague from Windsor-Buchans on behalf of 3,100 people.

The signatures are 3;100 but it is on behalf of a lot more people than that. All of Newfoundland apparently is up in arms over the spray programme but apparently government does not want to listen to it with their usual semantics and rhetoric fired at us because we are opposing it in support of our people. I think the story must be this;.they bought a lot of matacil and they did not know what to do with it after the

Tape No. 4637 NM - 3 June 20, 1978 MR. J. WINSOR: complaints started coming in. The only thing to do was spray it over Newfoundland. I hope the kick back this time goes to the government and not the people, because certainly enough evidence has been produced to indicate that there is a great deal of danger in the spraying. There is some spraying being done in the area of the districts represented by my colleague from Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir (Mr. Simmons) and mine.

There is spraying going on in Conne River and the only part of the district will be sprayed, there is no name on it, but people know it is there so they are going to..spray it now and make sure they do not get in there. Because they will not want to be. And some of the best fishing grounds in the country is in that area, as you know, and I certainly would be remiss if I did not stand on my feet and support the stand that we have taken against the spray. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! NOTICES OF MOTION: MR. SPEAKER: The hOh. Minister of Consumer Affairs and the Environment. MR. MURPHY: Mr.

Speaker, on behalf of my colleague, the Minister of Social Services, I give notice that I will on tomorrow ask leave to introduce a bill, "An Act To Amend The Social Assistance Act, 1977." ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHICH NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:

Tape 4638 PK - 1 June 20, 1978 MR. SPEAKER (DR. COLLINS): The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Communications. MR. DOODY: Mr. Speaker, this is the answer to Question No. 106 asked by the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) directed to the Minister of Transportation and Communications on the Order Paper of June 7, 1978, and it deals with the purchase of two Canso or PBY water bombers to be added to the Province's existing air fleet. There are only a few notes here, Sir, so if I may I would like to read part of it here and Table the rest. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.

DOODY: The Air Services Division was asked subsequent to the 1977-1978 Budget estimates,or during that period,rather,since they had had the necessary technical expertise to supply an estimate on the cost of the purchase of two additional water bombers for the Newfoundland Forest Service Air Fleet. The estimate at that time of the cost of purchasing of converting to water bomber configuration and the renovations of each aircraft to precise specifications to ensure compatibility with the existing water bomber fleet, the total would be in the vicinity of $900,000. MR. NEARY: MR. DOODY: No, 5780,000.

This then was the figure used by Forestry and Agriculture in oregaring its estimate at that time. MR. NEARY: No, it was not MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order! MR. DOODY: Following' approval of the Provincial Government and the Management Committee of the corestry Subsidary Agreement to have the cost of the purchase of the aircraft, cost-shared under the DREE Forestry Subsidary Agreement, Forestry and Agriculture submitted the request to the Government Purchasing Agency to tender the supply of the two water bombers. Tenders were advertised in five local and two Mainland papers. MR. NEARY: All pre-arranged.

MR: DOODY: The closing date of the tender was July 28, 1977. A public tender opening was held on July 29, 1977.

June 20, 1978 MR. NEARY: MR. DOODY: Tape 4638 PK - 2 Who was in attendance? Only one tender was received, and that was Field Aviation of Toronto. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Surprise! Surprise! MR. DOODY: And they placed a bid in the amount of $1093,00n. MR. SIMMONS: How about the secret share list now? MR. DOODY: . The fact that Field Aviation was the only bidder was not surprising, since this company was fully aware of the standards required by the Province - SOME HON: MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. DOODY: - and in fact it was the only firm in Canada able to undertake conversion to water bomber capability.

I understand that Field Aviation has indeed got the patent in Canada for the conversion process. MR: NEARY: $190,000 (Inaudible) $190,000. MR. DOODY: Do you mind? I will just fill in between the hon. member's comments, Sir , - MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: MR. DOODY: MR: SPEAKER: Order, please! You paid (inaudible) have it there. Order, please! - at the pleasure of the House. I must require the hon. gentleman please to obey the requirement of the Chair that the hon. gentleman speak without interruption. MR. DOODY: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: .$110,000. MR. DINN: I am ashamed of him. MR.

DOODY: Since the amount of the tender had exceeded budget estimates, and in view of the fact that it would take several months to obtain both Provincial and Federal approval for additional funds, it was decided then that the following action would be taken; one, the purchase,conversion, refurbishing of one Canso as specified in the tender call; two, the purchase and conversion to water bombing only of the additional Canso as per Items 13 and 14 of the tender specifications. I will not read them, so they are attached. Thank you.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4638 PK - 3 MR. NEARY: Do you want to read my file there, too? MR. DOODY: This mucn, Sir, one and two above to be funded from the 1977-1978 budget allocation which I mentioned a minute ago; And three, Sir, to obtain an option from Field Aviation for the refurbishing of the second Canso, and a contract for the remaining amount of funds to be confirmed in the fiscal year 1978-1979. This could permit the extra time .to obtain Provincial and Federal approval to have the extra funds covered under the DREE Subsidary Agreement.

Roth the Provincial Government and Field Aviation were in agreement on these items. One of the Canso bombers has been received by the Department of Forestry and Agriculture. As for the terms of the agreement, and I have been informed that it is in serviceable condition., indeed, Sir, it is in active condition. I visited the hangar on Saturday and the, plane was there. It had been used, and it has been used for water bomber service. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible). MR. DOODY: It has been operational, and is operational, and it is a welcomed addition to the forest protection fleet.

The Department of Forestry and Agriculture has been authorized by a Minute-in-Council, dated March 16, 1978 to proceed with the completion of the remaining contract to refurbish the second Canso. MR. NEARY: How much? MR. DOODY: It is expected - it is all here, Will you just get a grip on yourself for a minute? MR. NEARY: No, but - MR. DOODY: Would the hon. member just relax. MR. NEARY: - when will it be tabled? MR. DOODY: In a few moments. Just peace and benediction, brother. All things will come to those who show a little patience, even you. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh: MR.

DOODY: I think the hon. member is relaxed, Your Honour, With your permission we will proceed with this answer to the question.

Tape 4638 PK - 4 June 20, 1978 MR. LUNDRIGAN: He is all up tight today whatever the trouble is. MR. J. CARTER: No tranquillizers. MR. LUNDRIGAN: He is certainly up tight. MR. DOODY: I attach, Sir, for the information of the House and members the public notice,

June 20, 1978 Tape 4639 EC - 1 MR. DOODY: invitation to tender over the signature of E. E. Rowe, the Director of Purchases, Government Purchasing Agency. The report of the public tender opening with the signature of those people who were present, the Government Purchasing Authority officials, the Department of Transportation and Communications representative, Mr. D. B. Simmons, and Mr. E. P. Piercey of Air Services and a representative of Field Aviation.

I also attach copies of the tenders received from Field Aviation and a copy of the specifications from the Department of Forestry and Agriculture which were sent to the Government Purchasing Agency signed by the Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture and copy of correspondence from the Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture to the Secretary of Treasury Board covering the funding of the aircraft and copy of the specifications for the refurbishing and conversion of the aircraft.

I have no hesitation in tabling these documents, Mr.Speaker, as I have checked thoroughly with the officials of Forestry and Agriculture, with Inter-governmental Affairs, with Transportation and Communications, with Treasury Board and with the senior officials of all those government departments who were involved together with the Joint Management Committee under the DREE subsidiary agreement, and they have all assured me that the proceedings were entirely proper and correct in every detail.

I might say that the members of the Management Committee of the subsidiary agreement, joint federal/provincial also • acted as the tender board and these people were Mr. J. A. Brennan, who I think is the Assistant Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, Mr. A. M. Davis of the federal Department of Regional

June 20, 1978 Tape 4639 EC - 2' MR. DOODY: Economic Expansion, Mr. .John Fitzgerald, the Assistant Director of Inter-governmental Affairs, Dr. W. J. Carroll of the federal Forestry Service, Mr. Roy Forward, Secretary of the Committee and also an official of the Department of Forestry and Agriculture. The board also consulted with other officials of technical knowledge of the proposed contract, namely, Mr. Lloyd Leland, Chief Inspector of the Air Services Division, Mr. E. P. Piercey, Director of Air Services, Mr. J. A. Doyle, Director of Forest Protection. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible) of the aircraft (inaudible). MR.

DOODY:. Mr. Speaker, is it necessary to have me harassed? I am trying to provide the House with information that was asked. Now if the House does not want the information I will not bother. Again, there are a couple of other questions on the Order Paper which I would be only too happy to provide, but the hon. members are so impatient, Your Honour, they are so bloodthirsty, they are vicious, cruel. I think it is gone past their feeding time. It is time to slop the hogs, Your Honour. MR. LUNDRIGAN: Did not have his Pablum this morning.. MR. DOODY: Now where was I?

I was working on the expertise and knowledge of the various officials who advised us on this very correct and proper procedure. The recommendations were made to the Director of the Government Purchasing Agency through the Deputy Minister of Forestry and Agriculture and the decision was and the advice was to award the contract to

June 20, 1978 Tape 4639 EC - 3 MR. DOODY: Field Aviation in the manner outlined. This has been done, and I have absolutely no hesitation in accepting the advice and the information of the people involved and I tabled all of the relevant documents for the information of the House. Now there were some other points raised on that particular question of the water bomber. One of them was that the 'plane was a bucket of bolts and it was unfit for service and so on. I have already mentioned the fact that that is not so. The 'plane is very serviceable.

It is indeed on duty, in use, and I think some hon. members opposite took advantage of the opportunity to visit the hangar to look at the aircraft and they - MR. NEARY: And saw the oil leaks. MR. DOODY: Yes. That is not at all unusual,I understand, for aircraft of the vintage to have oil leaks. I would not want to have the hon. member in that aircraft either, Sir. It is a far too valuable piece of government equipment to trust it in the hands of the hon. member. MR. NEARY: (Inaudible) MR.

DOODY: Anyway, I have a few other things here, but I . will not bother, because obviously, Sir, they are not interested in information, they are more interested in harassment, and I am much to delicate, too nish, too sensitive to take these slings and arrows. Thank you, Sir. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: Oh, oh! A point of order, Mr. Speaker. A point of order. Mr. Speaker, I know it is improper, Sir, to respond to an answer given by the minister,

June 20, 1978 Tape 4639 EC - 4 MR. NEARY: but I sent the minister over a letter from Austin Aviation in Timmins, Ontario which shows the price that Field Aviation paid for that aircraft that the minister just referred to - $110,000 on the back page there - and I believe the aircraft cost the Newfoundland Government $535,000. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. NEARY: I am asking the minister if he would table it. I want the minister to table my letter. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!

The same ruling was made last year that under this Heading No.0), Answers to Questions for which Notice hasbeen Given, there are no supplementaries or further questions. They would be in order under the next calling of Oral Questions. I would suggest that that would be the appropriate place. But I could not allow questions under this heading. We would have two Question Periods, one of thirty minutes and one of indeterminate length. ORAL QUESTIONS MR. SPEAKER: Opposition. MR. ROWE: The hon. the Leader of the Mr. Speaker, where is the Premier of the Province?

I .want to ask an important question of the Premier of the Province, Sir, and he is never in the House.

June 20, 1978 MR. NEARY: MR. W. ROWE: Tape No. 4640 NM - 1 Bally Haly. Where is he? Would the House Leader mind telling us when we will have the pleasure of his company so I can save up my questions for him? Is he coming tomorrow? The House Leader does not know, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: Golf Course. MR. SPEAKER: MR. HICKMAN: Move the Assembly down to Bally Haly Order, please! The hon. Minister of Justice. Mr. Speaker, I presume that is a question because it is a very good oneIto answer but firstly, may I apologize to our guests from Nova Scotia for the behaviour they have seen coming across the. House. SOME HON.

MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. HICKMAN: It is the first time, that the Opposition have seen any living Liberals in a half a century and they are all excited this afternoon. This is why, Mr. Speaker, they are sort of out of control. SOME. HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS: MR. HICKMAN: There is a turn-coat Liberal over there. And do you know, Mr. Speaker, I must chastise my campaign manager; he is - you know - and I do wish, Mr. Speaker - MR. NEARY: If he only, had his time back. MR. HICKMAN: That is right. For once in my life I am on all fours with the hon. the member for LaPoile. If only I had my time back. MR.

NEARY: No, the hon. member I mean - MR. HICKMAN: He warned me I was wrong. He said I was wrong. He said I made a mistake. Order, please! Order, please! And, Mr. Speaker, I admit it to him. MR. SPEAKER: MR. HICKMAN:

June 20, 1978 Tape No. 4640 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: Sit down and do not be making a fool of yourself. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! Order, please! I must point out to hon. members that what they may well regard as and often start off as pleasantries, frequently do lead to a deterioration of order. So I would ask hon. members during the Question Period to keep their remarks to questions with the

preamble which is necessary and to answers rather than other matters. A supplementary, the hon. Leader of the Opposition. MR. W. ROWE: In the absence of the Premier, Sir, I will have to save my questions until probably next session; he is not likely to be here. MR. NEARY: Go down to Bally Haly and learn how to golf. MR. W. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I will direct/a question to the hon. Minister of Forestry - MR. NEARY: The Speaker from Nova Scotia, ask him a question. MR. W. ROWE: I might as well, for all the sense I am going to get from the Minister of Forestry. Mr.

Speaker, we saw the Minister of the Environment wash his hands of the spray programme a month or so ago, saying he knew nothing about it and was not going to answer any questions on it. Yesterday we had the spectacle of the Minister of Health stand up and publicly disassociate himself by saying it is not his programme. MR. NEARY: I would not blame him. MR. W. ROWE: And he would not answer any questions on it.

I asked yesterday the Minister of Health why it was that in spite of the day after day proclamation by the government that they were not going to change the spray programme, the Minister of Health, whose district happens to be Gander district, got Gander taken out of the spray programme and a new buffer zone, Mr. Speaker, established with respect to Gander Lake and the town of Gander.

June 20, 1978 Tape No. 4640 NM - 3 MR. W. ROWE: Now let me ask this of the Minister of Forestry, is the minister prepared to hear and make changes on other communities, towns in the Province who may wish to have a larger buffer zone as far as the spray programme is concerned, or to be taken out of the spray programme altogether? I refer particularly,for example, to Port Blandford. Hear, hear! CAPTAIN WINSOR: Gander Bay. MR. W. ROWE: And Gander Bay, and a couple of districts in my learned friend's, my hon. friend's district, the member for Lewisporte (Mr. F. White).

Communities that want to be further removed from the spray programme. Is the Minister of Forestry prepared to provide larger buffer zones with respect to some of these communities, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: MR. MAYNARD: The hon. Minister of Forestry and. Agriculture. Mr. Speaker, Gander Lake was the only water body that is directly a water supply where spraying was to be carried out to the edge of the water supply. There is no other actual water supplies in Newfoundland where spraying has been allocated to the edge of the water supply. MR. F. WHITE: Rivers. MR. MORGAN: Gander Lake. MR.

MAYNARD: Well if you keep away from rivers and watersheds in Newfoundland,I am afraid.that you would keep out of it completely. MR. F. WHITE: Thatis what you should do. MR. MAYNARD: We decided for the Gander water supply, because the people felt - SOME HON. /:EMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. MAYNARD: - that it Was necessary to have a buffer zone around, then we established the buffer zone. All the other communities and water supplies in Newfoundland have a buffer zone already established and the buffer zone is two miles with the large aircraft and one half mile with the small,crop duster type aircraft. :!R. W.

ROWE: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary, the original questioner. MR. SIMONS:

June 20,1978 Tape No. 4641 AH-1 MR.W.ROWE: the ans:,:er to the minister's question is that,no,this psychological buffer zone, which was not even necessary according to him in previous statements but which has been extended by political pressure in the case of Gander by the member, the Minister of Health,in order to safeguard the health of the people of Gander,that will not be changed with respect to any other communities in the Province. That is an edifying answer, tor. Speaker, I must say.

Let the minister answer this question; Are there any government inspectors on board these planes which the spray company, the company which•is spraying this poisonous chemical1matacil,into water supplies and near communities and in the woods and so on, are there any government inspectors directly on the plane monitoring the spray programme in each of these spray planes on a-day to day basis? MR.SPEAKER: The hon. minister. MR. MAYNARD: The government technicians, Mr. Speaker, are on the spotter planes.

The spotter plane accompanies each spray aircraft at all times and the government technician is on the spotter plane,and directs whether the spraying should be done or whether the nozzle should be turned off at any point in time or whether the wind speed becomes too high or whatever. He is actually in charge of the operation from the spotter plane itself. MR.W.ROWE: A final supplementary, Sir. HR. SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition.

MR.W.ROWE: I have a question which I was going to make mention in my petition, the speech on the petition but I was cut off by the arrogant Minister of Energy with his specious points of order. Mr. Speaker, let me ask-the minister this; it is a personal question, a question similar to the one that was asked by the member for LaPoile 04r. weary) district. I have a daughter who is going off to camp.or • supposedly going off to camp on the 22nd of this month which is two days from now. he is going to Mint Brook, Mr. Speaker, which is right in the middle of the spray area.

Now, I ask•this question as I asked the minister before with regard to 411 club campers and so on, is it in fact safe for

June 20,1973 Tape No. 4641 AH-2 NR.W.ROWE: children to be going out camping in the area where this spray programme is taking place? Is it safe? What guarantees or what assurances aan he give me and people in my position, hundreds of thousands of them that their children, innocent children, Mr. Speaker,who I may be sending out like a lamb to the slaughter for all I know, what assurances can he give parents, concerned parents that there children are not going to be adversley affected, medically with regard to their health, by this spray programme? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister. MR. MAYNARD: The answer, Mr.

Speaker, is yes it is safe and the assurance has come from the medical people who approved this programme, the medical experts in the field. I am not &medical expert but I have to take the advice of the medical experts and I say,yes,it is safe to be in the area. MR.SPEAKER: - Hon. member for Sti George's followed by the hon. member for LaPoile. MRS McISAAC: My question is for the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, Mr. Speaker.

I wrote two notes across this House to the minister this afternoon to ask him if he would consider changing tke spray boundary in my district because of the fact that there are three ponds that empty into this dribble, directly into the water supply of St. George's and he ignored both notes. So now I would like to ask him a question; would he please tell me if there is a possibility of having that buffer zone changed in order to keep this spray out off the water supply for St. George's? We have had problems enough with the water supply in St. George's,God knows,and we do not need matacil in it.

Would you please answer that? MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. NR.MAYNARD: Mr. Speaker, there is no spray carried out over any water supply in Newfoundland.The buffer zones have been established, they were established a long time ago, over any water supply. If the hon. member can show me that there is any spraying to be done directly over the water supply then we will look at it but we are not aware of any water supply in this Province being sprayed.

June 20,197S Tape No. 4641 AH-3 mks. McISAAC: MR. SPEAKER: MRS MciSAAC: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member. If the minister is so sure that there is no spray going on in any of the watershed areas AN HON. aMBER: Water supplies. MRS McISAAC: - why did he - water supplies, Okay, the same thing. If the water tuns out of the glass on the floor the supply is still in the glass. MR, F.ROWE: Have some respect for a lady. MR.

McISAAC: And if the water supply in Gander, if the buffer zone in Gander could be changed then there must have been some danger! that the matacil would get into the water supply, if the buffer zone was changed. If not why was Gander changed and why cannot St. George's be changed?

June 20, 1978 Tape 4642 DW - 1 SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR. MAYNARD: I said water supplies, Mr. Speaker, not watersheds and there is a distinct difference in water sheds from water supplies. MRS. MCISAAC: Water sheds, water supplies, the same thing. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: MR. MAYNARD: Gander Lake was the only water supply in the Province where spraying was to have been carried out to the edge of the lake. For psychological reasons we moved it back one mile. That is the total answer.

There are no other water supplies in the Province that are close to the spray areas. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member for LaPoile followed by the hon. gentleman for Burgeo - Bay d' Espoir. MR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question, Sir, to the minister responsible for scandal, Sir.The hon. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please: Order, please: I do think that-as a matter of fact, I am quite sure that that should be withdrawn.The hon. gentleman will direct his question to the minister. MR. S. NEARY: I withdraw.

He may not be directly responsible but scandals come under the hon. gentleman's jurisdiction. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please!' Order, please! I think the hon. gentleman is as aware as I am that that is an inappropriate way to preface a question and I would ask him to preface it in the normal manner. MR. S. NEARY: Sir, if the Minister of Justice cannot answer the question then maybe the minister responsible for housing can answer it. Is it correct, Sir, this morning the reports that we read in the morning news that another scandal has been uncovered in the housing agency, in the St.

John's Housing Authority that there is a probe going on there by the police by the CID. Could the minister confirm whether this is correct or not?

June 20, 1978 MR. SPEAKER: Affairs and Housing. MR. J. DINN: Tape 4642 DW - 2 The hon. Minister of Municipal Mr. Speaker, obviously this is an area where'we have to watch ourselves;we are talking about a police investigation. But the fact of the matter is I cannot confirm that there is. We received information in the department, the Department of Juttice was notified and the Department of Justice made the decision that they should have an investigation and the investigation is ongoing. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh: MR. S. NEARY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. member for LaPoile, a supplementary. MR. S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker now that we have confirmed that there is another scandal on the go - AN HON. MEMBER: MR. S. NEARY: MR. W.N. ROWE: MR. S. NEARY: How many now? I do not know how many this is, Sir. Number eight. Number eight.We have got them in alphabetical order now. Mr. Speaker, would the hon. gentleman tell us the nature of this scandal? What prompted the police investigation? What kind of reports do the minister have? Does it involve federal/provincial funding" just what is the nature of this latest scandal? MR. SPEAKER: and Housing. MR. J.

DINN: The hon. Minister of Municipal Affairs Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) is obviously as his same old game trying to create Newfie jokes,which I detest. There is no scandal. In Newfoundland as in every other province of this Dominion,and in the country as a whole_in the Northwest Territoties-nobody is guilty until an investigation is completed and they have some evidence - MR. WHITE: Maybe not then.

Tape 4642 DW - 3 June 20, 1978 MR. DINN: - and then they go to a trial and then the judge makes the decision or a jury makes the decision. In this country there is no scandal — MR. FLIGHT: MR. DINN: Why do you have an investigation? There is an investigation going on because we have some information that there may be something untoward, wrong. When that investigation is completed the justice department will handle it in its normal,expeditious manner. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. S. WEARY: MR. SPEAKER: *St. S. WEARY: Hear, hear! A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary. Mr.

Speaker, the hon. gentleman of course is wrong that you are guilty in this Province until you are proven innocent. That is the philosphy the Minister of Justice operates under, Sir. Can the Minister of Justice shed any light on this matter? Does it involve provincial/federal funding? Does it involve servicing contracts? What is the nature of the - What prompted the,police investigation? What kind of an investigation is it? We are not asking the hon. gentleman to tell us whether people are innocent or guilty. We just like to know what is going on,if the Public Treasury is being adequately protected.

That is all we want to know. What is the nature of the investigation? MR. SPEAKER: Hon. minister. MR. WN. ROWE: One at a time now. MR. HICK AN: Was the question directed at me MR. S. WEARY: Well I do not know who can answer it. MR. SI/LMONS: The minister in charge of (inaudible) MR. S. NEARY: The minister has a tendency•to cover up. Maybe we should go to the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4642 DW - 4 MR. HICKMAN: I am just wondering if that spray matacil would cure scandalitis because if it is I would recommend a huge dose for the member for LaPoile. Mr. Speaker, - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. S. NEARY.: The hon. gentleman (inaudible) MR.. HICKMAN: - any requests that cometo the Department of Justice from any department of government or any citizen for an 'investigation is carried Out carried out immediately. Fortunately we do not have gossips in the Department of Justice,they rely only on fact. MR. S. NEARY: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: Final supplementary. MR. S. NEARY: Obviously, Mr. Speaker , there must be some gossips in the housing authority because the hon. minister said . that somebody had reported that there was some evidence of wrong-doing and that was not - I do not know if it was gossip or not but the minister thought he should report it to the Minister of Justice, his colleague. MR. HICKMAN: That is right. MR. S. NEARY: But, Sir, what is the nature of this complaint?

June 20,1978 Tape 4643 PK - 1 MR. NEARY: Can the minister give us some idea what kind of an investigation is being carried out? AN HON. MEMBER: No! No! No! MR. NEARY: Does it involve servicing contracts, local contractors who are doing work for the minister's department? Or does it involve somebody siphoning off funds that were channelled into this Province by the Government of Canada? Provincial - MR. DOODY: Another one of his multiple choice auestions. MR. NEARY: No. Well, I mean, you pay your money and you can pick your choice, But, Mr. Speaker, we are just trying to get some information from the minister.

We are not sure at this stage, Sir, if the Public Treasury is being properly protected or not, and we are trying to find out. What is the nature of the investigation? That is all we are asking. We are not asking the minister for names, or if people are innocent or guilty. But why carry out an investigation? What is the purpose of it? And what is the nature of the investigation? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municpal Affairs and Housing. MR. DINN: Mr.

Speaker, I did not go through all of the information that was presented to me, but I can confirm, I am quite sure that it had nothing to do with buildinn sunolies on Bell Island. MR. NEARY: No. Did it have to do with A.B. Walsh? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! I stated that I would recognize the hon. member for Burgeo-Bay d'Espoir next followed by the hon. the member for Baie Verte-White Bay. :MR.'SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker - MR: NEARY: Bug-eye (Inaudible). SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMONS: Well, Mr.

Speaker, since we do have some distinguished visitors I will ask my question to one of the intelligent ministers so the others will not make a fool out of themselves. I was intending to ask it of the Premier but he is obviously on the golf course or wherever he is today. Did we find out where he is? SOME HON. MEMBERS: No.

June 20, 1978 Tape 4643 PK - 2 MR. SIMMONS: The question is really for the Premier - MR. NEARY: He is playing another tape for CJON. MR. SIMMONS: - but, perhaps, in the absence of the Premier, the ' continued absence of the Premier,perhaps the Government House Leader the Deputy Premier, the Minister of Justice, the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, the man who will never make it to the Bench, perhaps he, Mr. Speaker, can answer the question I had for the Premier.

Does the minister know or is he aware as to whether the Premier has asked for the resignation of the Minister of Manpower, the former Minister of Public Works,or asked perhaps more properly that he not pursue his assignment in his Portfolio until such time as he has been cleared of the charges of unethical conduct now laid publicly against him, conduct during the period when he was Minister of Public Works? Does the minister know if the resignation has been asked for and/or received by the Premier? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Justice. MR. HICKMAN: Mr.

Speaker, that is the kind of a question that no decent person would ever ask. SOMEHON! MEMBERS: MR. WHITE: SOME'HON. MEMBERS: " -AN'HON.*MEMBER: MR. NEARY: MR.'SPEAKER: MR. SIMMONS: MR: HICKMAN: AN HON. MEMBER: MR: HICKMAN: That is right. Somebody is going to have to answer it, though. Hear, hear! It has got to be answered. The government will change one of those days. Order! Order, please! Order, please! The Minister for Cover-Up. Mr. Speaker, I have - Note what Premier Bennett did.

I have no idea what the hon. the Premier does in communications with his ministers, and I am quite certain that he has not asked any of the ministers named, any such question or suggestion as posed by the hon. the member for Burgeo-Bay d'Espoir (Mr. Simmons). And I would hope that the hon. gentleman is not naive enough.because it would have to be in that category that he would ask the question,to suspect that anyone would be foolish enough to act or unwise enough to

June 20, 1978 Tape 4643 PK - 3 Mr. Hickman: act until a decision of the appropriate person is received and not on one bit of evidence. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. SIMMONS: MR.-SPEAKER: MR. SIMMONS: Oh, oh! Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. A supplementary. Sure,Mr. Speaker.the minister mentions - misses, rather the entire point of the question. we have a case now, Mr. Speaker, where a Minister of the Crown has been cited in quite a public fashion before a public enquiry by his Deputy Minister of some years for unethical behaviour, unethical conduct in the pursuit of his duties as a Minister of the Crown.

And it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that is a fairly serious charge. And my auestion was worded carefully the first time. I never said until he is convicted or Drovon guilty; I said, until such time as he is ,cleared of those charges. We now have a minister of Crown against whom these charges of unethical conduct have been made. And it would only be fair to him, I submit, Mr. Speaker, and to the public certainly when you have a man of the reputation of the former Deputy Minister, Mr.

Jack Ralph,making these statements in public knowing full well the impact of the statements, I am sure, and their ramifications, it seems to be it would only be proper for the minister to discontinue in a Portfolio of Cabinet until such time as the matter has been resolved publicly. And the minister in responding somewhat misconstrued the question, but that is all very well, that is his privilege. But what I am asking one more time is whether or not a resignation has been received to his knowledge? Or whether to his knowledge it is the intention of the Premier to ask for the resignation? MR. HICKMAN: No. MR.

SIMMONS: No, no? Mr. Speaker - MR. SPEAKER: The hon. for - MR. SIMMONS: - a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary.

Tape 4643 PK - 4 'June 20, 1978 MR. SIMMONS: Mr. Speaker, the minister had indicated the answer is, no, to the best of his knowledge. Can the minister indicate to the House whether the Minister of Manpower is still acting in that capacity, as the Minister of Manpower? And if so, I notice he is not in his seat today can the minister indicate to' the House where he is if he is away on government business? MR. WHITE: Or if he is coming back to the House? MR. SPEAKER: The hon . the Minister of Justice. MR. HICKMAN: Mr. Speaker ,

June 20, 1978 Tape 4644 EC - 1 MR. HICKMAN: I am quite confident that the hon. gentleman is still Minister of Manpower and Labour Relations,or whatever the title now is. I know that he is presently today, this morning very early, to meet in connection with a labour dispute that is on in this Province. AN HON. MEMBER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I have indicated I would recognize the hon. gentleman from Baie Verte - White Bay followed by the hon. gentleman from Port au Port. MR. RIDEOUT: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Minister of Fisheries. Mr.

Speaker, in view of the fact that we operate in and hopefully believe in the free enterprise,competitive system, I wonder if the minister could tell the House whether or not his department is prepared to take any action against the Lake group of companiei, the operators at' the Englee fish plant, who have'obviously now beyond any doubt told the fishermen of Englee that they are not prepared to buy any codfish from those fishermen who have been so naughty as to sell salmon to a competitor? AN HON. MEMBER: Aha! Boy! Free enterprise! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. W. CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, if the matter referred W by the member is correct then,of course, we will take whatever action we can. My deputy minister is presently investigating that allegation and if there is any way that the government can put a stop to it we will, and if we do not have the authority under the Act to do it,well, then I would be quite prepared to ask the House to amend the Act, because the licence to process fish is a public trust and must not be allowed to be used by the private sector as a licence to make money for their own convenience.

June 20, 1973 Tape 4644 EC - 2 SOME.HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. W. CARTER: We would, Mr. Speaker, take whatever action we can to put a stop to that sort of thing. If we have to amend the Act we will do it. It certainly will not be allowed to continue. . MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr.

Speaker, I wonder if the minister could tell the House whether or not his department will be getting in touch rather promptly - I know the deputy minister has already been in touch - with the Lake group of companies and saying to them in no uncertain fashion that 'Unless you are prepared to buy fish from any fisherman who wants to sell you codfish in Engleelthen we would very seriously consider revoking that processing licence'or some other kind of licence such as to force them to carry out the public responsibility that the minister has referred to? MR. W. CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, I can only repeat what I said, that if, in fact, the allegation is correct we will take that kind of action. If we have the right under the existing Act to lift the licence we will do it. If I do not have the authority,well then I will seek it in the Legislature. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the member for Port au Port, followed by the hon. gentleman from Trinity - Bay de Verde. MR. IIODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Transportation and Communications in his capacity as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Labrador Linerboard Limited. A few days ago when I was

June 20, 1978 Tape 4644 EC - 3 MR. HODDER: speaking here on a particular bill,o I believe on the Throne Speech debate, I mentioned that Abitibi had made a proposal on Labrador Linerboard Limited and the minister denied it. Could the minister now tell me whether a proposal has come from Abitibi to the government? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Transportation and Communications. MR. DOODY: Mr.

Speaker, the Divestiture Committee responsible for the Labrador Linerboard Limited facility, the people responsible for trying to interest a prospective buyer and/or manager for the facility, are still actively involved in discussing the possible sale or other arrangement with various companies, one of whom is Abitibi. There are at least four that I can think of offhand. To the best of my knowledge no concrete proposal as such is in the hands of either the committee or in the hands of government. Discussions are ongoing and hopefully a conclusion will be reached with one of these prospective buyers.

It is far too early in the game to make any statement more positive or concrete than that. It would be unfair to the people in the area and it would be misleading, and it also, of course, would weaken any bargaining position that we might have with any particular company. All I can say to the hon. member is that it is an ongoing process; it is one that the committee is working on very diligently and there is some real interest and some real enthusiasm shown for the facility out there. I sincerel}, hope that we can bring it to a conclusion that is beneficial to the Bay St. George area.

Certainly we are working in that direction and it appears to be

■ June 20, 1978 Tape 4644 EC — 4 MR. DOODY: encouraging at this point, but beyond that, Sir, I would not make a comment. MR. HODDER: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. MR. HODDER: Just one day ago or two days ago I spoke to a member of the Divestiture Committee who told me that they had not met since January and that particular committee has been keeping the Bay St. George membprs in touch with what has been going on and he told me that they had not met,

June 20, 1978, Tape 4645, Page 1 apb MR. HODDER: but the question I have for the minister is, if what the minister says is so why did the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture in Stephenville on last Sunday night make the statement that there would be a statement made by this government, a favourable statement made by this government as far as the acquisition of the mill was concerned, either at the end of June or very early in July? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Minister of Transportation and Communications. MR. DOODY: Mr.

Speaker, I know nothing of any conversation that the hon. member may have had with a member of the Divestiture Committee. If that particular member of the Committee is looking for information on conversations and discussions he is well aware of the channels through which he should go and he knows who the people in charge of co-ordinating the activities are. As for the comment allegedly made by the hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture, Sir, I have,no knowledge of that, Sir, and obviously the question should be directed to the minister who is supposed to have made such a statement. MR.

HODDER: A supplementary, Sir. MR. SPEAKER: A final supplementary. MR. HODDER: In

preamble to the final supplementary I would like to read a little portion of Hansard which was said by the Premier last year. These are the words of Hansard, May 13, 1977; "The fact is, Sir, that I would suggest that when the time comes and the Advisory Board - he talks about the Advisory Board bringing in its report - then he goes ahead, "at that time, maybe at that time we should have the member for Port au Port (Mr. Hodder), the member for Stephenville together with government members, sit down with the final reports and as negotiations go on and various things happen let them be

June 20, 1978, Tape 4645, Page 2 -- apb MR. HODDER: aware of what it going on." He goes on to say, "I think it is very. important that when the final reports come in and possibilities develop rather than make promises on radio stations, rather than make false hopes available to the people, .rather than doing these things that we sit down with those members who are most immediately concerned so that they can be part of the decision making process and the analysis and the judgements that have been made." MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please: MR. HODDER: The question - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please!

I think the hon. gentleman is getting to what I was about to direct him to, and that is to the question. MR. HODDER: The question to the minister - I had meant to direct this question to the Premier for the last week and-a-half, but the Premier has not been here for a week and-a-half - but would the minister inform me now whether - MR. HICKMAN: A point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order, I must interrupt. MR. HICKMAN. For the record,that is not quite correct. I am sure the hon.